NATURAL RESOURCES


[Stage Direction]
Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Minister of the Interior) moved that the house go into committee .at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to bring in a measure to confirm the agreement between the governments of the Dominion and the province of Alberta, dated 14th December, 1929, respecting the transfer of the natural resources of Alberta.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Minister of the Interior) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to bring in a measure to confirm the agreement between the governments of the Dominion and the province of Manitoba, dated 14th December, 1929, respecting the transfer of the natural resources of Manitoba.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. H. KING (Minister of Pensions and National Health) moved .that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to bring in a measure respecting allowances to war veterans, to provide assistance for certain veterans who are not in receipt of pensions, or who, if in receipt of pensions, are only partially pensionable, or who are unemployable, and to provide for the administration, amounts, terms and conditions of such allowances, and for the payment of such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of the proposed legislation.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with
Privilege-Mr. Spencer
[Stage Direction]
the subject master of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. P. J. A. CARDIN (Minister of Marine and Fisheries):: Mr. Speaker, I am
sorry I was not in my seat yesterday when [DOT]the hon. leader- of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) referred to the Vancouver harbour commissioners. He said that it had been reported that the commissioners had in their minds the turning over of the work connected with that harbour to a private firm to be carried out upon a cost plus basis. I am pleased to say that the practice which has been followed and which will be followed is that of calling for open tenders.
SOLDIER SETTLEMENT BOARD On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. T. LUCAS Camrose): Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire of the Acting Minister of Immigration (Mr. Stewart) regarding [DOT]the report that the soldier settlement board has refused to consider the supplying of seed and feed to soldier settlers who live in districts where there was a crop failure last year, and where the municipalities will not furnish this seed or feed because the board have a first charge against the holdings. If that report is not correct, will the minister state if the board will make the necessary advances for that purpose?


Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Minister of the Interior):: Mr. Speaker, this matter has
been under discussion with the chairman of the soldier settlement board and it has been decided that the field supervisors will seek to have the municipalities supply the seed grain and the board will be responsible for the furnishing of same.
EXPORT OF LIQUOR On the orders of the day:


Mr. E. J. GARLAND (Bow River):: Mr. Speaker, a report appears in the morning papers to the effect that the Prime Minister announced to a caucus of the Liberal party that the liquor-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order, order.

Mr. GARLAND (Bow River) -that liquor clearances to the United States would be prohibited and that legislation would be introduced shortly to that effect. It is also reported that the caucus cheered his announcement. Are those allegations true?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: Why did you not come to the caucus?
Right H'on. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):	It is not customary to
report the proceedings of the caucus, but, as the Minister of Justice has said, we shall be pleased to welcome the hon. member any time he wishes to attend.



PRIVILEGE-MR. SPENCER

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. E. SPENCER (Battle River):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. A few days ago I placed upon the order paper some questions regarding immigration for 192829. The questions were as follows:
1.	How many immigrants came to Canada during each of the years 1928 and 1929?
2.	What were these people by nationality, occupation and religion?
3.	In what provinces were they distributed according to tile three categories mentioned above?
Part of the answer made to the second question was:
Statistics showing religious persuasions of immigrants are not available.
I have on file from the Department of Immigration a letter dated some eighteen months ago, pointing out that this information could be obtained because such a question was asked on all the papers that were required to be signed by would-be immigrants. Samples of these forms were sent me and I have them in my hand. Number one is called the prospect memorandum and such a question is asked. Number two is the sailing permit and tlhe same question is asked. Number three is the sailing form on which a similar question is asked, and number four is the report of the medical examiner, the same question being asked. I would therefore be glad if my question could be answered in full.


Charles A. Stewart: It is quite true that
the Department of Immigration do not keep statistics with respect to religious sects that come into the country, but it is possible to

Taxation of Oil Companies
compile and there is being compiled for my hon. friend's information, as nearly as possible the numbers under the heads of their religious denominations.



DUMPING DUTY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders o>f the day:
Mr. JOHN EVANS (Rosetown):: Is it the intention of the government to bring down legislation to legalize the leeway of 5 per cent which is allowed before the special or dumping duty is applied, and why was this regulation set aside on October 10 last?


Mr. SPEAKER:: That stands as a notice,
I suppose.


Hon. W. D. EULER (Minister of National Revenue):: I would just as soon answer the
question now. So far as I know, no such legislative action is contemplated. The reason for the Change is to bring the regulations into harmony with the act itself.



TECHNICAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. W. NEILL (Comox-Albemi):: I
should like to ask the Prime Minister whether he can see his way clear to afford the house an opportunity to debate the report of the Royal Commission on the Technical and Professional Services before action is taken. There are in it recommendations that it is highly desirable we should discuss, and suggestions to be made, and it will be too late for this to be done if the report is carried out, presumably by an item in the supplementary estimates.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: There will certainly be
ample opportunity to discuss the report at any time legislation based upon it is introduced. That will afford the opportunity my hon. friend desires.



TAXATION OF OIL COMPANIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Leader of the Opposition):: May I inquire of the Minister
of the Interior whether or not there has been any change in the regulations imposing additional taxes on oil companies? I had a telegram asking me to inquire in the house this afternoon and I forgot to send it to my hon. friend.


Charles A. Stewart: Changes were contemplated
which were designed to come into effect on July 1. A royalty was to be collected on oil. Very strong representation, however, was made to extend that period, and I am now considering the matter.


Richard Bedford Bennett: There is another question arising out of that. Is it the intention of the government to make such regulations in view of legislation now pending in respect to the province of Alberta?


Charles A. Stewart: In view of the fact that their natural resources will very likely be transferred at an early date, I was going to recommend to the government that we do not bring that regulation into effect.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

William Lyon Mackenzie King: Order number one, supply.


Richard Bedford Bennett: As the rule now stands, unless
unanimous consent is granted the Speaker cannot leave the chair to-day for supply. The Prime Minister mentioned yesterday evening that we would go into supply to-day. I overlooked the fact that it was Friday and I fancy he did too. We are quite content so far as the opposition is concerned, that supply should be proceeded with to-day by consent, provided that on Tuesday next Public Works supply is proceeded with. That is, the supply of no other department will be proceeded with on Tuesday next but we shall go on with Public Works so that there may be an opportunity for moving an amendment before the Speaker leaves the chair.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The leader of the opposition is quite right in assuming that I had not noticed that to-day was Friday, and neither did he. I will undertake to say that on Tuesday next we will go into supply again on the estimates of the Department of Public Works, but I would say to my hon. friend that before going into supply, we would like to proceed a step further with the three motions concerning which notice has been given to-day. One of the motions includes the introduction of the bill with respect to war veterans. Our reason for that is this: the only government days at present are Tuesday and Friday, and I believe it would be helpful to the house, before proceeding further with the discussion of the resolution moved by the

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario (Mr. Mc-Gibbon), that it have before it the legislation which the government intends to bring down. With these exceptions we will carry out the arrangement as suggested.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Speaking for those associated with me, I may say there is no objection to proceeding to the bill stage provided that on Tuesday next we do not proceed with the second reading of the bills.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That will be understood.



DEPARTMENT OP PUBLIC WORKS

[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Johnston in the chair.
Public Works chargeable to income-harbours and rivers-Nova Scotia, $893,700.
The CHAIRMAN:: Is it the desire of the committee that we should take up the resolution as a whole or item by item?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Item by item.
Barringtsn Passage-ice piers, $25,000.


Mr. HANSON:: My information is that
the contract for this work was let to a gentleman by the name of Boone, whom I know very well. I understand that the work involved very considerable difficulty and that the department took over the work. I should like full information on this item. Mr. Boone is a very competent contractor. He has done a very great deal of work in the province of New Brunswick; he happens to be one of my constituents, and I know him very well. I am wondering just what the trouble was and how the government proposes to use him. Some of the workmen, I might point out, have not been paid. One of them came to see me just before I left home, and told me that the government engineer at Halifax, who was then in charge of the work, which I understand has been suspended1 on account of the season, had assured them that they would all be paid. I know that some of these men have not been paid, and I think that the government ought to see that they are paid. That is only one phase of the situation.
I think we ought to have a very full explanation from the minister as to the position of this contract.


Hon. J. C. ELLIOTT (Minister of Public Works):: The contract was let on September 22, 1928, to Mr. Boone, an order in council f\Tr. Mackenzie King.]
having been passed accepting his tender for the construction of pier No. 5. The work did not proceed in accordance with the contract, and it was taken out of Mr. Boone's hands and proceeded with by the district engineer. As far as the sub-contractors are concerned, when a contract gets into that position, it takes a little time to make all the necessary adjustments, but I understand that these matters are being looked after.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The minister has not quite covered the ground. I have no brief for Mr Boone. He has not retained me or consulted me, but I have been consulted by some of the men who have not received their pay for the work they did previous to the government taking over the contract. I am very much surprised to hear that Mr. Boone has fallen down on this job, and I would like to know what the trouble is. The minister said that he did not proceed in accordance with the contract. Mr. Boone is a very capable man. He has plant, machinery and equipment; he has experience and he has capital. How was Mr. Boone used? Was he simply shouldered off the job? I would like the details. I do not question the minister's word as to anything he said, but he has not said anything, and that is the fault I have to find. For a lawyer I am rather surprised that he is so sparing of information. If there is anything damaging to Mr. Boone in connection with the contract, let us have it, because I am satisfied that he will have an answer.


John Campbell Elliott: I can give the whole particulars if my hon. friend wishes them, but I have not them at hand. My information is that Mr. Boone took the contract, started upon the work, quit it, was notified to proceed at various times and did not proceed, and it was not until he had been notified and bad omitted to proceed with the contract that steps were taken to have the work carried on under the direction of the engineer.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That being the case, will
the minister produce some evidence to support that statement?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I would like to know what you. are going to do about the unpaid workmen? Are they to be allowed to starve? The men worked up to the time the contract was taken over by the government. I am not saying that it was taken over wrongly or improperly; I do not know; I am looking for

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
information. But I do know that one man at least needs the money that is owing to him. He has waited all winter for it. I told him that he had better get after Mr. Boone, who is quite capable of paying these men.


John Campbell Elliott: Quite so. You are right.


Richard Burpee Hanson: But the government must
have this man's deposit in their hands.


Mr. CHAPLIN:: Yes, he must have put
up a deposit. It is the government's business to look after the employees.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Has the deposit been released?


John Campbell Elliott: No.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I think the minister had
better let the item stand until we get more information.


John Campbell Elliott: I shall be very glad to
furnish my hon. friend with all the information.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am not making any
charges against the department. I am looking for information. The minister's statement so far as it has gone is all right, but let us have the whole facts.


John Campbell Elliott: I can probably get all
the information before six o'clock, and I am quite sure that I can satisfy my hon. friend that the matter has been proceeded with in the usual way. What my hon. friend has said with regard to Mr. Boone I understand to be true, that he is a man of substance and quite capable of paying all these people to whom he owes any obligation.


Richard Burpee Hanson: In that connection may I
say that the gentleman who interviewed me told me that the engineer said that the government would pay him and the other workmen, but that promise, if made, has not been implemented. I do not say that it was made, but I believe the man was truthful, and certainly the government have it in their power to pay these men from one source or another, out of the progress estimates, out of the drawback or out of the deposit.
Item stands.
Black Point-improvements, $1,800.


Mr. MACDONALD (Richmond):: Where
is this wharf?


John Campbell Elliott: It is in Cape Breton
North-Victoria.


Finlay MacDonald: Just
whereabouts?


John Campbell Elliott: It is about four miles
west of Baie St. Lawrence near the northern extremity of Cape Breton Island.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Broad Cove Marsh-breakwater-wharf extension, $9,500.
Mr. ERNST:: Where is this?


Mr. MACDOUGALL:: I can tell my hon.
friend where it is. It is a very important fishing centre in my county, and I am very glad to see an item in the estimates for this very much needed work. How is this work to be done-by contract or by day labour? If by contract, who is the contractor?


John Campbell Elliott: It will be done by contract; that is the expectation.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Will the fair-wage
clause be introduced and enforced on this work?


John Campbell Elliott: That clause is in all the
contracts made by the Public Works department.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: But it is enforced
in very few of them. On all the public works in my county the men are working ten hours a day at 25 cents an hour-$250 a day. I feel that that is unfair and does not fulfil the requirements of the fair-wage clause. I think something should be done about it, not only in my own county but in every place throughout the Dominion where public works are being carried on.


John Campbell Elliott: This is the first intimation I have had of anything in the nature of a complaint. Nothing has reached me that unfair wages are being paid. All our contracts contain the fair-wage clause; that is, wages satisfactory to the Department of Labour are being paid on these contracts.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Last session a certain amount of money was voted for works on the harbour in the town of Inverness, and the wages there paid on the average were only twenty-five cents per hour for a ten-hour day. I do not think that is giving the labourers of this country a fair deal. Last session when I criticised the Department of Labour the hon. minister (Mr. Heenan) promised me definitely that a bill would be introduced this session to enforce the fair-wage clause. It has not been introduced. It seems to me that the government should set an example to private corporations in the matter of wages. Does the Minister of Labour intend to introduce that bill this session, in accordance with his promise last year?
154	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.


Mr. HEENAN:: Mr. Chairman, you will
understand that my estimates are not under consideration just now.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Don't be so nervous.


Peter Heenan: This is the first time I
have ever been accused of nervousness. If the prevailing rates of wages are not being paid in my hon. friend's district, one reason is that we have received no complaints that such is the case. We have a fair-wage officer for the maritime provinces who goes around checking up wages.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: And making votes.


Peter Heenan: And enforcing the fairwage clause where there are any complaints.


Mr. CANTLEY:: All I have to say is, if
the statement of the minister is correct, officers of other departments of the government are complaining to the foremen in charge of public works that the wages being paid are too high, although the wages are much lower than those required by the fair-wage clause under similar circumstances.


Peter Heenan: Did I understand the hon. member to say that our officer is raising the wages on public works above that which prevails in the district ?


Thomas Cantley: No. I did not say anything of the kind. I said if the minister's statement was correct, other officers of the government -not in his department-are complaining to the foremen in charge of construction work that the wages paid are too high, while those wages are below the wages called for by the fair-wage clause.


Mr. ADSHEAD:: Is the fair-wage clause
posted up so that all men can see it?


Peter Heenan: Yes.


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Absolutely not.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Is the notice posted up where every man can see it?


John Campbell Elliott: Those are the instructions given by the department.


Finlay MacDonald: I may say for the information of the minister that during the past year various public works have been constructed in my constituency, and no fair-wage clause has been posted up; in fact everything has been done as secretly as possible. Furthermore, the general public are not permitted to get an opportunity to ask for work. They must come and promise under oath that they will support the party, and then they get $2.50 a day.


William Gordon Ernst: Hear, hear. In Halifax in
particular.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Mr. Chairman, I do not think we should dismiss this matter too lightly, for it is very important. If organized or unorganized labour in this country is to be given a chance at all, the first body to set a good example in the matter of wages should be the government of Canada. I am particularly pressing this point because of the definite promise made by the Minister of Labour last session, in response to criticisms levelled against government contracts by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. WToodsworth) and myself, that something would be done this session to see that the fair-wage clause not only would be inserted in all government contracts but that fair wages would be paid in all such cases. Now, fair wages are not being paid on all government contracts. In my own town of Inverness last year certain people withdrew their young men from public works because the wages were too low. These young men, about twenty years of age, were working on one of these government works, employment of a very trying nature, for 25 cents an hour, working ten hours a day. As a matter of fact in that community the minimum wage is $3.25. Not to apply this rate on public works is an absolutely unfair condition of things. I want to see public works constructed, but at the same time I want to see the men who work on them given a chance to live.


Mr. HEAPS:: Does the Minister of Public
Works admit that the men employed there were receiving only 25 cents an hour?


John Campbell Elliott: I cannot tell what amount the contractor is paying his men in each case unless a complaint is made, when we have it investigated, or unless the engineer or whoever is in charge goes around to the work and finds that less than the regular wages are being paid. Our experience has been that fair wages are usually paid, or else there is a complaint. In the cases in question, we have had no complaint.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Supposing it is a fact that
these men have been receiving only 25 cents an hour, when they were supposed to be receiving 334 cents per hour under the fair-wage clause, will the Department of Labour see to it that these men get back the difference in pay?


Peter Heenan: Just let me say this: If any hon. member of this house can show me where the men have not been receiving the prevailing rate of wages I will undertake to

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
collect the difference between what they have been paid and what they should have been paid. This last year we have collected thousands of dollars in back pay, where we have been able to find such cases.


Mr. SPENCE:: Is it not specifically mentioned in each contract what the prevailing rate of wages in that part of the country shall be. It is always specified in any big contracts that are let what the prevailing rate of wages shall be for labour.


Thomas Cantley: I was not referring to work carried on by contract. I was referring to work carried on by the government itself through foremen appointed by them, recommended by a certain man who had 'the patronage in the county. The engineer comes along and tells the foreman that he is paying too much. That is the situation.
Mr. ARTHUR'S: Will the Minister of Labour state whether he has had any complaints from 'that particular province.


Peter Heenan: Yes, we have investigated-


Mr. ARTHURS:: How many complaints has this officer reported, so far as government works are concerned, in the province of Nova Scotia?


Peter Heenan: We generally get the complaint from the men, and then an officer goes to adjust it. We do not get the complaint from the officer himself.


James Arthurs: I thought the minister said a few moments ago that he had an officer in Nova Scotia whose duty it was to visit the various public works to see that the men received proper pay.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: May I ask the Minister of Labour if he knows of the labour unions being consulted as to what the standard rates of wages are.


Peter Heenan: We consult everybody.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The minister cannot get away with any statement like that. There is a great deal of money being spent in my constituency by day labour, and I will tell you the little man who is consulted. His name is Peter J. Hughes. He was the man who stuck himself up the night before nomination day to run against me. He is a decent mao. I have not anything against Peter Hughes, but he is the man who is consulted, and the minister cannot get away with any statement like that, so far as I am concerned, because I know that what I say is tme. And I know who the foreman is and the foreman tells me that he was only to hire such men as
Hughes told him to hire, and he was only [DOT]to pay such wages as were agreed upon in the same area. The minister cannot say that he consults everybody, because we know to the contrary.


Peter Heenan: And I want, to say to you that an bon. member cannot get away with that with the Minister of Labour either.


Mr. RYCKMAN:: Don't sidestep.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am not afraid of the hon. minister.


Peter Heenan: If there is any department of the government that is out of politics it is the Labour department. There is neither a member of parliament nor a defeated candidate consulted in the matter of labour disputes or fair wages.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Nobody is talking about
that.


Mr. MANION:: The Minister of Labour says that the Labour department is out of politics. Well, if there is any department of this government that is absolutely in politics it is the Labour department. The Minister of Labour deserted his duties as the Minister of Labour in the federal parliament during the last provincial election and toured all over the north country, going into practically every constituency, riding in airplanes, probably at the expense of this country, at the same time boasting what they were going to do to Howard Ferguson in that election.


Edmond Baird Ryckman: And incidentally made bets from the platform.
Mr. HEENAiN: I thought my hon. friend invited me to go to Fort William.


Robert James Manion: Yes, and if he does as much harm to his party in my election as he did in the provincial election I hope he comes and stays there.


Ernest Lapointe: He did not take his department along with him.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: We are having a rather interesting discussion. This is a matter that should 'be aired on the floor of the house some time, and we might as well do it now. In respect to the contention of the hon. minister that no politics have been played in the matter of fair wages, and that the labour unions are being consulted, I am not going to say that that is untrue, but I do say that in so far as my constituency is concerned it is absolutely not the fact, and if he has heard anything to the contrary it is absolutely wrong. The man who is consulted is the defeated

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
Liberal candidate, and before you can get a job on a public work commanding the magnificent sum of 25 cents an hour for ten hours a day you have to have a written form signed by that defeated candidate, and I know that to be true. I am not protesting against that on political grounds because it is the beet thing that could possibly happen to me politically. In the town of Inverness some Liberals left that work because they were not being paid a living wage. I do not wish to introduce any politics into this. We are all very sincere when we make that statement. But what I am interested in is this: I take the stand that on public works in this country a living wage should be paid to the people who are working there no matter how they got there, so long as they are doing an honest day's work. The hon. Minister of Labour last year-and I want to emphatically recall this to his mind-definitely promised that some action would be taken this year; he promised my friend from Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) and myself when his estimates were under discussion last year that legislation would be introduced providing for a living wage for men who work on government works. Now, that has not been done and I am very much interested in that. I believe every hon. member no matter to what political party he belongs is also interested, and I want to ask the minister if he intends to do that this session, and if not, why not? I think I am entitled to a reply from my hon. friend. This is a serious matter, and when he makes a serious promise he cannot throw it lightly aside.


Peter Heenan: The Minister of Labour's estimates are not under consideration now.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: It does not matter. Your action is under consideration now. It is not a matter of estimates at all. I am just asking, in this connection, whether you are introducing legislation at this session. If you are, I would like you to tell the house.


Mr. SMOKE:: Mr. Chairman, we are 'told that there have 'been no complaints to reach either the Minister of Public Works or the Minister of Labour that the fair wage has not been given to those workmen. This government of all governments is appointing officers throughout the country at large salaries to do the work. Let them appoint overseers or inspectors whose duty it will be to inspect every public work and see that the workmen get the fair wage. Why do they not do that instead of asking the poor man-as they were asking the poor soldier the other day, to prove his case-to make the complaint him-
self. The first thing a workman finds when be makes a complaint is that he has lost his j ob. If an inspector appointed by the government is on the job to see that the contractor pays the fair wage all that will be done away with.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: I am rather astonished to find that the methods quoted by my friend to my right are entirely different from those found in my own experience. You will remember that last year this house voted a considerable sum of money to build the Calgary post office. One of the first things I found there was that the Minister of Labour had sent down a fair wage officer who consulted both unions there as to what the standard of wages should be. At that particular time I wrote to the Minister of Public Works suggesting to him that only people who were residents of Calgary should be engaged upon the work. I received a very abrupt reply from the Minister of Public Works, in which be said this was a Dominion concern and that they could not refuse employment to any Canadian citizen.


William Gordon Ernst: May I ask a question? Was there any defeated Liberal candidate there?


Herbert Bealey Adshead: No, there was not; I do not know about the riding itself, but I suppose there was in West Calgary. However, as far as I was concerned there were no politics in the matter and I believe there was no discrimination shown as between the different unions. I know the president of one of the unions went down with me to see if the fair wage clause was posted up. It was not my business to look after that, but he found it and he said, "I am perfectly willing to confess that there are international union men engaged there, together with men of the allCanadian congress, and they are all receiving the same standard of wages." On the other hand, on the Ghost river construction last year men were being paid very low wages. We complained to the Minister of Labour about the matter and fought it with him for nearly a year, with the result that almost $20,000 in back wages was paid. Many a man received a Christmas present of $100 or more which he had not expected, and so I am rather astonished to find that while this was the case in one constituency it was not the case in another.


Mr. GEARY:: I have received through the mail from two or three friends of mine belonging to associations in the city of Toronto and throughout the province, copies of a draft bill with regard to fair wages which they had submitted to the minister, as I understand

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
it, relying somewhat on an engagement of the government through the Minister of Labour last year to introduce such legislation during this session. I do not know very much about it, but I do remember the minister saying that he would undertake to submit legislation of that sort this year. Surely it is not unreasonable for the Minister of Labour, who is in his seat, to be expected to answer civil questions. This concerns his department, and the only construction 1 can put upon his refusal to answer is that he does not know anything about it. So man}- things in his department create a little suspicion, and there are so many things about which he does not know that I am not surprised at his inability to answer the question. Perhaps I might put it again: Are we to have such legislation this year.


Peter Heenan: All I can say just now is that in the Department of Labour we had a bill drafted, when the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada presented another bill of their own. That bill is now under consideration and I hope to be able to make a statement before very long as to what will be done in that connection.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: That hardly deals with the case.


Finlay MacDonald: I have no intention of embarrassing the Minister of Labour at all-


Richard Burpee Hanson: Why not?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Finlay MacDonald: Because he is a warm personal friend of mine, but there is a little information I should like to get from him. He mentioned the fair wage officer down in Nova Scotia, implying that this man would see that justice was done. Perhaps he could give - us some information about the capabilities of that gentleman, as to whether he would know what was a fair wage. From what I know of him I do not think the man ever did a day's work in his life. That man has been down in my constituency; what he was doing there I do not know, but I have a shrewd suspicion that the gentleman was there on a political mission, in spite of the statement by the minister that there are no politics in his department.


Peter Heenan: I do not know the fair wage officer, or at least I did not know him until he entered the service; he was appointed by the Civil Service Commission. I might just say it is the prevailing rate of wages which we try to enforce on these contracts. It is
not a fair wage; that is a misnomer. It is the prevailing rate of wages in that district, and whether or not we will change that policy this session is for further consideration later on.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: I should like to ask the minister if it is the wage paid to organized or unorganized labour in the district which is paid on public works.


Peter Heenan: We do not differentiate between oiganized and unorganized labour.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: For instance, in my constituency the lowest wage to coal miners is $3.25 for an eight and a half hour day. On the public works in the same town you pay 25J cents per hour for a ten hour day. However, I believe if the minister intends to bring down such a bill as he promised last year, it should state that the minimum wage on government contracts should be based in accordance with the wage paid organized workmen in this country, with corresponding hours of labour. We have a ten hour day on public works, and it certainly should be an eight hour day.


Peter Heenan: It is quite evident that the prevailing rate of wages is not quite understood. It is not the prevailing rate of wages in the particular district with regard to mining and carpentering; it is the prevailing rate on similar undertakings. That is to say, the prevailing rate to carpenters in the same district and to bricklayers in the same district is taken as the basis, not the wages of miners and other workmen of that type.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Could we have this fair wage clause read? I should like to hear it, together with the covenant the contractor signs to put it into effect.


Mr. CANNON:: Look it up yourself; you have been talking about it for the last hour and I am surprised to know that you have not read it.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I thank the Solicitor General for sticking his nose into this, which is not his business.


Lucien Cannon: This is my business; the ministers are not here to read what hon. gentlemen can read for themselves.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The ministers are here to answer civil questions, and there will be no public business done until those questions are answered. The Solicitor General cannot get away with anything like that. I ask now that the Minister of Public Works read the fair wage clause which is in government contracts.

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NS.


Lucien Cannon: Why should he?


Richard Burpee Hanson: Why should he not? It is a matter of public business; it relates to a public contract, and the public want to know what this clause is. We as members of this house have the right to know, and I am sure the minister will be the last to refuse.


John Campbell Elliott: There is not the slightest objection. Of course I do not carry the agreements around with me, but I would be very glad to send to my hon. friend a copy of the contract, possibly before six o'clock.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is fair enough; if the minister does not have it with him he cannot do the impossible.


John Campbell Elliott: There is no question about it; it is inserted in all these contracts.


Mr. PRICE:: I think, in view of the fact that the labour organizations throughout the country have listened on many occasions to what the minister has promised with regard to the inclusion of this clause, it is time we had a full explanation of the matter in order that the report may go out and the different labour organizations throughout Canada know the minister's stand on this matter. I would ask the minister to read the clause.


Peter Heenan: I have already answered that question twice. For the third time let me say we had a bill drawn up to provide for a fair rate of wages to be introduced as a government measure, when the Trades and Labour Congress presented a bill of their own. That bill is under consideration, but, as you know, all bills which come before parliament have to be considered by the Justice department. When we are considering the question of rvages and civil rights there are many things which might be ultra vires this parliament and we do not desire to introduce a bill until we are assured that it will be intra vires parliament.


Mr. GRIMMER :: Will that bill come before the house this session?


Peter Heenan: I cannot say until we get it back.


Mr MACDONALD (Richmond):: Who is consulted by the government as to the appointment of foremen and workmen employed on public works in the various constituencies throughout the maritime provinces?


John Campbell Elliott: The foremen are appointed by the department.


Finlay MacDonald: On whose recommendation ?


John Campbell Elliott: The recommendation may come from various sources, usually the district engineer.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Why is not the minister a little more candid; we would not think any less of him if he told the truth. Does he not know that the district engineer invariably goes to the sitting member, if he is supporting the government, or the defeated candidate, and obtain his O.K. on the appointment of a foreman? Mr. Stead is the district engineer at St. John. I know Mr. Stead and he is a very admirable gentleman, but he would no more think of appointing a foreman without the concurrence of the defeated candidate than he would think of flying. Why does not the minister admit that it is a matter of political patronage?


Mr. JACOBS:: Perhaps we could put a
more liberal construction upon the minister's suggestion.


Finlay MacDonald: Am I
to infer that the engineer of the Public Works department goes to the various committees in the constituency and demands of that committee that the man who applies for work- it is through these various committees that the men get their employment-must go on oath that he will vote for the Liberal party, before he receives employment? Am I to understand that the minister allows officials in his department to go that far? If that is the case,, I say that it is time that we should have something done regarding employment in the Public Works department of this country. One poor man who was on his deathbed informed me that he had not voted for me during the last election as he always had done. When I asked him why he told me, as he would have worded his last will and testament, that he was a poor man in need of bread and butter and he had to take an oath before he could obtain employment on the public works in the constituency which I represent.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Shame.


Samuel William Jacobs: He did one good act in his
life, anyway.


Finlay MacDonald: He did not consider it a good act for he was repenting of it upon his deathbed.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Chairman, not long since I had the opportunity of observing the very thing mentioned by the hon. member for Richmond-West Cape Breton. I am not mindful of the fact that in days gone by practices to some extent similar to this have been indulged in, but the stage has been reached where something should be done to

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
stop it; it is really a crying scandal. I had a man come to me a short time ago whose family was destitute, he could not get work on any of these new public buildings of which the minister talked so much and which the government is discussing in this house as a means of providing labour for the unemployed. Before he could obtain employment he had to have the approval and O.K. of the president of the Liberal association.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Was that in Calgary?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yres, in Calgary.


Thomas Cantley: And in Halifax as well.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The hon. member for
East Calgary (Mr. Adshead) has the approval of the Liberal party, whose candidate he hopes to be.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: If the hon. leader of the opposition means to infer that I have any part in that practice, he is entirely mistaken.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I do not mean to say that the hon. member is a party to it, but I do say that he has the support of the Liberal party and he hopes to obtain their approval as their candidate at the next election, and hopes to obtain the patronage as well. I put this question to the house and to the country: Shall the taxpayers' money-not the Liberal taxpayers, but the Liberal and Conservative taxpayers

be used for the purposes of supplying work for Liberals alone while those who are unfortunate enough not to agree with them-putting their construction upon it-are to starve? In times like this, when unemployment has reached the stage where we see such delegations as came down from western Canada the other day and made the statements which were made in the presence of the Minister of Public Works and the Prime Minister of this country, it is time something was done. The Prime Minister told that delegation of the public undertakings in which the government was engaging in order to supply work to the unemployed. Are we to understand that only those who will promise to support the Liberal candidates are to obtain work? That is the question. Are women to starve and children to be destitute because the husband will not promise that he will vote for the Liberal party? Are children to go in rags because mothers will not promise that they will vote for the Liberal candidate? Are they to sell their consciences and their souls and their judgment merely to obtain a little employment? What is more, before the house prorogues these matters will be brought up in the Public Accounts committee and details will be offered for the attention of this house. Last year it was shown how
men in Ottawa had to obtain a chit from somebody-to quote the language of the Minister of Trade and Commerce-before they could obtain work on the canal. If that condition exists in the city of Ottawa, what is it like in other communities? You will observe that I have been fair enough to say that it is not an unusual thing. Many Conservatives or Unionists had to seek the support of the party candidate in order to get employment, but in times like this for a man to be told that he cannot obtain work unless he signs a document or gives a promise, is entirely against the common sense and decency of Canada. It is a very difficult thing for the government to decide, and I will admit that it requires courage upon their part to deal with it.
Then in connection with the point raised by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Heenan). A few days ago I drew attention to the fact that the Trades and Labour Congress had Mr. 0. M. Biggar, K.C., an eminent counsel, prepare a bill for them, which bill was printed in English and French and circulated throughout the country. That bill provides that certain hours of labour shall obtain on public undertakings, and that certain wages shall be paid. This is the bill which the minister promised last year would be introduced at this session of parliament, or a bill containing similar terms. We were given to understand that this bill prepared by Mr. Biggar was not unacceptable to the government, but that bill has not been introduced. Is the government itself to be the principal offender with respect to the hours of labour and wages paid? Last year we had men leaving the harbour of Halifax bound for the Hudson bay under contracts which I think every member of this house would regard as being, shall I say, most offensive, because they permitted the contractor practically to traffic in the toil of his fellow man. That is what they meant. I submit the time has come when the committee has a right to expect from the minister a clear statement, in view of the fact that the attention of the committee has been directed to what I call a very grievous injury that has been done to some people in this country who cannot get employment because in the expenditure of the people's money they will not subordinate their convictions to the political exigencies of the party in power. That is the position.


John Campbell Elliott: Might I ask the hon. member a question? I did not want to interrupt him while he was speaking. Did I understand him to say that in regard to the public build-
1G0

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
ing in Calgary, it was necessary for a man before he could be employed to have a certificate from some representative of the Liberal party, or something to that effect?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Something to that effect, yes, the fact being that Mr. Young, who is the president of the Liberal Association, and one other gentleman, Mr. Connelly, who is conected with another branch of the Liberal party there, have to give their opinion-I shall put it as generally as that-in order that men may get employment. Of course when we confront them with this, they all deny it, but here is an individual who comes and gives his name and says that this is the situation. It is costing the province of Alberta $3,000 a day for unemployment, and some of these men would get a job if they would only be prepared to forswear their convictions politically.


John Campbell Elliott: I just want to answer the statements made by two of the hon. gentlemen who have spoken last. First of all, with regard to the oath being required, as was the case with the leader of the opposition, that is news to me; I never heard of it before. As regards the man who is doing work under contract, he has, as has been explained by the hon. member for East Calgary, an absolutely free hand as to whom he will engage. He gets the contract because he is the lowest tenderer. There is no limitation placed upon him. As has been said by the hon. member for East Calgary, we cannot dictate to him whether he shall take the labour from his own town or from some other town. The thing we have endeavoured to the very best of our ability to impose upon the contractors this winter, has been that they proceed with the contracts with all possible diligence. There is no obligation on the contractors, I may say, to proceed in unduly extreme weather where a contractor proceeding during very cold weather is going to incur great risk.


Richard Bedford Bennett: You cannot mix cement in freezing weather.


John Campbell Elliott: You can readily understand you cannot do work like mixing cement and that sort of thing in extremely cold weather. There have been disasters in the past on this account. You have to be careful to have sufficiently warm weather so that you will not get your cement frozen and that sort of thing. With regard to the contractors on the Confederation building, they have gone the length of heating the building, putting an artificial screen around it and putting stoves or heaters throughout. They keep thermometers in the

building so as to know that they are maintaining a temperature high enough to enable them to lay their mortar with safety. There have been no objections from those contractors. So far as I am aware they are all proceeding with great diligence in view of the kind of weather they have had to face this winter. There has been no regulation by this department as to whom they shall take on as labourers nor from what town they shall take them.
As regards the letter mentioned by my hon. friend (Mr. Adshead) I regret very much that any letter should be sent out by the department, either from any official of it or from myself, that would seem to him to be abrupt, but we must allow the contractor who gets a contract because bis tender is lower than that of other contractors, to be the boss as to the labour that he will engage.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: In view of the statement of the leader of the opposition, some little explanation is due from me. The house and the country, from hearing what the leader of the opposition has said, might infer that I was possibly instrumental in trying to get some person a job in the Calgary post office. I wish to deny emphatically that in any case have I asked for a job for a man in the city of Calgary so far as the Public Works is concerned. When any unemployed returned man or civilian has asked me to get him a job, I have never inquired as to his politics.
As regards my connection with the Liberal party officially, -when I was nominated by the Dominion Labour party I made it clear in my nomination speech which was quoted in the Calgary papers-possibly the hon. member for West Calgary has read it-and I repeated it in my first speech in the house, that I was a low tariff man; in fact, I was a free trader. I said: I believe in Liberal politics but I do not believe in their practices. That was before I was nominated by the Dominion Labour party.


Mr. SHORT:: What item is the hon. member discussing?


Herbert Bealey Adshead: I will go a little further as regards my association with the Liberal party.
I was asked by four members of the Liberal party-


Harry Bernard Short: What item is the hon. member discussing?


Herbert Bealey Adshead: The hon. member for West Calgary attacked me in the house and if it comes to a question of privilege, I have a right to speak about it. I met four members of the Liberal party after my nomination by the Dominion Labour party and they asked

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NS.
me whether I would not accept an endorsation by the Liberal party. I said that I could not accept. I said that those who believed in the principles I enunciated, would vote for me. No doubt they did and I hope they will again. I made those statements before the United Farmers of Alberta convention and they accepted me, and they would not have done so if I had been attached to the Liberal party.


Thomas Cantley: The Minister of Public Works has made very definite statements in regard to the practice in the matter of contracts, but he has made no statement in regard to the labour employed where the government themselves are doing the work under foremen subject to the oversight of the district engineer. What is the practice in that connection, because that is what I am more interested in than in government contracts? Practically all of the work in Pictou is carried on, not by contract, 'but by day labour. What rates of wages are paid by the government on work done on public works carried out by day labour?


John Campbell Elliott: As regards the rate of wages, we pay the prevailing wage for similar work in that district.
Mr. CANTLEY": Is the hon. member sure of that?


John Campbell Elliott: That is the policy of the department. I have no complaint, so far as I know, of that policy not being followed in any part of the county of Pictou. I am not saying that on some occasions less than the prevailing wage may have been paid, but I have had no record or complaint of this until what has been mentioned to-day. As regards the selection of wage earners there, the matter of foremen upon the work, that is a matter which is settled after a consultation with the people in whom the government has confidence to recommend someone who will faithfully and properly perform the duty of foreman.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Who are these individuals?


John Campbell Elliott: I would say that as a general rule the Liberal candidates are consulted.


William Gordon Ernst: Who else?


John Campbell Elliott: Of course, there are no such instructions from me, but I understand that for a number of years the practice has been- I do not think any hon. gentleman will deny this-for the engineer to consult the government representative in that particular district. The practice is exactly the same as was followed by my hon. friend from Pictou during 2419-11
the short time that the Conservative government was in power in 1926. I think that his recommendations were then taken, and foremen were employed on his recommendation. So far as I am aware there has been no change in the practice in that regard in recent years.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: But the difference was that the hon. member for Pictou was the elected representative of the people, not a defeated candidate.


Thomas Cantley: So far as I can recall, only one man was recommended by me, and he was a good man. Will the minister be good enough to tell us on whose recommendation work was done last year in the county of Pictou? Was it on the recommendation of the defeated candidate?


John Campbell Elliott: I would not be in a position to say offhand. I have no doubt that the engineer would consult the defeated candidate in Pictou, but I do not recall who he was.
Mr. CANTLEY": Mr. Fraser.


John Campbell Elliott: Mr. Fraser was getting along in years and I think wished to be relieved of the responsibility of advising the government.


James Dew Chaplin: Who subbed for him?


John Campbell Elliott: I do not think he named anybody to substitute for him, but I assume that the engineer would then consult with somebody else who was known to represent the government and on whom he could rely.


Thomas Cantley: I think I can refresh the minister's memory. Mr. Fraser made some recommendations, but later he threw up the whole business of making recommendations because he was dissatisfied in regard to several matters. Then another man was taken into the confidence of the minister. He had a lot of correspondence with the minister and his engineer. There is a file that high, and I did not think that the minister would forget that bulky correspondence so soon. I thought he would have recalled it before this discussion went so far.


John Campbell Elliott: I think I found out at the close of our investigation that the gentleman in question was much better known to my hon. friend than he was to me.
Mr. CANTLEY": That is another story. If he had been is well known to the minister as he was to others, possibly the minister might never have recognized him.


John Campbell Elliott: My hon. friend said last year that he was a good man.

162	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NJS.


Thomas Cantley: The fact of the matter is that the party in question recommended a certain man as foreman on the Bailey's Brook work. What happened? Your engineer went down there and reported on the work. Then you sent another engineer, and he reported adversely that the work was of the worst character that he ever saw. The foreman was then discharged. You had difficulty with his accounts. Then this gentleman I speak of recommended another man. Was he satisfactory, I ask the minister? That is the history of that one particular job. Every man that was appointed and all the work that was done was done on the recommendation of this same man. Again, you started to build a wharf at Pictou Landing by day labour; the foreman began building the wharf at the wrong end. It was not completed, and I submit it never will be a satisfactory job. You can begin to build a wharf at the extreme outer end or you can begin from the shore. Your man began at the wrong end in this case, with the result that the work is not completed, and it never will be a statisfactory structure if indeed it ever be completed, which at least is doubtful. That was all done by men appointed on the recommendation of this same gentleman. The minister knows quite well who he is. I am not going to advertise him further, because he was advertised considerably last year.


Abraham Albert Heaps: It would appear from the discussion that all parties are saints when in opposition and sinners when in office. I find out this afternoon that in the short period the Conservative government was in office in 1926 the members recommended certain individuals to do certain work. I think it is a very bad practice for any member to be consulted as to the work in his constituency. It is also a bad practice, I think, for the members to recommend any individual to do any work in their own constituency, and still worse is it for the defeated candidate to make such recommendations. The sooner this government and any government that may be in power in future can get away from that practice, the better it will be for all concerned.
I am still interested in the interpretation of the going rate of pay clause. I would take it from what the minister has said that if they find that the going rate of .pay is 25 cents an hour, that would be the wage irrespective of whether a man could live or starve on it. It appears that in Nova Scotia certain men employed by the government have been 
paid 25 cents an hour. The excuse may be made that that was the going rate of pay in that district, and consequently the contractor may have been entirely within the terms of the contract if he paid that rate. But I think the policy of the government ought to be to pay the men in its employ in whatever part of the country they may be, a reasonable living wage irrespective of what the going rate of pay may be in that district, and especially if it is 25 cents per hour. I think the going rate of pay clause in our contracts leaves a very big loop-hole for every government contractor to get through. Personally I would much prefer to see in all government contracts a fixed minimum rate of pay below which no contractor who accepts work from the government would be allowed to go. It has been stated by previous speakers that the government ought to be model employers of labour. If the government does not pay the men in its employ a reasonable wage, we cannot expect private employers of labour to do it.


John Campbell Elliott: Since the discussion started I have obtained the specifications for the extension of the breakwater at Brooklyn. But dealing first with the point my hon. friend from North Winnipeg has just brought up as to the Minister of Labour fixing a minimum wage, the rate is fixed by the Labour department based on the information they have as to what are fair wages or the prevailing rate in that particular district. The fair wage is based on the prevailing rate.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I do not accept that.


John Campbell Elliott: The prevailing rate is the deciding factor.


Abraham Albert Heaps: But it is not necessarily a fair rate.


John Campbell Elliott: I am not arguing that
point with my hon. friend. I have always found the Minister of Labour very diligent in seeing, wherever there was any douibt, that, the labourer got the benefit of the doubt. The Minister of Labour is asked to provide a clause in the contract stating what is a fair-wage. May I read the clause in regard to labour conditions in the contract under question?
No workman employed upon the said work shall at any time be paid less than the minimum rates of wages set forth in the fair-wage schedule following:

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NS.
Then follows the schedule:
Schedule of Wages and Working Day Hours Rates of Wages-Not lees than
Per	Hour	HourTrade or Class of Labour	hour	day	weekForeman Timberman.. ..	$ .65	9	54Carpenters	.60	9	54Concrete Foreman.. ..	.65	9	54Blacksmiths	.60	9	54Labourers	
Teamsters, team and	.30	9	54wagon	7.00	9	54Carters, horse and cart ..	5.00	9	54Piledriver, foreman	1.55	9	54Piledriver, crew	.35	9	54Timberman, skilled .. ..	.45	9	54Timberman, ordinary.. ..	.40	9	54
Any unavoidable overtime work in connection with the above to be paid for in conformity with
the custom of the locality.
Then there is this clause:
Where there are special circumstances which in the judgment of .the Minister of Labour make it expedient that he should do so, he may decide what are the current or fair and reasonable rates of wages for overtime, and what is the proper clasification of any work for the purposes of wages and hours. Immediately upon receipt of notice of any decision of the Minister of Labour hereunder, the contractor shall adjust the wages and hours and classification of work so as to give effect to such decision.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is that in reference to
overtime or to all labour?


John Campbell Elliott: The first sentence applies
to overtime I think. That is:
Where there are special circumstances which in the judgment of the Minister of Labour make it expedient that he should do so he may decide what are the current or fair and reason-ables rates of wages for overtime and what is the proper classification of any work for the purposes of wages and hours.
The next clause, I take it, does not refer to overtime, but to all work:
Immediately upon receipt of notice of any decision of the Minister of Labour hereunder the contractor shall adjust the wages and hours and classification of works so as to give effect to such decision.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is only overtime, is
it not?


John Campbell Elliott: No, it refers to "any
decision of the minister." The clause continues :
In case the contracter shall fail so to do or fail at any time to pay to any employee or employees for any services performed or for any hours of labour wages according to the rates set forth n the schedule or fixed therefor by the Minister of Labour heTeunder regarding overtime and classification, the Minister of Labour may authorize and direct the Minister to pay any such wages at the rates so fixed and to deduct the amount thereof from any 2419-Hi
moneys owing by the government to the contractor and any such payment shall for all purposes as between the contractor and the government be deemed and taken to be payment to the contractor, and the contractor shall be bound in every particular by any such authority, direction and payment as aforesaid. The powers of the Minister of Labour hereunder shall not be exercised as to any employee or employees where it is established to his satisfaction that an agreement in writing exists and is in effect between the contractor and the class of employees to which such employee or employees belong or the authorized representatives of such class of employees fixing rates of wages, overtime conditions and hour of labour.
Now, clause two:
The contractor shall post and keep posted in a conspicuous place on the premises where the contract is being executed, occupied or frequented by the workmen, the fair wages clause or schedule inserted in his contract for the protection of the workmen employed, also any decision of the Minister of Labour under the preceding paragraph.
I think perhaps those are all the terms in regard to which my hon. friend is interested.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am much obliged to the minister for reading those clauses to refresh our memory. To me their reading serves a very useful purpose. What the minister is reading from, I understand, is in connection with one of these very matters?


John Campbell Elliott: The Brooklyn contract.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The rates quoted are the
minimum rates for that particular job?


John Campbell Elliott: Quite so.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It would be interesting
to know just how those rates are arrived at, and if the contractor when he makes his tender knows that he will have to pay them.


John Campbell Elliott: What I am reading from
is the specification upon which the contractor tenders, so there can be no question about it.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is clear.


Thomas Cantley: What the minister has
read we all understand thoroughly. The contractor understands that those are the conditions governing his tender. But are those fair wage rates paid by the government when work is done under day labour, subject to the order of the public works engineer of the province and the foreman appointed to superintend the work?


John Campbell Elliott: That is the policy of the department.
164	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NS.


Thomas Cantley: Does the minister think
or now suggest that those rates of wages were paid by the government last year on work carried on in Nova Scotia by day labour?


John Campbell Elliott: I have heard nothing to
the contrary, and that is the policy of the department.


Thomas Cantley: If the minister has not
heard of it, I think he is the only man in the country who has not and does not know it to be a fact. Here is the difficulty. The government calls for tenders to carry out certain work in the province of Nova Scotia; the contractor is told in the advertisement that he must pay those rates of wages and lie figures on that basis; he and perhaps two or three other contractors tender; then the government engineer in the province says the tenders are excessive and recommends that the work be done by day labour. That . recommendation is acted upon, a superintendent or foreman is appointed, and the work is proceeded with. But those rates of wages are not paid. The result, of course, is apparent to everybody. The contractors who tendered have not got a fair deal. They are told that they must pay certain rates of wages. Then the work is carried on by the government by day labour and those rates are not paid by them, but much lower rates. That is the situation, and it is most unfair both for the contractors who tender and the labour concerned. Patronage is exercised in regard to that work, which is placed in the hands of friends of the government. These are the facts in such cases.


John Campbell Elliott: My hon. friend complains
that friends of the government are selected to do the work by day labour, and, if I understood him correctly, he complains also that those who are engaged on the work are not paid the same wages that are provided for in specifications such as I have read. I should like to call his attention to this phase of his argument. It does not look as if the so-called friends of the government are being given any great advantage if they are being treated as my hon. friend says.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The fact that people in
the city of St. John can get work at all is something. They would rather take any work than stand in breadlines or around soup kitchens. The minister should not plume himself on that condition of affairs.


John Campbell Elliott: Quite so, but as I understood the complaint it was that they were selected for this work on account of the recommendation of somebody who was friendly to the government.


William Gordon Ernst: They took advantage of
their importunities, that is all.


John Campbell Elliott: Well, all I can say with
regard to my hon. friend's suggestion is that I know he means to be accurate.


William Gordon Ernst: I am.


John Campbell Elliott: Will my hon. friend
pardon me. It is not to him I am alluding, it is to the hon. member for Piotou that I am referring just at the present time. I know he means to be accurate, and I think he is under a misapprehension when he says that those engaged on a day labour basis are not paid at the same rate as those who are engaged under contract. If it is so, it is a bit extraordinary and I have no information to that effect. I have had no complaint, that is all I can say.


Thomas Cantley: Mr. Chairman, in reply
to the minister I do not think I am mistaken. The minister has the evidence, that the provincial engineer has complained to the foreman that he is paying too high rates of wages when those wages were not in excess of those called for by the schedule. Will the minister deny that?


John Campbell Elliott: My hon. friend refers
to the provincial engineer.


Thomas Cantley: I refer to the Dominion
engineer resident in that particular province.


John Campbell Elliott: That he has complained
to the foreman?


Thomas Cantley: Yes.


John Campbell Elliott: Complaining that he was
paying too high wages when the wages that be was paying were no greater than those in the schedule?


Thomas Cantley: Yes.


John Campbell Elliott: Well, I would be surprised if it is the case, that is all. I have no intimation.


Thomas Cantley: If you look through the
file I think you will find it.


John Campbell Elliott: That may be, but I must say I would have expected a complaint from the workmen.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Cape St. Mary's-groyne, $4,000.
Harry Bernard Short: Will the minister explain
to us whether this is Cape St. Mary's in Digby county?


John Campbell Elliott: It is in Digby county.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NR.
Charloe cove-breakwater extension, $8,500.
Richard Burpee Hanson: I do not want to impede
those items at all, but I would like to ask the minister as to the very disastrous storm that took place a week ago last Sunday, and the wreckage that took place at Tiverton among the fishermen there. Is the Public Works department prepared to help those people, because they are taking up funds through the St. John Telegraph-Journal to help those fishermen whose traps were destroyed? Has there been any application made to the department for assistance there?


John Campbell Elliott: I would say to my hon.
friend, I have heard nothing of that.


Harry Bernard Short: I might say for the information of my hon. friend here that as Tiverton is in my constituency I understand damage has been caused to the breakwater there. The government have a very large breakwater at that point. I brought that to the attention of the minister the other day and he has promised to have his district engineer look into it and repairs effected immediately. That was the understanding, Mr. Minister?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, that was my understanding with my hon. friend, as soon as it could possibly be arranged.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Cow bay, (Port Morien)-breakwater repairs, $4,000.
Finlay MacDonald: Will
the minister kindly give us some information about that?


John Campbell Elliott: I would say to my hon.
friend that this is required to construct a portion of the breakwater two hundred and forty feet by twenty feet above low water level. It is asked for by the district engineer who reports that this section of the work is badly decayed, that the value of the fisheries there is $35,700, and other freight handled over the pier yearly $12,000, and it is likely to become worse if it is not remedied now.


Finlay MacDonald: I was
just going to call the attention of the minister to the extreme smallness of the vote, $1,000. That amount will never put that breakwater into any sort of shape at all. I think an item of $24,000 might possibly put that breakwater info good shape, but $4,000 is simply throwing it away.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It just shows they do not
intend to do it.


Finlay MacDonald: Four
thousand dollars is going to be of no assistance to the fishermen there.


John Frederick Johnston: Does the item carry?


Richard Burpee Hanson: The minister ought to
make some reply to that.


Finlay MacDonald: Will
that simply be a yearly grant, or do you intend to make it any more? [DOT]


John Campbell Elliott: Well, this is to repair the part of the breakwater that is the most decayed at the present time, and it is to reconstruct a portion two hundred and forty feet by twenty feet.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Just patching it up.


John Campbell Elliott: That is the estimated
cost sent in by the engineer. That is all I can say to my hon. friend.


Finlay MacDonald: Well,
two hundred feet of breakwater can never be repaired for $4,000. The thing is ridiculous on the face of it. It is absolutely broken down and washed away. There was some talk of building a wing that would afford some protection to the fishermen, but replacing the portion that is washed away cannot be done for $4,000 or $40,000. If it simply means the first instalment of work on that breakwater possibly it might be considered, but S4,000 is absolutely useless.


John Campbell Elliott: Mr. Chairman, I want to
be fair to my hon. friend. There is nothing in the detail which I have here indicating that this is not to cover the whole of the work that is contemplated by this repair. It is not part of a contract that is going to be let which will perhaps run into many times the amount, as we frequently do. That is the amount estimated to repair the portion of the breakwater that is now in the worst condition, and that is the estimate we have from the engineer as to what it will cost to do that.


Finlay MacDonald: I may say to the minister that I know the locality. I saw it last summer, and I can assure him that $4,000 is merely a drop in the bucket. It will be absolutely no use, as far as the fishermen are concerned. Unless you are prepared to increase the amount to a very large extent this expenditure is worthless.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Digby-harbour improvements, $250,000.
Harry Bernard Short: Mr. Chairman, I would like
to ask the minister to give us some explanation with reference to this vote. This is a
166	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NS.
pretty large amount, and I do not want the house to think that this is for the town of Digby alone. Digby is the Nova Scotia terminus of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and there is a very large government pier there. The Canadian Pacific Railway are putting on a new steamer this season from St. John to Digby, very much larger than the steamer that is running there now, and at the present time there is not sufficient accommodation. This is for the general benefit of Canada, not just for Digby or for the province of Nova Scotia, and I am very glad indeed to see that there is a sufficient amount put in the estimates to put this pier in perfect shape for the handling of the very large amount of traffic that is landed at that pier. I understand that tenders were asked for this work and these tenders closed on February 25, 1930. I would like to ask the minister what the department has decided so far as these tenders are concerned. How many tenders were received, who the successful tenderer is and what is the amount of the tender. I should like to know also if the work will be started at an early date, because it will be necessary that the work proceed almost immediately in order to have it completed when the new boat is ready for the route, which will be about the first of August.


John Campbell Elliott: I may say to my hon.
friend that the tenders only closed, as he stated, on Tuesday last, and they have not been considered by myself as yet. I received intimation to-day, however, that the Standard Construction Company was the lowest tenderer, and their tender for the portion of the work in which they were interested was $180,000.


Harry Bernard Short: That is just for the construction of the pier, I suppose, and I presume the balance of this vote will be for dredging the harbour. Am I correct?


John Campbell Elliott: There are five items included here.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Perhaps the minister would give us a general statement of the whole project, since it is quite important.


John Campbell Elliott: I shall be glad to do so.
We are providing for the following repairs and renewals to the pier, consisting of the removal of the old crib work and the renewal of the same in pile, trestle or new crib work; repairs to pier decking, construction of approach, installation of bollards, mooring posts elevator well shaft, and so on.


Mr. GARDINER:: What	is the amount
suggested for that work?


John Campbell Elliott: If my hon. friend will
permit me, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 are estimated at $184,820. That is the main contract, and we have a tender for $180,000, which was the lowest received.


Harry Bernard Short: That is $4,000 under your
estimate?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Harry Bernard Short: Then no doubt you will
accept that tender?


John Campbell Elliott: It does not very often
happen that the lowest tender is not accepted by this department.


Richard Burpee Hanson: You do slip sometimes?


John Campbell Elliott: Not very often. I do not think my hon. friend can tell me of an incident where the lowest tender was not accepted. Then paragraph 2 deals with widening the pier on the southern side 40 feet, for a length of 410 feet and on the northern side 20 feet for a distance of 370 feet, the work to be of pile bent construction. Paragraph 3 deals with the construction of a shed 320 feet long by 73 feet wide on the pier, and removal of the present freight shed. The tenders for these three items are estimated at 8184820. Then paragraph 4, for which the estimate is $36,000, provides for the installation of two electric elevators for combined freight and passenger service, while paragraph 5, which is estimated at $27,000, provides for the dredging to a depth of 18 feet plus 1 foot in areas shown on plan, involving the removal of approximately 35,506 cubic yards.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is all the work that
is to be done?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Harry Bernard Short: Now will the minister be
good enough to inform me if there is any stated time in these tenders when the work is to start and be completed, because that is very necessary.


John Campbell Elliott: The work is to be completed by August 1 next.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dingwall-dredging, $25,000.
Mr. JOHNSTONE:: I should like to ask
the government if it is intended to start this work immediately, or as soon as navigation opens?

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NS.


John Campbell Elliott: It is the intention to start work as soon as the money is available.


Lewis Wilkieson Johnstone: The reason I ask is
that last year the breakwater and the deepened channel were not available for vessels going through, because the dredging had been done on the inside first.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Ecum Secum-wharf extension, $2,700,
Mr. QUINN:: Will the minister kindly
give us some information in connection with this item?


John Campbell Elliott: This amount is to construct a crib work extension 20 by 52 feet to the existing wharf. This extension is required to accommodate the traffic and to increase the depth of the water along the face of the wharf.


Felix Patrick Quinn: Is that the wharf commonly known as the David Turner wharf, on which there is a government warehouse which is operated by one David Turner, a good friend of the government?


John Campbell Elliott: I have nothing in my detail to connect the name of Turner with this wharf. It is the government wharf at that point, consisting of a stone and gravel approach 70 feet long, 18 feet wide on top and averaging 8J feet high. There is block and span work 136 feet long, 18 feet wide and 21i feet high at the outer end, consisting of four stone-filled crib blocks 18 feet deep by 18 feet, with 16-foot span between same. The ell consists of one 16-foot span with a stone-filled crib block 18 feet by 18 feet.


Felix Patrick Quinn: At whose request is this
work being done?


John Campbell Elliott: There was a petition of the residents, which was forwarded by Mr. A. L. Phillips.


Felix Patrick Quinn: And Mr. A. L. Phillips is the chairman of the Liberal patronage committee in the city and county of Halifax.


John Campbell Elliott: I have no doubt that his recommendation would receive consideration. Evidently he was -the gentleman in that community-


Felix Patrick Quinn: Mr. A. L. Phillips is a printer in Halifax city, 110 miles from Ecum Secum.


John Campbell Elliott: Perhaps my hon. friend
would let me answer his question. According to my information the petition was forwarded by Mr. Phillips, the petitioners evidently thinking him the man through whom it would be best to have it forwarded.


Felix Patrick Quinn: Might I ask the minister if he did not also have a petition from 90 ratepayers of Spry Harbour, headed by Mr. W. A. Myers, asking for an appropriation to repair the wharf at Spry Harbour and, if he received this petition, why he has not acceded to that request?


John Campbell Elliott: My hon. friend will readily understand that since Spry Harbour does not appear in the estimates I have no details in regard to it.


Felix Patrick Quinn: That is quite obvious, and I might also ask the minister if he thinks Halifax county has been very generously treated in these estimates. We find that we have one .item of $1,700 and another of $2,700 or a total of $4,400 in the estimates. Why did not the minister place in the estimates an amount to cover the building of a wharf at Spry Harbour?


John Campbell Elliott: I cannot answer the hon. member with regard to Spry Harbour. As he will understand, my details only cover the items which appear in the estimates. Evidently it was not considered as being as urgent as some of the other items.


Felix Patrick Quinn: Does the minister recall
receiving a petition from the residents of Spry Harbour asking for the building of a wharf, and if he does, what action did he take?


John Campbell Elliott: I do not recall the petition.


Felix Patrick Quinn: If the petition were received, what course would be taken?


John Campbell Elliott: The engineering department would be asked to make a report and When the estimates were being considered its urgency would be taken into aocount.


Felix Patrick Quinn: Has that been done in this case?


John Campbell Elliott: No doubt it was done if a petition was received.


Felix Patrick Quinn: And it was not considered because there are two representatives from Halifax constituency sitting on this side of the house.


John Campbell Elliott: If it is not in the estimates, evidently it was not considered as being as urgent as the items which are in.


[Stage Direction]
Ttern agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NS.
Fourchu-harbour improvements-the British Metals Corporation (Canada) to contribute one-third of cost, $16,000.
Finlay MacDonald: How much of the 875,000 voted last year for these harbour improvements has been expended, and how was it expended?


Richard Burpee Hanson: And why was it not all expended?


John Campbell Elliott: The British Metals Corporation (Canada), Limited, was to bear one-third of the expenditure but the scheme as contemplated last year was larger than this company cared to participate in to such an extent. For that reason it was revised and a smaller scheme adopted.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What is the scheme?


John Campbell Elliott: The original scheme-


Richard Burpee Hanson: A hole in the ground.


John Campbell Elliott: Did the hon. member ask a question?


Richard Burpee Hanson: No.


John Campbell Elliott: The original scheme involved dredging the entrance channel generally 100 feet wide and 2,650 feet long to a grade depth of 16 feet at low water, and a turning basin at Cann's point 600 feet long and 100 feet to 300 feet wide to the same depth. Through the rock area at the outer end of the channel, which is 700 feet long, it was proposed to limit the bottom width of the dredging to 75 feet. The estimated cost of this scheme was $221,000.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is the big scheme.


John Campbell Elliott: That is the big scheme. Tenders were called for this work on June 14th, 1929, and the following were the only tenders received:	Beacon Dredging Company, Limited, class A, 812, and Halifax Dredging Company, Limited, class B, 67i cents. At the prices quoted in the above tender, the estimated cost of this work would be $317,550. No action was taken. The president of the Stirling Mines, Mr. Stavert, advised that on account of the expense involved the .company were not .prepared to proceed with the development of Fourchu harbour along the 'lines for which tenders were called, but will develop some other scheme of handling concentrates from the mine.
The departmental engineer at Halifax visited Fourchu and Louisbu.rg with representatives of the British Metals Corporation (Canada), Limited, and discussed the matter of transportation from Fourchu, at which 
place that company has a large interest. The previous scheme of developing a harbour at Fourchu was found to involve an expenditure in which the company felt it was unable to participate to the extent of the one-third required, and the object of the further discussion was to try to arrive at something which would enable this company to carry on its operation.
The scheme as now presented calls for the dredging necessary to accommodate a boat to carry from 200 to 250 or 275 tons and make two round trips per week between Fourchu and Lunenburg and St. Peters, N.S. To accommodate such craft, it is proposed to dredge the entrance channel 100 feet wide to a depth of 81 feet at low water and have an overall length of about 3,300 feet.


Finlay MacDonald: I asked how much of the $75,000 was expended before the work was stopped.


John Campbell Elliott: The work done during
1929-30 consisted of the removal of 21,967 cubic yards at 75 cents per yard.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Was that work let by tender?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, it was a tender on the yardage basis.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is that not a pretty high price?


Finlay MacDonald: I asked what portion of the 875,000 was expended during last year.


John Campbell Elliott: There was expended $16,475.85, and the British Metals Corporation contributed $5,491.95, which left $10,983.90, to which amount was added approximately $1,000 for inspection and contingencies.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What was the character of that dredging, because 67 cents per yard is an exceedingly high .price for ordinary material, and if it is a rock bottom it is not an adequate price.


John Campbell Elliott: That was our tender.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am not questioning that at all. The minister will realize that if it is just ordinary mud and silt, the price is exceedingly high, and if it is rock, it is not nearly enough.


John Campbell Elliott: There is a different price for the rock.


Richard Burpee Hanson: But that 67j cents price is one unit?


John Campbell Elliott: That is class B.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is the other material? Mr. ELLIOTT: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That would mean everything but rock?


John Campbell Elliott: Everything except rock.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That price is too high for dredging, and the minister had better not accept tenders of that character.


Finlay MacDonald: I may say that the dredging at Fourchu harbour is of such a nature that I do not consider 674 cents as being too high. Last year I made the statement that the government should go very carefully and obtain expert engineering advice before proceeding. Fourchu harbour is situated on one of the most dangerous points on our sea coast, and it is practically impossible to dredge for more than short periods at a time. As regards the stone, I think it will cost more than S12 a yard to move the stone from the entrance. I am sorry that the development of Fourchu harbour has not been proceeded with. We have a few miles from Stirling one of the greatest mining propositions in eastern Canada, and I regret very much that the government and the company have seen fit to delay the improvements that must come at some future date to one of the best mining properties that we have to-day, not only in the maritimes but,
I may say, in Canada as a whole.


John Campbell Elliott: I cannot add anything
to what I have said. I think my hon. friend will agree with me that the government would not have been justified in going ahead when the company most vitally interested, which was contributing one-third of the cost, was not willing to pay one-third of the cost of the tenders we had received.


Robert Gardiner: Is this company the
only one to use the wharf?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, practically.


Robert Gardiner: Are they going to pay
one-third of the cost in the estimates of this year?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Robert Gardiner: Will this complete the
work?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Finlay MacDonald: I would
like to know if a public wharf is to be erected at Fourchu?


John Campbell Elliott: My hon. friend will remember the discussion last year when in answer to a question similar to the one just
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
asked by the leader of the group in the corner, it was explained that the company was building the wharf. I think the provincial government was building the road; the company was building the wharf; the company was doing one-third of the dredging and we were doing the other two-thirds.


Robert Gardiner: Will other parties have
access to this wharf, and if so, under what conditions?


John Campbell Elliott: As a good deal of the
business done there will be business in which that company is interested, they will naturally be anxious that they should have the use of the wharf, but there is already there a government wharf for the general business of the people of that district.


Robert Gardiner: Is it sufficient to accommodate their needs?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Glace Bay

wharf reconstruction, $14,500.
Finlay MacDonald: Will the minister give us some information about this wharf?


John Campbell Elliott: This is required to provide for the reconstruction of an old Wharf, 566 feet long and 10 feet to 37 feet wide in Glace Bay harbour.


Finlay MacDonald: Was some of the work not done last summer? Why was it not completed then? The money was voted.


John Campbell Elliott: It was not possible tc
get out the plans, secure tenders and have the work completed last year.


Finlay MacDonald: Some money was expended last year?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Finlay MacDonald: I am afraid there may be another evil in connection with this matter. Some of these expenditures may be carried on from year to year, held over until an election year comes along and then the money may be spent. I hope that is not the case in this connection.


John Campbell Elliott: I know my hon. friend
is not of a suspicious mind. This was proceeded with m the regular way. The contract was let on the first of February, and it is to be completed by the end of October of this year.


Finlay MacDonald: Who is the contractor?

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NS.


John Campbell Elliott: McAskill of Glace Bay.


Finlay MacDonald: That is satisfactory.


John Campbell Elliott: We always try to have
everyone satisfied, if we can.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Nova Scotia-harbours and rivers generally- repairs and improvements, $100,000.
William Gordon Ernst: May I ask, as a matter of
information only, whether this amount of $100,000 is based upon the previous estimate of the requirements, and if so, what expenditure is contemplated and in what places?


John Campbell Elliott: The estimate is based
upon what the engineer thinks 'the requirements will be in connection with works which should properly come out of the general vote.


William Gordon Ernst: Are details given?


John Campbell Elliott: No. We do not know, as my hon. friend will readily understand, what works will have to be done perhaps due to freshets and that sort of thing that may occur even after this vote is passed.


William Gordon Ernst: It is a sort of an emergency fund?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


William Gordon Ernst: For an election or anything else that may crop up?


Harry Bernard Short: I understand $100,000 was
voted last year and $80,000 was expended. Is that correct?


John Campbell Elliott: No; it was just $80,000
last year.


Harry Bernard Short: I was in hopes the minister had $20,000 left over, because that would take care of the expenditures I brought to Ins notice with reference to damage caused at breakwaters at Centreville, Sandy Cove and Iiverton in my constituency just a couple of weeks ago. If he had that $20,000, Inere would be no reason why the work could not be ordered to be started a.t once. While I am on my feet, I hope the minister will take into consideration the damage done to those three breakwaters and have them repaired at 'the earliest possible moment, beoause it is very necessary that the work be done so that the present condition of the breakwaters will not interfere with the spring fishing in those three localities. There are laige fleets of boats going out of those three places, and it is necessary that 'they have breakwater protection or else they cannot carry on their vocation. The minister 
promised me the other day that he would immediately' telegraph the district engineer in connection with this. I presume the minister has done so. Has he had any reply?


John Campbell Elliott: I do not think there is
any reply. Since my hon. friend spoke to me I do not think we have had time for him to investigate the three points which my hon. friend has mentioned. At any rate, no reply has come to my notice, but I will repeat to my hon. friend whait I have already said: namely, that as soon as these estimates are available, the matter will receive consideration.


Harry Bernard Short: I want to draw the attention of the minister to the fact that in these estimates there is nothing for the extension of the breakwater at Westport. I have brought this matter .to his attention for the past three sessions. Westport is the most westerly point in Nova Scotia situated in my constituency. It is one of the largest fishing centres that we have in the Bay of Fundy. Hundreds of thousands of dollans' worth of fish are produced there each year. We have a government breakwater there, and it is quite an extensive one, but in order that the fishermen can carry on their vocation in a satisfactory manner it is necessary .that that breakwater be extended. I have brought this matter to the attention of the minister several times before, and I was in hopes that there would be an amount in the estimates this year to take care of it, but it has evidently been overlooked. However, I trust that the minister will give the -matter further consideration and that when the supplementary estimates come down an item will be included to provide for this work.


John Campbell Elliott: I can assure my hon.
friend that I will give the matter every consideration.


Robert Gardiner: Can the minister say
how this $80,000 is made up, and how much of it was spent last year?


John Campbell Elliott: There has been spent to
date $74,000. By the end of the fiscal year it is expected that the whole sum will be spent, and that we shall not have enough to take care of all the work that is required to be done. We are therefore asking for $20,000 more.


Finlay MacDonald: Is it
the intention to use any portion of this vote for the opening of the entrance to the Grand river in the county of Richmond?

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NS.


John Campbell Elliott: No. That is a dredging proposition, and we cannot take money out of the general vote for dredging of that kind.


Finlay MacDonald: This
vote deals with harbours and rivers generally, and the Grand river is a river. I am not so sure as the minister that it would be a dredging proposition exactly. Has the minister considered up to the present time the opening of the Grand river?


John Campbell Elliott: There has been some consideration given to the matter by the engineers, but I have nothing on record so far as I recall.


Finlay MacDonald: I have
brought this matter to the attention of the government practically every session since I have been here. It is a very, very important matter. As I have said on previous occasions, the Grand river opens into one of the finest fishing districts on the north Atlantic. For forty or fifty miles along that shore we have no proper harbour, and the opening of the entrance to the Grand river would give us one of the finest harbours available between Scatarie island and St. Peters. The people of that district have been clamouring for years for the opening of this very important river. In addition to the fishing industry, we have in that section probably the only crown timber that has not been alienated from the province of Nova Scotia, and a pulp industry is about to begin operations in that district, employing from four hundred to a thousand men. In order to give work to the people of this district and those who will be coming to it, I would urge that the government start this important project at once. As I said, the Mersey Pulp and Paper Company are about to start up operations in the district, and I would urge upon the government the advisability of immediately opening up the Grand river and giving to the residents of that district the employment which they have been looking for, for a long time.


John Campbell Elliott: Did I understand my hon. friend to say that he had made representations each session in regard to this matter?


Finlay MacDonald: Yes, to
the minister and the department, and on the floor of the house.


John Campbell Elliott: If that is the case, the
matter has no doubt been investigated. I shall be very glad to look into it carefully and see what the reports are and give them my best consideration.


Finlay MacDonald: The
engineers of the department have spent months in that vicinity studying the feasibility of the project, and I find it strange that their reports are not in the possession of the minister or of his deputy.


Felix Patrick Quinn: May I ask if under this vote provision will be made for providing an engine at Sandy cove in Halifax county for the use of the fishermen in that district? I have brought this matter to the attention of the minister in a previous session, and he promised consideration. I am given to understand that Mr. Smith of the Public Works department of the province has visited that district, but with what result I do not know.


John Campbell Elliott: It is impossible to say
now just what will be provided under this vote. The matter which my hon. friend mentions has no doubt been submitted to the engineers and will be looked into and given consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Joggins-repairs to breakwater-wharf, $4,000.
Mr. SMITH (Cumberland):: I am pleased to see this item included in the estimates. Is this amount to continue the work that was commenced last year, and will it be sufficient to complete the undertaking? Is the work to be done by tender or otherwise, and will the prevailing rate of wages in the district be adhered to under the fair wage clause?


John Campbell Elliott: This is to repair the breakwater-wharf which furnishes protection for the coal-shipping pier of the Maritime Railway and Coal Company. The proposed work is asked for by the district engineer, who reports that a portion of the wharf is unsafe and in danger of collapse. The work will be done by day labour, and the usual conditions with regard to the fair wage clause will be observed.


Robert Knowlton Smith: Will this
amount complete the work?


John Campbell Elliott: No, it will require about
as much more to complete it.


Robert Knowlton Smith: ' Will the further amount required be brought down in the supplementaries?


John Campbell Elliott: No, this amount is all
that will be required this year. The recommendation is that these urgent repairs be made this year, and that a similar amount for repairs be provided next year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NR.
Little Anse-breakwater repairs, $20,000.
Finlay MacDonald: Why
was not the $20,000 expended last year?


John Campbell Elliott: We got two sets of tenders; both sets were considered too high.


Finlay MacDonald: Was
not any work performed last year?


John Campbell Elliott: No.


Finlay MacDonald: Thpt
seems strange. Mr. Dickson-I do not know the name of his company-was awarded the contract for work on the breakwater some time last year.


John Campbell Elliott: Mr. Dickson did tender
His was the lowest tender, $3.44 per ton William McFatridge also tendered at $3.50 per ton. Tenders were called for first in August, 1028. By order in council passed September 19, 1928, the contract was awarded to Dickson, involving an expenditure of $17,200. Dickson advised the department on September 27, 1928, that it would be impossible for him to do the work without considerable financial loss. On October 6 he returned the agreement unsigned. On October 18 the district engineer was authorized to expend $1,200 to have urgent repairs carried out by day labour. The work was readvertised last year, tenders being due on June 20, and offers were received from the Arichat Steamship Company, Limited at $3.72 per ton; William McFatridge made an offer of his plant at $200 per day. The Arichat Steamship Company Limited and Mr. McFatridge have since amended their tenders to $3.50 per ton. They were considered too high.


Finlay MacDonald: And
the work was not proceeded with?


John Campbell Elliott: No.


Finlay MacDonald: This is a very important fishing section and the breakwater is in a very dilapidated condition.
I think at the present time we are losing money by not proceeding with the work, because it is going to cost a great deal more to repair the breakwater after the storms of last winter. I would urge the government to give the fishermen of Little Anse the facilities which they so urgently require. My hon. friend the Minister of Public Works has not been in that district, but the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Cardin) was there last summer, and were he in his seat at this moment I am certain he would support me in my plea that the people of that district should receive at the hands of the govern-
ment every possible consideration. We have there a breakwater in the most dilapidated condition that it is possible for any public work to be in short of complete destruction. On that breakw'ater depend the lives of the poor fishermen in the vicinity. This matter has been dilly-dallied with since 1928; in fact recommendations for these much needed repajrs were made as far back as 1926 or 1927. Again, I would urge that this important public work be taken in hand as soon as spring opens so that the fishermen of the locality may be given the protection which they need. Those men are in urgent need not only of this protective work, but of an opportunity to earn a living.


Finlay MacDonald: I do not know whether the minister has given the committee all the information available with regard to this particular contract. I am informed that tenders were called for and that the Arichat Steamship company tendered at $3.72 per ton, theirs being the only tender received in accordance with the advertisement. The McFatridge company at Halifax put in a 'tender at so much per day, which was not according to the specifications. Therefore the other tender should have been accepted if the price was fair. What happened? McFatridge was given an opportunity to change his tender, which he did, and put in an offer at $3.50 per ton. I think the minister has just made a statement along those lines. If my information is correct, the Arichat Steamship company also tendered at so much a day, very below the McFatridge tender. Then the McFatridge tender was changed to so much per ton. I think some explanation is due from the department in regard to this transaction.


John Campbell Elliott: If my hon. friend thinks the Arichat tender of $3.72 per ton was reasonable, and argues that it should have been accepted, may I point out that afterwards we did get offers to do the work at $3.50 per ton,, which woukl indicate that both the Arichat Steamship company and Mr. William McFatridge considered that they could do the work at less than the figure of the Arichat ^Steamship company's first tender. It is hoped that when we again advertise we will get a tender that will be reasonable in the estimation of the department so that the work may be proceeded with.


Finlay MacDonald: Probably I misunderstood the minister. Do I understand him to say that no tender has been let? I thought that McFatridge's tender had 'been accepted.

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NJS.


John Campbell Elliott: An order in council was passed authorizing the acceptance of McFat-ridge's tender at $3.50, but he notified the department that he would hare to have a guarantee of $600 iper week. We did not feel inclined to give that guarantee, and that is the reason he did not proceed further.


Finlay MacDonald: (Cape Breton South): Was not another offer received from the Ari-cbat Steamship company ?


John Campbell Elliott: They offered to reduce their tender from $3.72 to $3.50.


Finlay MacDonald: That is where, it seems to me, there is objection to such a transaction as this. The Ari-ehat people tendered in good faith at $3.72 per ton. McFatridge came in with a tender of S200 per day. The Archiehat company was not given a chance. McFatridge changing his tender to $3.50, knowing what the Arichat tender was. I submit that such a transaction is not defensible.


John Campbell Elliott: I scarcely think my hon. friend means to be understood in that way. If there is any suspicion in his mind,, perhaps I had better give the whole of the details. The Arichat tender was $3.72 per ton. The McFatridge tender was, offer of plant $200 per day. Both were considered too high and they were invited to submit further tenders. The Arichat Steamship Company Limited then tendered at $3.50, and McFatridge tendered at $3.50.


Finlay MacDonald: Did the Arichat company not tender for so much per day?


John Campbell Elliott: There is nothing on the record here to indicate that there was any tender from the Arichat people at so much per day. Then an order in council was passed on the 7th September, 1929, authorizing the acceptance of the revised tender of William McFatridge, Halifax, for repairs to the breakwater at Little Anse, and the district engineer on 13bh September, 1929, reported that Mr. McFatridge would not enter into a contract without a minimum guarantee of $600 per week, and the distriot engineer recommended that no further action be taken, as that was too high.


Finlay MacDonald: But was there no deposit required from the McFatridge people for their tender?


John Campbell Elliott: No, I think it was all tentative. They did not get to making a tender and enclosing a deposit.


Finlay MacDonald: I know, but there was a deposit from the Arichat people in their first tender.


John Campbell Elliott: That was for the $3.72.


Finlay MacDonald: And that is the only tender now before the department.


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, and it is considered too high.


Harry Bernard Short: Then the department considered the tender of $3.50 of McFatridge was about the proper amount, and after they awarded the bender to him at $3.50 per day he refused to take, it. Why did not the department take the offer of the Arichat people whose revised offer was exactly the same, $3.50?


John Campbell Elliott: Of course it was October by that time, and it was considered too late in the year to proceed with it.


Harry Bernard Short: Then are you prepared to accept that offer now?


John Campbell Elliott: Oh, no, we are going to call for new tenders. We think they are too high yet.


Finlay MacDonald: I cannot understand why the Arichat Steamship Company, Limited, has been discriminated against in this regard. I well remember having sent a telegram to the deputy minister, Mr. Hunter, about that time. I do not believe the government intended at any time to allow the Arichat company to have anything to do with the construction, and I think that we are dilly-dallying with this and playing a little bit of party politics. Party politics should be left out of some of these things, especially when we are dealing with public works and public contracts.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Meteghan-breakwater extension, $7,600.
Harry Bernard Short: Will this expenditure be by tender or by day's work?


John Campbell Elliott: This is new work. It will be by tender.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Pietou-repairs to railway wharves, $5,000.
Thomas Cantley: How much was expended on those wharves last year?


John Campbell Elliott: The work is still going on. The probable expenditure for the year 1929-30 is $10,000.

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NJS.


Thomas Cantley: Was that the amount expended last year?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Thomas Cantley: The minister, of course, is aware that this is one of the railway wharves in the province of Nova Scotia which the government or the Minister of Railways unloaded on the Public Works department and so reduced their railway charges and transferred the whole repair account in the maritime provinces practically to the Public Works department. What is the amount expected to be expended this year, and wdl it complete the work?


John Campbell Elliott: I would say to my hon. friend that the amount of $5,000 is expected to be all expended this year but it will not complete the work. It is estimated it will take about $12,000 to complete the work.


Thomas Cantley: I think his estimate is correct. Why not complete it? This work has been under construction now for three or four years. One of the wharves is in a deplorable condition.


John Campbell Elliott: It is the one, no doubt, that this will be spent on.


Thomas Cantley: I made some pretty strong remarks last year, in regard to the condition of one of those wharves, and the only thing I wonder at is that that wharf is still standing. I refer to the wharf with the railway freight shed on it. It is in an actually dangerous condition. Why not complete that wharf? Five thousand dollars is only putting a patch on a mitt. Why don't you finish it?


John Campbell Elliott: This is expected to do the work on the wharf that he says is in the worst condition. I think that is what they call the shed wharf, and it is not thought that any serious damage will result from letting the other work stand for another year. That is our report.


Thomas Cantley: Am I to understand from the minister that the whole $5,000 will be spent on the shed wharf?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Thomas Cantley: And you will not complete the repairs to the low level wharf?
Mr. ELLIOTT. Not this year.


Thomas Cantley: Why not?


John Campbell Elliott: Well, we are trying to do the things that are the most urgent, in the order of urgency. That is all I can say to 
my hon. friend. The fact that we are doing the one that is most in need this year is the best evidence he can have of the policy that we are following in these different repairs.


Thomas Cantley: But the whole work is urgent and should have been done long ago. Why do you not complete it? What is the use of making two bites of a cherry?


John Campbell Elliott: Those are two cherries.


Thomas Cantley: This is one of the jobs that I referred to a little while ago where you are doing this work by day's labour.


John Campbell Elliott: Oh, yes, this is the kind of work that can only be done advantageously by day's work.


Thomas Cantley: Leave out that word
"only." That is not correct.


John Campbell Elliott: I shall be very glad to
have any suggestion my hon. friend may make as to how I will express it, but that is the idea: work and repair of this kind can be done much more advantageously by day's labour. I think my hon. friend agreed with me a year ago in regard to a similar repair to this, that it could be doDe better by day's labour than by contract.


Thomas Cantley: That is quite correct as applied to one of the jobs, but it does not apply to the whole work. But my principal point is that I thought you would have completed this work this year.
I cannot yet see why that was mot done. The item is not very large and you are taking quite a risk in not completing the work. It might be that the $5,000 you spent on that shed' wharf that year will be wiped away simply because you have not completed the job.


John Campbell Elliott: I know my horn, friend
wants to be reasonable. He will bear in mind that we spent $10,000 on the other wharf last year and that we are now trying to fix up the wharf that seems to be most in need of repair. I should like to call to his attention the many wharves throughout this country which are in need of repair, and with the money we have at our disposal we are trying to look after the ones which are in greatest danger and where the work is most urgent.
I cannot say more to my hon. friend.


Thomas Cantley: I hope I am not unreasonable-I realize the difficulties of the minister-but I point out to him the fact that he would not have found it necessary to spend one dollar on these wharves at all if he had allowed the Department of Railways and.

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NS.
Canals to look after its own property. However, having volunteered to look after these wharves and taken them over as he has done, I ithink the least he could do would be to complete the work, particularly where it is badly needed. These wharves were in a scandalous condition when they were taken over by the Department of Public Works; they have been considerably improved since then, but I submit that in the interests of both the department and the public the work should be completed this year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Port Greville-groynes, $2,000.
Mr. SMITH Cumberland):	Will the minister explain this item?
John Campbell Elliott: This amount is required
to construct two parallel pile and waling groynes each 300 feet long and about 400 feet apart.
At six o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair and the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

[Stage Direction]
The 'house in committee of supply, Mr. Johnston in the chair.
John Frederick Johnston: When the committee rose at six o'clock we were considering the item "Port Maitland-breakwater extension, to complete payments, $3,500."


Robert Knowlton Smith: Mr. Chairman, we had not passed, as I understand it, the item referred to just above that, "Port Greville-groynes". I asked the minister a question, and he was answering it when the house rose.


John Campbell Elliott: I think I mentioned, Mr. Chairman, to my hon. friend, that this amount of $2,000 is required to construct two parallel pile and waling groynes each 300 feet long and about 400 feet apart. The proposed work is requested by the district engineer. The drift of gravel at this place is to the east and towards the breakwater. A gravel bar extends past the breakwater several hundred feet. Schooners loaded with lumber and piling have difficulty navigating the crooked entrance channel which has a very sharp turn through the bar. It is anticipated that the proposed work will form a trap and prevent the drift
from going past the breakwater. The river and tidal flow from the harbour basin could overcome the obstruction at the entrance and maintain the entrance in a stable condition. A public wharf, a number of private wharves and a shipbuilding plant are located at this place. Shipments consist of approximately five million feet of lumber annually.


Robert Knowlton Smith: Is this protection work to take place of the proposed extension to the breakwater as suggested by me some years ago? A new breakwater was constructed there considerably shorter than the old one, and the shortness of the break-wafer has caused the formation of this bar which the minister mentions. Do I understand from the minister that this is to take place of the extension to the breakwater? I would also like to ask whether any provision is 'being made .this year to repair what is commonly called the beach protection at this point. This beach protection protects the channel of the harbour so that it keeps it clear from gravel drifts and sediment and allows vessels to pass in and out. Is any provision being made to repair this protection?


John Campbell Elliott: I would say to my hon. friend that the breakwater 'built in 1924-26 is a protection work out at the end of the beach protection work, and curving off at an angle. The object of the proposed groynes is to stop the drift. They are located near the centre of the protection work, and it is thought that they will stop the drifting which has been occurring there.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Port Maitland-breakwater extension-to complete payments, $3,500.
Robert Gardiner: Mr. Chairman, this is to complete payment of the estimate last year of $50,000. Was that not sufficient to meet the requirements?


John Campbell Elliott: The contract was more than the amount that we took last year because we did not expect the work to be completed until this year.


Robert Gardiner: What was the total amount of the contract?


John Campbell Elliott: As estimated at the end of the fiscal year, $49,223 will have been spent in 1929-30, with inspection amounting to $776, making a toal of $50,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
176	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
Pugwash-repairs to departmental railway wharf, $3,500.
Robert Knowlton Smith: Mr. Chairman, in connection with this item I may say that there are two wharves at this particular point. One is what is known as the government railway wharf and the other the Public Works wharf. May I point out that within the last couple of years, Mr. Cyrus S. Eaton, a well known financier who was born in the vicinity of Pugwash, and who has won considerable fame for his prowess in the financial world on the other side of the border line, generously offered to beautify the waterfront there, to which end he has spent many thousands of dollars in building a sea-wall and making other improvements. Those two wharves, which are more or less in a dilapidated condition, are almost at one end of the work being done by Mr. Eaton. There are some buildings in between, but they are in close proximity to the work that he has undertaken to beautify the town of Pugwash. It seems to me that the least the government can do is to [DOT] put those public services in such a condition that they will not be, as they are to-day, a disgrace to that portion of the water-front. Moreover, I am told by those who are in a position to know, that in recent times they have inspected the wharves and they are both in need of what they call new decks. I am also told that the ballast at the end of both the railway wharf and the Public Works wharf has rolled out into the channel and filled it up so that large steamers, when they enter, frequently go aground and considerable dredging is required to make the channel free. This is one case where a special appeal can be made and I urge the minister to give this matter serious consideration. Mr. Eaton is endeavouring to do everything possible to beautify the place and also to make it commercially advantageous to those who live there. Therefore the least the government can do is to put those services in a proper state of repair. This is an important point on the Northumberland straits and a great deal of shipping passes through there annually. Will the minister give some consideration to the observations I have made?


John Campbell Elliott: The hon. member has referred to the two services, and by that I understand he means the Canadian National Railways wharf and the Public Works wharf. The Canadian National Railways wharf is still under the Department of Railways and Canals and we are repairing only the portion of that wharf which is under the jurisdiction of this department. The statement made by Assistant Engineer Bennett is that the wharf

has been damaged by ice and that repairs are absolutely necessary to the lumber shipping, especially since the Canadian National Railways wharf is in a bad state of repair. This corroborates what my hon. friend has said. The bulk of the lumber has to be handled over the Public Works wharf. That is the one we are proposing to repair.
Mr, SMITH (Cumberland):	The item
reads "repairs to departmental railway wharf." Is that an error?


John Campbell Elliott: No; that is the departmental wharf that has the railway connection to it. The other wharf has not any railway connection to it. This is distinguishing the departmental wharf from the other so as to make it clear to which wharf these repairs shall apply. It is the departmental wharf which has the railway connection.


Robert Knowlton Smith: Will the minister take into consideration the question of repairs to both those services? That is what I am anxious to know and what the people there are concerned about.


John Campbell Elliott: I am afraid there is no
object in my taking into consideration repairs to a wharf that is not under the jurisdiction of this department. There is no use in my saying I will do so, because the other wharf is not under my jurisdiction.


Robert Knowlton Smith: Unfortunately that is a situation that should not exist. For the last two or three years negotiations have been carried on between the railway department and the Public Works department with respect to the Public Works taking over the railway wharf. I do not know how much longer these negotiations are going to last, but in the meantime that particular wharf is going to pieces. The railways are doing nothing about it. The Public Works department say they can do nothing about it; that it belongs to the railways. Something should be decided very soon in this matter so that this service can be put in a fit condition.


John Campbell Elliott: Does my hon. friend suggest that we should take over the railway wharf?


Robert Knowlton Smith: I am not suggesting anything about it, except this, that the wharf ought to be repaired by either the government or the railways, and that if the railways refuse to repair it, the government should take it over and put it into a state of repair. It does not matter under whose jurisdiction it is, it should be repaired.

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, NR.


John Campbell Elliott: The argument made by
one of my hon. friend's colleagues in the house this afternoon was that we should not have taken over a similar wharf at Pictou. I just wonder whether my hon. friends are in agreement with regard to this policy. At any rate we have not taken over the wharf and we shall not make any repairs to it until we do. Whether or not we shall take it over in the future -is a matter for consideration. We are, however, doing our best to repair the wharf which is under our jurisdiction.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Port Williams-wharf extension and vessel bed, $14,000.
Mr. ILSLEY:: What is the length of the
wharf now and how long will it be after the extension is added?


John Campbell Elliott: This amount is required
for constructing an extension 40 -feet by 80 feet to the present breakwater, widening the present vessel bed by 10 feet and extending it for a distance of 50 feet. The proposed work is requested by the district engineer who reports that the work is necessary to accommodate the increasing export trade at this place. The existing wharf is 250 feet in length and steamers of 280 feet can load only two hatches at one time. The export trade there consists of shipping apples to European ports, 90,000 ban-els being shipped last season. It is anticipated that with the proposed improvements, from 150,000 to 250,000 barrels of apples will be shipped annually.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I thank the minister for
the information. I want to do what I seldom do when the minister's estimates are before the committee; I want to say a word about that wharf at Port Williams. I do not know of any other investment the governmemt has ever made that has yielded to date more tremendous dividends than the investment on that wharf. About 815,000 was voted in 1927 to take over the wharf, and during this apple shipping season alone, 95,000 -barrels of apples were shipped over tlh-e wharf to Great Britain and other European countries at an estimated saving of 40 cents per ban-el, the shippers being saved S38,000 in one season on an investment of 815,000. More than that, under the Maritime Freight Rates Act the government of Canada is obliged to pay one-fifth of the freight rate on apples going via Halifax and that is the way those apples would go if they did not go over this wharf. That would mean the government of Canada would be obliged to pay something over $6,000 to the railway company if the apples did not go over this wharf. I thought it worth while
to bring these facts to the attention of the minister and the committee. We sometimes hear it said that money invested in breakwaters or wharves in Nova Scotia is to a considerable extent wasted, but I will venture to say there are very few members of the house who have heard of an investment of the government that has yielded or could be expected to yield greater dividends to shippers or to the government than has the investment in this wharf.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Trout Cove (Centreville)-harbour improvements, $5,000.
Harry Bernard Short: I presume this is for repairs
to the old breakwater in regard to which I wrote a letter and forwarded a petition to the minister last year. Would the minister please give details of this item?


John Campbell Elliott: My notes show that this
work was requested by the district engineer, and -also -in letters of November 30th, May 23rd and March 23rd, 1929, from Mr. L. J. Lovett, stating that this work was urgent and necessary.


Harry Bernard Short: Who is he?


John Campbell Elliott: An ex-M.P.


Richard Burpee Hanson: And likely to remain so.


Ernest Lapointe: Be careful. It may
happen to you.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Not as long as you are
over there.


John Campbell Elliott: The proposed work is to
extend a small piece of cribwork built by the fishermen so that it will connect with the present west breakwater. This extension will be 45 by 15 feet. It is also intended to cut an opening through the west breakwater and -build a fifty-foot ell on the east side of its outer end.


Harry Bernard Short: Why has the minister
omitted any reference to the letter and petition I sent him regarding -this breakwater? Evidently no attention was paid to the letter that I sent to the department, together with a petition signed -by practically every resident in that community; but when you receive a letter from Mr. Lovett you put it on the record. I am not seeking credit for this at all, although I shall get it just -the same, but it strikes -me as pretty cheap stuff to record a letter from a -candidate who has been defeated in that constituency on three different occasions and to say nothing whatever about the letter and petition from the sitting member. I am very glad that the

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
minister has seen fit to include this item in the estimates because this work is much needed. There is a very extensive breakwater at this place now, which is one of the largest fishing centres on the Bay of Fundy. Hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of fish are landed there every season. The work is an absolute necessity, but I do not think Mr. Lovett should be given any credit for it at all.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is the cheapest
thing I have seen.


John Campbell Elliott: My hon. friend's remark
is, cheap.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Not a bit cheaper than
what provoked it.


John Campbell Elliott: I did not volunteer the
information. I was asked for it by my hon. friend (Mr. Short), and I gave him the information I had before me.


Harry Bernard Short: The minister gave only part of the information.


John Campbell Elliott: I am giving my hon.
friend all the information I have, and I did not volunteer it; I only gave it in answer to my hon. friend's request. I see now that the obpect of his request was to have reference made to his letter.


Harry Bernard Short: If you quote one letter, why not quote the other?


John Campbell Elliott: Perhaps my hon. friend
would permit me to finish. My hon. friend will realize that I do not compile this record, and if his letter has been overlooked, and he says he has sent a letter-


Harry Bernard Short: You know I have sent a
letter. I have talked to you personally about it as well.


John Campbell Elliott: All I can say is that I
will look into the matter, and if his letter can be found I will see that he gets full credit for the letter that he sent.


Harry Bernard Short: I do not want any credit
for it. at all, but what I do object to is the minister quoting a letter from the defeated candidate in the constituency and ignoring altogether the real application that came from the sitting member. It is simply a question of fair play.


John Campbell Elliott: I hope my hon. friend does not imagine for a moment that if his name were here on the record I would have withheld it. I am only answering the question which he asked. I am very sorry if my hon. 
friend has not been given full credit for any representations which he made, but his representations do not appear in the details I have before me, which were prepared by the officers of this department, and not by me.


Harry Bernard Short: They were prepared by someone in the department.


John Campbell Elliott: Certainly.


Ernest Lapointe: What does it matter if you have the appropriation?


Harry Bernard Short: It is the appropriation we want.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Webb's Cove-harbour protection, $2,200.
Mr. BLACK (Halifax):: I have had only a moment to look over the estimates, and while I see there is a very considerable amount of money being spent in Nova Scotia, I find very little for the county which I represent jointly with my hon. friend the junior member for Halifax (Mr. Quinn). We have there about one hundred and forty miles of coastline on the Atlantic, studded with bays and harbours and inlets, with wharves and breakwaters in most of them, and all that I can find allotted in these estimates to that long stretch of seaboard in my constituency is about S4,400. I am not familiar with all the conditions as to piers and breakwaters, snags and so forth along that coast, but it seems to me very remarkable if on that long coastline only $4,400 is required to maintain these works in order. In contrast with what I read in the papers to-day there is discrimination, and without being able to point to any special work that requires to be done, I protest against such a very small amount being spent on that one hundred and forty miles of sea coast.


John Campbell Elliott: I very much regret that my hon. friend feels that the riding which he represents is not being generously treated. If he will look carefully over the estimates he will see that the amount is more than he has stated. He will see that there is a very considerable expenditure being made in his constituency for buildings, for instance. I think after he has had an opportunity of looking over the whole estimates he will feel that his constituency is being fairly treated.


William Anderson Black: I should like to have details of the lump sum to which the minister refers.


John Campbell Elliott: I shall be prepared to give them to my hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
West Advocate-Extension to breakwater-wharf, $13,000.
Robert Knowlton Smith: Will this
appropriation complete the 'breakwater? I should also like to know who is the successful tenderer and who is the supervisor or foreman for the government. The minister might also inform the committee whether the fair wage clause is being applied.


John Campbell Elliott: The contract will contain
a clause similar to the clause which I read this afternoon, which is the usual clause providing for fair wages. The revote of $13,000 is required to complete the extension of the breakwater wharf, now under construction by Mr. Frank L. Boone, of South Devon, New Brunswick.


Robert Knowlton Smith: The name of the inspector?


John Campbell Elliott: I do not think I have
that information, but I shall be glad to get it for my hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Yarmouth Harbour-dredging, $60,000.
Richard Burpee Hanson: Is this work 'being done
by the Public Works department with its own dredges or by contract?


John Campbell Elliott: This work will be done
by contract.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Have tenders been called
for?


John Campbell Elliott: No, we could not call for tenders until we had the appropriation for the work.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What is the approximate
cost peT cubic yard of dredging Yarmouth harbour?


John Campbell Elliott: The class of material to
be dredged varies in different parts of the harbour. The estimated cost varies accordingly. The engineer's estimate for this work is fifty-five cents per cubic yard.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am more or lees familiar
with conditions in Yarmouth harbour, and my recollection is that the material is very soft and easy to dredge. There may be some rock, but of course that would not be included in the dredging. I think fifty-five cents is a pretty high price for dredging.


John Campbell Elliott: My information is that
there is what is known as bug shoal in Yarmouth harbour which is rather difficult to dredge.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is farther out.


John Campbell Elliott: But it is included in the
dredging. We shall advertise for tenders, and the lowest tenderer will get the contract.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Barrington Passage-ice piers, $25,000.
John Frederick Johnston: The fourth item of this resolution was allowed to stand. Is it to be disposed of now?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes. I might proceed
with that and give my hon. friend the information which he desired. I find on glancing over the file during the recess that the contract for this work was let on the first of September, 1928. As it has a bearing upon the labour conditions and the attitude taken bv the government in regard thereto, I will give briefly the history. On the first of September, 1928, the contractors, Messrs. Boone and Voye, were duly advised by letter from the chief engineer .that the authority of council was being obtained to accept their tender amounting to $18,190 at the unit prices quoted, the work to be fully and satisfactorily completed on or before the first of September, 1929. He added that a formal contract would be submitted for their signature within a few days. The contractors were also advised that the contract contained a clause in connection with .the fair wage requirements. Then the order in council was passed and the contract awarded. It will be observed that under this contract the work was to be done by the first of September, 1929. On August 31 a telegram was received by the chief engineer as follows: Reference Barrington ice pier number five under contract Boone and Voye. Progress of work unsatisfactory and consider interest to public and department require department complete this work under terms of said contract. Chronologically the record is: contractors notified by you September first 1928; September 28th contractors visited site of work with assistant enginers Gregory and Allison; September 11th contractors informed me that hardwood timber could not be procured until next spring; during April 1929 I informed contractors of necessity early commencement work; on May 7th they informed me timber would not be ready until September; after considerable discussion I ordered timber to be creosoted Truro immediately; after considerable negotiations with Canada Creosoting Company, timber was creosoted early in June, first car being delivered Barrington June 22nd; this timber should have been delivered there; contractors made no efforts towards dredging pier seat until hardly pressed by me, when they entered into contract with Beacon Dredging company to perform said dredging; on July 1st work was commenced-
180	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.S.
That is to say, the work that was to be commenced on the first September was commenced on the first of the following July. 

on construction on shore of crib for pier; on July 2nd, dredge tried to excavate material but unsuccessfully; consider dredge too small for this work and. arranged for Leconfield on way Brooklyn to perform said dredging; July thirtieth and thirty-first Leconfield attempted to dredge pier seat, found not feasible, therefore requested contractor to lay foundation of pier on present surface, evening u,p said foundation and then to place piers on same; contractor has made no progress since. Time of completion of contract September first nineteen twenty nine but consider contractor has not given this matter proper attention and consideration and as he has had twelve months from date of notification of contract to perform this work do not believe he will complete same this season. Consider it urgent that pier should be completed this year and therefore ask in accordance with clauses sixteen and nineteen of the contract that I be authorized to proceed with this work and instructed to pursue said work with the utmost diligence so as to complete same at earliest possible date. Consider completion of pier by department can be accomplished not later than December first. Would strongly recommend and request immediate authorization; this matter extremely important.
Thomas J. Locke,
.	District Engineer.
What the hon. member says about the contractor being financially sound is correct, I understand. He is now performing work under another contract with this department, but his work in connection with this particular contract has been in accordance with this telegram. At the time the contract should have been completed only a small start had been made at the work, and so far as the labourers who were employed are concerned, they can collect from him. From the file it would appear that the engineer who took over the work had intimated that the government would probably pay the men.
Mr: HANSON: I do not think there is any probability about it; I understand that he did promise them.


John Campbell Elliott: Possibly so. The hon. member will be the first to recognize that until the work is completed and until we know what it will cost us to complete it, we will not be in a position to pay the labourers. We still have the contractor's bond of $1,850. The period of the year during which this work has to be completed is not as favourable as that period of the year which elapsed before the contract expired. As far as I can ascertain, there will be money in hand when the work is completed.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I do not think I intimated I was finding fault with the government for
'Mr. Elliott.]
taking over the contract; in fact I did not know it was as bad as it now appears to be. It is quite evident that the contractor found that the excavating for the pier would be more expensive than he had anticipated when he took the contract, and that is something the government should take into consideration in the final winding up of the whole thing. 1 would like to see some means devised whereby these men could get their money out of the contractor.


Thomas Cantley: I notice the Minister of Labour (Mr. Heenan) is in his seat, and before these Nova Scotia items are disposed of I would call his attention to a matter to which I referred this afternoon. I have in my hand particulars of work done on channel piers at Bailey's Brook, Pictou county, in 1928, to which I referred last year, and this statement shows that twenty-six men were employed at $2.50 per day. Evidently his fair wage scale did not apply there. In support of the assertion which I made this afternoon, I have also a copy of a letter from the government engineer in Halifax, objecting to the prices paid for ballast labour. Further it is evident that his fair wage scale is inoperative in the province of Nova Scotia where labourers have to accept any rate of wages which the government may care to give them. The proof of that is here in my hand, and I can give the minister the names of the twenty-six workmen.


Peter Heenan: The only reply I can make to that is that it had not 'been brought to my attention. When I get to my estimates I shall be able to show my hon. friend that our great difficulty in the operation of this fair wage scale in Nova Scotia, in setting a prevailing rate, has been on account of the prevailing rate paid by the Nova Scotia government. We finally set wages which forced the provincial government to raise theirs.


Thomas Cantley: You cannot fight with that cock, for that is not the fact. This government is responsible for the fair wage scale being paid on all work 'being carried out in the Dominion of Canada. The minister cannot shield himself behind any action of the provincial government, and I deny any such situation existed or that any effective action has been taken by this government through the Minister of Labour.


Peter Heenan: The duty of the minister is to set a prevaling rate of wages.


Thomas Cantley: The prevailing rate of wages in that district is not $2.50.
1S1

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, P.E.I.


Peter Heenan: I do not think it is, but if that is the rate which is stated, it is because the Nova Scotia government and employers generally are paying that rate, and I agree with my hon. friend that it is not enough.


Thomas Cantley: Neither the provincial government nor employers generally pay so low a rate.


Harry Bernard Short: Why does not the government set a beter rate, say $3 per day, and force the province of Nova Scotia to raise their wages?


John Campbell Elliott: Before we leave these items, I would like to give some information to the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Smith). I promised this afternoon to give him the rate of wages paid to the inspector on the work at West Advocate. The name of the inspector is Henry L. Reid, and the rate of wages is $4 per day.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Harbours and rivers-Prince Edward Island -Georgetown-(railway wharf), repairs and strengthening, $14,000.
Mr. MACDONALD (Kings):: Mr. Chairman, I have no desire to criticise any of the few and small items for Prince Edward Island, especially in view of the fact that no items for public buildings appear in the estimates, but I would like to ask the minister just what use is to be made of the $14,000 for the railway wharf. I understand that some demand has been made for the extension of the railway freight shed.


John Campbell Elliott: This amount is required
to provide for strengthening and repairing the pier head of the railway wharf. The proposed work is asked for by the district engineer who reports that the eastern face of the pier head is in bad condition, and that the wharf will be closed to railway traffic unless repaired at an early date. In view of the value of Georgetown as an early winter port, and the late shipments of potatoes to foreign markets therefrom, the potato industry of the province would be seriously handicapped if this wharf were not maintained in good condition. Eight hundred thousand bushels of potatoes were shipped from this port last season, these shipments being made through the large frostproof warehouse constructed on this wharf in 1927. Water traffic at Georgetown is valued at from $500,000 to $750,000 annually, and consists of exports of farm products and fish, and imports of coal, lumber, fertilizer and general merchandise.


John Alexander (1874-1948) Macdonald: Then I understand from the minister's explanation that no part of this amount is to be used for extending the accommodation there?


John Campbell Elliott: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Souris habour-breakwater repairs, $11,500. Mr. MACDONALD (Kings): I would like just a word of explanation from the minister about the Souris breakwater, as to how much money has been expended there and how much work is still to be done.
John Campbell Elliott: I would say that this appropriation is asked for by the district engineer to provide for the reconstruction of 493 feet in length of the middle section of the breakwater. The proposed work is reported to be urgently required for the maintenance of the breakwater, which furnishes protection for a fishing industry valued at from $40,000 to $60,000 annually. Exports consist principally of farm products and fish, while exports are of coal, lumber and general merchandise. The annual value of the shipping trade is estimated at $200,000, and the population is 1,100. The probable expenditure for the current year on the work at this point is $55,000. Included in this amount of $11,500 is a revote of $5,000, and the total expenditure at that harbour up to March 31, 1929, was $531,690.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Souris-repairs to and widening of approach to railway wharf, $15,000.
Otto Baird Price: I should like the minister to explain this item.


John Campbell Elliott: This amount is required to repair and widen the approach to the railway wharf which was transferred to the Department of Public Works by order in council of October 28, 1928. The district engineer reports that the approach is in bad condition owing to decay and that repairs are required in order to make it safe for railway traffic. Traffic consists of exports of farm products and fish and imports of coal and general merchandise valued at $200,000 annually.


John Alexander (1874-1948) Macdonald: Is the minister aware of the fact that the freight shed at that wharf was destroyed in a storm during the present winter?


John Campbell Elliott: The chief engineer advised me yesterday that word had been received from the local engineer with regard to the destruction of the shed.
182	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, P.E.I.


John Alexander (1874-1948) Macdonald: I should like to bring to the attention of the minister the fact that this is rather an important shipping point. This wharf is the connecting point with the Magdalen Islands, and a large part of the traffic to and from the Magdalen Islands passes through there. Therefore it is necessary to have a shed in which goods can be stored, not only for local shipments from the town of Souris but for commodities passing through by rail to different points on the island and between the island and the Magdalen Islands. In view of the fact that the shed was destroyed by a storm recently I should like the minister when the question of rebuilding the shed comes up, which work must be done, to consider, very seriously, the question of making it frost-proof for the purpose of handling potatoes. A few years ago the government decided to erect a frost-proof warehouse at Georgetown. The expenditure which was necessary in order to construct that warehouse has been more than justified by the large amount of traffic going through it in the last few years. Souris is just about an equally good port for late shipping, and Georgetown is very often congested in the early part of the winter with a number of steamers waiting to be loaded. The point I desire to bring to the attention of the minister is that in rebuilding the freight shed at this wharf it might be wise-in fact it would be wise-to consider making it frostproof for the purpose of handling potatoes.


John Campbell Elliott: I do not want to interrupt my hon. friend but perhaps it will relieve him of some doubt if I say that the engineer tells me that the recommendation which he will make provides for making this a frostproof warehouse. I quite agree with all my hon. friend has said about the good results that have come from the Georgetown warehouse, and this seems to be an opportune time to take a similar step at Souris. That is what the engineer is recommending.


John Alexander (1874-1948) Macdonald: I am very glad indeed to know that the minister takes that attitude with regard to this matter, and I hope we may expect some item in the supplementary estimates to provide for the construction of a frost-proof warehouse during the coming season.
I should like to emphasize further this matter by stating that only a year ago there were five steamers in the port of Georgetown trying to load potatoes at the same time. Four of the steamers got away successfully, but the fifth was held up by ice and the frost seriously damaged the cargo. With ware-
[Mr. Elliott.1
house accommodation at Souris sufficient to load one or two steamers the entire five would have been able to get away successfully. I simply mention this to impress the minister with the importance of making this shed at Georgetown frost-proof.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
West river bridge wharf-freight shed, $2,200.
John Alexander (1874-1948) Macdonald: I should like to say just one further word to the minister before this resolution is reported. On at least four occasions during the last four or five years I have asked the minister to consider the advisability of rebuilding the government wharf at the port of Cardigan. No attention has been paid to this request. I know that a number of years ago the district engineer reported that the government wharf at that point was wholly out of commission and recommended that one of the private wharves should be taken over and rebuilt. There are four private wharves there but not enough business to make it worth while for the owners to keep any of them in repair, with the result that year by year one or the other, in fact all of them, are going down. Now there is only one private wharf left at that port over which the farmers' produce can be shipped, and that one is very rapidly getting into a state of disrepair. It would not involve a large expenditure for the government to take over one of those private wharves and rebuild it for the accommodation of the public. It is not desirable to repair the government wharf because it is not in a position which is convenient for the shipping public. Last year the minister promised that some attention would be given to this matter, but he has not brought forth any item in the estimates for this year, and once again I would like to ask the minister to give this matter some consideration. He has the engineer's report. It is of considerable importance, because if the last of the private wharves finally gets into such disrepair that it cannot be used, then there is nothing left, and there is considerable traffic to be carried by water from that port to Nova Scotia points, Newfoundland and St. Pierre. I am making this appeal to the minister and would ask him to give it very careful consideration with a view to getting an item in the estimates this year for the purpose of rebuilding one of those wharves.


John Campbell Elliott: In answer to my hon. friend I would say that the fact that no item appears in the estimates is no evidence that attention has not been given to it and to the representations made by him a year ago. Generally speaking the policy of the

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.
department is not too favourable to taking over private wharves, especially at a point where there have been several private wharves, all of which have been allowed to fall into disrepair amounting almost to ruin. That, of course, is evidence that they have not been doing the business which would justify the owner in repairing them and continuing them. However, I will say to my hon. friend that there will be a fresh investigation made to see if there is any change in conditions there since the last investigation was made, and it will be given every attention.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
New Brunswick-harbours and rivers, $502,500.
Richard Burpee Hanson: Why this discrimination
against my fair native province compared with Nova Scotia? We have a coast line quite as exposed as that of Nova Scotia, though not quite as long. There must have been many requests for public works in the province of New Brunswick which have not been heeded by the minister. How does he justify a vote of this proportion to New Brunswick in view of what he is doing for the other provinces? Take Quebec, which has not anything like the coast line New Brunswick or Nova Scotia have.


Mr. CASGRAIN:: All the north shore.


Richard Burpee Hanson: My hon. friend the chief whip on the other side takes some exception to my statement, and he speaks of the north shore. I would like to point out to him that all that part of the St. Lawrence river from Montreal down to Quebec is under another department altogether.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: From Quebec to Labrador.


Richard Burpee Hanson: There is no settlement below Clarke City.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: I beg your pardon,
there is a large population. I was there last summer.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The hon. gentleman cannot put anything like that over me. I was down there a good many years ago.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: It has improved since
you were down there.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I would like to point out
to the minister that there is discrimination here, and I want to know how he justifies it.


John Campbell Elliott: I would say first of all to my hon. friend that his colleagues from the province of Nova Scotia do not claim that there is the discrimination to which he refers, and if he *will look at the estimates for last year
he will find that there is a large increase in the vote for harbours and rivers for this year, amounting to $58,000.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is a mere bagatelle.


John Campbell Elliott: If my hon. friend will
look over the estimates for the last twenty-five years and compare the proportion of the total estimates which goes to the province of New Brunswick I think he will find that they are faring very well this year. With regard to the statement that there must have been a great many requests for which no appropriation has been made, that, I would say to my hon. friend, is true of all the provinces. There have been a great many requests for harbour works and various other works which, of course, it was not possible to have money voted for.


Mr. VENIOT:: What about the dredging of St. John harbour?


John Campbell Elliott: Of course we are not considering the capital items at the present time, but I am sure my hon. friend has noticed that there is an amount of $200,000 for dredging at St. John. That is a national harbour, but it is a New Brunswick expenditure, and that is only, I would say, about one-fifth of what the cost is going to be to make the improvement which the department considers necessary in order to make that channel what it should be to furnish facilities for the traffic that goes there. When my friend thinks that over he will realize how very generously the province of New Brunswick has been treated this year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Anderson's Hollow (Waterside)-breakwater repairs, $8,000.
Mr. MacLAREN:: Is that in Albert county?


John Campbell Elliott: St. John-Albert.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Beaver harbour-wharf reconstruction, $17,000.
Mr. HANSON-: Is that a contract at Beaver harbour? It is a revote, very largely, I notice. Why was not the money spent last
year?
John Campbell Elliott: This is largely a revote,
as my hon. friend has suggested. It is required to provide for completing work now under contract with Mr. A. D. Dyas of St. Stephen, New Brunswick. The reason it was not. completed was because the season was well advanced when the contract was let and there was very little work that could be done in 1929-30.
184 __	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Who is the contractor? Did I catch the name light, Dyas?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is the minister aware that that gentleman is a medical practitioner,that he is not a practical contractor, that he does not own a dollar's worth of plant himself, and that the work is all done by sub-contractors?


John Campbell Elliott: I was not aware of that,
but wihat I am aware of, and what guided me in letting this contract, is that after public advertisement tenders were received from A. Douglas Dyas, St. Stephen, $14,282.50; James E. Kane, St. John, $22,255, and G. & T. A. Stackhouse, West St. John, $33,480.90. The deposit required by the department was made. There is nothing on the books of the department to show that there is anything against the man, and I do not think my hon. friend would argue for a moment that we would be justified in letting the contract to anybody else.


Richard Burpee Hanson: There is such a vast discrepancy between the tender of Mr. Kane, who is a practical builder, and that of this gentleman, who is a medical doctor and who has not any plant, that I would be doubtful whether the latter could carry out the work. Therefore. I should like to know the engineer's estimate of the work.


John Campbell Elliott: I am not sure that I have under my hand the engineer's estimate, but I should be glad to give it to my hon. friend.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It is important to know it. The minister is undoubtedly on sound ground when he lets the contract to the lowest tenderer; but other things being equal, if this man's tender is too low, as he is not in the business and he knows nothing about it-


James Dew Chaplin: A doctor would be able
to diagnose the case, at any rate.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Yes, but the government
will afterwards have to take over the work. Has this man done any work for the department in the last year or two?


John Campbell Elliott: I do not think he has.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I understand he figures
very largely in connection with government work in the county of Charlotte. He is a medical doctor who Jives miles away and who has not any plant. I think the minister should investigate the matter a little further before he gives him any more contracts.


John Campbell Elliott: Perhaps it is not necessary for me to say what my hon. friend already knows, but there are men in various companies who take contracts from the governor. Elliott.]
ment but who do not do much of the actual work themselves. I do not think my hon. friend would argue for a moment, because a man is a doctor, if he makes a tender, if he puts up the deposit required and if his tender is about $S,000 below the next one and less than half the one above that, there should be any hesitation about giving him the contract.


Richard Burpee Hanson: If the minister will be
good enough to tell me what the engineer's estimate is, I shall be able to give a better opinion.


John Campbell Elliott: I do not seem to have it
under my hand. I shall be glad to get it.


Murray MacLaren: I understand this work
is much needed. Is that not the case?


John Campbell Elliott: That is the reason we are letting the contract.


Murray MacLaren: Will this work be proceeded with promptly this year?-because I think last year nothing was done.


John Campbell Elliott: It was late. The contractor has until the sixteenth of next September to complete the work. Unless he shows any evidence of falling down on the job, he will be allowed to continue and we shall deal with him at the expiration of his contract. We shall give him every opportunity of doing the work just as we did with the other gentlemen whose contract we were discussing a few moments ago. If in the meantime he shows signs of falling down on the work, I doubt whether he will receive the same consideration as the other gentlemen have received, because it is not always advisable to wait until the time the work should be completed before taking steps to take it out of the contractor's hands. It is an urgent work.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is it not possible to have the information as to the estimate of the engineer?


John Campbell Elliott: I find I have overlooked the information which my hon. friend asked. The engineer's estimate is S20,742.


Robert Watson Grimmer: Is that the only contract which Mr. Dyas has at the present time for construction work in the county?


John Campbell Elliott: I think so.


Robert Watson Grimmer: The minister is not sure?


John Campbell Elliott: I am not sure, but if my hon. friend really thinks it is advisable to have that information, I shall be glad to get it.. It is very easily obtained.


Robert Watson Grimmer: There are in the county other breakwaters that are in the estimates before us at the present time, and I should.
1S5

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.
like to find out from the minister whether the same gentleman has a contract for any other breakwater in the county.


John Campbell Elliott: As we come to them I shall be able to answer my hon. friend's question.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Caissie's cape breakwater and pier, $80,000.
Otto Baird Price: Will the minister kindly explain this?


John Campbell Elliott: This is for the completion of work now under contract with Mr. A. A. Colter of Fredericton, New Brunswick.


Otto Baird Price: How much business is done over that wharf?


John Campbell Elliott: The district engineer's report is as follows:
The fishermen have now no shelter, and must tend their boats and haul them up on the shore during storms at all times of day and night. In one storm eight motor boats were destroyed. We believe that the construction of the breakwater and pier is warranted.
The population in the vicinity is about 350, but many fishermen from outside points and people of the rear settlements will also be benefitted. About forty fishing boats are owned in the district, besides small boats or tenders, and the value of the fishing is now given as about $35,000 per year against the value of about $13,000 in 1914. With the construction of a safe harbour, no doubt the value would further increase.


Richard Burpee Hanson: This is a breakwater for the protection of the fishermen at that point. I think these expenditures are all right provided that the money is properly expended, not wasted. Anybody who is familiar with conditions on the north shore knows that it is subject to tremendous storms, and if the fishermen do not have protection, their fishing gear and everything else they have will be lost. This, I presume, is a contract job?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: A reputable contractor?


John Campbell Elliott: It is Ashley Colter Limited, of Fredericton.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Cape Bald-breakwater extension and dredging, $38,000.
Otto Baird Price: Has the contract been let for this work?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes. This is required to provide for the completion of work now under contract with the John W. McManus Company, Limited, of Memramcook, New Brunswick.


Otto Baird Price: For how much?


John Campbell Elliott: The amount of the contract is $34,837; inspection, contingencies, $3,163. The estimated total is $38,000.


Otto Baird Price: How much for dredging?


John Campbell Elliott: The first contract consisted of building a cribwork extension to the present breakwater, 150 feet long on the outer face, 25 feet wide for a length of 120 feet, and 40 feet wide for 30 feet; and the removal by dredging of 6,500 cubic yards, scow measurement of class "B" material from an area about 250 feet by 100 feet to 125 feet wide, to 6 feet at low water ordinary spring tides.


Otto Baird Price: Does the contract include a
fair wage clause? The fishermen at that point have been paid only 25 cents per hour, which seems a very unfair wage.


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, the fair wage clause
is inserted in all these contracts.


[Stage Direction]
Itom agreed to.
Dalliousie-repairs to ferry wharf, $5,000.
Mr HANSON:: In view of the dilapidated condition of the wharves at Dalhousie and of the very large development which is taking place there by the building of a large newspaper mill by the International Paper Company of New Brunswick, is it the intention of the government to put its property there in propeT condition? I happened to be there on two occasions, once last year and again this year, and I saw for myself that some of the government property was in a very dilapidated condition. Will this item provide all that is required to be done at that point?


John Campbell Elliott: I canmot say just what is
required to be done at that point, but this item of $5,000 is required to provide for repairs to the pier head, which is reported to be in bad condition. The wharf provides a landing place for motor boats, tugs, vessels, schooners and so forth, and is the terminus for the ferry steamer running between Dalhousie, N.B., and Miguasha, St. Omar and Carleton on the Quebec shore.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is that all you intend to
do there this year?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, out of this vote.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Eseuminac-to indemnify Ashley A. Colter, the contractor, for construction of an addition to the breakwater, to the extent of part of the damage done by a severe storm which suddenly broke upon the work during the placing: in position of a large crib on the 24th July, 1928, $5,000.
186	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.
Richard Burpee Hanson: I am not rising for the
purpose of criticizing this item. If I were x>
make any criticism at all, it would be that ;he government, having admitted the prin-liple, has not gone far enough. This public vork at Escuminac is an old friend. Those if 11s who were here prior to the election if 1925 will remember the vote for this work, it was put in to redeem a by-election pledge, but I am not going to hark back over all that. The country is committed to the expenditure. No doubt this work had some merit, but it has turned out to be very costly. I venture to say that we have spent a quarter of a million at Escuminac, and I doubt if you will ever have a harbour there. It is true that this contractor-or rather his subcontractor, because the contractor himself did not do the work although he is a bona fide contractor-suffered a very severe loss in a storm in midsummer. Negotiations weTe had with the department, and while perhaps there was no legal liability on the department to pay anything, yet they have decided to pay the sum of $5,000 to reimburse in part the subcontractor for the loss which he sustained on that occasion. I wonder why the government, having admitted the principle, do not pay the contractor for all the loss that he sustained by reason of that storm. It does not matter anything to Mr. Colter because the work was sublet to the firm of McMulkin and Fox. They are very good men, and the loss comes on them. They will benefit to the whole extent of this $5,000. What was the total estimated loss, and why is the whole amount not being paid if anything is to be paid? It does seem to me that if the government is exercising its discretion in the matter it could go a little further and pay the whole damage. I do not see why the government does not pay the whole amount of the loss if it pays anything.


John Campbell Elliott: My hon. friend I think
has stated the case -pretty fairly. I doubt if there is strictly any legal liability upon the government to pay anything at all. The loss occurred on account of a very violent storm destroying work amounting to $12,259. We are paying a little less than half of the loss. It has not been the practice of the department in cases of this kind, where a contribution is made by the government as a matter of grace, to pay the whole loss. There was some question about the omission to bolt a certain part of the work which, if it had been done, might have avoided the loss or at all events have prevented it being as extensive as it was. The practice of the department, extending back for a number of 
years, in these cases where a contribution is made by the government as a matter of grace, and not with any admission of legal liability, has not been to pay the whole loss. The usual practice is to bear part of the loss with the contractor. Perhaps the government might be criticised for doing even that, but I think it is good business in the long run. I believe it is good business for the contractors who tender on government work to feel that if they do have a major loss of this kind from unforeseen causes, a loss not entirely attributable to their own fault, the government of this country should bear part of that loss That has been the practice at any rate. We are doing it in two or three other cases, and I do believe that on the whole the tenders we receive are more favourable than they would be if we adhered rigidly to the legal position.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The minister I think is
quite on safe ground there, but I do remember that in the last ten years there have been cases in the supplementary estimates where we have paid the full amount of the loss. I cannot recall particular cases at the moment; I would have to look up the estimates of former years. I would like to know why the minister stops at $5,000. Was it a matter of bargaining or did the minister harden his heart just at that particular point? I think we are not giving enough.


John Campbell Elliott: I went into the matter
carefully before agreeing to the $5,000. The report of the engineer has a good deal to do with the treatment the man receives. The reports that come to me through the various departmental channels, and the recommendations which the departmental officers make. I feel are generally safe.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I suppose the amount of
political pressure that can be brought to bear has something to do with it.


John Campbell Elliott: My hon. friend would not believe me if I told him how little that has to do with these cases.


Otto Baird Price: What is the engineer's report in connection with this work; was it done efficiently?


John Campbell Elliott: The report of the district engineer is as follows:
The work was of good materials and workmanship;
The contractor omitted bolting the vertical posts to face timbers below the ballast floor, as called for. The .presence of the bolting, as specified, would probably have enabled the work to have stood until completed when it -ivould

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.
have been safe. Work built in 1926-27 did not fail although the bolts below ballast floor were not required;
The contractor has no legal claim, as the work was not built as specified, the bolts being omitted;
In addition I have to say that the work is one exposed to risk of damage, and although the damaging storm was not unduly severe, the cause to which the damage is attributed is unusual. The floor of the bay at the site is flat rock, with no overburden. The crib was ballasted with as much stone to give it weight as circumstances allowed. The storm came on at a critical time, when the rise and fall of the water level due to wave action was sufficient to produce a lifting and dropping action on the ballasted crib.
The crib was pounded on the rock bottom, the drift bolts loosened so that the crib timbers gradually parted enough to allow the ballast to be released, and the crib, deprived of its supporting load of ballast, was wrecked.
Had the storm held off another twenty-four hours the work would probably have been safe.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is it intended to make any further expenditures on Escuminac? How much has Escuminac cost the country to date since the Northumberland by-election of 1923?


John Campbell Elliott: I cannot give my hon.
friend that information.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The deputy minister
knows.


John Campbell Elliott: I can give my hon. friend these figures:	1928-29, $29,006.08;	1929-30,
$29,866.99, or a total of $58,873.07.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It has cost a quarter of a million dollars, has it not?


John Campbell Elliott: The deputy informs me there was a contract before that amounting to approximately $100,000, but I have no memorandum of it here.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Gagetown-wharf repairs, $2,500.
Mr, HANSON: Was there not an appropriation last year?
John Campbell Elliott: I do not think so; there does not appear to be any revote.


Richard Burpee Hanson: All right.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grand Anse-extension to breakwater and pier, $19,000.
Richard Burpee Hanson: Is this a contract?


John Campbell Elliott: No. The amount is required to complete general repairs to the wharf commenced in 1929-30.


Otto Baird Price: Does the minister consider
that sufficient has been allowed in the estimates to carry the constituency?


Harry Bernard Short: I notice that $12,000 of this is a revote. Why was not that amount expended last year? Is it the intention to expend the full amount?


Peter John Veniot: There is no need of any expenditure in Gloucester county for an election.


Richard Burpee Hanson: There may be.


John Campbell Elliott: We expect to complete the work this year. It is now under contract.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Last year $12,000 was
voted for this work. Evidently that was enough in, the opinion of the engineers to do all the work. As I gather from the estimates, nothing was expended last year. Now we are asked for $19,000 for the same work. This seems to me to require some explanation from the minister.


John Campbell Elliott: The explanation is very simple. The $12,000 was put in the estimates last year. The engineer's estimate was $16,181. When the tenders came in the lowest was $17,259 at unit prices: inspection, contingencies, and so forth, $1,741.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Who is the contractor?


John Campbell Elliott: The contractors are J. E. and D. P. Connolly of Bathurst.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Harbours and rivers generally-repairs and improvements, $60,000.
Murray MacLaren: This item, Mr. Chairman, will give me an opportunity of referring to a harbour that is urgently in need of attention. Quite recently I have had an opportunity of speaking to the minister about it, but I should like to repeat to him and to the committee to-night what I said on that occasion. There is a harbour called Dipper harbour in the bay of Fundy, and it is the centre of valuable fisheries such as salmon, lobster and haddock. I have been informed, and I think my information is correct, that no dredging has been done in this harbour since the days of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, about twenty years ago. This is a case where I think patience has ceased to be a virtue. I believe the minister will readily appreciate that it is time something was done for these fishermen. Last year the Department of Public Works did about one weeks' dredging. True, it was done late in the season and it was all the time available for such work. I think it a fortunate circumstance that a beginning has been made. I wish to point out to the minister that there is nothing in the estimates in reference
188	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.
to any further work at Dipper harbour; that is point number one. Point number two: I cannot believe for a moment that he would begin a work and then leave it unfinished. My third point is, that this would not be a large or costly work. I am not urging the minister to undertake a large expenditure. Probably the minister has a report there as to what the estimate is; in any case, I would like some assurance from him that the work will be completed. The sum required is not large, but the need is very great. I do not know whether the minister is prepared to spend something out of that $60,000, or whether there is some other fund from which this amount could be obtained, but I do urge the minister to consider this matter. Twenty years have passed without any work being done, and no work has been undertaken for this year. It would be a grievous disappointment to these people if this work was allowed to be discontinued in the early stages.
The minister will notice that I have not mentioned Lorneville. I understand he has carried out the work he said he would, and the people of the community are very much satisfied.
I would ask the minister to give me some hope for the people of Dipper harbour. They deserve some satisfaction; they have been too patient in the matter; they have been too quiescent. I think people of that character Should be recognized and something done for them.


John Campbell Elliott: Any requests my hon.
friend may make are always made in the manner in which he has made this one, and they are always received and given the greatest possible consideration. Regarding Dipper harbour, he will recall that $5,000 was voted last year.


Murray MacLaren: I did not recall the
exact amount.


John Campbell Elliott: The amount was $5,000.
That amount was considered necessary by the engineers to carry out the most needed improvements to the harbour and breakwater, and the amount was all expended. With regard to Lorneville, my hon. friend is quite right as to what has happened there. His statements of last year were investigated and found to be quite correct, and the matter was attended to. All I can say is that his present suggestion will receive the same consideration as his previous suggestion. Regarding the length of time which has elapsed since this work was proceeded with, I would say that a -lot of the work which ceased about that time is now being proceeded with.

Mr. MaoLAREN:	I am making no complaint about the $5,000 which was set aside -last year. We -were given to understand that that was all that was available at the time, both as regards funds and as regards time. It was towards the end of the season and a certain amount of dredging work was done rather than letting it go. A beginning was *made on the work, and I would like the minister to give me an estimate of what the cost would be to complete it.


John Campbell Elliott: I have not that information here, but I shall be very glad to look into it.


Murray MacLaren: I ask only for a small
amount, which would be required to make it a really serviceable and useful convenience.


John Campbell Elliott: This work could be taken care of out of the general funds. If only a small amount is required and the work is urgently needed we will see if it cannot be attended to in that manner.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The minister seems to be
in such a happy, receptive mood, that I venture to urge upon him a little matter in my own constituency. In the city of Fredericton we have a line of wharves owned by the city, and for some time they have been a great -burden upon the municipality. This is a small city. It is one of those cities which have much government property which does not -pay any taxation; there is a great deal of university and ecclesiastical property in the same category, and the city is not financially able to keep up these wharves along the river front. There has been an agitation for a number of years to ask the government to take over these wharves. I remember when the present Minister of National Health (Mr. King, Kootenay) was Minister of Public Works, a delegation came here and asked him to take over these wharves. I gave them a luncheon, and I think that was probably the one -bright spot in their trip, because in respect to the object of their coming here nothing was done. I understand from my partner, who is a member of the city council, that another effort is being made to have the Department of Public Works take over the city wharves and put them in shape. The government does not spend a great deal of money in the city of Fredericton; as a matter of fact I doubt if there has been one dollar spent in that city since the war. The government receives a large revenue from the post, office and customs there. I believe that the excise and customs revenue from the city of Fredericton is the largest of any city of its size in Canada.
1S9

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.


Peter John Veniot: From the liquor trade.
Mr. H'ANSON:	The importation of liquor
for the government liquor board is very largely responsible, but there is a substantial revenue aside from that. I know it is the desire of the city and the citizens that the government should .take over these wharves.
I have no idea of the cost of putting them in repair, but I am satisfied that the city would be quite willing to deed to the government the wharves and the approaches. I ask the minister to give consideration to this request, which has either reached him or will very shortly reach him.
The government have been doing the same thing in other places. They have taken over many of the railway wharves and all the branch line railways in New Brunswick. They have taken over all the wharves at tidal waters in the river St. John. If my memory serves me aright, that was done when the present Postmaster General (Mr. Vendot) was Minister of Public Works at New Brunswick, and he will know that what I am saying is true. I ask the government to do this much for the capital city of New Brunswick.
It is really a disgrace the way government property in that city has been allowed to deteriorate. In the heart of the city there as what is known as Officers square, which for many years during the time the permanent corps was established there was one of the beauty spots of the city. The company of the permanent force which was established there was taken away some time previous to the war, and this property has not been since used for military purposes. The old officers' quarters have been given over to the Canadian Legion and are now used as a clubhouse. This is a beautiful square between the main street of the city and the river, and the retaining wall has been allowed to get into disrepair. This matter has been brought to the attention of the department more than once. When Hon. Mr. Graham was Minister of Militia he could not get them to do anything. I suppose it would be done if it were profitable from the standpoint of votes, because most of the items seem to be measured in those terms, I am sorry to say, but I make this appeal to the minister to take over these wharves. There is no reason in the world why the city of Fredericton should be treated differently from other localities. I do not know whether or not the department has been approached within the last few weeks, but if that has not been done a request will be made, and I ask the minister to do as I have suggested. I do not want any kudos out of this; it docs not make any difference to me whether or not they are taken over. It will not relieve me of anything as a taxpayer in the city; it will not give me or take away from me any votes, but it will be doing justice to a community which has not received a great deal of consideration at the hands of this government since 1921.


Robert Watson Grimmer: I should like to direct
the attention of the minister to the fact that it will be necessary to do some little dredging in front of the wharf at St. Stephen, although the dredging will not amount to a great deal and will not be very expensive. It is intended to put a new and larger boat on the St. John-St. Stephen route, and it will be necessary to do some dredging in front of the public wharf, which I must say has been fixed ' up very nicely during the past year. The people of that vicinity are very much pleased with the new ship that is to be put on that service, but it cannot operate satisfactorily unless this work is done, and when the request is made of the minister I trust he will see his way clear to accede to it.


Mr. BELL (St. John-Albert):: Will the
minister be kind enough to give some of the items embraced in this vote of $60,000 in order that we may have an idea of where the different improvements will be made?


John Campbell Elliott: At present it is quite
impossible to tell what items will be included in that vote; it will depend largely upon what happens between now and the time the spring freshets are over. Necessary and urgent matters, and suggestions such as that brought forward by my hon. friend who just spoke, will receive careful consideration.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is there anything in the
departmental estimates for Campbellton and that vicinity? I have not had time to go through the estimates, I may say frankly, and I should like to know if there is anything for dredging at Campbellton on the Restigouche river.


John Campbell Elliott: There is nothing in the
general estimates, but I understand there is a recommendation that some dredging be done there with the departmental' dredge, during the coming season.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Will that be done?


John Campbell Elliott: It probably will be done,
but I cannot say positively. We get all these recommendations and we have to do the things that seem necessary.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Of course the minister
knows that this is a very important point, and that practically all the developments in

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.
New Brunswick in the last few years have been on the Restigouche river. I know the companies with which I am connected are very heavy importers and shippers from that point; practically all that shipping is done on the New Brunswick side. My hon. friend from Beauce (Mr. Lacroix) is operating on the other shore. I think it extremely important that the channel be kept open; and in order to do that, dredging will be necessary from time to time. Therefore I would ask the minister to give very earnest consideration to any recommendation which may be made by the engineer. We are importing shipload after shipload of material for the pulp mills, and a great deal of lumber is shipped from that point as well, so that the channels must be kept open and the dredging must be done.


John Campbell Elliott: It is the desire of the
department to do everything possible and necessary in order to provide for increased business at these different places.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The minister's colleague
will bear me out in these statements.


John Campbell Elliott: Yes; he already has made recommendations in reference to this matter, and I think my hon. friend can be reasonably hopeful that provision will be made for the work.


Otto Baird Price: While we are appreciative of what has been done in regard to estimates for tlm maritime provinces, there are some items which have been overlooked. Within the past year I attended a meeting of the board of trade of the town of Shediac at which the Postmaster General was present, and we visited a place in the county of Westmorland known as Point du Chene, where there is a small wharf. At present that wharf is in a very dilapidated condition and is unsafe for traffic; it really is a disgrace to the department and to the government of the day. At that time the Postmaster General stated that he would see to it that these wharves would be fixed up and put in shape. I believe he intended to carry out his statement, at any rate at the time he made it. In previous years thousands of dollars worth of sea food such as lobster, oysters, clams and so on passed over this wharf, and I believe the Postmaster General had every intention of seeing that this wharf was put in order. However,
I note that in these estimates not one cent has been allowed for that work. Of course I do not know whether or not it is the intention to bring down something in the supplementary estimates to look after these repairs; perhaps that will be done, but at any rate the wharf

at Point du Chene has been overlooked, together with the Shediac wharf, and I want to say to the Minister of Public Works and to the Postmaster General that the people in my constituency will hold the government of the day accountable for their neglect in this regard.
I should also like to dfaw attention to the fact that within the last year the Minister of Marine and Fisheries was notified of the fact that one of the mooring posts on the public wharf at Moncton had decayed to such a point that it broke off while a ship was moored there with a cargo of lumber, and the result was that two individuals from Pre d'en haut in my constituency were drowned. Morally the Department of Public Works is responsible for those deaths, although legally that may not be the case. I have appealed to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, asking that some allowance be made the dependents of these men; the parents of one of the men are over seventy years of age and I have asked that something be done for them by way of a compassionate allowance, but no action has been taken. I believe there is some possibility of such an allowance being made during this session, and I do hope the minister will see his way clear to recommending it.
I must add that in my constituency the Department of Public Works has entirely failed to maintain properly the wharves and other public undertakings. I believe the Postmaster General will bear me out when I say that the wharves in particular have been absolutely neglected and allowed to rot to such an extent that they are not safe for the use of the general public.
There is one further matter which I should like to bring up, and that is in regard to the construction of a post office in the city of Moncton, which turns into the revenue of this country about $388,000 per year, or an average of over SI,000 per day. On several occasions the attention of the government has been called to the fact that the post office building in that city is in a miserable and dilapidated condition; it is a menace to the public, unsanitary and unsuitable in every way for the use of the public and those who are handling the mails and endeavouring to give the public proper service.


Peter John Veniot: It was not my intention to take any part in the debate on these estimates, but since the hon. member who represents the county of Westmorland has thought fit to say that he was sure I would agree with him when he said that the Department of Public Works had neglected the wharves and other structures in the county of Westmorland,

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.
I rise to say that I cannot agree with a statement which in my opinion is not founded on
fact.
The hon. member has referred to the wharf at Point du Chene. If he had wanted to tell the whole truth he would have told the house that the wharf does not belong to the Department of Public Works at all, but it is controlled by the Department of Railways and Canals. The facts are that when the Cape Tormentine route w'as opened this wharf was practically abandoned, and from that time on the Canadian National Railways never paid very much attention to it and let it go to destruction. It is true that now it is in a scandalous condition and unsafe, but the blame should be placed not on the government or on the Department of Public Works, but on the Canadian National Railways. It is true I visited Point du Chene in company with the hon. gentleman representing the county of Westmorland (Mr. Price) and members of the board of trade and city council, and I there and then said that I would make as strong representations as I possibly could to the Department of Public Works or to the railway for either the railway to repair the wharf or the Department of Public Works to take it over. It will cost about 8130,000 to put this wharf in repair- not the whole of it, but sufficient of it to meet the traffic conditions as they exist at the present time. The Canadian National Railways draw a revenue of from 828.000 to 830,000 a year from the traffic that is landed at that wharf, placed aboard the cars and shipped to the United States and sections of Canada. The Canadian National Railways have refused to contribute anything to the upkeep or repair of this wharf, and they want the Public Works department to take it over at an expenditure of 8130,000 to 8140,000. I have been trying to convince the Canadian National Railways that since they are getting a revenue out of it it is up to them to keep this wharf in repair. So far I have not succeeded in convincing Sir Henry Thornton that I am right and he is wrong. I am not the first one who has been' unable to convince him of a thing of that kind, and it is not surprising that I have not succeeded up to the present time. I understand negotiations are proceeding between the Department of Public Works and the railway authorities at Montreal touching this very wharf. Those are the facts. If my hon. friend had told those facts as I relate them now it would have been better instead of trying to put the blame upon the Department of Public Works. I know something about the hon. gentleman's
county and no doubt he is aware that I do. Last year I visited every wharf and every harbour in the province of New Brunswick excepting one county which I could not reach, and I know the condition of nearly every harbour and wharf in that province with the exception of that one county. My hon. friend from York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson) was very fair this afternoon in referring to certain wharves that have been repaired. After this year there will not be a wharf owned by the Department of Public Works on the whole St. John river that will not be in first class repair, not only repaired in wood but reconstructed in concrete. Those wharves were taken over in 1920-21 from the government of New Brunswick. I had the honour of being provincial Minister of Public Works at that time, and those wharves were found to be in a very dilapidated condition owing to the fact that the provincial government could not afford to repair them. Last summer, as I visited every wharf on the St. John river- the wharf referred to by the hon. member for York-Sunbury as well-I found, with the exception recommended by me to the Department of Public Works, every wharf on the river St. John as well as on the Ken-nebecasis river and the Belleisle, in first class condition. I visited the wharves in the county of Westmorland, and I also visited the most important section of wharf construction in Westmorland county. There excellent work is being done, and it is not fair for the hon. member for the county of Westmorland to state that the Department of Public Works has absolutely neglected the wharves in that county.


Otto Baird Price: They certainly have been
neglected.


Peter John Veniot: The hon. gentleman knows
that I am telling the truth.


Otto Baird Price: I know that you are not.


Mr. YENIOT:: Take that back. I doubt
very much whether the hon. gentleman has visited many of those wharves, and there are not many wharves in the county of Westmorland owned by the Department of Public Works. The greater number of the wharves on the Petitcodiac river, and the most important, are owned by private owners, and if these wharves are in a dilapidated condition-


Otto Baird Price: What about Cape Bald?


Peter John Veniot: I referred to that.


Otto Baird Price: Just explain Cape Bald. Put yourself on record.
192	COMMONS
Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.


Clarence Joseph Veniot: The wharf at Cape Bald
is a construction which was started about twenty years ago, built absolutely of concrete, one of the best constructed wharves there is in the whole maritime provinces. True, it was destroyed or put out of repair in certain sections owing to the very severe storms along that coast, but the necessary repairs have been made. With the development that has taken place they have to-day at Cape Bald a breakwater that protects the harbour, and it is one of the best and most substantial wharves in the whole maritime provinces. I know something about construction; I have had ten or twelve years' experience in the matter.
Mr. PRICE Why enlarge the wharf now?


Peter John Veniot: Because the time has arrived when the wharf in its present condition does not meet the requirements of the fishermen and the department are giving them the requirements to meet the case so that they will have better protection than they have been getting in the past few years.


Otto Baird Price: How many boats have been
destroyed in the last few years on those shores as a result of the neglect of the present administration? Why is the government only now bringing down an estimate for $10,000 for repairs?	-


Peter John Veniot: I will do what an Irish friend of mine does-answer my hon, friend's question by asking him another one. How many boats and schooners and even lives were lost during the time my hon. friends were in power on account of their neglect in the matter of looking after the Cape Bald breakwater? They did not spend a dollar on it from 1912 to 1918 or 1919.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I suppose the Postmaster General remembers that there was a war on then.


Peter John Veniot: There was no war on between 1911 and 1914 or between 1919 and 1921. My hon. friends had five or six years in which to make the repairs.
Let me come to the statement made by the hon. member for York-Sunbury. It is true the city of Fredericton has a wharf, not wharves. It has what is known as a combined high and low tide wharf. The city of Frederioton the year before last spent on the maintainance of that wharf between $8,000 and 810,000. I visited that wharf last September, I think it was, accompanied by the mayor and members of the city council. I went over the wharf carefully. The federal engineer, under instructions from the Depart-

ment of Public Works, accompanied me. I have recommended to the Department of Public Works the taking over of that wharf from the city of Fredericton, and the matter is now under consideration. But let me point this out: there is a government wharf within the limits of the city of Fredericton, but it is above the bridge; it is a concrete wharf and it has been used in the pa9t only for tugboats handling rafts or something of that kind, shallow boats drawing very little water. But the wharf at Fredericton owned by the city is a very important one, and I have hopes that when all the negotiations have been concluded, the Department of Public Works may see its way clear to look with favour upon the taking over of that wharf. The city council of Fredericton had not previously intimated to the Department of Public Works that they had passed a resolution authorizing the turning over of the wharf to the government. Yesterday I received from the mavor of Fredericton a letter in which he informed me that the city council, only the night before, had passed such a resolution, authorizing certain officials to get into communication with the Department of Public Works with the view of offei'ing the wharf to the government. They are not asking any price for it; they are giving it gratis; they feel that they themselves cannot afford to maintain it. The estimate for repairs to put the wharf into proper condition is $110,000. It is impossible to leave it in its present condition. Some repairs must be made to it and negotiations are now pending, so I am informed, between the city authorities and the Department of Public Works.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I have no complaint to make about the statement of the Postmaster General with respect to the Fredericton wharf. All I would like to announce is that if the wharf is not taken over by the present government, we will take it over after the next election.


Peter John Veniot: That will be ten years from now.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I would like to challenge one statement which the Postmaster General has made with respect to all the wharves on tidal waters in the St. John river having been put into thorough repair as a result of his intervention.


Peter John Veniot: Will the hon. gentleman
pardon me? I made no such statement.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Then I misunderstood the hon. gentleman. I do not wish to do him any injustice, but before he ever became a member of the present administration, in the summer

Supply-Harbours and Rivers, N.B.
of 1926, I had more work done in the constituency of York-Sunbury than has been done before or after, since 1922.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Middle Caraquet-wharf, $32,100.
Richard Burpee Hanson: Is this a contract? I see part of it is a revote. Just what is the situation in respect to this wharf?


John Campbell Elliott: It is a contract. It is required to provide for completing the work now under contract with Charles L. Comeau of Caraquet, New Brunswick.


Richard Burpee Hanson: How far has it gone? What is the contract price and the estimate?


John Campbell Elliott: The contract price is $29.180; contingencies, inspection and so on, 32,920. The probable total cost of the work is $32,100.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What county is it in?


Peter John Veniot: Gloucester.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
North Head-breakwater extension, $25,000.
Richard Burpee Hanson: This is a new vote.


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What is it intended to do? I am familiar with the locality.


John Campbell Elliott: It is to provide towards the construction of an extension of 100 feet to the existing breakwater at North Head. This is the beginning of a rather extensive project, estimated to cost $120,000.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What is intended to be
done there?


John Campbell Elliott: The construction of an
extension of 100 feet to the existing breakwater.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is it understood the extension will cost $120,000?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: And this is a first vote?


John Campbell Elliott: This is a start.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Of course that is quite an important point. It is the point at which the steamboats land. I have been there in an easterly gale and I quite appreciate the necessity of something being done. It is a wonder to me that something has not been done there before, because the ground swell is enormous in an easterly gale. Could the minister tell us whether the present breakwater is simply to be extended in the same direction, or is it intended to create something in the nature of a harbour at the steamboat landing?


John Campbell Elliott: It is intended to extend the present breakwater in the same direction.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is the engineer's recommendation?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes. My memorandum is that the present breakwater is very serviceable for the vessels using it, but it cannot accommodate the larger vessel that is being put on the St. John-Grand Manan route. It is the only breakwater which exists on the New Brunswick side of the mouth of the bay of Fundy.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is not a correct statement because there are other breakwaters on Grand Manan island-the minister has them in the estimates-at Seal Cove, Woodward's Cove and other places.	.


John Campbell Elliott: They are not breakwaters; they are wharves.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Seal Cove-breakwater extension, $17,000.
Robert Watson Grimmer: There is a revote of
$17,000. Was any work done at Seal Cove last year?


John Campbell Elliott: The contract was not let
until September, and owing to the lateness of the season it is not anticipated that any work will be done there during the present fiscal year. The contractor, however, is making arrangements for the delivery of materials and it is possible they will be delivered before the close of the present fiscal year, on which an estimate can be forwarded; but this is uncertain. The work is under contract with Mr. A. D. Dyas, of St. Stephen, N.B.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Shippigan Gully-repairs to breakwaters and breastworks, $15,000.
Richard Burpee Hanson: This is rather an important item. How much money has been spent at Shippigan Gully in the last ten years? I cannot remember a session when there has not been a large sum of money voted for Shippigan Gully. What is the necessity for it? Is it the yearly annual allowance for the people in that community to live on, or what is it? It does seem to me that there ought to be some let-<up in the expenditure of public money at that point. Like some individuals who are never off the payroll of the country, Shippigan Gully never seems to be out of the estimates.


John Campbell Elliott: I understand that these
works were started away back in 1875, which would be long before my hon. friend was born, and they have been carried on with reasonable diligence from time to time since. This


Peter John Veniot: There seems to be an impression in the mind of the hon. member for York-Sunbury that this is a sort of yearly grant to the people of Shippigan. To my mind that is a reflection upon the hardy fishermen and upon the honest folk of the mainland of Shippigan.
If the hon. gentleman knew the history of this undertaking, I am sure that he would recognize at once the necessity of keeping it up. It is true that Shippigan Gully breakwater was started as far back as 1875, but at that time there was no intention to make it the very important structure that it is to-day. It was not really started at all at that time. Shippigan Gully, up to fifteen or twenty years ago, had only four feet of water at low tide at the entrance to the gully. As the fishing fleets of Caraquet, Lower Caraquet, Little Lameque and St. Simon increased, these works had to be added to. The Department of Public Works at that time, instead of dredging yearly to try to keep this channel open, undertook to construct a breakwater of immense proportions, which was necessary, and directed the flow of tide in and out to such an extent that after dredging the gully to a depth of 14 feet, that depth was able to be maintained by the current itself. To-day no less than 350 fishing sail, ranging all the way from twenty to fifty tons, use weekly this entrance to Shippigan harbour. In former years, instead of being able to go through Shippigan Gully, they had to make the round of East Point Miscou, a distance of forty-one miles, but by the construction of these works these vessels can come in a direct run of about four hours from the shipping banks of Prince Edward Island, thus saving a run of over fifty miles by having to go round East Point Miscou. Anyone who would attempt to belittle the department for making an expenditure of this kind certainly does not know what he is talking about.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am very much obliged
to the Postmaster General for his scolding, though it really does not matter a bit what he thinks of me. I was simply pointing out that the public are entitled to know why year after year there is this very large expenditure
(Mr. Elliott.)
at Shippigan. I quite realize that over half the estimates for New Brunswick are in the county of my hon. friend, but that does not help the rest of the province very much.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Lapointe the house adjourned at 10.30 p.m.
Monday, March 3, 1930