1946-04-08

EXCHANGE OF NOTES


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to table an exchange of notes between the United States of America and Canada constituting an agreement on the subject of war surpluses and related matters. In relation thereto I should like to make the following statement.
Both the United States government and our own have found it advantageous to simplify the procedure followed hitherto in disposing of defence facilities and equipment provided in Canada by the United States. They have therefore agreed that Canada shall pay the United States $12,000,000 (U.S.) in return for which there is transferred to the Canadian government a long list of defence facilities and equipment, the original cost of which was approximately $59,000,000 (U.S.).
These installations and materials include items related to the Alaska highway and the northwest staging route, to weather stations in northeastern Canada, movable property reported to War Assets Corporation under an earlier agreement, but not sold, and certain naval and air equipment which had been provided by the United States to the United Kingdom under lend-lease and which, when returned to United States account, remained in Canada. The price paid is a reasonable one, in view of the usefulness of many of these installations and materials to the armed forces and other agencies of government, and the agreement is regarded by both governments as a satisfactory settlement of a property disposal problem which otherwise might have been long drawn out and complicated.
There is an additional aspect of the exchange of notes which is important.
In order to provide equipment necessary for the training programmes of the Canadian armed forces, the United States government will endeavour to make available, surplus military type equipment up to a maximum value of $7,000,000 (U.S.). The agreement calls for negotiation between the two governments as to quantities and prices and will enable the Canadian armed forces to obtain much of the training equipment that they will require at figures considerably less than would be the case if orders had to be placed with manufacturers for new equipment.

Questions


Mr. BRACKEN:: In connection with this adjustment, I understood the Prime Minister to say that there were included therein certain items relating to the Alaska highway. I was under the impression that that matter had been closed some time previously. Perhaps the Prime Minister would clear up the point.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: "Items related to the Alaska highway" are the words I used: "These installations and materials include items related to the Alaska highway and the northwest staging route." I cannot give my hon. friend further particulars at the moment. I will look into his question and if there is additional information I will give it later.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I have just been informed by the Minister of Justice that what is referred to as matters related to the Alaska highway is in the nature of building equipment and the like. The highway was to be turned over to the Canadian system of highways but the Americans were to have the right to take away building equipment and other materials they have been using.



QUESTIONS

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by in asterisk.)

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	Has !C. 0. Mollberg been an employee of the Wartime Prices and Trade Board a>t any time since 1943, and to date?
2.	If so, is he now so employed?
3.	What was his salary?
4.	If not now employed, when did his employment cease, and for what reason?
Cal.	Barbados	Jamaica	Trinidadyear	cwt.	cwt.	cwt.1927 ...	..- 1,042,061	769,632	371.0291928 ...	.. 1,132,149	797,114	723.3491929 ...	.. 1,250,264	765,331	867,3531930 ...	.. 1,083,257	1,018,376	773,5461931 ...	.. 760,010	867,369	1,282,9781933 ...	.. 787.067	332,345	413,3601934 ...	.. 1,478,051	1,006,149	429,1671935 ...	.. 770,938	1,269.969	1,124,0511936 ...	.. 1,222,400	1,397,138	1,366,4681937 ...	.. 807,126	1,349,716	397,6441940 ...	.. 610,847	853,662	671.5781941 ...	.. 875,608	1,008,381	1,131,7691942 ...	.. 172,860	1,305,801	678.2151943 ...	.. 1,435.569	2.725,587	157,0441944 ...	.. 1,811,760	2,687,343	248,938


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	Yes. Appointed May 5, 1942 as an investigator, Prince Albert local office, Saskatchewan.
2.	Yes.
3.	$1,860 per annum, plus $221.04 cost of living bonus.
4.	See answer to question No. 2.


CURRAN-KNOWLES COKE AND GAS PLANT, HAMILTON
Mr. LENNARD:: 1.	What was the overall cost to the government of the Curran-Knowles Coke and Gas plant at Hamilton, Ontario?
2.	Are any moneys still owing the contractors who erected this plant?
3.	If so, what are the amounts?
4.	What disposition is the government making of the plant?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	The capital cost of the plant, including additions to December 31, 1945, was $4,084,717.60.
2.	No. The contractor is making a claim but the department denies liability.
3.	Answered by No. 2.
4.	The disposition of the plant is a matter of government policy to be made known in due course.


IMPORTS OF SUGAR FROM WEST INDIES AND CUBA
Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	What quantity of sugar was imported from the West Indies in each of the years, 1927, 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1936, 1937, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 and 1944?
2.	What quantity of sugar was imported from Cuba in the same years?


Mr. MacKINNON:: Br. West Indies other	Hayti	San Domingo	Cubacwt.	cwt.	cwt.	cwt.674,720	101,745	1,446,863	1,262,598409.985	141,614	522.945	1,446,333158,012	35,358	865,732	1,129,490777,235	278,692	739,218431,806	408,553	235,133371.436	94,517	734,078302,348	1,369,482	573.241521,512	37,941478,070	57,971294,497	330,092250,957	58,944	1,993,603	508.288458.580	12,003	2,350,208	1,320,71167,766	184,842	1,800,782114.240	41,600	2.601.470111,420	490,820	1,603,893	437,563
Questions


CANADIAN TROOPS IN JAMAICA
Mr. COLDWELL:: How many Canadian troops were in Jamaica on or about February 20, 1946?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 722.


DOMINION BONDS HELD BY CHARTERED BANKS
Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	To what extent of their savings accounts are privately-owned banks permitted to hold Dominion of Canada bonds?
2.	Is there any limit to the amount banks may hold as collateral?
3.	When Dominion of Canada bonds, bearing interest at the rate of three per cent per annum, are deposited as collateral with privately-owned banks, is there a maximum or fixed rate of interest which may be charged by the banks? If so, what is the rate?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	By voluntary arrangement between the chartered banks and the Minister of Finance, the banks have agreed that their holdings of dominion government domestic bonds (including guaranteed issues) will not average more than 90 per cent of the amount of their Canadian savings deposits (i. e., their notice deposits other than balances of corporations).
2.	No.
3.	No other than the maximum of 6 per cent permitted under section 91 of the Bank Act.


WAR ASSETS-CAMP BORDEN BUILDINGS
Mr. MENARY:: 1.	Is the War Assets Corporation at present disposing of any of the surplus buildings at Camp Borden?
_ 2. If not, when is the disposal of these buildings expected to begin?
3.	Would these buildings be available to returned soldiers by direct purchase and, if so, at what date?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	No.
2.	No information (not yet declared surplus.)
3.	Federal government departments, provincial government departments and municipalities including educational institutions, in this order, will be given an opportunity to purchase 'these buildings. When these priority applications have been met the remaining buildings will be advertised for sale by tender.


REGIONAL WAR LABOUR BOARD FOR QUEBEC
Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	Was Paul Emile Marqiiette of Montreal recommended for appointment to the Regional War Labour Board by the Canadian Congress of Labour?

2.	Has the Canadian Congress of Labour requested the removal of Mr. Marquette from this position? If so, what action has been taken?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes. In February last the Canadian congress of labour requested that Mr. Marquette be removed from the Quebec regional war labour board.
On March 5, 1946, an official communication was received by the department from the Canadian congress of labour nominating Mr. T. Prezeau to replace Mr. Marquette.
On March 8 a unanimous resolution, which had been passed by the Quebec regional war labour board on February 26, was received from the board to the effect: "that Mr. Marquette should be maintained in office as a member of the regional war labour board, first, because of the lengthy experience he has had in dealing with matters pertaining to the control of wages-besides that which he has acquired since he is with the board-also because of the fairness and impartiality he has always displayed in the judgment of the applications which up to now have been presented to the board".
On March 12 the department notified the Quebec regional board that the Canadian congress of labour urged that Mr. Marquette be replaced.
The Quebec board was organized by agreement between the government of the province of Quebec and the dominion government. The necessity, therefore, for consultation between the parties in this matter will be appreciated.
On April 2 the names of Messrs. T. Prezeau, J. E. Corbeil and J. M. Bedard were submitted to the department by the congress for consideration.
On the same date, April 2, these three names were telegraphed to Honourable Antonio Barrette, Minister of Labour for Quebec, requesting that he indicate his choice.
On April 3 the regional war labour board for Quebec wrote the department repeating its recommendation of February 26 that Mr. Marquette be retained on the board for the reason that "his integrity and experience have proved to be most valuable to the regional board".
On April 3 Honourable Mr. Barrette wrote the department suggesting the appointment of Mr. J. M. Bedard to the Quebec regional war labour board.
On April 8 the dominion Minister of Labour had a telephone conversation with the Quebec Minister of Labour and the latter made it

Questions as Orders for Returns
clear that he wished to have Mr. J. M. Bedard appointed a member of the Quebec regional war labour board in place of Mr. Marquette.
Steps are therefore being taken to revoke the order in council appointing Mr. Marquette a member of the board and to recommend to the cabinet council that Mr. Bedard be named as his successor.


AIR FORCE-OFFICERS
Mr. COCKERAM:: 1.	How many officers, holding the following ranks, are now on the strength of the Royal Canadian Air Force, at home and abroad (a) air chief marshal; (b) air marshal; (c) air vice-marshal; (d) air commodore; (e) group captain?
2.	How many of these officers have received promotion since V-J day?
3.	Who are they and what ranks do they now hold and what appointment do they now hold?
4.	How many of these officers, in addition, have received promotion since December 1, 1945?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: 1.	(a) Nil; (b) 2; (c) 11; (d) 18; (e) 98.
2.	Five.
3.	Acting Air Vice-Marshal A. L. James, CBE, Air Member for Research and Development; Acting Air Vice-Marshal J. L. Plant, CBE, Air Officer Cbmmanding Western Air Command, Vancouver; Acting Air Commodore L. E. Wray, OBE, AFC, Air Officer Commanding, No. 9 Group Rockcliffe; Acting Air Commodore R. A. London, OBE, Director of Equipment Supply; Acting Group Captain S. B. Rhude, MBE, Director of Accounts and Finance.
4.	None.


*FREE PORTS
[Stage Direction]
Mr. MENARY;
1.	Are there any free ports in Canada?
2.	If not, what has been done by the government to establish same?
Mr. CHEVRIER:: I should like to answer this question orally. The answer to the first part of the question is no. With regard to the second part, an interdepartmental committee has been set up to study the general question of the establishment of free ports in Canada, and the committee has not yet reported.


AMBASSADOR AT THE VATICAN
[Stage Direction]
Mr. LACROIX;
1.	Have any steps been taken towards appointing an ambassador at the Vatican?
2.	What has been done in this connection?
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by the answer to No. 1.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	Prior to the outbreak of war in 1939 did the Department of Fisheries operate a ship known as the Arleuxf
2.	If so, for what purpose was this ship used during the war?
3.	Was the ship passed over to the Royal Canadian Navy ? If so, on what date, and what was the date it was released?
4.	Has the ship since been sold? If so, was it by private or public sale and how was transaction handled?
5.	If by public sale (a) how many bids were received; (b) who were the bidders, and for what amounts?


DESERTERS
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many alleged deserters in the United States army have been apprehended and turned over to the United States authorities under the provisions of P.C. 6577?
2.	How many Canadians in the United States have been returned to Canada under reciprocal arrangements ?


SERVICE PERSONNEL STATIONED IN WASHINGTON
Mr. COCKERAM:: 1.	What is the number of service personnel, of all services, at present stationed in Washington?
2.	How many officers of all ranks of all services are now stationed in Washington and what duties do they perform?
3.	What are the names of the senior officers of all services now stationed in Washington?


OFFICERS SECONDED TO OTHER BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT
Mr. COCKERAM:: 1.	How many officers of the following ranks (a) army, general, lieutenant-general, major-general, brigadiers, colonel; (b) navy, admiral, vice-admiral, rear-admiral, commodores, captain; (c) air force, air chief marshal, air marshal, air vice-marshal, air commodore, group captain, now on the strength of the armed services, are seconded to other branches of the government ?
2.	Who are they and what is their substantive rank as against temporary rank held at present?
3.	To what department is each of them seconded ?


OFFICERS RETIRED ON PENSION
Mr. COCKERAM:: 1.	What are the names of all officers retired on pension from the Royal Canadian navy, army and air forces since September, 1939?
2.	What was the rank of each such officer and what was the rank held in September, 1939?
3.	What is the amount of pension being paid to each such officer?
Motions for Papers


PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE-STAFF
Mr. McICAY:: 1.	How many (a) appraisers; (b) other officials, and staff are now in the employ of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act branch, Department of Agriculture?
2.	How many of these employees are located in (a) Alberta; (h) Saskatchewan; (c) Manitoba; (d) Ottawa?
3.	What amount has been paid out since the inception of P.F.A.A. in respect of such employees for (a) salaries; (b) expenses?
4.	What is the total expenditure under the act for (a) rental of office space; (b) other expenditures?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Mr. FRASER;
For a copy of all correspondence< reports and other documents in the possession of the Department of Reconstruction and the War Assets Corporation relative to the gift or sale to educational bodies in Canada for vocational training and educational instruction, of any machine tools, equipment, motion picture projectors, typewriters, hand tools and other material.
Mr. McILRAITH:: The information sought to be produced: by this motion as it stands is of such length that it would require several filing cabinets to hold it. I have discussed the matter with the mover and he has agreed to place a question on the order paper which will, I believe, give him the information that he desires. I ask that the motion be dropped.


Mr. FRASER:: I will drop the motion and put a question on the order paper in a different wray, Mr. Speaker, with your permission.
Motion dropped'.



CANADIAN FORCES-WITHDRAWAL OF OCCUPATIONAL FORCES FROM GERMANY

Mr. PEARKES:: For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, and other documents exchanged between the Prime Minister and/or the Minister of External Affairs of Canada with the Prime Minister and/or the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs or any other member of the cabinet of Great Britain, relative to the withdrawal of the Canadian army occupational forces from Germany.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Correspondence of this kind is, according to long standing .precedent, privileged. I would ask the hon. member not to press for it, because it would not be possible to meet his wishes at present.


George Randolph Pearkes: Statements have been
made in the British House of Commons which would indicate that the agreement to withdraw these troops was of a unilateral character and against the wishes of the authorities in
 -
Great Britain. There is a good deal of feeling about this in the country. If the Prime Minister is unable to produce all the papers, perhaps he could produce sufficient to clear up the matter, or he may be prepared to make a statement with regard to the reasons behind the withdrawal of this force.
'Mr. MACKENZIE KING: I have no doubt the matter will come up when the Minister of Defence is dealing with his estimates or at some other appropriate moment. I know the minister will be only too ready to make a statement at that time.
Motion dropped.



CANADIAN CITIZENSHIP


[Stage Direction]
On the order:
Mr. Castleden-the following proposed resolution:-That, in the opinion of this house, it is in the best interests of Canada to establish a distinctive Canadian citizenship, which shall be available to all persons of certain residence or birth qualifications within the dominion.
Mr. CASTLEDEN:: Stand.


Mr. MARTIN:: This matter should hardly
be allowed to stand. It is now before the house in the form of a bill. Under the rules of the house I believe this motion should be dropped.


George Hugh Castleden: Speaking of the procedure in that regard, I might say that last year I had practically an identical motion on the order paper and I dropped it because a bill having t,o do with the. matter was introduced in the house. But the bill received only first reading and was then dropped from the order paper. I prefer to have this motion stand until the bill is passed.


Major James William Coldwell: Stand until then.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The rules of
the house are quite clear in this matter.
Motion dropped.



WATER CONSERVATION


Mr. J. R. MacNICOL (Davenport) moved:: That, in the opinion of this house the government should take into immediate consideration the advisability of introducing legislation during this session to set up a permanent interprovincial board or commission on which the three prairie provinces and the dominion would have equal representation under the chairmanship of a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada or some other qualified person, to conduct investigations and make studies of the most feasible

Water Conservation
and economic means for the conservation and utilization of the eastern watershed of the Rocky mountains, particularly the watershed of the Saskatchewan river.
He said: Mr. Speaker, the matters referred to in the resolution are of such tremendous importance to the three western provinces as well as to all of Canada, that I hope out of this debate much good will result to the country generally. The whole economy of the western provinces is threatened by the presence of areas which may be described as arid or semi-arid, or, better still perhaps, as desert and semi-desert; and unless immediate steps are taken to reclaim these areas the consequences to the western provinces will be disastrous. I hope those who take part in the debate may bring home to the people of the three prairie provinces a keen conception of the situation as it exists to-day; and I hope proper emphasis will be given to the lowering of the water plane of the three western provinces. which is one of the main causes of these arid areas. I trust that the business men and financial interests of eastern Canada will take an active part in trying to reclaim these areas, because as a former eastern business man I am convinced that unless these desert and semi-desert areas of the west are reclaimed, the eastern companies will have great difficulty-in maintaining their present position, let alone bringing about any expansion.
I should like to give just two examples et what is resulting from our failure to reclaim these areas. I believe the census is taken in the western provinces about every fir? years, whereas the census for all Canada i? taken every ten years. Between the taking of the census of 1935 and the time war broke out in 1939, the population of the great central province of Saskatchewan dropped by some forty thousand persons. In my opinion that was a major disaster to Canada. Then in January last, on my way west, in a report issued either by the Department of Agriculture or the Department of Trade and Commerce, I saw an announcement that in 1945, notwithstanding the fact that the farmers received substantial prices for what they had to sell, the returns to the farmers of the . three prairie provinces were $186,000,000 less than those of 1944. That is another problem of major proportions, because if additional crops to the value of $186,000,000 had been produced the difference would have mors than paid for the programme I have in view in this connection. I hope every hon. member of the house will take note of those two striking figures; a loss of population of 40,000 souls in Saskatchewan alone from 1935 to 1939, and a loss through drought, principally
in Saskatchewan, of $186,000,000 in 1945 as compared with 1944. In my judgment these are staggering figures.
The only antidote for arid or semi-arid areas, or desert and semi-desert conditions, is water. Nothing else can reclaim such areas. A few days ago in an engineering article I read that deserts do not stand still, that they can be reclaimed by water but that if water is not applied, they march on. This article went on to say that what had been the great city of Timbuktu in north Africa is threatened with destruction by the continuing march of the Sahara desert toward the south west, and that already it has been partly destroyed. So our objective should be not only to reclaim but to try to arrest any expansion of these desert conditions.
Now may I say just a word about the resolution. It divides itself into four parts. I must confess that it could have been much better worded, but I suppose the ministry will have no difficulty in accepting the first division, namely that immediate consideration should be given to the advisability of introducing legislation during this session. As a matter of fact I am very happy to say that the estimates for this year contain the sum of $10,000,000 for this work, which is a substantial start toward reclamation. I believe that $10,000,000 can be divided up among several projects, and I shall deal with that later.
The second division has to do with the setting up of an interprovincial-federal board. Recently when I was in the west I discussed this whole problem with every engineer with whom I came in contact-city engineers, government engineers, and general engineers. At that time I had in mind that we might have in Canada something similar to the Tennessee Valley Authority in the United States, with which I am very well acquainted. What they have done is revolutionary in regard to expanding the economy of the seven states through which the Tennessee river flows. At the time I thought we would have to set up some such authority here. However, I must confess that I am quite pleased with what the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act has done, and I have great confidence in the director of that organization, Hon. George Spence. However, the PF.R.A. legislation, which I believe was enacted in 1935, does not take in the whole of the area. It does not include northwestern Alberta or northeastern Manitoba, both of which would come under any project of the magnitude of that I have in view. However, I have no doubt the government can expand the control of P.F.RA, and if they should so decide, well and good.
Water Conservation

The next division of the resolution pertains to the participation of the provinces. The states do not participate in the T.V.A.-set-up; the United States government has financed the 'whole undertaking.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: I wonder, Mr. Speaker, if you can do anything to bring about a little better order. We cannot hear the hon. member at all down here; others are speaking almost as loudly as he is.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I had in view the participation of the provinces in suggesting a separate board. I cannot conceive of works of this magnitude being carried on without the consent and perhaps assistance of the three western provinces, and I can see no reason why they should not participate and why their participation would not be helpful. Of course I am not going to tell the minister what he should do; he will use his own judgment in that regard. I merely point out in my resolution that to include the provinces in these works in my , judgment would be beneficial.
In my reference to the chairmanship of the proposed board I had in mind one whose decisions would inspire the utmost confidence throughout the country. I have suggested a judge of the supreme court, but I have noted a good deal of opposition to the appointment of judges to boards. If the government decided that the chief engineer in the department, the chief engineer under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, or the director thereof, in whom, as I said a minute ago, I have great confidence, would be suitable, I should have no quarrel with that decision. When I suggest the appointment of a judge I am not offering something which could not be altered.
The provinces are already acting. Each of the three western provinces has sent engineers -I am not sure whether they have sent their chief engineers, but information to this effect appeared in the press. Those engineers, meeting in Regina, have formed themselves into a small board. They cannot act, of course, because the Saskatchewan is a navigable river. I am sure however that their participation in the matter of western rehabilitation and conservation could not be other than helpful.
In the latter part of the resolution I refer to the conservation of water and the utilization of the eastern watershed in the Rocky mountains, particularly the watershed of the Saskatchewan river. I shall proceed from that point, because it is with that matter I wish to deal particularly.
I have made as careful a survey as was within my power, both by foot and on horseback, of a considerable portion of the eastern

slope of the Rocky mountains. I learned- I was going to say with horror, because what I saw affected me in that way-about great acreages of fine timberland which had been burned. I learned that for years a minimum of 30,000 acres each year have been destroyed by fire. In consultation with engineers in the west I learned, and I have reason to believe what I was told, that the destruction of
30,000	acres a year in the foothills of the Rocky mountains, timber which had retarded the run-off of the- snows and water in the spring so that it was retained in a manner which permitted its flowing down the river more evenly, had a disastrous effect on the glaciers.
I have not sufficient technical knowledge about these matters to check on that information, but I was told by two outstanding engineers that the great forest fires on the slopes of the Rocky mountains, through the process of hurling soot on the glaciers, retarded the accumulation of those glaciers, with the result that they have shrunk to a considerable degree. I can see nothing but disaster to. the west if those glaciers shrink appreciably. Of course it would take a long time to bring this about-perhaps not in our time-but I do urge it is our duty, to the extent of our ability, to protect the generations which will follow us. One of the protections we could afford would be the preservation of the watershed of the Saskatchewan river, through the protection of the glaciers. A step in that direction would mean the restoration of vast areas of foothill forests which have been destroyed by fire, and every effort made to prevent future fires in the foothills of the Rocky mountains would be worth while.
As to the conservation of water, might I point out that I have been up and down all the important parts of the river, from its mouth to its source in the mountains. I travelled up as far as I could go, to view the Columbia glacier. In company with engineers I have seen many splendid sites for reservoirs. P.F.R.A. has issued some instructive maps and excellent reports which indicate that on the source rivers of the Saskatchewan there are about thirty-six splendid sites for reservoirs, some of which are large. I have in mind two which I inspected, one called the Whirlpool and the other the Gap. The Gap was located not far from Nordegg in Alberta, and the Whirlpool also in Alberta but much closer to the Banff-Jasper highway. Both these sites are large, each one capable of conserving about 380,000 acre feet of water. That is a lot of water, Your Honour. If one

Water Conservation
adds to those two the other thirty-four reservoir sites, he might well be convinced that we have ample opportunity in the source rivers of the Saskatchewan for this type of work. I have in mind rivers like the Castle, Old Man, Waterton, St. Mary's, High, Bow, Brazeau, Clearwater and Mistaya. One reaches all those rivers when making a survey.
So far as I can estimate all those reservoir sites on the head waters are sufficient to store approximately 10 million acre feet of water. That, too, is a lot of water.
In addition, along the main river there are many excellent sites. As hon. members are aware, the main river has two great branches, the North Saskatchewan and the South Saskatchewan. In consultation with engineers, and after inspecting as thoroughly as is possible by a layman-that is, outside of digging down below the water line-I can say that the site near the Riverhurst area, if it were developed by the construction of a dam 175 feet high, would back the river up 100 miles. And I am satisfied the average width of water at the top water level would be not less than three-quarters of a mile. One can figure by taking the top 50 feet of that reach that he would have available 2,500,000 acre feet of storage. I have seen other excellent sites, just as good as the one at Riverhurst. If one were to limit himself to only four such sites-and there are many more-he would have another ten million acre feet of storage-In other words, from what I have seen of the river and its source branches, there are reservoir sites capable of conserving twenty million acre feet of water.
When I think of the priceless necessity for water in western Canada, and think that almost every drop runs to the sea without giving any advantage to those great provinces -with the exception, of course, of what is dione in southwestern Alberta-I feel that we are confronted with nothing short of a tragedy. I am not blaming anyone for this. I know the country has a big load to carry, and that it cannot go ahead faster than it can secure the money for purposes of development. But let me point out.-and I shall develop this later on-that these projects are self-liquidating and in reality cost the country nothing.
For instance, let us consider what has been done in recent years in India. One often thinks of India as a backward country. 'It is far from that. Within the last few years in the province of Sind a very great irrigation work has been created. Water is stored behind the Sarda dam, and the main canals running frcpn that point are 4,177 miles in length.
Just try to imagine any canal in this country to equal that. Then let us ask ourselves how we compare with India. We will remember that in our childhood we read, times without number, about the tremendous loss of life in the Punjab, and the province of Sind, because of drought. In the province of Sind, behind the Lloyd dam, they have backed up sufficient water to irrigate five and a half million acres. In the Punjab they have their great irrigation works which irrigate millions of acres Of land. They have worked on the basis, and rightfully so, that these are self-liquidating projects which will pay for themselves and which will save millions of lives in that country. When I think of what I have observed in the west and what the people in the western provinces have come through, my heart Weeds. I am going to stay with this business as long as I am in public life. I am going to advocate the completion of these projects which will restore that western countiy.
When the house rose in December I was planning several trips. One was to Arizona to make a further study of the great Roosevelt dam and the Salt river irrigation works associated with it. Any one who has been in Arizona will have observed the vast transformation that has taken place in that formerly cactus-ridden state because of these irrigation works. The magnificent city of Phoenix has grown up where formerly nothing but cactus grew. It is a beautiful city of about
150,000.	people. Just fancy the returns to the United States from the production in that area, from sales tax and income tax from a city like Phoenix. It is a self-liquidating project which will not cost the country anything.
I was considering going to the west, although I was a little afraid of the winter-but I should not have been afraid, because I learned afterward that the winters there are delightful. I like the wh lers in the west and I am planning to go there again in the winter time. The fact was that I had never seen the Saskatchewan river in the winter. I have seen it at other times of the year, when it was in flood and when it was in half-flood. I realize that the Saskatchewan river is not comparable to many other large rivers because its water resources are comparably not as large. But the Almighty has provided enough water to take care of any of the requirements of the three western provinces.
I have seen that river when it was flowing at not less than 100,000 cubic feet per second and when it was flowing at the rate of about
10,000	cubic feet per second. I am referring to the river east of the junction of the two main rivers, the North Saskatchewan, and
Water Conservation

South Saskatchewan. But I had not seen it in the winter time so I visited the river at several points during the winter season, this year. I spent some time examining it at Saskatoon and at Medicine Hat in particular, and I am satisfied that at neither point was the South Saskatchewan flowing at more than 1,500 cubic feet per second, with a maximum of 2,000 cubic feet per second. There is a vast difference between 100,000 cubic feet per second and 2,000 cubic feet per second.
Someone will ask: Where has the water gone to? It has gone down to the sea without having done much good to the parched prairies, which if they are given sufficient water will grow anything. There is no better land in the world. In some places it is a little alkaline, but the, vast proportion of it contains the necessary chemicals to produce crops of all kinds in abundance, provided it gets the water. It is part of my purpose to try to see that it does get that water.
In referring to the flow of the Saskatchewan river I dug up some old tables. I find that in 1915 at Edmonton, during high water, in June that river was flowing 186,600 cubic feet per second, which is a vast volume of water. In that same month the South Saskatchewan was flowing at the rate of 86,000 cubic feet per second at Saskatoon. The low flow of the North Saskatchewan in that year was 700 cubic feet per second, with the South Saskatchewan down to about the same amount.
Our duty is to conserve that water and use it for the irrigation of crops in the west.
In addition to the two other journeys I have referred to, I was considering going to the old country to make a survey into business. I have been there many times, because business is my middle name. I knew that we were considering granting $750,000,000 to help create business over there. I voted for that, and I was in agreement with it. I look upon it as an investment, as an insurance. But I said to myself: That is all very fine, but why should we not spend a few hundred millions in the west to create a home market that would be within our own boundaries? If we could build up the production of farmers, they would make something and be in position to buy from the manufacturers of Canada.
One morning on the way to the house, I believe the second day after the house prorogued, I happened to look at the monument which has been erected just southeast of the east block to the memory of Right Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, and there flashed through my mind what he said when he opened the Saint Andrews locks on the Red River on July 14, 1910. He addressed a great concourse

of people, and I can picture him-a handsome man, with a noble countenance and a fine head of hair. Remembering what he had said I reflected that at the time, he did not see the 2,000 people who were in front of him; he was looking away beyond them, beyond that great body of water which is one of our most splendid lakes-lake Winnipeg. Few people have any conception of its size. It is about 9,400 square miles in area, almost one-third larger than lake Ontario and. only a few hundred square miles smaller than lake Erie. It is next to Great Slave and Great Bear lakes, purely Canadian lakes. I could see him looking down that great lake and saying: This is only the first step in a great vision of transportation right up to the foot of the Rocky mountains. I am not quoting his exact words. He told those people he could see ships coming down 900 miles from Edmonton to that great lake and then right up to the city of Winnipeg. Later I read that he had had the vision to predict something with which I heartily agree and which I hope some day will be carried out. He said that he could see the same boats going up the Winnipeg river to the lake of the Woods along Rainy river, across Rainy lake and then by some means or other to Port Arthur and Fort William.
From 1910 up to the present time all that has been done to carry out that great vision of the then prime minister of this country was a little bit of work done, I believe by Hon. Robert Rogers in 1913. In cooperation with the city of Prince Albert a lock was built in the Prince Albert dam at a point twenty-six miles down the river from the city. That is all that has been done to conserve those waters in the great west. My hon. leader, when premier of Manitoba, projected a grand scheme of damming the Saskatchewan at the east end of Cedar lake and then taking the water through lake Winnipegosis, thence on through lake Manitoba, through lake St. Martin .and then drop into lake Winnipeg, one hundred miles south of Grand, Rapids. That project has this wonderful advantage, that at the point of the drop into lake Winnipeg, 500,000 horse-power could be developed. If the Manitoba government wished to sell that power to anyone who would complete the project, there are plenty of financiers who would say: We will complete it if you will allow us the power. But I believe that large blocks of power like that should belong to the government.
These suggestions have been made in past years, and now we must have action. What I am trying to do now is to encourage the minister, who this year has put into the estim-

Water Conservation
ates a vote of $10,060,000. I should like to see a similar vote put in the estimates for each of the next nine years; make it a ten-year programme of spending $10,000,000 a year, or $100,000,000 in the ten years. I do not say that I want to see the minister there that long, sir, but whoever the minister might happen to be would carry out any plans instituted now. Such a ten-year programme would enable us to complete this' project for the conservation of water and the construction of irrigation works. That amount would not, of course, create power to the extent that it could be created, nor permit of the canalization of the two branches of the river. That would take much more money, but it is one which should be carried out. Perhaps that will be a project for the future.
We have some fine examples of what can be done. What did the late great president of the United States, President Roosevelt, do in 1933? From his boyhood he had heard of the possibilities of conservation of the waters of the Tennessee river, just as the western members must have heard from their boyhood of plans to conserve western waters which have never been carried out. The conservation of the waters of the Tennessee river was first projected in 1807. After President Roosevelt took office he said, in 1933, that that was long enough to wait, and he went ahead, and in twelve years had revolutionized the economy of seven states. He canalized that great river, built nine large dams on the main river, as well as many other dams, and to-day they have a navigable route from Paducah at the month of the river right up to Knoxville, 650 miles away. Last year that river transported
150,000,000 ton-miles of freight. What has been accomplished down there is stupendous. They produced from that river the greatest single aggregation of power, not in any one place, but from any one river that is to be found the world over, developing from three and a half million to four million horsepower. What that has done to restore the economy of all the cities in that river valley is something the whole world can be proud of. We can do the same thing in the Saskatchewan river valley. When I think of what those people out there in our westren country have endured I am almost ashamed that in the past I did not take the part that I am taking now. I am not going to let up now; I am going to keep at it until I see this, thing finished-the restoration of the economy of the west. I know it can be done-and all these projects are self-liquidating.
I have made a careful survey of irrigation in many states, covering many thousands of
miles. If any one goes out to the west and crosses the international boundary line into the United States and goes through Montana, Idaho, the valley of California, Arizona, Utah, and part of Oregon, what will you see? You will see the marvellous transformation that has been brought about in the last fifteen years. They reclaimed 3,000,000 acres of land from the dried-out desert, so dry . that it would not even grow cactus, and you never saw such bountiful production as you can see there to-day. In Idaho they have land producing 750 bags of potatoes to the acre and 1,000 bags of onions, and all the other crops are in proportion. We can do the same thing in Alberta and Saskatchewan if only we give our land water; and we can give it water, because the Saskatchewan river, if conserved, will provide all the water that the west can use in all the projects that we have in mind, and will provide irrigation, power, navigation and anything else that will help to make that country grow.
Let me show you how the people in the east will profit from the carrying out of this project-because I cannot separate it from the east. The east must come forward, its business men, its bankers and financial men because the east will receive just as much in the way of returns, Mr. Speaker, as will the western farmers. The western states, from those 3,000,000 acres of reclaimed land, produced $400,000,000 of products for the states themselves, and in addition vast sums of money were obtained through processing those products and sending them to the east. Every year there went to the east $200,000,000 worth of orders for manufactured products. That is how the east will benefit if we reclaim these
3,000,000 acres in our Canadian west, and so the eastern manufacturer and the eastern banker will get their return just the same as the western farmer. We want unity in Canada, which we all love, and there is nothing that would do so much to bring about unity in this country as carrying out this project. I often used to sit in this house and listen to the western members advocating such projects in past years. None of them are here to-day, except perhaps the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. Irvine). They advocated them then, and I did not seem to know enough to understand it. But I understand now, sir, from much travel in the west. I know what the reclamation of that land would mean, what magnificent returns there would be all along the line, what a bountiful thing it would be for all of Canada, and not merely for western economy. This whole project has been a football long enough. I have read everything that I could on it-from Dan to Beersheba, I was going to say, but that would hardly be appropriate.
Water Conservation


Mr. COLD  WELL@: From Genesis to Revelations.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Yes, and I find that back in 1804 the XY company, a fur company, which 'had branches in the west long before there was any settlement at all, wrote to their principals' that tlhe west would never come into its own until water from the South Saskatchewan river was sent over the dried-out parts of tlie prairies. The father of the late General McDonald, of the pension board until his death a few years ago, was a Hudson's Bay factor at what was then Fort Ellice, at the junction of the Assiniboine and Qu'Appelle rivers. Away back in 1854 he recommended such a project, and from that day to this all that I have been able to read of engineers' reports has recommended the same thing. In heaven's name when are we going to carry out some of these things?
I know that the minister is having a survey made on the South Saskatchewan river to find a place to build a dam, and I give him credit for it. Of course you have to have something solid on which to build a dam. I presume that the minister has not yet received a report from his engineers that they have found a solid place somewhere near River-hurst. But they will find it, and if they do not find it they can build dams as was done on the Tennessee, with bases half a mile wide and with the regular core that the engineers use. I understand that dam sites have been found at two other places. I have here a core taken from the bottom of the St. Mary's river, and I am glad to say that I have had word lately that they are now about ready to call for tenders for the building of that dam. The building of a dam on the St. Mary's would mean the reclamation of 300,000 acres south of the Saskatchewan river. I have also a core obtained from the Red Deer. Near Buffalo lake a great dam could be built, which would mean the reclamation of 500,000 acres between Buffalo lake and Stettler on the north and Hanna and Youngstown and Acadia on the south. There is no reason why a project could not be undertaken immediately across the Bow river to reclaim all that area of Redcliff, Ronalane and Medicine Hat.
This winter I made an examination of that district, even in the midst of the snow, and that would mean another 300,000 acres. From Saskatoon west to Rosetown, and further down to Kindersley, there is an area of another
1,000,000 acres waiting to be reclaimed, if we can get the dam site on the South Saskatchewan river; and there are 1,000,000 acres east of the South Saskatchewan river as far as Estevan.

Here is a programme which the minister, I submit, ought to carry out to the full. I am prepared to encourage him with all the strength I have. I would support him in this effort to put through a $10,000,000 vote this year, and I would suggest that he come back next year, if he is still minister, and ask for another ten millions, and another the year after that. As long as he is minister he should ask for ten millions every year until we get the whole project completed so that we may reclaim the dried-out areas in the prairie provinces and restore the economy of the people there, and give them that chance to which they are entitled. They were put there on lands by the government-not by this government particularly, but by all governments-and they have been trying to eke out an existence on land that does not always produce a crop.
I should like to read a few words written by that distinguished man. Mr. R. O. Sweezey, with regard to the western projects and their importance. If I might be allowed to put it on Hansard without reading it, it would save time.


Mr. SPEAKER:: If the hon. gentleman has the unanimous consent of the house, there is no objection.


Mr. GLEN:: Agreed.


John Ritchie MacNicol: With the consent of the house I will hand it to Hansard:
There is an area of some thirty million acres of farm land comprised within the southern parts of the three prairie provinces which is subject to such adverse conditions, caused by lack of moisture, that when sown to wheat the chances are proven to be about four to one against the farmer reaping better than one-half the crop that his labour and the quality of his land would entitle him to. Frequently he loses an entire year through complete crop failure. With wheat he has an occasional bit of luck, but it is rarely more than a bit, and, because of the arid conditions, experience shows that wheat is the only product that may in a measure survive a season's distressful drought. Too often, though, the failure has been complete, and so the mental anguish and human distress has been piling up to the breaking point. At one time the ground water level was higher, and it often sufficed to bring a crop to maturity. But the gradual lowering of the ground water level since the first breaking of the sod is responsible for the growing severity that has led to what now constitutes an utterly intolerable situation.
The problem is now a national one, and bids fair to be calamitous unless responsibility and leadership is assumed by someone for the purpose of applying the obvious remedies of simple engineering practice. Unfortunately, however, economists, financial experts and political scientists have not been keeping pace with the progress of engineering and science. So, when a large, though simple, project of this nature looms up, it is usually procrastinated to its doom.

Water Conservation
Saving the losses from one or two years would easily provide all the means for remedial works to permanently cure the evil. From a financial viewpoint it would be the most profitable project ever attempted in this country. As a self-liquidating enterprise it merits the most attentive study of statesmen. Private capital is ready and willing to assume responsibility for rescuing the western prairies from their heartbreaking losses.
There is one other item that I would refer to, Mr. Speaker, and it is of such vital and transcendant importance that I would hesitate to omit it. I refer to the water supply of Moose Jaw and Regina, two beautiful cities. I have here some clippings from the Regina Leader Post and the Times of Moose Jaw. I will read only one item, though I could quote extensively to the same effect, because there are a number of items of the same purport. Under date March 5, 1946 there appeared the following item:
At noon yesterday there were three feet ten inches of water in the reservoir representing
190.000	gallons.
That is only one out of many items indicating the same thing. Now I say, Mr. Speaker, that we in this House of Commons, all of us without exception, stand condemned unless we do our utmost to give to the cities of Moose Jaw and Regina the means of defence against fire. We all saw recently what happened across the river here in Hull, when that woodpile was burning. It contained only
16.000	cords of pulpwood, and yet what a flame it made. How much water do you think was required to put it out? Yesterday I was talking to the chief engineer of the Hull fire department, Mr. Lanctot, and I wish to congratulate him and all his captains and the men serving under him on the wonderful job they did in saving the paper mill over there. I did not believe it was possible; but to do it they had to pour 62,000,000 gallons of water on that fire.
What would happen in Moose Jaw to-day with less than a million and a half gallons and Regina with less than five million gallons per day? They have no water to spare. Their plight would be tragic. We will stand in the light of public condemnation unless we make every effort to see that this dam is built on the south Saskatchewan river in order to provide the people of those cities with the water they so badly need. I hate to think what would happen if a fire one-tenth the size of the Hull fire started at the west end of Moose Jaw or the west end of Regina, with a wind blowing from the west. What do you think would happen to those two fine cities?
As a member of this house I would hold myself condemned unless I raised my voice and did my part to encourage the minister and to support him in any measure that is required to speed up the construction of the dam on the South Saskatchewan river near Riverhurst. The work should be proceeded with as rapidly as possible so as to provide the people of those two prairie cities with an ample water supply, apart from irrigation.
When I was in Moose Jaw I visited different factories, and I was greatly interested in one that was operated by a man from Czechoslovakia, I believe. In that factory they were making glucose from wheat, and that is something that the west is just built for. The gentleman who was with me was from the waterworks department of Moose Jaw and he told the proprietor that he would have to cut down on his use of water. The proprietor assured him that as it was he could not get enough water to fill the orders he had. When I heard that, I felt that I too would be condemned if I did not bring this matter up in the house. Those people have an opportunity to run ten factories instead of one, producing something that Canada needs. Their product is shipped east, and my good friend who represents London tells me that he buys a good deal of it himself. I want to do everything I can to stir up this house and the west, as well as the financial and business men of the east, so that we may all get behind the government and help the minister to carry through a project which will conserve water all along the Saskatchewan river, to reforest the foothills of the rockies, and to assist the Alberta government in preventing further fires. I would feel like reproaching myself if I did not speak as I am doing this afternoon.
I am going to put a map in each member's post office box. It is a composite map which I drew myself. In this connection I should like to say a word about Major Duncan Stuart, K.C., a wonderful old man who is well known to my hon. friend the member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith). I take off my hat to him, because I found his map helpful. The same can be said of his articles on irrigation. In these articles he points out, as I have pointed out, that the whole programme is self-liquidating. Although it might cost $200 millions to complete the whole job in reality it would not cost the country a single dollar, because every dollar would be returned in crops alone apart from power. Then later on there would be taxes coming in. This is a permanent programme. It is not a programme where we put money in and never get it back. It is not that kind of


[Stage Direction]
Water Conservation
programme; it is a Canada programme, a Canadian market programme, a self-liquidating programme giving thousands and thousands of jobs. Moreover it will create forty thousand new farms and provide orders for the equipment for those new farms. There will be about eighty irrigated acres to the farm.
One only has to go into southern Alberta, where we have a little irrigation, to see the wonderfpl results that can be obtained. I think of the fine city of Lethbridge, which went over the top in the three last victory loans, first in all Canada. Why? Because round about they have about 600,000 acres of irrigated land, taking in Taber, Cardston and Raymond and many other fine villages and towns. There is nothing that will give the same returns as a programme of this kind, and in the long run it will not cost the country a dollar.
Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) :: The resolution which is being discussed will be replied to by the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) in so far as the government is concerned, as it relates to work which has been previously suggested in his department. But there were some remarks made with regard to Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act work about which I should like to say a few words before leaving the house to meet a delegation.
The suggestion has been made that something ought to be done to locate the dam site on the South Saskatchewan river. If hon. members will examine the estimates they will find that there is an item there which makes it possible for P.F.R.A. to take funds which are being provided by the reconstruction department-there is a ten million dollar vote-sufficient funds to do all the survey and engineering work necessary for the promotion of the Red Deer river diversion, the irrigation work in the vicinity of . Medicine Hat, the location of the dam site on the South Saskatchewan river, and any other survey work necessary to the determination of the areas that can be irrigated. All of that is now provided for in the estimates, and engineering investigations will be made or continued during the coming summer.
Much of the information necessary to the doing of this work has been in our records for some considerable time. It is now seven or eight years since we started making these investigations, and most of the important engineering work associated with it has already been done. What we are really doing at the present time is having that work checked by an efficient engineer who has been
TMr. MacNit ol.J
recommended to the department by the Department of Reconstruction. He is a gentleman by the name of Ferguson, who is now operating in the west. He has examined into the engineering work done by P.F.R.A. in connection with the St. Mary dam. My information is that he has reported favourably on that work, and has few recommendations to make of changes that might be made in the work actually done by our engineers. But it is thought important to have all the work done up to date on these other projects checked over by this same engineer, and then if possible to have further work done during this summer.
I do not know whether it will be possible to do any actual construction work so far as the last three named projects are concerned, but there is $750,000 in the estimates in relation to the St. Mary dam. That amount may be voted this year with which to proceed with the construction work there.
The main part of the work which is being undertaken at present is the tunnelling from one dam to another. I understand there are three dams in the project, and there has to be a tunnel associated with each of them. Contracts are being called for that work.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I understand the tunnel
is to let the river run by where they are building the main dam.


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes; that tunnelling is
now being done, or the contract is now being let for that work to be done, and there is money in the estimates for carrying it out. I just wanted to draw attention to these facts in order that the discussion might proceed with that in mind.


Major James William Coldwell: I am glad to hear the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) say that some work has been going on for the last seven or eight years. I think that is true, but I rose particularly to support, the resolution of the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol). Had I been drawing the resolution I might have drawn it in slightly different terms, but its intent is such that I think eveiy hon. member of the house can support it. I and those associated with me-and I have no doubt that I am speaking now for others who come from western Canada-are very pleased that the hon. member for Davenport, representing as he does a city constituency in eastern Canada, has felt it incumbent upon himself to bring this matter up in the house at this time.
As the hon. member said in the course of his remarks, the question has been discussed in the house on many occasions in the past,

Water Conservation
but without a great deal of success. We understand, of course, that action in these matters, involving, as they do in the final analysis, probably several hundred million dollars, takes some time, particularly when it appears that only one area of the country is interested. But the hon. member placed another complexion upon it this afternoon; he has shown clearly that to undertake work of this kind is in the interest not only of the prairie provinces but of the whole economy of Canada, and that upon the prosperity of that great area which we call the prairies depends in no small measure the prosperity of the great industrial centres of all of Canada.
I was interested when the hon. member told us about the various projects that he has visited in the United States, because over the last twenty years I myself have had the privilege of seeing many of them. In 1938, driving back from Los Angeles to Ottawa in the autumn of the year, I stayed in a little town called Needles in Arizona. I was told that there were twenty-seven motorboats in that little town-twenty-seven motorboats in the middle of the desert. The nearest water, except for the dried out Colorado river, was some 130 or 140 miles away. I was told that when the dam 120 or 130 miles south of .the little town of Needles, Arizona, was completed, there would be a lake extending all the way to this town, which wpuld be a little port and the motorboats could then be used. The same thing occurred in Montana. I visited Fort Peck before the dam was completed in Montana. I was told that a lake would be made on the Missouri river which would have a shoreline-I am speaking from memory now- of 1,628 miles. From that scheme, which was mainly a power and flood control project, there could be irrigated a great deal of land.
I have seen the developments in the state of Washington, where they proposed to use the water from Coulee dam so that it would flow once more through the Dry Falls and irrigate an area which was, when I saw it, nothing but an arid, barren desert with a little sage bush on it. I remember being told that
200,000	families would be established in that area in the state of Washington. One could mention the other great projects in the United States and elsewhere across the world; and when I think of the water which flows down the two Saskatchewans, which runs down the Red Deer river into the South Saskatchewan and into other rivers flowing south into Montana, I realize what we could do with that fertile land in the southern part of the prairie provinces if only we had that inch of water 63260-41J
in June and that inch of water in July that would ensure always something of a crop over the irrigated area.
In 1938 I had the privilege of introducing into this house a resolution which was supported by the hon. member for Davenport. While it was debated, it was more or less brushed off. The expense was too great; the undertaking was too large, and after all, the rains would come again. I moved the following resolution:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should place before parliament at an early date plans, or proposals, for a comprehensive and authoritative survey of water conservation, irrigation possibilities, and other feasible projects for the permanent rehabilitation of the drought-stricken area of western Canada and its people.
Those of us who lived in that area then knew that the resolution placed before the house the need of the people at that time. It was a drought-stricken area. In 1938 the prairies were just emerging from the worst period in their history since the first settlement of the southern plains. I remember that in preparing to speak on the resolution I went into the library and gathered together everything I could find about the prairies in the days gone by. I remember reading the report of Captain Palliser, who made his trip through southern Saskatchewan and Alberta in 1858. I quoted from that report in 1938; I do not propose to quote from it now, but I recall that he spoke of the desolated plains and the desert cactus which grew in what is now southwestern Saskatchewan and southeastern Alberta, after he had left what he described as-and these are his exact words- "the creek where the bones lie." I have no doubt that "the creek where the bones lie" was the site of the city in which my hon. friend from Calgary west (Mr. Smith) was born, and in which I had the privilege of living for a good many years; that is, Regina, the capital of Saskatchewan. At that time Captain Palliser, as those of you who have read the report will remember, described all the country which lay west and south of the Qu'Appelle valley and the South Saskatchewan river as an arid plain where nothing grew. He spoke of a place he named The Elbow, where he met a band of Indians who warned him that if he was going in a southwesterly direction he had better take not only food for himself but fodder for the horses and even sticks with which to make fires, because he would find nothing in that country either to eat or to burn.
We saw something of that in the thirties. Not one of us who lived in western Canada
<344
Water Conservation

during that period will ever forget the misery of those ten years; the days when we drove over the prairies and could not see the radiator caps on our automobiles because of dust; when in the cities of Regina and Moose Jaw we drove with our headlights full on day after day in order that we might see in the darkness caused by the 'blowing of the topsoil of that rich prairie land. It is true, of course, that a remarkable comeback has been made in the last six or seven years. We bad hoped this would occur, and it has occurred. But we know from the historic past that these prolonged droughts in western Canada are periodic. It is proved by history. If you cut down the trees and look at the rings, they tell the story of the periodic dry and wet years during the time of their growth, which is perhaps a hundred years or more in the case of the elm trees that grow in some of our valleys. We know that country is subject to periodic and devastating drought. What it has meant to the men and women of those plains no financial balance sheet can ever tell; the misery, the dread, the piling up of debt, the women living alone in prairie homes who day after day heard the winds blow and saw the dust sweeping by the house, with nothing growing on the land year after year. Many of them, and it cannot be wondered at, even lost their reason as a result of the conditions under which they lived. And in this country, east and west, we spent millions and millions of dollars in relief. I am not going. to complain, because the people of eastern Canada came to the rescue of the people who lived on the plains. They sent us carloads of vegetables, of food and of clothing, and this parliament appropriated millions of dollars for the relief of man and beast. And when it was all over, after the low level of relief upon which people were compelled to live, what had Canada to show for what had been done? Nothing but a people who still hoped that the rains might come and the land might once .again be productive.
As the hon. member for Davenport has said, the cause of the drought in western Canada can be explained in only one way, the lack of moisture in the soil. Yet when that lack of moisture was clearly before us and the rains were, scant or came not at all, millions and millions of gallons of water were flowing through those plains in the various rivers, which might have been utilized to relieve at least in part the tragic conditions with which we were confronted. And let us remember that in a period of drought the dry soil blows, and wind erosion is added to the disastrous consequences of the lack of moisture. I remember a constituent of mine writing to me in 1937;

I have the letter in my office even now. He lived quite close to the South Saskatchewan river, near Saskatchewan Landing, just north of Swift Current. He said, "I have been sitting to-day on the bank of the Saskatchewan. All the valley up from the Landing, through Kyle and Tuberose right up to Elrose and Rose-town, is a scene of devastation; nothing grows. Yet to-day I see the Saskatchewan river in flood." That was in July, the flood period. He went on to say, "The river is lower, than it sometimes is at this period, yet millions of gallons of water are going by which might be used to relieve the drought on the farms of this locality." ,
Like the hon. member for Davenport, at that time I discussed irrigation with the best engineers I knew. I went carefully over the contour maps of the dried out area, and as a layman I would say that widespread irrigation does not present insuperable difficulties, particularly on the northern side of the Mis-souri-Coteau divide, which of course is in part the southern side or Canadian base of the Pal-liser triangle. As -we have been told this afternoon, the problem is the conservation of waters in the rivers which flow together and form the South Saskatchewan river-that is, the Red Deer and the other tributaries-and the impounding of that water in a series of dams in the deep river valleys or in the mountains. I believe, as my hon. friend says, that the impounding of water near Riverhurst and the utilization of that water by the building of channels along natural lines of flow, as the contour maps indicate, would carry water down to Moose Jaw and Regina-yes, and even beyond Moose Jaw and Regina, down to the Souris river near Weyburn and into the Souris river valley right through Estevan and beyond. The contour maps clearly indicate that this is not an insoluble problem; it can be done. I believe the physical difficulties can be overcome. Of course, as my hon. friend has said, a by-product of an irrigation project of this description would be the generating of comparatively cheap power, which could be used for the rural electrification so badly needed in the western provinces, where there is so little of it.
Many people conceive of irrigation channels as long straight cuts, like a chess-board. But that is not what irrigation might be. As I suggest, it might follow the natural channels and contour. There are depressions running north and south, east and west, through which water might be channelled. While I appreciate what the Minister of Agriculture and the government have done in connection with the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act- and if I may say so, as a westerner, J believe

Water Conservation
one of the best projects ever undertaken by a government in Canada was that which is called the P.F.R.A. project-still, they have not been extensive enough. There are still a good many coulees, still a good many valleys, which could be dammed to conserve the spring run-off. They would carry not only the water from the rivers, but the run-offs from the land after the winter snows have melted. For instance, we had a large quantity of snow in the prairie provinces this winter. This spring, when the snow melted, it ran down the coulees, found the channels, and away it went to the rivers and out to the sea. Those coulees might be dammed and the water conserved so that at least farms in the neighbourhood would have hay and be able to grow vegetables. In the event of a dry season they would at least have something upon which they could rely for food, both for man and for beast.
I have been told by engineers that with proper conservation in the mountains, and with appropriate dams placed at intervals on the South Saskatchewan from where the Red Deer joins it in Alberta, to a point south of Saskatoon, sufficient water could be impounded to give needed moisture to a very large area of central and southern Saskatchewan and southern Alberta. I say of course that I have been told this. I do not profess to be an expert in irrigation or in engineering. Every man to his own trade. But I believe that a thorough investigation by those who are competent to make an appraisal would indicate that a great deal can be done in this regard.
I have always been in favour of a really authoritative and comprehensive survey of these irrigation possibilities. I have heard the objection raised that a project of this description would cost hundreds of millions of dollars. I noticed that this afternoon the hon. member for Davenport mentioned $100 million. Well, what is $100 million, after all? We spent more than $100 million on the very lorv relief levels upon which we maintained people in western Canada during those eight or nine years of terrible drought. We spent more than that. The highest estimate I have heard for damming the rivers in the mountains and for making the necessary channels to convey the water here and there, to build conservation dams and undertake a comprehensive irrigation project for the whole of the southern prairie provinces is S400 million. Yes, $400 million is a lot of money. But let me point out that it is less than we spent in one month for the prosecution of the war.
That large amount of money was only one month's war expenditures-and I am purposely citing the largest figure I have heard
mentioned, because I do not think that amount of money would have to be expended. Let me emphasize the fact that to ensure life and opportunity in a vast area of this country an amount less than one month's war expenditures might be required. When we realize that this expenditure would make a great country permanently productive and give possibilities of increased prosperity, not only to the people who inhabit that country but to the whole of the Dominion of Canada, we can see that the amount involved is relatively small. As I have already said, during the years of drought, when the rains failed to come to us in western Canada, we spent from a quarter to a half that amount in unproductive relief.
Inevitably, from the history of the country as we know it, droughts will come again, and they may even be more prolonged than the one we experienced between 1930 and 1940. The Indians who have inhabited the- plains throughout the years talk about lakes being dried up, although they are not now dried up. In the constituency of the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) is a body of water known as Long Lake. Long ago I was told by the Indians that seventy or eighty years ago, when they were children, Long Lake was so dry that they could drive across it in a wagon. Consequently we know that there can be even more prolonged droughts than those which we have experienced.
The hon. member for Davenport has mentioned what irrigation has brought to one part of the prairies. Those of us who have seen the irrigation in southern Alberta, around Lethbridge, realize the truth of the statement that is has done much for that country. One day a year ago last July I was in Medicine Hat. It was a hot day, and very dry. A friend of mine was to drive me to Lethbridge. We drove from Medicine Hat across a scorched plain, where the oats and wheat, stapding five or six inches high, and headed out, were dry and dead. Then, all of a sudden, the wind being from the west, we could smell the odour of vegetation; and when we arrived at Taber, Alberta, the limit of the irrigation project, we passed into a country which was a veritable paradise. The corn was standing high and green, the grain waving in the wind, acres and acres of sugar beets-land that was a picture not only of beauty but of productivity. And all this because there was water: water which the other parts of the prairies with exactly the same kind of soil- just as productive, if given the opportunity, but without that one essential-did not have. And when we got to where there was water,
Water Conservation

brought in by the cunning and ingenuity of man, we saw how productive that soil really could be.
We do not need to go to the Sudan; we do not need to go to India; we do not need to go to the places that have been mentioned

Arizona, Montana, or Washington; we do not need to go to any of those .places to see what water does for what would otherwise be an arid area. All we have to do is to take a drive into southern Alberta during a hot. dry summer, and we can see in our own country how prairie land has been transformed under irrigation.
This party to whicn i Delong has always urged these irrigation projects, both provincially and1 federally. As my hon. friend has said, navigable -waters are under the control of the federal authorities. As my hon. friend said also, the people who settled in these areas were settled there by the authority of the parliament of Canada. As far as southwestern Saskatchewan and southeastern Alberta are concerned, I can remember that there was strong opposition from persons who were living in those areas and who knew that without irrigation people who went in there to settle would be doomed to disappointment in the days to come. Sir Frederick Haultain, the head of the territorial government of the northwest territories until the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta were formed, warned against the possibilities of drought. Many others, including myself, did not accept the reasons given by the ranchers in the Medicine Hat area for opposing the settlement of that land. We were under the impression that the ranchers were a little selfish, that they were trying to keep the land from settlement in order to retain their ranching leases. But time has proved that they were right and we were wrong, that the settlement of that country was ill-advised from the point of view of agriculture.
It is true there was a good crop in that area in 1915 and another in 1942, with a few fair crops in between. But without irrigation, much of that Medicine Hat and Swift Current country, as well as other parts _of the country between there and Moose Jaw and Regina and to the south, cannot be made productive year after year. Ways and means must first be found of getting moisture to the land. As I said, we have always been in favour of it. In February, 1938, I moved a resolution in this house, and at the same time the C.C.F. group in the legislature at Regina moved the following resolution:
That this assembly respectifully request the federal government to set aside an appropriation of at least $50,000,000 this year, to be used in 
investigation and completion of feasible water conservation, irrigation and other projects, directed towards the permanent rehabilitation of the drought area of this province.
That was not a partisan resolution. None of these resolutions were partisan. At that time the government in power in Saskatchewan was a Liberal government. While they did not approve the amount suggested in the resolution, and amended it, the amended resolution which called for a study of irrigation projects in that part of Canada was passed unanimously. The matter transcends the needs of the various provinces. It is the responsibility of all Canada. It is a work of importance to the whole of our country.
I' do not want to prolong the discussion, because many hon. members who come from other parts of the prairie land as -well as other parts of Canada will wish to participate in the debate. A few days ago we were discussing immigration. Whatever we may think of immigration, whether we believe in wholesale immigration, as some do and as I do not, whether we believe in planned immigration, by which people would be brought in and settled where they should' be settled under proper conditions, where they can be given the opportunities they should be given; whether we believe that they should not be brought in in indigestible numbers, the fact remains that there is room for many thousands of people in this country. I cannot think of any part of Canada which offers greater possibility of better homes, better climate and better living conditions than the prairie land, provided a certain amount of stability is assured in the production of crops. Give the prairie land moisture, and the prairie land will produce crops.
The other day I looked up the debates of 1938 and I found that at that time some took the view that if we irrigated we would increase our production so tremendously that we would not be able to find markets. We already had surpluses on our hands, in spite of the drought years through which we had been passing. All I can say is that it is a strange world where there is starvation or near starvation on almost every hand and yet the production of foodstuffs is discouraged.
I referred the other evening to the privilege I had had of being on the social economic council at San Francisco, when the nations of the world1 obligated themselves to see to it that as far as possible everybody every day in the year should have an opportunity of eating a decent meal. There ought never to be a fear of overproduction in our country. We do have great crops, and perhaps sometimes we cannot

Water Conservation
find immediate export markets, but any surplus should be regarded as a reserve against the time when crops may fail.
I speak not only for myself but those in this party with whom I am associated when I say that we are in favour of a comprehensive investigation into the possibilities, not merely of a series of small irrigation projects but of a comprehensive irrigation project to make the prairie land productive year after year and to guarantee to the people who live there the opportunity of producing from their labours year after year, indeed an opportunity for this country to become more prosperous than it has been in the past.
We support the idea behind the resolution of the hon. member for Davenport. We are grateful that he has introduced this resolution. He sits for an eastern constituency, and perhaps is thus able to render greater service to the area we are discussing than those of us can who have been introducing such resolutions in the past, for he can have no selfish interest in the matter.


Mr. VICTOR QUELCH (Acadia):: Mr. Speaker, first of all I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) on the campaign he has consistently waged in this country in the interests of water conservation and irrigation in western Canada. The work he has done in the past and the work he is doing to-day is greatly appreciated by all the people in western Canada. I am sure all the people in the west will appreciate the importance of the resolution he has submitted to this house, which reads in part:	'
. . . to conduct investigations and make studies of the most feasible and economic means for the conservation and utilization of the eastern watershed of the Rocky mountains, particularly the watershed of the Saskatchewan river.
Forest fires and logging operations have caused a great deal of devastation on this watershed. The task of conserving this watershed in the past has been largely the responsibility of Alberta, but of course it is too large a job for any one province. It is a large job; it is a costly job. The whole dominion is vitally interested in seeing that this work is carried out efficiently, because the waters from the watershed flow not merely through Alberta but down through Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and these provinces will need every drop of water that can be conserved in those rivers for irrigation, stock watering, power development and human consumption in the future.
Again, eastern Canada has a direct interest in that work being carried out because, when the west prospers, eastern Canada benefits by an expansion of markets and sales in the west. In this house we have heard a great deal about the St. Mary's river project, the development at Medicine Hat, and certain developments from rivers in Saskatchewan-all worth-while projects; but we have not heard very much about the utilization of waters from this watershed in the east central part of Alberta, and I should like to speak of this for a few moments.
I think most members of the house remember that great engineer by the name of William Pearce and his great scheme for that area, mainly for the purposes of stock watering. Under that project it would have been possible to water between 17,000,000 and 18.000.000 acres. I do not mean by that irrigation, but it would have brought water to pasture lands of that acreage. In 1922-23, government engineers made a survey based upon the William Pearce project and as a result of this survey a scheme was developed known as the North Saskatchewan irrigation project, which would have irrigated approximately 1,000,000 acres in Saskatchewan and
500,000	acres in Alberta. The cost would have been around $100,000,000. The essentia! difference between the William Pearce project and the North Saskatchewan project was that the William Pearce scheme was a stock watering project, while the North Saskatchewan was an irrigation project. The mechanics of the two were very similar. They both proposed to divert water from the North Saskatchewan river and the Clearwater river down Raven river into the Red Deer river and to place a dam about fifty feet high below the junction with the Red Deer. Then it would have been possible to divert water by gravity from that dam through a canal 146 miles long to Sullivan lake, which would have provided a storage of 1,500,000 acre feet. From Sullivan lake it would have been possible to irrigate 500,000 acres, and water would also have been carried by a gravity canal and by natural waterways, namely, Sounding creek and Eyehill creek to Tramping lake in Saskatchewan, and from Tramping lake 1,000.000 acres could have been irrigated. However, that project was by many people considered impracticable, mainly because there would have been a heavy seepage of water and heavy evaporation from Sullivan lake to Tramping lake because of the sandy nature of the soil.
Another thing that weighed against the project was its actual size. It was a large one costing $100,000,000. During the war that
Water Conservation

did not sound very much, but in those days it appeared to be an astronomical figure, and unfortunately there is a tendency now in some places to revert to those pre-war ideas on questions of expenditure.
Many additional surveys have been made since that time. A number of surveys were made from 1938 to 1940 by P.F.R.A. engineers, and I pay tribute to the fine work they have done in conducting these surveys and surveys for smaller projects. The surveys made from 1938 to 1940 were surveys with a view to providing not merely for irrigation but for power development purposes. The cost of irrigation would have been considerably higher finder those projects because it was proposed to pump the water instead of having it moved by gravity. They also proposed to obtain power from the Calgary Power Company at a time when they were pumping water heavily and to make the power available to the Calgary Power Company in winter time.
As a result of all these surveys and the promises made, particularly at election time, it was only natural that the people in that area became very much interested in irrigation, and a great deal of pressure has been exerted from time to time on the government to start work on one of these projects. The people in that area are hoping that the government will finally decide which project would be of greatest advantage to the people and start construction thereon immediately. However, a good deal of opposition developed to the idea of diverting water from the North Saskatchewan and the Clearwater rivers into the Red Deer river, because it was felt that the water might be needed lower down the river in Saskatchewan, and therefore new surveys were made of a project which would irrigate a limited number of acres in Alberta, utilizing the waters of the Red Deer river alone, instead of diverting the water from the North Saskatchewan river.
A brief outline of the new scheme known as the Red Deer diversion project, which was referred to by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) this afternoon, is as follows: Tt is proposed to place a dam on the Red Deer river just above the content bridge and build up the water to a height of 150 feet. That dam would be approximately thirty miles east of the town of Red Deer. Then by gravity canal the water would be carried to Hamilton lake, which is at a lower level than Sullivan lake, a distance of from sixty-five to seventy miles. At Hamilton lake it would be possible to provide a maximum storage of 380,000 acre feet, and additional storage could be provided in a number of lakes surrounding Hamilton lake, one of

them being Kirkpatrick lake. From these reservoirs it is proposed to irrigate about half a million acres. Actually in that area there are over 900,000 acres that could be irrigated, but the waters from the Red Deer river will only be sufficient to irrigate half a million acres. If, later on, it was possible to use waters from the North Saskatchewan river, using 2,000 cubic feet per second, it would be possible to irrigate another 400,000 acres. But that is not included in the scheme. The Red Deer river diversion provides only for the irrigation of half a million acres, using the waters of the Red Deer river alone. Under this scheme 1,200 miles of waterways could be re-watered, and on the basis that range lands benefit for a distance of three miles from live water, 8,000,000 acres of pasture land would be available under this scheme.
Some of the main advantages of the Red Deer river diversion scheme over other schemes are as follows. In the first place it is the most northerly scheme of its size to be found anywhere in the world, and for that reason there would be less evaporation than there would be on other projects farther south; also the water is carried by gravity, which costs considerably less than pumping the water. Perhaps one of the most important factors in this scheme is that substantial services have already been established in that area, and therefore it would be better to go ahead with it than with projects in some new district where there are no such services. We have in that area two railways, the Canadian Pacific and the Canadian National, running east and west, and with branch lines running north and south; we have two main highways running east and west, and two highways running north and south; substantial telephone service has also been established, and there are five hospitals in that area. The question of population throughout that area is a tragic one, and in that connection I should like to read from a report tabled in this house on September 10 of last year from P.F.R.A., which has this to say regarding the Red Deer river diversion scheme.
It will provide settlement, permanent homes and means of livelihood for 7,500 families in a section of western Canada from which over 90 per cent of the original settlers were forced by drought: it resettles an area now practically depopulated; the area will support between
30,000	and 40.000 people. It will provide irrigation for approximately 500,000 acres of land suitable for irrigation. This land is not now in production and is largely publicly-owned. It will rehabilitate 24 urban communities now practically depopulated from the years of drought.

Water Conservation
Then regarding labour requirements:
Estimated labour requirements:	The actual
construction of the works will employ 1,500 men steadily for eighteen months. This does not include indirect labour required in the preparation of materials, cement, lumber, equipment and miscellaneous supplies, nor that required in servicing the purchasing power of these men and their families.
The area to which I have referred lies within a square of approximately 7,000 square miles. It is bounded on the south by the Red Deer river, on the east by the Saskatchewan boundary, on the north by a line running east and west through the town of Castor, south of township 38, and on the west by a line running north and south through the town of Hanna in range 14. This area was settled chiefly between the years 1909 and 1918. Settlement at that time was encouraged by colonization companies, railway companies and certain government officials, and that encouragement was given in spite of the fact that the government had been warned time and again by prominent engineers that that land was not suitable for settlement.
For instance, reference has been made to Captain Palliser, who, in 1860, warned that a certain area within the so-called Palliser triangle was not suitable for settlement. It is true that a great deal of the land in that triangle has proved satisfactory, but on the other hand the record of the land lying in the south central part of the triangle fully substantiates the warnings issued by Captain Palliser at that time. That includes the area to which I am referring to-day.
In addition to Palliser, we had warnings from a number of men such as Doctor Hector, Professor John Macoun and Professor James Mavor. Warnings were issued from time to time by various engineers and surveyors who had been working through that area from 1870 on until the time of settlement in 1909.
The consequences of settlement in that area have been extremely tragic, as shown in the report from which I have just quoted, when it says that over ninety per cent of the population had to move out owing to drought. The effects of droughts were not as devastating in the earlier days of settlement because in the first place there were fairly heavy rains in 1915 and 1916, and unfortunately the crops grown during those two years encouraged more people to come in. Moreover, there was plenty of range land. The land had not been fenced and the farmers were able to run their stock on the open range instead of confining it to half-section areas such as they may have obtained from the dominion government. In 63260-42
addition to that, there was an almost unlimited amount of work available for the farmers, who could work on their land for a certain length of time and then go and work on the construction of branch railway lines that were being constructed at that time through those areas.
However, conditions changed rapidly. Continued drought and soil drifting made it impossible for many farmers to continue to farm their land,, because as soon as they started to cultivate it the dry winds began to blow the land away. As soon as farmers fenced their farms off in half-section lots they found that, owing to the dryness of the land, it took over forty acres of pasture to feed one head of stock. Of course a man with 320 acres cannot carry many head of stock if the land can pasture only one head to forty acres. Eight head of stock would not provide a living for any man, so that these farmers could not make a living out of live stock when they had only 320 acres of dry land to pasture them on.
The situation that developed in that area is graphically illustrated in a report on the rehabilitation of the drought areas of Alberta, issued in 1935 by the Department of Agriculture. This shows what happened in that area during those years:
With the coming of the railways, settlement poured into the short grass plains. From 1911 onward, the rancher who had previously occupied this area was progressively crowded out, and by 1920 settlement was almost complete. Bumper crops and high prices in 1915 and 1916, had removed the last remaining misgivings on the part of those who were afraid of the short grass plains. Roads, telephones, schools, churches and social services of all kinds were demanded and provided-the - whole superstructure, literally built on stalks of gold and wheat, in a foundation of shifting sand. Then came 1917, 1918, 1921 and 1922-drought, discouragement and despair-the covered wagon and the settler on the move again like wild geese in the spring going north. Another lease of life, good crops in 1926, 1927 and 1928-then drought again, followed by wholesale abandonment-40 per cent, 50 per cent, 60 per cent, and 80 per cent in some districts. The burden of taxation necessary to maintain necessary services bearing heavier and heavier on the settlers who remained. Finally it became difficult to operate schools, to maintain roads. Telephone lines were abandoned by the hundreds of miles. Life became more primitive and intolerable through lack of natural community life. Such is the history of the greater portion of Palliser's triangle-one of the greatest mistakes that national policy ever made.
As a consequence of so many farmers leaving that area, the rest of the farmers who remained were able to make a better living because they had more land upon which to run their stock, though I wcdfl again point out

Water Conservation

that when it takes forty acres to pasture one head of stock a man would need to have from 2,000 to 3,000 acres to carry fifty or sixty head of stock if he wanted to make a decent living. As pointed out in that report, the history of the whole area has been a tragic one. People came to the district in their youth full of ambition and hope for the future, some with a small amount of capital, although, generally speaking, they did not bring much capital with them. They slaved and toiled for many years. They cleared the rocks away and broke the sod, only to see the land blow away in dust storms and the soil drifted up under the fences; and as they fenced their pastures and the grass was eaten down to the ground, the stock began to eat right down into the roots. The result was that even pasture land, never cultivated, started to drift, a thing which it is hard to imagine 'in areas where moisture is more abundant. Having fought these conditions for a number of years, as the report points out, over 90 per cent of these settlers moved out. They left the area, having lost in many cases their health, their ambition and whatever capital they may have had. Although a drive through that area to-day reveals a tragic picture, it is not as tragic as it would have been about ten years ago because then one would have seen many abandoned homesteads with windows boarded up, whereas to-day most of them have been torn down or taken away. The only evidence that at one time that land had been settled is furnished by the spectacle of rocks that have been cleared from the land and piled in rows, north and south and east and west, representing many long years of toil on the part of these farmers, who eventually had to move owing to the extreme drought.
I should like again to say how much the farmers who stayed in that area have been helped under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act and the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act. The Prairie Farm Assistance Act gave them a kind of drought relief and made it possible for them to exist. The Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act made it possible for them to store up water for their stock in dug-outs. Unfortunately, in that area the run-off from snow is so uncertain that in many years these dug-outs dry up and the farmers are not able to use the pasture that the dug-out is supposed to water. The construction of the Red Deer diversion scheme would change the whole picture. The pastures would be provided with water on a permanent basis. To a great extent irrigation would provide insurance against crop failure, and the farmers would be able to increase the size of their herds knowing full well that they would have the TMr. Quelch.]
water to water them and the feed from the irrigated land to feed them in times of dry years.
The cost of getting the water from the Red Deer river to Hamilton lake would be $6,700,000. It would probably cost a similar amount to get the water from Hamilton lake on to the land. That work would be done by the provincial governments, the municipalities, and the federal government working together; but the cost of getting the water from the Red Deer to Hamilton lake should be borne by the federal government as a national undertaking because it is of direct benefit to the whole of the dominion of Canada. The financial cost of constructing this project would be small as compared with the losses incurred in the area since settlement. In the past, millions of dollars have been lost in that area, partly as a result of the heavy expenditures for drought relief, partly as a result of the loss of revenue due to crop failure and partly, of course, as a result of the loss of markets in so far as eastern Canada is concerned.
This afternoon the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) said that moneys will be made available for a number of these projects from vote No. 606 of $10,000,000. He included the Red Deer scheme, but he made it clear that this money is not for the purpose of starting construction on the projects but rather for cost of engineers' work in checking these surveys. I hope that it will be possible for the federal government actually to start construction work on this and other projects in western Canada at the earliest possible date. I know it is felt that the government should not start projects of this kind until unemployment increases. On the other hand, if the work could be carried out now, by the time the slump arrives, which most people fear may come in two or three years from now-and of which they were warned by the governor of the Bank of Canada-and if those projects were completed we would hav^ available land for around thirty thousand people. These people would be on a self-sustaining basis. If, on the other hand, we wait until the slump comes along we can provide employment on this scheme for around 1,500 men. But if the job was completed we would have additional homesteads for around thirty thousand people. I do not think any time should be lost in starting to carry out the project at an early date.
This is just one example of the utilization of the waters from the watershed of the Saskatchewan river. I am strongly in favour, and this group strongly favours the conservation

Water Conservation
and utilization of the watersheds of the Rocky mountains as suggested by the hon. member for Davenport.


Mr. J. G. DIEFENRAKER (Lake Centre):: At the commencement may I pay my tribute to the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) for the interest that he has taken over the years in western development. He is one of those members of parliament who have contributed much to the welfare of this country. To-day, after several years of advocating the necessity of irrigation and power development in western Canada, many who previously scoffed at the necessity of such works being undertaken are giving support to the ideas that have been his for all those years.
In the constituency of Lake Centre the attitude of the large majority of the people is one of high commendation and appreciation for the work and activities of the hon. member for Davenport.
May I first of all deal with the motion itself? The motion provides for a request to the government to take into immediate consideration the advisability of introducing legislation to set up a permanent interprovincial board or commission on which the three prairie provinces and the dominion would have equal representation. In other words, this resolution requests the government to set up a board or commission under the chairmanship of a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada or some other qualified person, to conduct investigations and make studies of the most feasible and economic means for the conservation and utilization of the eastern watershed, and particularly the watershed of the Saskatchewan river.
I am one of those who support this resolution because of the necessity of something being done as provided for in the resolution, but at the same time I maintain the stand I have taken at all times, that judges ought not to serve on royal commissions. I am sure that this resolution will receive the support of members on all sides of the house. In point of fact, if this resolution were carried into effect it would implement the recommendations of the advisory committee on reconstruction, which made its final report on September 24, 1943, the. report in question being one by a subcommittee on the conservation and development of natural resources. This subcommittee was set up to study the natural resources of Canada, particularly water and power, with a view to providing employment after the cessation of hostilities, and also for the purpose of recommending long-term policies necessary to safe-63260- 42i
guard these resources. The main resources which have to be safeguarded are the resources of water with a view to conserving moisture, developing power and assuring irrigation. I am going to refer to some portions of this report so that the minister in replying may be able to give to the house and to the country some information as to the extent to which the recommendations have been implemented.
On page 6 of the report the recommendation is made that:
An early decision should be reached as to the sharing of costs as between federal and provincial authorities in implementing the policies herein recommended, or such as may be adopted. This can only be done by conference between the authorities concerned. The longer-term programmes of conservation, of research, and of surveys may be considered to be properly the responsibility of the federal government.
I should like the minister to advise the house and the country to what extent this recommendation has been carried into effect, and in particular what decisions have been arrived at as to the sharing of costs as between federal and provincial authorities.
With reference to the resolution in question, I find the following recommendations with respect to water and power resources an page 15 of the report:
A.	The provision of immediate post-war employment.
B.	A long-term, or continuous policy, to assist to assist in the use and control of water on the basis of sound conservation.
The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) referred to the fact that over a long period of years western Canada, and in particular Saskatchewan and southern Alberta, has been subject to recurrent droughts. He mentioned the Palliser expedition. I had an opportunity of discussing that expedition on a number of occasions with John Moberley of Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, who died some years ago at the age of almost one hundred years. He was the water boy and last survivor of the Palliser expedition. He particularly emphasized that during that expedition their greatest fear was not death from starvation but from lack of water. He told me that on one occasion Palliser had stated that this area never would be settled. That was also the view of the then leaders of the Roman Catholic church and in particular of the archbishop, Tache, who 'in 1867 after crossing this area expressed the belief that it would never be suitable for agriculture. The report to which I am referring deals with this situation. At page 16 it says:
Water Conservation

In the great plains region of western Canada, and in central British Columbia, many areas have insufficient precipitation for the successful pursuit of agriculture. Irrigation in these areas is necessary, and the conservation, control and distribution of both surface and underground water supplies is of vital importance. The use of the rivers of the great plains region in Canada raises both interprovincial and international problems.
After setting out the necessity for water storage and irrigation projects in the drought areas being proceeded with under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act it indicates what should be followed in the matter of a longterm policy:
The continuation and systematic extension of basic water resources investigations by the dominion water and power bureau in collaboration with the provinces . . .
Then on page 18 it recommends what the hon. member for Davenport has included in this resolution, namely the setting up of a permanent board or commission, This is the recommendation:
The setting up of a western provinces water board to include representatives of the dominion and the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba for the purpose of advising the respective governments on the most equitable and advantageous use of the limited water supplies in the great plains region of Canada.
Therefore, sir, I am sure that from all parts of this house will come support for this resolution in its present form. It asks for no expenditure of money at this time, but it does ask for immediate consideration of a problem that will be recurrent in the years to come, namely the problem of drought. It asks that necessary measures be taken to ensure that never again shall we in Saskatchewan and Alberta pass through the conditions so ably and vividly described this afternoon by the hon. fnember for Rosetown-Biggar, conditions which could have been avoided if parliaments, realizing that recurrent droughts do take place in western Canada, had carried out a system of public works of irrigation to the end that, instead of the devastation that prevailed between 1930 and 1939, there would have been a degree of production which would have done away with the necessity of providing money for direct and indirect relief in those provinces.
I realize that something has been done; but too little has been done. This afternoon the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) referred to the fact that some portion of the $10,000,000 which is to be voted may be used for this purpose; in other words, that the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act administration may use some portion of this vote to carry out survey and engineering works. These
[Mr. Diefenbaker.)
works are to be undertaken for three purposes; first, to secure and assure employment; second, in the larger field, to protect western Canada from' the effects of recurrent droughts, and, finally,, to assure the development of power and irrigation projects. I am particularly interested in what has been done because of the fact that, as has been mentioned by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, in the centre of my constituency is the largest lake in central Saskatchewan. It was a navigable lake which was utilized for the transportation of wheat from central, eastern and middle western Saskatchewan down its entire length and ultimately on to the C.P.R. main line, thence to the markets of eastern Canada. Today that lake is in grave danger of drying up. Between April, 1944, and October, 1945, its depth decreased by two feet. Its shore areas are becoming infested with weeds. This lake is worth preserving as a reservoir for conserving and distributing moisture, through irrigation, along the Qu'Appelle valley. It is worth preserving for the production of fish. It is worth preserving as the finest sanctuary for wild -bird life to be found anywhere in central Saskatchewan. Finally, as the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar suggests, it is worth preserving as a .playground, having on its shores some of the largest resorts in Saskatchewan.


Mr. SMITH (Calgary West) :: And the finest duck shooting in the west.


John George Diefenbaker: Apparently all my hon. friends know how really important this lake is and how necessary it is that something be done for its preservation.


Mr. STIRLING:: What is its name?


John George Diefenbaker: It is called Long lake. Las,t year and the year before I brought to the attention of the house and the country the necessity of doing something. Some mention was made by the hon. member for Davenport of one of the schemes for the irrigation of oentral Saskatchewan and the supplying of water from the Saskatchewan river for the cities of Moose Jaw and Regina by way of Elbow, thereby permitting through the necessary development the transfer of millions of gallons of water down through Beaver lake and thence into the Qu'Appelle valley, thereby ensuring the preservation of this lake by maintaining a reasonable level throughout the year. Speaking on this matter last year, I emphasized the necessity of public works being undertaken which would be self-liquidating. I am going to refer to that in a moment, because I was very much impressed with what was said in that regard by the hon. gentleman who moved this resolution. I

Water Conservation
pointed out that as far as this lake was concerned there was no place in Saskatchewan where the expenditure of money would pay greater dividends in enjoyment, in the preservation of an agricultural area, in the conservation of bird life and the development of irrigation by the diversion of the surplus waters of the South Saskatchewan river.
There are those who say that to-day is not the time for public works or expenditures. There are others who say that we should wait a little longer. I brought these matters up last November when the estimates of the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier) were before the committee, and he quite frankly stated that the matter was not within his jurisdiction, but that it came within that of the Minister of Agriculture, being a matter which could be dealt with under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act.
I do not want to see the expenditure of large sums of money for public works unless the works undertaken are to be reasonably self-liquidating. I have before me two alternative plans for irrigation in Saskatchewan. According to the consulting engineer under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, both these plans, one involving the expenditure of $28 million and the other of $39 million, would be self-liquidating. One must keep this fact in mind, aside altogether from the further fact that these developments would serve areas which year by year would yield crops where, in the past, from year to year during the draught periods the same areas yielded nothing but drought, grasshoppers and all manner of difficulties. And, as the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar has pointed out, the debt piled up from year to year.
These projects are necessary in the interests of the survival of Saskatchewan. They will ensure employment to-day. I am not one who from time to time comes before the government and, while preaching the necessity for retrenchment, at the same time asks for large expenditures which would not be self-liquidating or beneficial. I believe a reduction in taxation must come immediately if industry in this country is to provide the jobs so necessary for our returning men, and for those who have been discharged in recent months from munitions factories and other war industry in general.
I was much disturbed the other day upon reading the remarks of the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) in this connection. He placed before the country a most dangerous doctrine in a speech he delivered in answer to a conference which met here, namely, the delegation from the Canadian and Catholic Federation of Labour, protesting against the
loan being made to Great Britain. He stated that it had taken him a whole month to understand the necessity for this loan. Then, as reported in the press, he said:
If the loan w'as not granted the Canadian government might be forced into the position of having to cut off family allowance payments, which now total between $200 million and $250 million annually, and it might also have to default in the payment of interest on victory bonds.
If those statements were made-and they have not been denied by the minister-they represent the expression of a dangerous viewpoint at a time like this.
I am not one who wants to add to the clamour for works which will not be self-liquidating. But if that statement be true, and if the minister meant what he said, then the financial position of this country is very serious. Those who are answerable for it are the members of the government who, in recent years, have gone out of their way to secure the support of the country by making promises for expenditures far beyond those which should have been made, having regard to present conditions. I am not referring to war expenditures, either, not in any sense of the word.
Is it not strange that one minister says we are in a terrible condition, when only the other day the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann) said at a banquet in his honour that conditions were so fine in Canada he expected income taxation would be cut by 50 per cent at this session?


Lionel Chevrier: He said expenditures,
not taxation.	.


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: He did not say
taxation.


John George Diefenbaker: I did not hear what the interruptions were-they came from so many sources.


Mr. CLAXTON:: They were all the same.


John George Diefenbaker: Well, for once the cabinet is in agreement-if they were all the same. I would not ask the government to make these expenditures unless they would be self-liquidating, unless they would bring benefit by way of extra and assured crop production. Therefore I have no hesitation in asking not only that the committee be set up, as requested in the resolution, but that immediately the government proceed with the necessary work to make sure that millions of acres of Saskatchewan and Alberta will be irrigated, thereby ensuring more employment and greater production, and a return ho prosperity which, through drought and other conditions, will periodically be denied' in pears to come.
Water Conservation

I believe that, to be justified, expenditures to-dhy must assure an increase in economic production. We hear talk about the necessity of retrenchment and we have the Minister of Justice making a statement such as I have quoted. Yet we have such unnecessary expenditures as some $5 million on propaganda agencies; and another of the estimates to come before the house will be for a sum of $300,000 to renew the national registration, something which is totally unnecessary in peace time, justifiable as it was in time of war.
I should like to see set up the committee recommended by the advisor}' board on reconstruction. Let them take evidence on projects which, will be self-liquidating, which will assure greater production, and maintain economic unity in western Canada and elsewhere. Then let them proceed with construction, thereby insuring immediate employment and prosperity in that western country.
I shall not speak longer at this time, more than to say that I support the resolution because I believe it is necessary. I am one who has never seen that division between east and west about which we hear so much.
In concluding. I should like again to pay tribute to the hon. member for Davenport, who represents a constituency in eastern Canada. By his work he has riveted the eyes of eastern Canada on the needs of the west; he has thereby assured the realization by eastern industry of the necessity for prosperity on the prairies.
For the future of our western country I feel that hon. members on all sides of the house could .do no better than support the resolution; and if recommendations are made by the committee, the government should carry those recommendations into effect.


Mr. H. R. ARGUE (Wood Mountain):: in Canada and no immediate hope of their being employed, surely half a million dollars less than the appropriation for 1938-39 is just not good enough.
Mr. George Spence, an official of the P.F.R.A., estimates that irrigation projects totalling some $111,000,000 could be undertaken. In that estimate wage rates are calculated at forty cents an hour. Surely, when surveys are being made by government officials, the rate of wages should not be as low as forty cents an hour. The government should not be niggardly in the sums of money it appropriates to be paid for the hard labour of working people. If the wage rate were increased, perhaps the project would cost $135,000,000.
I notice by the auditor general's report of last year that some $1,180,000 was spent by P.F.R.A. for water development, and of that amount $525,000 was spent on buildings and land. I suggest to the government that all the buildings and all the lands in the world will not irrigate a single acre of land. At the rate the government is proceeding with its irrigation programme it would take well over a hundred years to complete those projects which its officials say are feasible.
It is estimated that 3,000,000 acres of land be placed under irrigation. In terms of production that might mean an additional
75.000.	000 bushels of wheat, or an additional
6.000.	000 hogs, or an additional 10.000,000 tons of feed annually. I would suggest that the government is more concerned with the dangers it sees in what it might term overproduction than with supplying jobs and with ensuring the prosperity of the people of Canada.
I have before me this evening's Ottawa Journal and I notice that an UNRRA official, Mr. Sidney Rittenberg, says that famine is so critical, particularly in Honan province that,
. . . children look like old men, with shrunken, emaciated bodies and swollen stomachs.
The countryside looks as if it had been shaved clean. All grass, weeds, foliage and bark from trees have been grabbed for food.
Seven million persons are reported starving in Honan province alone.
Surely it would have been a great boon to the people of Canada and to the people who are starving in so many nations of the world today if during the 1930's the then governments had been far-sighted enough to have planned and implemented an adequate irrigation project. Then we might have had 75,000,000 bushels of wheat which might have kept alive another ten to twenty million souls. Surely in the future we should keep that experience in mind. I do not think there is ever a

danger of overproduction so long as there is one undernourished person in Canada, or for that matter one undernourished person anywhere in the world.
Our veterans at this time are looking for land. If they take up land under the Veterans Land Act they will get $4,800 worth of land, which in almost every case would be dry-farming land. That amount of money in the dry area will not buy more than 160 acres of land, and only mediocre land. But had three million acres of land been irrigated, it would provide 20.000 veterans with 100 acres of irrigated land apiece. It would provide irrigated farms for almost all the veterans who are looking for land in western Canada under the Veterans Land Act. Surely the government should take that into consideration and develop irrigation as a means of rehabilitating the veterans.
In conclusion, I suggest it is time that the government got away from taking into consideration or thinking over the advisability of an irrigation programme. Certainly the reports of all government officials show that a large irrigation programme is feasible, and if the government would enter into a longterm plan for agriculture, a plan for increasing production, which can come from irrigated lands, we would make certain that all the farmers of all western Canada would all the time have sufficient feed and grain to maintain their farming operations.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. J. A. ROSS (Souris):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to support the resolution which has been proposed by the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol), may I congratulate him not only on having brought forward this important motion but on the excellent work he has done in this direction over a long period of years. The resolution reads:
That. in. the opinion of this house, the government should take into immediate consideration the advisability of introducing legislation during this session to set up a permanent interprovincial board or commisison on which the three p'rairie provinces and the dominion would have equal representation under the chairmanship of a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada or some other qualified person, to conduct investigations and make studies of the most feasible and economic means for the conservation and utilization of the eastern watershed of the Rocky mountains, particularly the watfrshed of the Saskatchewan river.

Water Conservation
I am sure that hon. members in all parts of the house will agree with the principle of the resolution, which asks that a careful investigation be made into this subject. As was pointed out by my colleague, the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker), the reconstruction committee gave long study to the whole question during the session of 1943. At that time they considered the matter in connection with the problems of reconstruction and made a recommendation in the report which they submitted following their investigation. I would join with the hon. member in requesting the minister, when he replies, to tell us what has been done with respect to that recommendation and whether any arrangements have been negotiated between the federal authorities on the one hand, and, on the other, the various provinces concerned.
I was born and brought up within the Palliser triangle and I have farmed there for the past twenty-five years. I also had the privilege of serving on the advisory committee under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act for a number of years before coming to this house, and I have witnessed great changes in scientific agriculture, in methods of tillage and cultivation, in soil conservation and the development of rust-resisting cereals, improvement in the production of live stock, and man}- other similar questions; but certainly [DOT] the most important of all these matters has been water development and conservation.
You cannot produce foodstuffs of any kind in this country without water; water is the most essential element in any production of foodstuffs. The reclamation possibilities, under proper development and conservation of water, are immense, a fact which has been pretty well proven by the efforts that have been made under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act. Those ' who have been administering that legislation since its inception in 1935 can substantiate this.
Possibly there has not been accomplished under the board quite as much as many of us would have liked to see, but one thing that has been achieved is this:	They have established what can be done as a result of the conservation of water. As was pointed out this afternoon, when we realize what quantities of water are wasted every spring from the various streams and rivers, we realize how much can be accomplished by the proper control of these streams for the promotion of agricultural production throughout the year.
May I refer to a pamphlet entitled, "P.F.R.A. and their Record of Achievement", which was issued in 1943. From 1935 to 1943 a great deal was accomplished; but since then, owing to
the war effort, the achievements have been more or less nullified. At page 55 of the pamphlet reference is made to the work accomplished under P.F.R.A. From the inauguration of the programme in 1935 to March 31, 1943, the water development work that has been accomplished has included the maintenance of water supply to take care of 50,000 acres of irrigated land and existing projects; repairs have been carried out, and so on. It lists the number carried out, and states that the amount spent up to that date for water development and 'conservation alone was $2,124,722. Much more than that was spent in connection with community pastures, reforestation, regrassing and other matters of that kind.
This afternoon I listened to the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) telling about the difficulties which the people of the three prairie provinces passed through in the early thirties. I experienced all the conditions as he portrayed them. Southern Saskatchewan suffered more severely than any other part of those provinces as a result of the drought at that time. One could drive for days and not see any vegetation whatever. There was no water to be seen anywhere, and one marvelled how the women and children on those farms existed at all during that period. The corner I lived in, in southwestern Manitoba, was on the fringe of that area.
When we remember what those people had produced in years prior to that period and contrast it with their privations during those years, I do not think anyone would object to a survey, and even to a considerable expenditure of money, for the purpose of finding out what can be made possible through proper water conservation, so as to conserve the runoff from the large rivers coming from the mountains. Someone mentioned a lake this afternoon. I remember driving along lake Johnstone, south of Moose Jaw, during those dry years. Tire lake was perfectly dry, not a drop of water being at the bottom.
On all hands people boast of our great agricultural production during the war years, and I do not think it would have been possible had it not been for what had been accomplished in the prairie provinces under P.F.R.A. Development and conservation made it possible for many people to maintain live stock, to produce dairy products, to cultivate fine vegetable gardens for themselves where previously in average years they had been unable to do anything of the sort.
It is difficult to estimate in dollars and cents how much extra we were able to produce for the war effort, as far as foodstuffs are concerned, as a result of the work done by that board throughout the prairies. I remem-
Water Conservation

ber reading in the fall of 1943, in a magazine called Canadian Business, an article pointing out the trend that had been observed in western Canada. The writer of that article stated that in the early twenties seventy per cent of the farmers' income was from wheat and cereal products and that position had been reversed so that less than forty per cent of their income was now obtained from that source.
I maintain that the greatest part of the change-over was made possible by the efforts of those operating under P.F.R.A. in large areas of those three provinces in connection with the development of water, regrassing, and community pastures. We were simply experimenting and the expenditure was not large-a very few million dollars, as had been pointed out. If such results could be obtained there, I am sure that our potentialities along those lines are still considerable.
The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) stated this afternoon that, apart from the vote this year of $3,000,000, an amount of $10,000000 was to be made available through the Department of Reconstruction for survey work along these lines. The other day I read an article, under the date of April 5, by Doctor Archibald, director of experimental farms in Canada. He, along with the deputy minister of agriculture, Doctor Barton, had more to do with directing the efforts of the prairie farm rehabilitation work in the prairie provinces than anybody else. In his address at Guelph the other day he referred to the fact that $110 million were to be spent on some project in the prairie provinces in the near future. I am not sure what it is. That is quite a large sum of money the department is to spend.
I support this resolution wholeheartedly. While we have accomplished this fine piece of work in the prairie provinces, it is practically nothing when compared with what our neighbours to the south have done. This afternoon the hon. member for Davenport, the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar and others told of the magnificent achievements with respect to water conservation and irrigation in certain parts of the United States. That has been done. In to-day's Christian Science Monitor, a Boston paper, I noticed a full page devoted to this type of work. The heading is "Flood wall at Kansas City paces vast drive to tame Missouri river." It goes on to point out that the sum of $7 billion has been set aside for this work, and that $1,500 million is to be spent on the Missouri river. It will affect some ten states and bring about irrigation and improvement of agricultural productivity in the states concerned. If they can

' do that in the United States surely it should be an example to this country as to what we must do in the interests of our own people, and more especially in the interests of world food production.
Throughout history the majority of the people of the world have been undernourished. To-day we hear much of world government and international agreements. If this is to become a fact, then we in this country have great possibilities and responsibilities to produce much more food than we have ever done in the past. Therefore I think this resolution is most timely and we would be neglecting our duty if all quarters of the house did not support it. We should see that a thorough investigation is carried out. Like the hon. members who spoke this afternoon, I believe that at this time all large expenditures of public money should be self-liquidating. It is a matter of surveying. I am satisfied that it ivould be self-liquidating. A few million dollars is a lot of money, but in comparison with government expenditures to-day very little has been spent on P.F.R.A. It has returned many times the amount to the citizens of western Canada and to this nation as a whole. I am pleased to have the opportunity of endorsing this resolution which, I am sure, will be accepted in all corners of the house.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Just
to prove that there is nothing political in this matter, I rise as a representative of our party in Alberta to support my old friend who knows every rock in the Mackenzie river and every blade of grass grown out there. I hold in my hand a clipping from the East Central Irrigation Association which quotes Herbert Hoover, one-time president of the United States, as saying that every drop of water that runs to the sea without rendering a commercial return is a public waste. Perhaps we can all agree that Mr. Hoover has at last said something that is really worth while.
We shall be told something about the expenditure of money, and I have no doubt of the position of those of us who criticize the government for overexpenditures and then in the next breath urge them to spend something more. I appreciate that position to the fullest, but I may be permitted to criticize and to doubt the wisdom of the way in which they spend other people's money. It has got abroad in this country, through the various information agencies which rude people occasionally suggest are propaganda agencies, that there is a feeling that they may be tainted just a little bit with the government's idea and that they might assist them in remaining where they are.

Water Conservation
I, of course, know nothing about that. I am quite sure the ministers would not consciously do that, but perhaps some of the chaps who work for them know where their bread is buttered and occasionally they may slip into political propaganda. That is gentle criticism.
On the large question of sectionalism which has so often been raised, I wish to say that in a portion of western Canada we are seeking to have this government, in conjunction with the provincial governments, undertake a large project. Therefore I immediately say to my hon. friends who come from Ontario and Quebec that what we are seeking is a few canals. We want these canals to carry water in order that we may raise food. You have your canals here to carry bottoms. Ontario did not pay for them. Quebec is not going to pay for the St. Lawrence waterways. The point I am anxious to make, whether I succeed or not, is that because of the geographic location of an enterprise it cannot just immediately be said that it was done to help one province or two provinces or one area. In my judgment, what my old and hon. friend-and when I say "old" I mean I have known him a long time-* the member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) said was well put. If improvements were brought about out in that country this would spread. Take the little Lethbridge Northern. I see the hon. gentleman writing at his desk who knows much more about it than I do. But what has happened there? They have a wonderful show going; they have sugar refineries and, in the last few years a canning factory. I do not care where hon. members live, they cannot buy canned vegetables that will even compare with those that are canned right now in Lethbridge. All that is the result of irrigating some land and making it productive.
I do not know how many hon. members have visited the town of Brooks. I am quite sure many of us do not even know that it exists. I give the house my word for this, there are no finer homes, there are no more healthy or contented people throughout Canada than those who live in that irrigated area. What strikes one so forcibly is this. You go about three miles south of Brooks, turn right and then you strike the main canal which comes from the dam at Bassano. There you have on one side of the road gardens blooming like the rose. Another fifteen miles away you come to the area of Scandia and Rainier, a small area. There is not enough grass growing there on fifty, acres to support a sheep, let alone a cow or steer that someone mentioned a moment ago.
What are these lands that we are seeking to do something with? Take an area out there where we have some land that is most unusual. The hon. member for Medicine Hat (Mr. Wylie) is not in his seat at the moment; perhaps he knew I was going to say all these things; but it got so dry out there at one time some years ago that after the farmers had sold their fence posts in order to get the last dollar they could, the city council of Medicine Hat got a rainmaker by the name of Hatfield. He built a thing that looked like an oil derrick, although it was not so high. Up there he lit a fire and brewed some kind of witch's stew; I do not know what it was. He was paid on the basis of an inch and a half of rain or nothing. He lit this pot-I think he was just cooking himself a cup of coffee or something of the kind- but in any event they had a wonderful rain. Those hon. members who read Time magazine will know that Hatfield is still going. Down in San Diego a short time ago, when they had that young world's fair and the country was dry, they hired him and he guaranteed two inches of rain. They got seven inches and everybody in San Diego was flooded out. Then they had to pay him again to get it to stop. Of course he had nothing to do with it, but I tell that story for this reason. When people are driven to such straits that they will hire a charmer to try to induce a little bit of rain, conditions are serious. I have lived in that section of the country for a long time, and am familiar with the constituency of Acadia, from whose hon. member we heard this afternoon. I used to go there to shoot partridge.


Mr. JOHNSTON:: That was a pleasure trip.


Arthur Leroy Smith: It was. Incidentally I may tell my farmer friends that partridge live on weed seeds; they do not eat your grain. But matters got so bad there that even the weeds would not grow and there were no partridge; that is why I stopped going to the hon. member's constituency. I was there quite often, however, and I did see this more than once. I would see a man and his wife and kids driving out behind a team, the harness held together with hay wire. If they were lucky, in the back end of the wagon they had a cow tied. They used a hay-rack because they could put on it all their kitchen stuff and bits of furniture; and they were going to some other place. Why? Because of lack of moisture.
I am anxious that one scheme be undertaken, and we have heard that a beginning is to be made in connection with the Red Deer
Water Conservation

river development. I do not think the hon. member for Davenport occupied all the time of the engineers when he was in western Canada recently; perhaps it would be better to say that they occupied all his time, but in any event these same men tell me that from that development, which includes a 150-foot dam, we can get enough power to electrify all the farms in that part of the country. Let us be practical; let us see where our money is going. We gave out relief in large sums in that area, and as someone has so well said we got nothing from it except a number of angry people. I am quite sure the Minister of Agriculture (Mr, Gardiner) would appreciate that if he were here, because he gave them all this dough; then everybody voted against him and threw out his outfit, so that it is difficult to buy votes in that way. I like the direct method; $2, and nobody says anything about it.
In any event, we have spent all this money and we have received nothing from it. With respect, sir, I say that in that arid land when they have rain they raise wonderful crops. I have seen them grow sixty bushels of wheat to the acre around Medicine Hat, and I am not using a bit of imagination. The land is tremendously fertile if only it can get some moisture. As the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) put it, it needs just that other inch. I think he is wrong; I have a record of the moisture every year from 1933 to 1946. And I believe we need more than another inch; certainly that is so in a bad year.
What happens when you get an irrigation system out there? Practically no wheat is grown at Brooks to-day. It becomes a specialized business; seed crops, peas, beans, small fruits and that sort of thing. I mean it is not going to increase the thing of which we have most, and I agree that there should be no difficulty about that. It becomes a specialized show. We will not interfere with your markets here, because we cannot ship these products that far. No matter how good we are, we just cannot overcome the north shore of lake Superior. I see the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Howe) is here; probably he is going to tell me more about coal before this session is finished, but he knows there are transportation difficulties. In all seriousness, I say that we in this house should regard this as a national problem, as it is. The Ontario canals were national problems. All we want is canals. We will use them for a different purpose; but will anyone tell me that we in the west got any benefit from the canals in eastern Canada? Of course we did not, but we did not complain;

we figured it was in the interests of the country that this should 'be done. So that all we are asking is a few canals which will generally add to the wealth of Canada, as I am quite sure the little bits of ditches here in the east have done.
Now a word as to money. I do not know anything about money; that is, about cost, and in that respect I like the terms of the resolution, which asks that a complete examination of the picture should be made.
I cannot sit down without giving the house a history of irrigation in our province. The Canadian Pacific railway had both the eastern irrigation scheme and the western scheme, coming from the Bow river. They spent millions of dollars and then gave it all away; houses, horses, machinery, ditches-one conduit over two miles long, just east of the town of Brooks-land and everything else including $450,000 as working capital. They gave it all away in order to get out of it. Why? Their irrigation fee was 50 cents an acre. They have some good men in that district. They took hold of the thing, raised the fee to $1 an acre, and then got tough. As everyone knows, nobody will pay the government or the Canadian Pacific railway anything if they can possibly avoid doing so. That just seems to be true throughout the length and breadth of this country; and nobody paid the C.P.R. So that they found themselves supporting this thing with tremendous losses every year. I believe the district took it over about five or six years ago. Their ditches are clean; their roads are good, and instead of working capital of $450,000 to-day they have working capital of well over $1,000,000. That shows what can be done if the people who are there take an interest in the picture.
At the session before last of the Alberta legislature a similar group took over the western district, which is immediately east of Calgary, in around Strathmore and Gleichen. The C.P.R. gave them the same amount of money. They could not give them the land, because they did not own it any longer, but even in one short year they are making a success of that business. The Lethbridge Northern, as hon. members know, is a government-supported affair, and it seems to me that when we have operation by governments or railroads we get into trouble. But if we can have local management of these things they can be made successful and, as my hon. friend has told us, they can become self-liquidating propositions. Why, in the eastern irrigation district they grow fruit; they grow anything there.

Water Conservation
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, having talked about four times longer than I intended to, I am still in favour of the resolution.


Mr. DANIEL McIVOR (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, having spent many years in the west, in both Manitoba and Saskatchewan, I would have no trouble whatever in occupying forty minutes in describing the good derived from plenty of moisture over certain parts of Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta. However, I do not think I am intruding when I say that moisture is no more necessary for growing crops than is good food and lots of milk for growing boys.
Therefore I take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, of congratulating Your Honour on providing a free meal for our page boys once each sitting day in addition to a drink of good wholesome milk at 4.30 in the afternoon. This is most commendable; and if Your Honour continues doing this sort of thing for our page boys, it will be a fine bonus for them. On behalf of those for whom I might speak may I commend Mr. Speaker's action, and his treatment of these page boys, who are the best boys in Canada to-day.


Mr. E. B. McKAY (Weyburn):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to support this resolution I wish first to congratulate the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) to whom all westerners owe a great deal. All of us appreciate his efforts to educate the public of Canada to the very great need for irrigation In western Canada.
I particularly wish to thank the hon. member for the map indicating the Saskatchewan river power, navigation and irrigation rehabilitation scheme which he has proposed.
A large part of the constituency of Wey-burn, which I have the good fortune to represent, is embraced in this project, for it includes the Soo line district, as well as the Regina plains and Areola line areas. In this region are located the Souris river, Long and Was-cana creeks; and may I say that this is one of the most productive areas in the whole of Saskatchewan.
Most western people are interested in irrigation, for the greatest natural hazards in the southern portions of Saskatchewan and Alberta are the fairly frequent and all too regular cycles of drought. According to records, droughts occurred during the periods 1838-48, 1885-95 and 1929-3S. It appears that drought is widespread in the prairie provinces every thirty years or so and extends over a decade with a varying degree of intensity. The worst year which the western agriculturist has experienced was 1937. That year
half the population of Saskatchewan was forced to accept government relief and the whole situation savoured of a national calamity. On that occasion the federal authorities came to the aid of provincial governments in the west, and kind-hearted folk from all parts of Canada dispatched trainloads of food and clothing to aid the stricken people of the plains.
On that occasion live stock were slaughtered by the thousands because of lack of water and the scarcity of fodder with which to feed them.
Fine herds of cattle were marketed for $8 and 810 a head. Other thousands were transported east and west of the prairies where fodder was available. Trainloads of grain and other fodder were shipped to the west at great expense to the public to keep alive the relatively few remaining animals the people were permitted to retain on the farm. I believe this catastrophe could have been averted had a programme of water conservation been embarked upon years ago. A programme embracing the construction of small dams, dug-outs, and small irrigation projects would have provided water for live stock and the much needed fodder for their sustenance.
Such a scheme, together with larger irrigation projects as envisaged by the resolution before the house, while incurring the initial outlay of considerable sums of money would lend stability to western agriculture and create a prosperous farming population, so necessary to the prosperity of the whole national economy.
Everyone agrees that irrigation on a large scale requires detailed planning in engineering and an exhaustive study of the economic aspects involved. I believe, if this is done, that irrigation of the western prairies will be found to be economically sound and a profitable investment.
Anyone who has inspected the 500,000 acres of irrigated land in Alberta will recognize the great material advantages accruing from such development.
Irrigated land supports from nine to ten times as many people there as do the dry farming areas surrounding those projects.
There are 4.600 prosperous farmers in the district, making for a steadying influence on Alberta's economy. Over a ten-year period the average wheat production exceeded dry area yield by almost twelve bushels an acre. If we assume that this whole irrigated area produced nothing but wheat that would mean almost S7 million worth' of new wealth for Alberta every year. But other crops are produced in this region, all of which produce more per acre than wheat. For instance,
Water Conservation

eleven per cent of the sugar production of Canada comes from sugar beets produced in this area.
Irrigation is necessary for the economic stabilization of the western provinces. In order to achieve a well-balanced and stable economy there must be diversification of industry.
The whole matter of irrigation must be approached from the national viewpoint, since Canadian prosperity and well-being are impossible while a large area of the prairies is subject to the wide fluctuations of income caused by repeated crop failures induced by drought. A stabilized western economy would create a steady market for eastern manufactured commodities. The establishment of secondary industries for the processing of primary products from the farm would create more wealth in the west and for Canada. They would employ many workers who must of necessity consume primary products and the goods from Canadian factories. Without irrigation and its attendant hydro development many such industries could not be established.
In closing, may I enumerate some of the major benefits that would result from western irrigation:
(1) It would permit a greater range of diversified crop production and an increase in live stock population.	,
(2)	It would tend to stabilize crop production and would ensure against total crop failure.
(3)	Stability of farm tenure would be established with a higher standard of living.
(4) A broad, sound base for industrial development would be set up.
(5)	Electric power for industry and rural electrification would be created.
(6)	There would be established a source of stable revenue for the municipal, provincial and federal governments of the country.
I shall support the resolution.


James Allison Glen: Mr. Speaker, the motion before the house moved by the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) reads as follows:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should take into immediate consideration the advisability of introducing legislation during this session to set up a permanent interprovincial board or commission on which the three prairie provinces and the dominion would have equal representation under the chairmanship of a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada or some other qualified person, to conduct investigations and make studies of the most feasible and economic means for the conservation and utilization of .the eastern watershed of the Rocky mountains, particularly the watershed of the Saskatchewan river.
[Mr. McKay.)
The contents of this resolution have been discussed many times in this house, always under the auspices of the bon. gentleman. He has now, I think, gained for the proposal he has announced in this house during many years support which I am sure must be gratifying to him, and I congratulate him upon the method and determination with which he has continued his fight for water for the prairie provinces, although, being an eastern member, he is not so politically identified with those particular provinces. I like to think of him as a. very close friend, not as a member of a constituency but as a citizen of Canada, knowing that in what he now .proposes in his motion that is now before the house he is dealing with a matter that will have an effect upon the economic life of all Canada and not upon any particular constituency.
In this proposal he is asking for the setting u.p of a commission, and I should like to deal with the history of the transactions that have taken place since the natural resources were transferred to the province of Alberta in 1930. I was asked a question in the house by the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefen-baker) and also by another hon. member as to what the government had done in the light of the reports that had come from the committee. The hon. member for Davenport divided his motion into two parts.
In the first instance, he spoke of the conservation of water and dealt more particularly with conditions in Saskatchewan. The hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Quelch) also followed the same line as far as Alberta was concerned. In the second place, the hon. member for Davenport dealt with it from the point of view of the watershed on the eastern slopes of the Rocky mountains. There are two different proposals, both related to each other .but both similar, although easily distinguished.
With regard to the first of these, I may say that the rivers of the prairie provinces are interprovincial or international in character. Every important stream in those provinces is shared by another province, by the northwest territories or by the states that are immediately over the border. From the eastern slope of the Rocky mountains the main sources of water flow easterly across the three provinces and northerly to the northwest territories, and the boundaries of those political divisions bear no relation to the physical characteristics of the areas which they include.
Prior to 1930 all these waters were administered by the dominion, -which greatly simplified all questions of use and control. From the first settlements on the prairie up to that

Water Conservation
date a large number of water rights were granted by the Department of the Interior with an almost complete absence of litigation between interests claiming conflicting rights, and no questions arose as between one province and another. Since the transfer of the natural resources, four jurisdictions-the dominion and the three provinces-administer these same waters. While up to the present no serious difficulties have arisen, minor questions having been settled in an amicable manner, it does not follow that the need for planning and apportionment has lessened by the lapse of time. The contrary is true.
Following the transfer of the natural resources there came a long period of depression when there was no incentive for new undertakings. This was partly overcome by the activities of the prairie farm rehabilitation administration. It is interesting and, I am sure, gratifying to all members of the house to hear the praise that has been lavished upon the work of the prairie farm rehabilitation administration. I am sure that will encourage them to carry on even in a larger degree than they have done hitherto.
Changed conditions are favourable for new developments, many of which have been planned and some have already been authorised. Never before have the use and conservation of the prairie water supply been so needed. I doubt if there are two things more needed in the Dominion of Canada than, first, water, and then, oil. This department has been endeavouring as best it can with all the facilities and resources at its command to find both.
This department is satisfied that a board or authority of some kind is necessary to assist and advise in the administration of all interprovincial waters and that the dominion is entitled to representation on such a board as the administrator of the northwest territories. as being responsible for international boundary w'aters and by reason of its operations under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act.
Action to set up a board representative of the three prairie provinces and the dominion which would examine and report upon the most effective use or control of waters common to two or more of the parties was begun as soon as the agreement for the transfer from the dominion to the provinces of resources, including water resources, was completed in 1930. It was intended that this agreement, which was drawn and which was submitted to' the provinces, should become effective about the same time as the transfer agreements. For this purpose negotiations were entered into with the provincial premiers and a draft
agreement to establish a western provinces water board was prepared by this department. That was accepted by the provinces and signed by the three premiers under date of the 24th October, 1930. For some reason there were some clauses in it which seemed to operate unfairly against the dominion, and Justice, at that time being consulted, were not in favour of the agreement as drawn.
It was not until 1937 that the province of Manitoba began to make inquiries with regard to the rehabilitation plans for the western drought areas which called for taking water from interprovincial streams, such as the South Saskatchewan river, and which it was feared might affect future power developments within the province. Consideration was sought for the establishment of such a board to anticipate the problems which might arise and thereby avoid possible disputes relating to interprovincial streams.
The then minister, the Hon. Mr. Crerar, replied on April 16, 1937, that he was in favour of such a board; and that it would prove of very great value for the purpose intended. He said that he was in favour of carrying on the negotiations with respect to the formation of the board and that he would be glad to communicate with the other provinces in due course. A few days later he wrote to the ministers in charge of water resources in Alberta and Saskatchewan suggesting that the agreement of 1930 be brought up to date- I am speaking of 1937 now-and the objectives of the board and the proposed method of operations be discussed between the responsible technical officers.
Hon. Mr. Kerr, the natural resources minister of Saskatchewan, immediately replied as favouring the board and referred to the recent amendment to the water rights act, 1931, which authorized him as minister to enter into agreements with the other provinces and the dominion for the establishment of a board to control the use of interprovincial waters. The other ministers stated that they were prepared to give the proposal careful consideration.
A new agreement was drawn, prepared by this department and submitted to the three provincial ministers concerned. The new draft proposed an arrangement much simpler than the previous one. Instead of an agreement between governments, it was to be an agreement hetween the ministers responsible for the administration of water resources in the four areas, and was to be advisory only. I have the substance of the agreement here, but I do not think I need trouble the house with the terms of it except to say that the

Water Conservation
rights of the dominion were protected. The powers of the advisory board were set out clearly and in detail.
The basic principle underlying the formation of the board wTas that it would be a technical board consisting of the officers responsible for the detailed administration of water resources in each of the jurisdictions affected and reporting t-o the ministers in executive control of these resources.
The new draft was accepted by Mr. Kerr for Saskatchewan on June 30, 1937, and by Mr. McDiarmid for Manitoba on October 8 of the same year, but the Alberta minister declined to take action, although pressed to do so by the Alberta director of water resources.
The matter was again brought to the attention of the Alberta minister, now the Hon. Mr. MacMillan, by the acting deputy minister of this department on August 11, 1941. Mr. MacMillan replied on January 2, 1942, to the effect that his province did not see the need of such a board on the grounds that Saskatchewan was the only province that could be affected by rights granted by Alberta and that so far the authorities in Saskatchewan had not intimated that they wished to discuss any questions. There was a further exchange of letters shortly after, but Mr. MacMillan remained unconvinced.
There was no further action at that time, but the approaching end of the war brought a renewed interest throughout the west in large-scale projects for irrigation and power. During 1944, boards of trade at Saskatoon, Prince Albert and Perdue in Saskatchewan, and Drum-heller and Craigmile in Alberta passed resolutions asking the Department of Mines and Resources to set up a water board for the prairie provinces:	[DOT]
. . . whose duty it would be, among others, to assemble all the available stream flow data of western rivers and establish such new stations as may be required to get a complete record of the river discharge throughout the whole western drainage area, and to determine the most feasible and economical water power and irrigation projects that would make the best use of all the available drainage water, with the object of advising the various governments concerned of the possibilities of the area.
The establishment of such a board has also seen endorsed by the dominion subcommittee on agriculture and combined resources set up in connection with the reconstruction programme of the dominion-provincial conference.
In consequence of these large-scale irrigation and other projects proposed as a post-war measure of rehabilitation, the department again wrote to Mr. MacMillan on June 13, 1944, suggesting that if, in view of this changed situation, Mr. MacMillan was agreeable to

having a board constituted under section 64 of the Alberta Water Resources Act, which provides appropriate authority, the minister would be glad to review the matter with the responsible ministers of Saskatchewan and Manitoba who had previously expressed their approval.
There is no reply to- this letter on file, and so far as the dominion is concerned the matter rests at this stage.
Within a few months after the minister's last letter to Mr. MacMillan, the provinces took action without reference to the dominion. At a meeting held at Saskatoon on September 21, 1944, it was decided by Hon. N. E. Tanner, Alberta minister of lands and mines, Hon.
J.	H. Phelps, Saskatchewan minister of natural resources, and Hon. J. S. McDiarmid, Manitoba minister of mines and) natural resources, to establish a water board representative of the three prairie provinces under an agreement along the lines of that prepared by this department in 1937.
At the time of this meeting it was the understanding of those present that the board should be advisory only and should have no jurisdiction in the matter of allocating water rights with respect to' interprovincial watersheds as between the three provinces concerned.
Some time elapsed before the formal agreement was completed, this being dated December 7, 1945. The present representatives on the board are, for Alberta, Mr. Ben Russell, director of water resources; for Saskatchewan, Mr. G. N. Munro, chief engineer, water rights branch; and for Manitoba, Mr. D. M. Stephens, deputy minister of mines and natural resources.
Arrangements have been made for an organization meeting of the board to be held at Saskatoon on April 1 and 2. Questions relating to procedure as well as with regard to specific problems to which the board might devote immediate attention will probably be decided upon at that time.
It is understood that when the decision was made to set up the board the dominion was not asked to participate on account of objection by the representative of Alberta, but those from the other two provinces felt that, while it would be desirable to have the dominion interest in water resources represented, there would be a considerable advantage in having the work begun on a provincial basis.	,
That is the position so far as the conservation of water in Saskatchewan is concerned. An advisory board has been formed representing the three provinces, with no representation of the dominion upon it, and for that

Water Conservation
reason, as I said before, that is where the dominion goes out of the picture as at this stage.
The motion that is before the house aks for the setting up of an interprovincial board. I suggest that we as a dominion cannot set up through this house a board which is going to take over the jurisidiction of either of the three provinces and that any board that is set up must be with the consent and approval of the three provinces. For that reason I suggest that that part of the hon. member's motion has already been met by the three provinces, which have made their choice of an advisory board.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Is the minister not overlooking the fact that, the Saskatchewan river being a navigable river, none of the three provinces has any jurisdiction over its water except for power purposes and that the board they set up has not functioned? My information is that it is not going to function and that they would be very glad to have the dominion cooperate in the manner suggested in the motion with equal representation of the prairie provinces and the dominion on the board.


James Allison Glen: I am not overlooking the fact that the dominion government is deeply concerned in all that pertains to this matter because it is an economic matter affecting the provinces, which are equally interested and are anxious to share in the conservation of the water in those three provinces. I do not think that the hon. member would suggest that we should set up a commission now just because the Saskatchewan river may be a navigable river; that because of that fact we should take upon ourselves the setting up of a commission which would advise the three provinces without their having some say in the setting up of that commission.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Each province would
name the same number of representatives to the board and have equal representation with the dominion. You cannot do anything else.


James Allison Glen: A board has been set up by three provinces and the dominion is not represented on it at the present moment. Therefore the proposal in the motion of the hon. member for the appointment of a commission would, if it were carried out, be overriding the wishes of the provinces, which have already set up their own commission.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The minister does not seem to realize that the board which has been set up acts only in an advisory capacity to the provinces themselves. It has no jurisdiction over a navigable river.


James Allison Glen: I have already said that. I have also stated that when the agreement was being prepared by the dominion with the provinces the commission was to be of an advisory character, without any executive power.
The hon. member then addressed himself to the question of the protection of the forests on the east slope of the Rocky mountains. Here again I must give a little of the history of the forestry of the eastern slope.
The Rocky mountains forest reserve was established in 1911, at which time the dominion government through the dominion forest service of the Department of the Interior inaugurated a development policy of administration and protection, which continued until the transfer of the resources late in 1930. Complete control of all the natural resources within the boundaries of the forest reserve was vested in the forest service. These included fire protection, timber disposal, grazing uses, rental of surface rights, and mining claims, permits to hunters and trappers for the erection of cabins and many other miscellaneous uses.
While administration of hunting and fishing was a function of the province, a measure of control was exercised by the dominion forest officers through the requirement for travel permits; in fact, during periods of high fire hazards large sections of this area were closed to hunting and travel.
The total area of the east slope reserves as of 1930 was 13,786 square miles, but certain proposed additional areas were under consideration. When the province of Alberta took over these areas were added and the total area of provincial forest reserves on the east slope now stands at 14,266 square miles.
That land was divided into five units under the dominion. When the province took it over they made it into three and then began their jurisdiction to protect these forests. Unfortunately, the experience of the province was that the losses were much greater than they had been under the dominion government, the reason being that they had not the money necessary to provide that forest protection at that time.
Communications were exchanged between the province and the dominion with regard to the taking over of the east slope of the Rockies by the dominion, and in the first instance a letter was written on December 10, 1937, by the then provincial minister, Mr. N. E. Tanner, of which I have here a copy, dealing with the whole matter:
When in Ottawa recently my colleague-the Hon. Solon Low, provincial treasurer-had intended to discuss with you the matter of our
Water Conservation

forest reserves situate on the east slope of the Rocky mountains, but owing to your absence, also that of Doctor Camsell, he mentioned the subject to the department and I am writing at some length so that you may more fully understand our attitude.
As you are aware these reserves are considerably important when consideration is being given to the rehabilitation of the drought areas, as all our large rivers, with the exception of the Peace, have their source in the forest reserves.
While these waters are of importance to Alberta, they flow through our neighbouring province of Saskatchewan into Manitoba, and we feel that Alberta is entitled to some consideration in maintaining the organization established during the administration of the resources by the Department of the Interior. Such assistance might conceivably be along the lines of the Clarke-McXary legislation in the United States of America, with which no doubt your department is very well acquainted.
I understand that in the year 1924 the President of the United States of America gave his approval to "an act to provide for forest lands, for the reforestation of denuded areas, for the extension of national forests, and for other purposes in order to promote the continuous production of timber on lands chiefly suitable therefor," and in so doing the President and congress established on a statutory basis a fundamental forest policy for the United States . . .
You will readily appreciate that if the province were to discontinue this service we might anticipate a serious depletion of the forest cover within a few years, and the passing of this protection would have a considerable effect on the distribution of water throughout the following years.
So long as the east slope of the Rocky mountains is well timbered the periodic run-off will be well controlled by nature, but with the loss of the timber we could expect periods of high water in the early spring and the water courses practically, if not, dry, in the summer and fall seasons.
The importance of the east slope watershed has been recognized in publications that have been issued by various governmental departments, as the agricultural development depends for its success, to a large extent, on a dependable water supply for domestic use, power and especially. for irrigation projects.
Your department will have given these matters their earnest consideration in dealing with the rehabilitation programme for the drought areas, and the information as to stream measurements is a matter of record in your department: this work having been continued as a federal service under an arrangement with the province.
All of these facts must have been recognized by Canada when considering the transfer of the natural resources to the three western provinces as the draft agreement of January. 1926, reserved to Canada the crown lands included in the Rocky mountain forest reserve, so that these lands might continue to be administered by the government of Canada for the purposes of Canada.
It is understood that the preliminary drafts of the agreement finally made in December. 1929. had continued this reservation, but for some unknown reason, this section was withdrawn from the agreement as completed.
Were the government of Canada to feel that it could not consider making a grant to Alberta along the lines of the Clarke-McXary legislation.

would it be possible to consider having these areas again vested in Canada for administration?
That letter was written on December 10,
1937.	There was further correspondence with the then minister with regard to forest protection, and a letter written on February 16,
1938,	reads:
Dear Mr. Crerar:
Consideration has been given to your letter of the 29th ultimo, on the subject of our discussion relative to the forest reserves situate on the east slope of the Rocky mountains, and may I again emphasize that Alberta has, since the transfer of the resources, expended a large sum in maintaining a staff on these reserves.
We freely admit, however, that an adequate protective service has not been furnished at any time since the province took control, although more money has been expended each year than essential for the welfare of Alberta.
This expenditure, we can no longer justify under existing financial conditions, and it is our proposal to immediately curtail this service as in justice to our people we cannot continue an expenditure in the interests of our neighbouring province.
On the other hand, I think that I should draw to your attention once more the fact that greater protection is necessary in this area in order to maintain a more equitable flow of water through the streams having their origin there.
It seems to me that ay such expenditure made by the federal government in this respect would be much less than the saving which would be possible in the drought area as a result of this protection.
Our great concern is, although we realize the importance and necessity of protection in the interests of the timber, adjoining parks, and especially the watershed, we find it necessary to reduce our staff and protection. With this in mind I felt that it would be only right for me to advise your government before any such curtailing of service was made effective.
The question of minerals underlying these lands should not cloud the issue as their administration has no bearing on the protective features. In fact, this was fully acknowledged in the draft agreements that were the subject of negotiation before the resources were actually transferred to Alberta for administration.
Later on, the discussion was renewed with regard to the taking over of the projects, and the then minister, Mr. Crerar, wrote a letter to Mr. Tanner under date of August 18. 1943, as follows:
We are considering projects that might be included in a scheme of post-war development. For many reasons, which it is unnecessary to recapitulate in this letter because you are thoroughly familiar with them. I believe it is of importance that steps should be taken to more adequately protect the east slopes of the Rocky mountains in Alberta. These are in the main included in provincial forest reserves. This is a project that would provide much useful employment.
We had some correspondence on this subject in 1938 and it was mentioned by the Honourable Mr. Maynard at the forestry conference with provincial ministers last May. I would refer you to my letter of January 29, 1938. The only

Water Conservation
difference of opinion that developed in our correspondence was concerning the under-rights. I can assure you that there is an appreciation of the position of the province in this respect. Provided that an agreement can be reached whereby the development of mining and oil rights is not allowed to jeopardize the effective administration of the area for the purposes for which the dominion might take over responsibility, I would be prepared to recommend the acceptance of your view as to the retention of under-rights by the province. I would like to have confirmation from you of the fact that your government is still prepared to turn over the surface rights and the resources thereon in order that the watershed protection functions of the area may be conserved to the general advantage of Canada. If an agreement can be reached by our respective governments, plans for the protection of the area could be got under way at once and put into effect immediately the war ends.


Arthur Leroy Smith: What were those	rights-"under-rights"	or "surface
rights"?


James Allison Glen: Under-rights. He is speaking there of minerals, ore particularly.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Under-rights?


James Allison Glen: Yes.


Arthur Leroy Smith: What are they?


James Allison Glen: As opposed to surface rights.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Minerals.


James Allison Glen: I continue:
It is therefore desirable that we decide upon the details of the arrangement in the meantime.
Yours very truly,
(Signed) T. A. Crerar.
That was written on August 18, 1943. Then on September 29, 1943, Mr. Tanner replied as follows: .
I regret that so much time has elapsed in answering your letter of the 18th ultimo.
I have spent some time in discussing the subject of your letter with the officers of the department. in an endeavour to get a clear picture of all that is involved, so that I might present it to the government for consideration. I have also asked our subcommittee on natural resources, which is a part of the post-war reconstruction committee, to give me their views on this matter. I hope to be able to advise you further in the near future.
I might say that I am very desirous of being able to work out some satisfactory arrangement whereby the east slope of the Rocky mountains in this province can be given the attention which it deserves, with the cost of administration equitably borne by those concerned.
It will be remembered that in the first letter I read they were prepared to turn back the eastern slopes pf the Rocky mountains to the government, but now they are willing to enter into some arrangement. On December 11,
1943, a letter was written by the then minister, Mr. Crerar, to Mr. Tanner, which reads as follows:
Re protection of forests on east slopes of the Rocky mountains
Following the discussion with Premier Manning, yourself and your deputy minister, Mr. Harvie, in my office, I undertook to write you again on this subject. Evidently the provincial government would prefer to continue the administration of the area, but considers that because of the benefits which undoubtetdly accrue to Saskatchewan and Manitoba from the maintenance of adequate, forest cover on the east slopes the dominion should provide the funds for forest protection.
I endeavoured to set forth the difficulties of such a course from the dominion standpoint and repeated the offer which I made to you recently that I would recommend to the government taking over the administration of the east slopes of the Rockies, subject to the province retaining control of the under-rights.
As we were concluding our discussion the idea of constituting a commission or board representative of both dominion and provincial governments to manage the east slopes in the best interests of all concerned was suggested. Our view is that if the dominion is to put up all the money for the protection of these slopes then the dominion should have control of the area and be free to conduct the administration in such a manner as to ensure the results desired. My proposal meets the conditions on which your government was willing to transfer the lands in 1938 and I hope that you will not consider that I am unreasonable in urging settlement of the matter on this basis if I can secure the concurrence of our government and the approval of parliament.
The dominion now has the responsibility for the protection of the forests in the large park areas lying immediately to the west. It would seem reasonable to expect, therefore, that the two areas could be more efficiently and economically administered by one department rather than having two different administrations with the resulting duplication and overlapping of service. As I mentioned to you the dominion does not expect to make a profit on administering the forest resources. If the time should ever arrive when the amount received in revenues should exceed the dominion's total expenditures, then we would be willing to turn over the surplus to the province.
We did not discuss the length of time the area should be under special control. While I feel it should be for a long period of years, if it would be helpful to your government in reaching a decision. I would be prepared to recommend that at the end of twenty-five years the situation might be reviewed in the light of the circumstances then existing. That is, if an agreement were reached between the two governments along the lines of our proposal some years ago. it would not mean that the area for all time to come w'ould be removed permanently from provincial administration. I do feel, however. that any arrangement that is made should continue for at least twenty-five years in order to secure satisfactory and permanent results from the expenditures that will have to be made.
I shall be glad to hear farther from you on this subject at your early convenience.
66S
Water Conservation

Again on October 26, 1944, Mr. Crerar wrote Mr. Tanner as follows:
Following our conference last winter, I wrote you under date of the 11th December, 1943, respecting the possibility of entering into arrangements with your province for the better protection of the watershed forests of the east slopes of the Rocky mountains.
As you know, this is a matter of more than local importance, affecting as it does agricultural and power problems in the provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba, as well as of Alberta. In some quarters the view is held that the national interest demands the assumption of a measure of permanent responsibility by the dominion, and that this is a question that should be actively dealt with as an important element in the reconstruction planning. I should be very pleased indeed to have the present views of your government on the proposals I have placed before you.
In reply, this letter of December 20, 1944, was received from Mr. Tanner:
Dear Mr. Crerar:
Re: protection of forests on the east slope of the Rocky mountains
Following our discussion in Ottawa on the 6th instant. I agreed to write you setting out as clearly as possible what I thought our programme should be regarding the above question. In doing this I shall set it out under separate points:
1.	The department of lands and mines and the Alberta government recognize the need of assisting forest fire prevention on all forested areas in the province, built to the most modern and efficient standard.
2.	As the east slope lies within the province of Alberta no other province is so intimately involved with the regulatory functions of forests in respect to water conservation. The stability of irrigation farming, of the beet sugar and canning industry, and of ranching, as well as water supplies for rural and urban settlement, is founded upon the constancy of stream flow and water level, largely dependent upon the condition of the watershed forest. The future of the forest industries is also dependent upon the continuance of forest growth.
3.	Alberta does not favour divided jurisdiction in the handling of any of the natural resources. The province opposes the administration of any portion of her forest domain by a forest service conducting its operations from the federal seat of government. Any such form of control is in our view dilatory in method and not always efficient.
4.	While opposed to the transfer of any portion of Alberta's forest area to dominion management. we feel that inasmuch as such watersheds affect the welfare of important areas beyond the provincial boundaries, it is the dominion government's responsibility to assist financially in the protection and management of the east slope watersheds.
5.	Providing the dominion government is prepared to give this financial assistance, Alberta is willing to give full effect to a forest protection and forest management plan, which would be in the interests of all parts of the dominion affected. The province is prepared to engage

any technical experienced competent engineer which a comprehensive plan of protection and management might require.


James Horace King: Order. I am sorry to
interrupt the hon. gentleman, but he has
already spoken for forty minutes.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carry on.


James Allison Glen: Thank you. I continue with the letter:
6.	In order to satisfy the dominion government that any financial assistance given would be used on a programme of control and management which would be in the best interests of Alberta and the other provinces affected, we would favour the setting up of an advisory board on which the federal government would have a representative. This board would recommend a programme which might extend over a period of from five to twenty-five years, such programme to be approved by both governments, and a division of the costs agreed upon. The Alberta government Avon Id then accept full responsibility for putting into effect the programme as recommended by the advisory board, and approved by the dominion, with the understanding that each year as the work is done according to the programme the dominion government would pay its share of the costs as agreed upon.
7.	The viewpoint of the Alberta government is that the forest resources of the province call for a long-term policy assuring of full maintenance under all conditions, and in keeping with the best known engineering standards, and we are convinced that all advantages by any plan which may be proposed, can be secured by all administration being retained by the provincial government.
8.	We believe that as a result of such an elaborate programme greater revenue might be obtained from this area, and. therefore, during the term of this agreement the Alberta government would be prepared to make available to the dominion government its proportionate share of such increased revenue.
I shall appreciate hearing from you in the very near future as to how far you are prepared to go in a programme of this kind.
That is the situation as far as the east slope of the Rocky mountains is concerned. The province of Alberta desires, and has so indicated, to have complete control of the administration. It asks financial assistance from the dominion government, to be expended by the province and accounted for through the board. Nothing further was done at that time, but as far as the dominion is concerned we have now followed it up in the dominion government proposals to the dominion-provincial conference. On page 24, paragraph 4. under the heading, "Activities for which the dominion is fully responsible or is prepared to consider assuming full responsibility by suitable arrangements with the provincial governments wherever necessary," I find this:
4. Development and conservation of resources which are interprovincial in nature or have important interprovincial or regional effects:

Water Conservation
(i)	protection of regional watersheds; e.g., east slope of Rocky mountains;
(ii)	integrated development of interprovincial river valley systems;
(iii)	protection of migratory wild life;
(iv)	agriculture; e.g., control of plant diseases.
That is the position of the dominion government at the moment. The matter has been the subject of the correspondence which I have read. The provinces have decided to form their own advisory board, which is now functioning. The dominion has not been asked to become a member of that board. As far as the forested area on the east slope of the Rocky mountains is concerned the province takes the position that it will not yield its jurisdiction over that area; but in view of the fact that the conservation of the forests is of value to the provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba in connection with the conservation of water, the province feels that the dominion should share the financial burden. The dominion has gone further now and placed its proposals before the dominion-provincial conference. There it is stated that this will be the subject of arrangement and agreement with the provinces concerned. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that the dominion can do no more at this moment. They are fully seized with the utter desirability of some scheme being planned and carried into effect whereby the forests on the east slopes of the Rockies may be protected and water may be conserved to the advantage of Manitoba and Saskatchewan; and they are exercised that these things should be done at the earliest possible moment.
I am grateful to the hon. membej- for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) for having brought this matter before the house. I suggest that the substance of the motion he has moved has already been implemented, as far as the provinces are concerned, by the appointment of the advisory board. I suggest to him also that in the circumstances it would be presuming on the part of the dominion government to impose a body on each of the three provinces without even being asked or without their approval. In the meantime an offer has been made by the dominion, which will be considered at the conference which is to take place on April 25, when some definite plan must be entered into for the conservation of the water and the forests. I can assure the hon. member that when in his motion he speaks of "immediate consideration", these matters are being given daily consideration. Something will have to be done, because at the present time the situation is unsatisfactory from all points of view. At an early date a plan must be evolved under which the forests on the east slope of the Rockies will be protected and water will be conserved so that the other provinces may get the benefit. Therefore I suggest to the hon. member that, having given the house an opportunity to express its viewpoint with regard to irrigation and other matters which will have to be considered, he has done a very great service, but in the light of what I have said I suggest that the hon. gentleman should withdraw the motion.


Mr. E. G. McCULLOUGH (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, I did not intend to take part in this debate. I regret that I was unable to hear the whole speech of the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen), but I take it that he was speaking on technical grounds against the motion now before the house and suggesting some other plan by which these measures might be made effective. Since I represent a portion of Saskatchewan which is very mucfi interested in this irrigation project, I think I should have something to say
In the first place, I feel it is tremendc 'y important that at this time some respc ibility should be assumed by the fedei government in connection with a large-scak irrigation project such as that outlined by the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol). To-day, simply because of the failure of past governments to formulate plans and develop these irrigation projects, we are scraping our bins right at a time when the whole world is hungry, when we have millions of people starving. As I said last session, I am firmly of opinion that here in Canada we should establish the principle of the ever-normal granary. During the latter part of the war we were spending something like 8400,000,000 a fnonth for war purposes; and I submit that if we could do that for war, we can do it for peace. Some hon. members to my right have spoken in favour of this resolution. I do not know how they are going to bring it into harmony with large-scale production after we get back to peace-time economy. I can only say that this programme would be in complete conformity with the position taken by the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation; that is, planned production for use.
I should like to direct the attention of hon. members to the fact that this great Palliser triangle which is under consideration here in connection with irrigation is considered to be the bread-basket of Canada.


James Arthur Ross: If I may ask a question, what did my hon. friend mean by harmonizing our suggestions with large-scale production? I did not quite get that.
Water Conservation

Mr. MoCULLOUGH (Assiniboia): In the past when we have had plenty, when our granaries have been bursting with wheat when our corrals have been filled with live stock, under the private enterprise system we have always had depressed prices and poverty among our farm people. What we want is a planned economy under which we shall produce and still have fair prices for the farm people. We are concerned with all the peoples of the world, all the hungry throughout the world. As the leader of this group said last session, nations march when they are hungry. So that to-day, when we are trying to formulate plans respecting the united nations organization, it is our duty to produce as much as we can. The greatest natural hazard we have in connection with agricultural production is that of drought. In the southern part of the province from which I come I have seen conditions, for several years, under which our people, due to the vagaries of the economic system, prices going up and down, and because of drought conditions have been forced to go to other parts of the dominion or the province. Therefore I say this is a project which, for only technical reasons, should not be thrown back into the lap of the province, but should be accepted as a responsibility of the federal government.
The irrigation project would come down from Regina to Moose Jaw, and right down through Estevan, in my constituency. We already have a project under P.F.R.A. through which from Estevan to Dead lake we can irrigate around 3,000 acres of land. Then, from Estevan to the international boundary there is another 3,000 acres .which can be irrigated.
We are endeavouring to enter upon a scheme in that area whereby we can open that land for settlement by veterans, as a result of which they can go back to irrigated land and enjoy some stability in farming. Surely this is a worthwhile undertaking. Any larger scheme running down from the Saskatchewan river, through Moose Jaw and Regina, supplying those cities with water, and servicing a large acreage of land, would add tremendously to the security of those people.
A survey respecting industrial development within the province was made and handed to the present provincial government. In the survey it is stated that it was not feasible to enter into large-scale uses of chemurgy within the province, because so often in the history of the province we have had small crops. However, if we had a scheme such as this, under which in each year we could be assured of a 
certain crop, the project would be feasible. When one remembers that in 1937 and 1038 we had to go as far east as Quebec and as far west as British Columbia to get fodder, when we had to ship in seed qnd feed, and put our farming people in that section of the province under a debt-load for seed grain which was not settled until this year, one realizes the necessity for such a scheme. In those times the people suffered greatly. They had to sell their live stock, their foundation herds, and at ruinous prices.
I believe all hon. members ought to insist that this matter be put to a vote, and that the house go on record as being in favour of it. This would give a lead to the dominion-provincial conference, and the country would know where we stand.
Mr. J. II. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge): Mr. Speaker, I desire first to congratulate the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) upon placing the resolution on the order paper so that the house might discuss at length the whole question of irrigation. I believe, however, that as we face a vote it is necessary to be very careful to read the resolution, and to understand what it says. It calls for the setting up of a board, or for the passing of legislation under which the dominion government would set up a board. .
Practically all hon. members who have discussed the resolution have not discussed that problem at all. Rather they have addressed themselves to the question as to the advisability of establishing an irrigation scheme. I take it there is no hon. member in the house who has any objection whatsoever to the development of an irrigation scheme.
When the minister replied, in his usual analytical fashion he directed the attention of the house to the request contained in the resolution, namely that of setting up a board. He pointed out, further, that parliament has no authority to set up such a board. He was not discussing the question as to whether the government or he were in favour of developing an irrigation scheme. Neither was he opposed in any way to the general idea of protecting our forest areas on the eastern slopes of the Rocky mountains.
Consequently the minister is entirely in accord with the arguments which have been advanced by all hon. members who have discussed the resolution, all of which tended to establish the idea that we should develop an irrigation scheme throughout the three prairie provinces, and thereby protect the forests. I rather got the impression that the last speaker had not grasped the distinction between the two matters involved in the

Water Conservation
resolution. I would ask that we concentrate out attention again on the real meaning of the resolution.
I agree with the minister; I think his analysis of the situation is beyond reproach. He has brought us right up to the position we now occupy in Canada, and has shown exactly-


John Ritchie MacNicol: I am afraid the hon. member, like the minister, is wholly astray on the resolution. It asks for consideration, and the minister appears to be afraid of consideration. So does the hon. member. But I am going to see that there is a vote on it, anyway.


John Horne Blackmore: 
John Ritchie MacNicol: "Consideration".


Mr. COLD  WELL@: "Consideration" of the advisability.
Mr. BLACIvMORE: That is just a diplomatic way of saying the same thing.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Oh, no, it is not.


John Horne Blackmore: Let us read it. I hope we shall not go astray in this matter and become confused. It states:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should take into immediate consideration the advisability of introducing legislation during this session to set up a permanent interprovincial board or commission-


John Ritchie MacNicol: Is the hon. member
afraid of consideration of that?


John Horne Blackmore: I am not saying
whether I am afraid or not. I am just trying to get it clear, so that we shall all know what we are talking and voting about. And it continues:
-on which the three prairie provinces and the dominion would have equal representation under the chairmanship of a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada or some other qualified person, to conduct investigations and make studies of the most feasible and economic means for the conservation and utilization of the eastern watershed of the Rocky mountains, particularly the watershed of the Saskatchewan river.
I suggest once again, in all seriousness, and with all sincerity, to the hon. member for Davenport, that the whole gist of the resolution is that we should set up a committee, or commission. That is an altogether different matter from embarking upon an irrigation scheme or embarking upon a scheme for protecting our forest areas on the eastern slopes of the Rocky mountains. Let me repeat once more that practically every hon. member who
has discussed this resolution has approached it as though it meant the introduction of an irrigation scheme.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: Showed the need for a commission.


John Horne Blackmore: Showed the need for bringing in an irrigation scheme. There is no member of the C.C.F. or of any other party in this house who cares a button whether or not you have a commission so long as you get irrigation. It is irrigation you want, is it not? If you can get the forests protected you do not care by what technique it is accomplished, whether there is a commission or whether there is not, or whether the dominion has anything to do with it at all.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Which side are you on?


John Horne Blackmore: First I want to be sure just exactly what we are talking about. That must be known before anybody can tell what side he is on. As far as irrigation is concerned, I favour one hundred per cent the ideals of the hon. member for Davenport. Certainly there should be established throughout the three prairie provinces an elaborate and extensive irrigation system by which we could use all the water which falls on the eastern slopes of the Rocky mountains for the improvement of conditions in the three prairie provinces. I do not think there is an hon. member in this house who does not believe that. I certainly believe it.
Furthermore, I agree entirely with the approach of the hon. member for Davenport in the matter of protecting our Rocky mountain slopes. They have been neglected far too long. Not only must we protect the forests that are now there, we must embark upon an extensive programme of reforesting those slopes. I live right close to those slopes where I can see them every day when I am home. I have been in the mountains and I have seen how fires have devastated the forests. I know how serious the matter is, and no one in Canada is more enthusiastic than I about protecting the forests. But when it comes to voting that we must set up a commission to do this, that is an entirely different matter.
This resolution calls for the setting up of a commission. Let us see if we all agree on this matter. It calls for having the dominion government obtruding itself to a certain extent into affairs which particularly and specially belong to the provinces. I am not sure that any hon. member would vote for that principle. The minister was very wise in the stand he took on this matter. Surely, if the British North America Act has any meaning at all,
Water Conservation

the provinces must have control over their resources and their property and civil rights. It is proposed to have the dominion government take action which would in effect mean the abrogating of provincial rights to a certain extent.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Did the P.F.R.A. intrude itself?


James Arthur Ross: You do not want it to operate in Alberta?


John Horne Blackmore: I hope we shall not have a lot of foolishness going on. If the hon. member for Calgary West will make sure he [DOT]sees it squarely, there will be no difficulty. In connection with the P.F.R.A. I would call the attention of the hon. member to the fact that that is merely a scheme under which money is spent by the dominion government for the development of certain water facilities anywhere in the provinces. It has nothing to do with the taking away of any provincial jurisdiction over their waters or forests. This resolution proposes the setting up of a commission by this parliament-


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: What for?


John Horne Blackmore: The important language in it is that it proposes to set up a commission.


John Ritchie MacNicol: It only asks consideration.


John Horne Blackmore: To deal with a matter [DOT]which is of purely provincial concern.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: To conduct an investigation.


John Horne Blackmore: In my opinion the provinces have taken exactly the right stand. They have taken the initiative and have met together. They recognized that this is a matter of provincial concern; they met to *consider the problem and they have established their own board.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: Which will need funds from the dominion government.


John Horne Blackmore: That is right. I think the minister indicated clearly that the next .step would be that that provincial board would ask the dominion government to sit in.
I think I have made my position with respect to the resolution quite clear, and I shall turn now for a few minutes to discuss the aspects of the resolution which all hon. members up to the present time have been discussing, namely, the desirability of developing a great irrigation system and the desirability of protecting our forest areas at the head waters of our rivers.
It is well that the members of the house should know something of the [DOT] efforts that Alberta has put forth up to the present time in connection with the development of irrigation. There are one or two hon. members who have indicated that they are ready to accuse Alberta of not cooperating. I trust they will not get any such ideas as that in their minds because there is no more cooperative province in the dominion than Alberta. The Hon. T. A. Crerar rose in his place two or three times and testified to that effect even while these negotiations were going on. But the people in charge of Alberta have to be watching the interests of the people of Alberta for the next hundred years.
I am not sure that I understood exactly what the minister read and I know he will put me right if I have not interpreted it correctly. Was it not the proposal of the dominion at one time that the dominion would advance money to take care of the forests if the province of Alberta would give the dominion the under-rights. What did that mean? It meant, that the dominion was prepared to advance money to help protect the forests if the province of Alberta would permit the dominion to have control over the coal under the forests, over the iron under the forests and over the gold under the forests-over the under-rights. If that is not the meaning of under-rights, then what is it?


James Allison Glen: The province is to get the
under-rights.


John Horne Blackmore: Was that involved?


James Allison Glen: That was the suggestion which was made, that the province would get the under-rights.


John Horne Blackmore: That would not be so objectionable. I do not wish to cause any unhappiness at all, but one of the difficulties the provinces have faced, and especially Alberta, is a tendency on the part of certain dominion officials to try to get more control over provincial affairs than they ought to have under the British North America Act. The province is prepared to recognize the dominion in its field and has always been so prepared, but it is also prepared to protect the people of Alberta in their field.
May I turn from that aspect of the question because I do not wish to spend time on it. I should like to point out just what Alberta has done already with respect to irrigation. There are four major projects which have been built with provincial guarantees. These projects are the Lethbridge Northern irrigation district, undertaken in 1019, with a total irrigable acreage of 93,000 acies; the United Irrigation

Water Conservation
district, undertaken in 1919, with a total irrigable acreage of 34,166 acres'; the New West irrigation district, undertaken in July, 1922, with an irrigable acreage of 4,563 acres; the Little Bow irrigation district, undertaken in March, 1922, with a total irrigable acreage of 3,093 acres. These projects are of considerable size, particularly the Lethbridge Northern and the United irrigation districts, and the amount of money involved is large. This indicates quite clearly that the province of Alberta has been prepared to do its share in connection with the development of this great irrigation scheme and has been so for a great many years.
The province of Alberta has eight other irrigation projects, some of them of considerable size. These were all undertaken' by private enterprise. They are the Canadian Pacific railway western section, undertaken in 1903, with 218,980 acres; the Canadian Pacific railway eastern section undertaken in 1903, with 250,000 acres; the Canada Land and Irrigation company, undertaken in 1908, with
130.000	acres; the A. R. and I. company, undertaken in 1899, with 100,000 acres; the Raymond irrigation district, undertaken -1925. with 15,130 acres; the Magrath i'~' ,aon
. o acres;
the Mountain View irrigation district undertaken in 1923, with 3,500; the Taber irrigation district, undertaken in 1917, with 21,499 acres. All together these irrigation districts .total 880,906 acres. These are projects which have been established in Alberta and most of which are 1 in operation right now.
There are in Alberta approximately 2,300000 acres that could yet be brought under irrigation. They could be brought under irrigation in two ways, first of all by possible extensions where ditches have been built but have not been operated. We have two projects of that sort, the Eastern irrigation district, with 100,000 acres, and the Canada Land and Irrigation company, with 150,000 acres, or a total of 250.000 acres. What I am referring to now are extensions of schemes that are now in operation.
We have, in addition, projects which have been surveyed but which have not been constructed. One is the Lethbridge Southeastern, with 415,000 acres; the South Macleod, with
50.000	acres; Champion, with 50,000 acres; Retlaw-Lomond, with 115,000 acres; small projects, 25,000 acres; North Saskatchewan (William Pearce) project, 1,400,000 acres, or a total of 2,055,000 acres.
I think all members will realize, therefore, that Alberta is in irrigation right up to the 63260-43
ears. So that we must be deeply interested in this matter. We know what irrigation projects cost and we know their value.
There is another aspect of this question which I think is of interest to the house. From page 64 of "The case for Alberta", I quote:
The total amount which the province has expended upon these projects and for which it remains liable under its guarantees, including future interest, is $16,921,728.39, made up as follows: total net outlay Lethbridge Northern, $6,416,821.98; total outlay other three districts, $473,259.34: remaining liability under guarantee, $4,911,772.07; future interest, $5,125,875.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: On a .point of order, Mr. Speaker, I submit that the hon. member is not speaking to the resolution, which calls for:
. . . a permanent interprovincial board or commission ... to conduct investigations and make studies of the most feasible and economic means for the conservation and utilization of the eastern watershed of the Rocky mountains.
It does not say anything about Alberta irrigation.


John Horne Blackmore: I grant that the hon. member's point is well taken, but I would point out to him that, under his argument, every speech which has been delivered here this afternoon except the speech of the minister has been out of order.


James Horace King: If some other members who have taken part in this discussion were out of order, that is no reason for the hon. member himself being out of order. I would ask him to speak on the motion.


John Horne Blackmore: Mr. Speaker. I would just like to ask for your ruling on this point. I am quite prepared to abide by your ruling, but in this discussion a very wide latitude has been allowed, which in my judgment was the right thing to do. The hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Quelch) spent the whole of his time in discussing the William Pearce project.


James Horace King: Order. I would ask the hon. member not to discuss the Speaker's ruling.


John Horne Blackmore: All I am asking, Mr. Speaker, is for your ruling on the point I raised.


James Horace King: I would ask the hon. member to speak on the motion which is before the house.


John Horne Blackmore: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will proceed with what I was going to say.
I should like to outline the general situation with respect to my own constituency

Water Conservation

as it bears on the subject-matter of this resolution as it was interpreted by the hon. member for Davenport. There are in southern Alberta wide areas of land which are rich and easy to work, and relatively near to railways and schools. This land .has nearly all been settled and brought under cultivation. The rainfall in this area is usually too scanty, and crop failures are therefore common. The climate is well adapted to growing sugar beets, canning crops, peas, beans, corn, tomatoes and all kinds of vegetables. It is also well adapted to the production of alfalfa and other hay crops and all kinds of grain. It is one of the greatest potential food-producing areas in this dominion. All that it requires is more water.
There are in my constituency four major irrigation projects. They are the Lethbridge-Colddale district, the Raymond irrigation district, the Magrath irrigation district and -the Taber irrigation district, comprising altogether 120,000 acres. These projects $re irrigated from the St. Mary's river through a canal built early in the century, from 1899 to 1901. Most years there is too little water in the canals of these four projects. The result is that in July, August and September, just when the water is most needed, there is a falling off and frequently there is an acute shortage of water, especially if the snowfall in the mountains has not been adequate during the previous winter, or if there has been hot weather melting the snow' rapidly in the early weeks of the year. We have known at least forty per cent too little water in the ditches right at a time when growing was most important.
In the St. Mary's river there is at the present time not a reservoir in which water can be stored and from which the water in the ditches can be supplemented. There is considerable water in Alberta if only we could store it and have it available. There is enough water in four rivers in my constituency to supply all the area in that constituency and some of the area in other constituencies, particularly Medicine Hat. There are four rivers, namely, Waterton, Belly, St. Mary's and Milk, all in southwestern Alberta. From these rivers there is available for use in irrigation 795,700 acre feet of water. This quantity, allowing for losses from evaporation and seepage, would supply the needs of 465,000 acres of land. There is a particular matter of urgency in connection with' this area. The St. Mary's and Milk rivers are both so nearly international streams that the United States has a claim to a share of the water. Back in 1901 the Alberta Railway and Irrigation Company began to build a canal from which the 
Magrath, Raymond and Lethbridge areas are now watered. Then a reclamation act was passed by the congress of the United States in 1902. The St. Mary's and Milk rivers project in Montana was authorized in 1903, and there were protests from citizens on both sides of the line, those on one side fearing that the people on the other side would. get more than their share.
In consequence, a boundary waters treaty was made on January 11, 1909, in which, under article. VI, there was set up an international joint commission to deal with the boundary waters. This provided for an apportionment of waters between the two countries under the direction of the commission. In the final act of the international joint commission on October 4, 1921, definite rules were laid down for dividing the water between Canada and the United States. In accordance with the final act, Canada, between 1922 and 1940, would receive annually from the St. Mary's and Milk rivers 403,200 acre-feet of water, and the United States, 324,100 acre-feet.
During' the years from 1922 to 1940 and since, Canada has wasted and is now wasting 55 per cent, of her share of the St. Mary's and 95 per cent of her share of the Milk river. This is extremely serious for two reasons. First, there is loss of production and of human values, and, second, there is danger of our losing our right to this water. It is recognized that a country must make beneficial use of water if it is to retain its right thereto. Canada for twenty-five years has neglected to make such beneficial use of her share of this water.
Realization of this fact will make it clear to hon. members why the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) is very wisely planning to begin active work on the construction of the St. Mary's river project this year. It is in order to protect our right to the water, and I wish to commend him very highly and to express to him once more the gratitude of my constituents for his promptness in going forward with this work immediately upon the cessation of the war.
Meanwhile, what has the United States been doing with her share? The United States authorized her St. Mary's and Milk river project in 1903 and began work in 1906, completing it in 1920. She has built the Sherbourne reservoir, capable of storing 66,000 acre-feet near the head1 of the St. Mary's, and a diversion canal from the St. Mary's to the Milk river to carry into the Milk the United1 States share of the St. Mary's. Then, near the Milk river she has constructed the Fresno reservoir,

Water Conservation
capable of storing 126,000 acre-feet and the Nelson river reservoir, capable of storing 66,800 acre-feet.
It is estimated that the United States is now equipped! to handle h$r share and ours as well, and all her share of the water is being beneficially used*. She has great need for much more than she has available, and she is finding irrigation profitable, as has been pointed out several times in the debate to-day. Thus again hon. members can see why the Minister of Agriculture has taken particular care to go ' forward with the construction of this project as expeditiously as possible.
The dam which we need to construct in Canada in order to show our good faith is what is known as the St. Mary's river dam. This dam is situated at Spring Coulee in my constituency. Its capacity will be 270,000 acre-feet. Into it can be diverted water from the Waterton river and the Belly river. Once this dam is constructed, once this reservoir is being used, there will be no occasion for anyone from the United States to establish the idea that Canada is not making beneficial use of her water. Thus the minister is proceeding with construction of the St. Mary's river dam. From the St. Mary's river dam, water can be carried to supply all the present projects to which I have referred' and to the seven other reservoirs in the district, and all these together will store enough water to supply the needs of all the present irrigation projects, and
345,000	acres of land which have not yet been brought under water.
Consequently this dam is of extremely great importance. The minister has told us to-day that $750,000 is to be spent on this dam this year. The total cost of the dam will be in the neighbourhood of $4,000,000. The reason why $750,000 is to be spent this year rather than the whole amount is that the dam cannot be built any faster. That is indicated by the apportionment of that sum of $750,000, which is about all that can be spent this year. In the second year the reservoir and outlet canals can be built at a cost of $2,250,000. Hon. members might therefore expect next year that the amount of money which will be set aside for the construction of the St. Mary's river dam will be $2,250,000. In the third year the reservoir, canal enlargement and distribution system would be built according to plan. This cost will be something over $2,250,000, estimated at pre-war prices.
There are four reasons, then, why we should go forward with this particular project as rapidly as we possibly can. The first one is the food situation; the second one is the possible war needs, for apparently we are not yet through with wars; the third one is the 63260-43J
rehabilitation of our boys, and finally, once more, the protection of our share of the water from the St Mary's and Milk rivers.
May I refer for just a moment to the general resolution? At the outset of my remarks I pointed out that the resolution does not really call .for the construction of the great irrigation system, although unquestionably it is the construction of the great irrigation system which is near to the heart of the hon. member for Davenport. I honour him greatly because of his deep interest and activity with respect to the popularization of the idea of constructing this great irrigation scheme. Since he spoke this afternoon, there has come into my hands the map of the whole area to which he referred. ' I wish to congratulate him again on that map. Many things are shown in detail. To my mind it is a splendid conception. I heartily support the idea. As a resident of Alberta, as a member for Alberta, let me say to the house that we in Alberta have no desire to have more of the water than is our share. We desire to see the other provinces have the advantage of water. We believe there is pleny of water in these rivers flowing down from the eastern slopes of the Rocky mountains to supply the needs of all three provinces. The hon. member for Davenport expressed that idea this afternoon. From what studies I have been able to make I feel that I am justified in agreeing with him that there is plenty of water.
The next idea that was near to his heart,, and which he made quite clear to the house, was that of protecting the forests on the-slopes of the mountains. This must be done.. Once more I am heartily in accord with that idea. I believe, of course, that dominion money must go into the protection of those-forests, for the simple reason that one province simply cannot take care of the great problem which is involved in looking after those areas. All anyone needs to do is to look 'at a map, look at the Rocky mountains as they skirt the western boundary of Alberta, estimate the tremendous length of those mountains, estimate the amount of money which would have to be spent in order to have suitable precautions made ready to act in emergencies, such as fire hazards. Anyone can recognize that no one province in this dominion would be in a position to discharge the financial responsibilities involved. There simply must be assistance from the dominion government. This does not mean that Alberta should surrender any of her rights under the British North America Act, any of her resources or any of her property and civil rights. It does mean that assistance must
Water Conservation

come from the other provinces to protect the resource which is of vital interest to all the people of Canada.
I now find myself in a difficult position. I have to repeat once more that I favour com' pletely the establishment of an elaborate, far-reaching thorough-going irrigation system throughout the three prairie provinces, and I favour the protection of the forests on the eastern slopes of the Rocky mountains. But I cannot say that I favour the idea of the dominion government passing a law to set up a commission to do what this resolution calls for. There is no objection to having a committee study the situation. I think there is no danger in the wording. In that respect may I read it again. This commission is to be set up to conduct investigations and make studies of the most feasible and economic means for the conservation and utilization of the eastern watershed of the Rocky mountains, particularly the watershed of the Saskatchewan river. So far as I can see, there can be no objection to that if this committee has no power or authority to rule with respect to the use of the water. However, I believe the minister's point was well taken when he indicated quite clearly that it is not the proper function of the dominion government to take the initiative in this matter, especially since the provinces themselves, through their representatives, have met and proceeded to do the work which is envisaged by this resolution.
THOMAS REID (New Westminster): I ur^^lre to say a few words on this resolution. First of all, may I commend the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNieol) for bringing the resolution before the house. He is one of those members who have, in the words of the man on the street, what is called a roving commission. He has taken it upon himself to interest himself in parts of Canada other than his own particular riding. Perhaps he may have a little more time and may be a little better fixed financially than many other hon. members to do this, and then he is not easily intimidated with respect to going into other members' ridings and investigating what is going on there.
On various occasions the hon. member has introduced most commendable resolutions. In commending him to-night I wish at the same time to say something on the principle of the resolution. It may seem strange that one from British Columbia should rise at this late stage of the debate and deal with a resolution which refers particularly to the watershed of the Saskatchewan river. It is no more strange than the hon. member for Davenport introducing it.

As I say, I intend to deal with the resolution itself. In that regard I am inclined to agree with the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore), who in his opening remarks drew the attention of the house to the fact that this resolution might infringe upon provincial rights.	[DOT]
I know there are many members in the house who do not view the infringement of provincial rights by the dominion as seriously as I do. Ever since 1939 when the dominion took over all tjoe powers of the country many municipal and provincial governments have been set aside. As a matter of fact, in many instances provincial governments have been nothing more than glorified municipal councils, at least for the past six years. People have become so accustomed to the dominion government handling their affairs that their eyes turn to Ottawa. If their chickens do not lay, it must be the fault of the dominion government. If there is trouble at home, it must be the fault of the dominion government. On every occasion the provincial governments will be found looking to Ottawa for assistance and help. I view that tendency with alarm. I view as one who lives some three thousand miles from Ottawa viewing with alarm the centralization of power in Ottawa. I would advise members of parliament to give a little more thought to asking the dominion government to do everything within their province or within their municipality. Bit by bit power is being concentrated in the city of Ottawa, and I say the time is not yet ripe, in the interests of the welfare of the people, that all power should be centralized here.
I listened with a great deal of attention while the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) read the voluminous correspondence which has passed between the dominion government and certain provincial premiers, in which the discussion centred around the eastern watershed and the taking off. of trees from the mountain-tops. The removal of the trees from both heights of land and from the mountains as well has done irreparable damage to farm land not only close to the Rocky mountains but in the other western provinces as well. In the province from which I come there was a time when the forests in the Fraser valley held the water right through the growing season. In those years the farmers had not the difficulties they have experienced since. The rain that fell in the winter and spring was held in the soil for months, generally speaking, and percolated very slowly to the creeks and rivers. Once the timber was cut off, however, the rain which fell in the winter and spring ran right off, of course

Water Conservation
causing floods during the spring season. Something else was caused in the summer time, however; a dryness resulted which has affected the growing of crops for many long years.
I remember an incident which occurred in 1932 or 1933, when under the administration of that day men were put to work cutting trees off the mountains in a district called Lillooet. The only purpose in having those men cut the trees from the mountain-tops and mountain-side was to keep the snow from hanging, although those men might have been given other and more useful work, because Lillooet is a gold centre and men were and still are making anywhere from $2 to $16 a day panning gold. But taking off that timber did irreparable damage to the district of Lillooet, and the same thing occurred in the Fraser district.
I should like to have seen a resolution of this kind broadened, not to ask the dominion government to take over irrigation projects but merely to ask it to make a survey and advise the provinces as to what should be done in regard to irrigation. Something has been said about planned economy; I believe I heard one speaker mention that this evening. From my knowledge of the prairies I believe I am correct in saying that, at the most, irrigation would affect but a fraction of the prairie land. Out of some sixty or sixty-five million acres of land, of which some twenty or thirty millions are in the prairie belt, I doubt if more than two or three million acres at the most could be brought under irrigation. It is all very well to talk about producing more food, about planned economy, and so on, and to place before the people a picture in which the whole prairie district will be helped out by some great water scheme. But for the benefit of the farmers on the prairies and some hon. members who advocate this scheme, after some practical experience I am going to predict that when that type of farming comes to the prairies many who are looking forward to it may not care to farm under it.
With irrigation you have to farm with a shovel. The irrigation ditches are all put down; but once you start irrigation you cannot just sit on your fanny and pray that the Lord will bring some rain, or send for a Hatfield to bring rain. You cannot do that any more. Once you get into irrigation you have really to work; and after a man has sat on his fanny for ten or fifteen years on the prairies, once he has to get hold of a shovel and work all day going out through the rows of trees or out among his crops he may not like it. Yet if he does not do that the water system will not be worth anything at all;
I do not think any hon. member will dispute-that. I know a district in the middle of British Columbia where a certain type of farmer has taken up the growing of apples and other crops under irrigation. Those farmers have gone into that district because they are not afraid of work, and because they know what they have to put up with. But I am thinking of those who have long sat looking to the clouds or to the dominion government or to a Hatfield to bring them what they need, and I am just wondering how they will like it after these irrigation schemes are put into effect. I am not too sure that they will take kindly to it. I know that many who come from the prairies to British Columbia find farming there just a little tougher than they found it in Saskatchewan, Alberta or Manitoba, although perhaps when we get into the new era that may be changed.
My main purpose in rising, Mr. Speaker, was to draw the attention of hon. members to the principles at stake in this proposal, and to advise hon. members to view with care putting into the hands of the dominion government powers which properly should belong to the provincial governments.


Mr. GEORGE BLACK (Yukon):: Mr. Speaker, with all respect to the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) I should like to call your attention and that of the house to the fact that this resolution indicates no feasible conclusion. It suggests that a board or commission should be appointed to investigate and make studies, but then it does not provide what shall be done with the information they get. Are they to carry out that investigation and make those studies just for their own amusement or their own information? It does not provide that they shall report to the government or any department of the government. Why should this house want to create an institution like that, to do nothing that will be in the public interest? As far as the resolution goes, if they get any information they may keep it to themselves. I should think the hon. gentleman and other hon. members would agree that the Department of Mines and Resources has on its staff enough engineers and experts to make such an examination and report to that department. Then, if the minister chose he could report to the house and action could be taken. As I say, however, with all respect to the hon. member for Davenport I cannot see any advantage in putting through a resolution like this.


Mr. J. M. DECHENE (Athabaska):: As I rose, Mr. Speaker, I was advised not to speak too long. I shall govern myself according to
Water Conservation

which is variously estimated at 100, 200, 300 and even $400 million, that this house is perfectly entitled to discuss such an important question for at least a whole day.
I am not one of those who waste their time in discussions on what the east could do for the west and vice versa. I know too well the good understanding that exists among our people to waste time in such idle talk. A lot is said that is jocularly but I know that in Montreal, Toronto and even in the maritime provinces, our conditions are perfectly well known. I realize the vast sums of money that were expended to open the western prairies, where I live, but I also know that they have created considerable wealth in return, to an amount which certainly balances the expenditures involved.
I well remember, Mr. Speaker, that in normal times-and I hope they will return-I well remember that the topic of the day in the month of August boiled down, for western farmers as well as for the rest of the country, to wondering about the crop out west. Would the prairie provinces have a bumper crop? The Montreal, Toronto and Winnipeg newspapers and those of other cities as well sent reporters and experts to gauge the crop prospects out west. Factories in our industrial centres anxiously awaited reports on the wheat crop of western farmers. Would we reap one hundred, two hundred or three hundred million bushels of wheat? That was the topic of the day, Mr. Speaker, because western farmers, who operate on a large scale, supply with funds the factories v as well as wholesale and retail dealers of the central and eastern provinces.
Sometimes I incline to think that the western farmer is to a certain extent a spendthrift. Then, let us stop discussing projects as extensive as the one which has been proposed by the hon. member for Davenport, who considers it rather as from a local issue, while I view it as having a national character. I was saying, in the course of the remarks I made in English, that about fifty-four years ago this month. I was travelling with my father and a neighbour who were chatting on the train that was moving slowly across the great western plains. Those plains looked extensive to us, outsiders, who were from the Lake St. John district, where, as you all know, the plains do not cover very great stretches- when I was a boy, I remember that our small pasture seemed very near the house. Needless to say how astonished I was when I saw those great plains which seemed to extend so far in the distance, that we could not think we would ever reach the end: It was then
[Mr. Dechene.1
that I asked my companion: "How is it that these lands are not afl under cultivation?" Why are those plains not already peopled all over? Why do the wheat fields not stretch as far as the eye can reach? That is what happens to-day in the irrigated areas or where the rainfall is plentiful. And my old companion answered right back: "Well, my friend, do you see any trees in these plains?" "As a matter of fact, I do not". "Well, that is because we have no rain. The soil is so fertile that if the Good Lord watered it occasionally with a bit of His beneficial rain, these plains would be covered with forests. The lack of timber in these vast areas is due to the lack of rain."


George Hugh Castleden: Talk it out.
(Text):


Joseph Miville Dechene: I heard the hon. member, and with the permission of the house I shall revert to the other language, of which I happen to know a little, in order to answer his remark. He does not seem to understand the rule. Surely the hon. member knows that the rule which provides that private members' motions shall be discussed only on certain days was not put there just for fun. He knows it was placed there because of a need. He knows that in this parliament and in the legislatures of Canada the government is the body which governs. That rule was placed there so that the private members of this house, as in any other legislature in a British parliament, may bring before parliament the question that he wishes to bring to the attention of the people. A member from British Columbia, for instance, may bring before the house a matter in which he is interested, but a member from Nova Scotia who is not conversant with the matter requires time to study it. It takes time for public opinion to be seized of the matter and for the press to discuss it. We can conceive of a member of a certain group arriving at a certain conclusion before the matter comes before parliament but-


An hon. MEMBER:: Why not let the house settle it?


Joseph Miville Dechene: I was replying to the question that had been asked by my hon. friend over there, a question that could have been asked only by a man who does not understand the rules. To say, "talk it out," shows an ignorance of the rules that one would not expect of a member who has been in the house all the years he has been here. (Translation):
Now, Mr. Speaker, I shall proceed in the language I was using when my hon. friend interrupted me.
I wish to insist anew on the deforestation of the eastern slopes of the Rocky mountains. To my mind, this is the most important part

Water Conservation
of the resolution now before the house. Indeed, as the eastern slope of the Rockies is stripped of its vegetation, and as the snow-fields, which were so beneficial to us in past years, recede, water gets scarcer in the western prairies, the velocity of our rivers decreases, humidity gradually disappears everywhere. As a result, the dry regions of the western provinces increase in area, except, possibly, in ' Manitoba. This is a vital problem which will command our serious attention at some future time, but, of course, it cannot be considered with a province that will not cooperate. In my opinion, the hon. member for Davenport should have sought first of all, with his customary courtesy, an interview with the leaders of the Alberta government in order to ascertain whether the latter were prepared to cooperate with the dominion government in carrying out such a measure. But as the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) has shown by means of the correspondence exchange with the leaders of that province, they are not prepared to cooperate in carrying out the work essential to the project which was so ably introduced by the hon. member for Davenport.
As I stated a moment ago, rainfall is getting more and more scanty from year to year in the northern section of Alberta, of Saskatchewan right up to my own district in the vicinity of Cold lake. There lies the vital problem which prompts me to join with the hon. members who have spoken on this matter * in asking the whole house to consider very seriously this matter of irrigation in that part of the western provinces. We must act now, but not in the manner suggested in the resolution. In fact, I do not think it wise to insist on such a vote being taken, when the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore), who represents his party in the house to-night, is apparently unable to make up his mind. This matter should be submitted in such a way that the house could unanimously support a resolution which should be endorsed by hon. members in every section of the house.
As I said a moment ago in English, the province of Alberta is carrying on a rather costly experiment in the way of irrigation-[DOT]


James Horace King: Order. I wonder if the hon. member is complyifig with the rules and if he really speaks to the question before the house.


Joseph Miville Dechene: Mr. Speaker, I thought I was discussing the two points mentioned in the resolution submitted by my hon. friend.
I shall give the French version of it, if I may be permitted to do so, because the translation we have does not convey exactly
the same meaning as the original. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for having called my attention to the rules of the house. If I broke those rules, I beg your forgiveness. The resolution is worded as follows:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should take into immediate consideration the advisability of introducing legislation during this session to set up a permanent interprovincial board or commission . . .
The province of Alberta is therefore included.
... on which the three prairie provinces and the dominion . . .
Again the province of Alberta is included.
. . . would have equal representation under the chairmanship of a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada or some other qualified person, to conduct investigations and make studies of the most feasible and economic means for the conservation and utilization of the eastern watershed of the Rocky mountains, particularly the watershed of the Saskatchewan river.
Mr. Speaker, I was just discussing that point. I was saying that some of this water flows in the plain, gradually reaches to the northlands and even further. This water, however, does not flow with the same abundance as in the southern areas of the prairies, but , . .
(Text):


Mr. McCUAIG:: If I may ask the hon. member a question, why will he not let the people's representatives vote on this question?


Joseph Miville Dechene: I have no idea whatsoever how the people that I am supposed to live with would vote on this question. I am speaking as J. M. Dechene, M.P. for Atha-baska. I have been in this house for some years, and my hon. friend, when he has been here longer, will know that I speak my own views in my own language in my own way and that I am not governed by anybody else.
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, I regret very much having been unable to complete my last sentence as it was the most important point to which I wished to refer to-night. However, it is eleven o'clock and as I do not wish to. break the rules of the house, move the adjournment of the debate.


James Horace King: The hon. member moves the adjournment of the debate?


Joseph Miville Dechene: Yes, Mr. Speaker, as it is eleven o'clock, I move the adjournment of the debate.
On motion of Mr. Dechene the debate was adjourned.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
International Agreements
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, April 9, 1946.