1954-05-06

[Stage Direction]
First report of the joint committee of both houses on the library of parliament.-Mr. Speaker.


Mr. McGregor:: 1.	During the fiscal year 1952-53, how many personnel in the (a) army; (b) navy; (c) air force, were used mainly in recruiting?
2.	In each case, what were their ranks?


Mr. Blanchette:: 1.	The following service personnel in the field who were engaged mainly in recruiting in 1952-53; Navy, 38; Army, 91; Air force, 196.
Note: Army and R.C.A.F. recruit only for the active force; navy recruits for both active and reserve.
2.	(a) Navy: Lieutenant commanders, 6; Lieutenants, 6; Chief petty officers, 1st class, 10; Chief petty officers, 2nd class, 6; Petty officers, 1st class, 5; Petty officers, 2nd class, 3; Leading seamen, 2.
(b)	Army: Lieutenants, 25; Sergeants, 39; Corporals, 5; Privates, 22.
(c)	Air Force: Squadron leaders, 5; Flight lieutenants, 23; Flying officers, 59; Sergeants, 31; Corporals, 4; Airmen, 53; Airwomen, 21.


TUNNEY'S PASTURE, OTTAWA
Mr. Hodgson:: 1.	How much of the property known as Tunney's pasture was purchased by the government?
2.	From whom was the purchase made?
3.	What was the purchase price?
4.	What buildings are the government constructing there?
5.	How much is the estimated cost of construction, etc.?


Mr. Bourgei:: 1.	Approximately 113.5 acres.
2.	W. L. Ballentine, J. Beaudin, Laurier Bellefeuille, Donat Bray, Burgess Tool Company, Charles Burnside, Leonard Copeland, Rodrique Dagenais, William Doe, Rodolphe Dumouchel, Margaret Ericksen, William H. Fader, Lewis R. Ferrier, Alex. Fleck Limited,
J. A. Lalonde, Edouard Lavigne, Harvey Leduc, Henri Leduc, Napoleon Martineau, Rupert S. McClelland, John M. McGuire, Mrs. Anne B. McManus, Mrs. Grace Olivier, Mrs. Sarah E. Poll, Edmond Quesnel, Albert Quesnel, Ernest St. Germaine, Tessier and Schryer, Victor J. Thom, township of Nepean, Gordon C. Webster, Robert S. Wright.
3.	The site was expropriated under date of July 28, 1947. Settlements have been made in the amount of $670,125.
4.	The following buildings are under contract: (a) Food and drug laboratory for the Department of National Health and Welfare; (b) Virus laboratory for the Department of National Health and Welfare; (c) Archives storage building; (d) Testing laboratory for the Department of Public Works.
5.	(a) $2,566,450; (b) $943,243; (c) $1,180,956; (d) $681,235.


FRENCH EDITION &quot;CANADA 1953&quot;
Mr. Girard:: 1.	Has the distribution of the French edition of "Canada 1953" been prohibited in France by the ministry of commerce?
2.	If so, has the Canadian government made representations to France, protesting against the restricting of distribution of French publications printed in Canada?
3.	Is there a cultural agreement whereby French publications from Canada may enjoy the same freedom of distribution as is granted by Canada to the publications coming from France?


Mr. Pinard:: 1.	To the best of our knowledge and as far as we can learn from inquiries in Ottawa, there has been no difficulty concerning the distribution of the French edition of "Canada 1953" in France. Further inquiries are being made through the Canadian embassy in Paris.
2.	See answer to No. 1 above.
3.	No. The movement of books and other literature is, as with other countries, handled commercially and customs, exchange control and other regulations are applicable to it where they exist. I understand that exchanges of books have in the past been subject to private agreements between publishers in Canada and France and that it is hoped that such agreements can be revived.

Inquiries of the Ministry EXTERNAL AFFAIRS



SECURITY ARRANGEMENT FOR SOUTHEAST ASIA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Howard C. Green (Vancouver-Quadra):: Will the Prime Minister give the house information concerning a security arrangement for southeast Asia which was announced by President Eisenhower yesterday as being in the process of formation? And is the Canadian government participating or willing to participate?


Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I understand the hon. gentleman telephoned my office as to the terms of this question shortly after one o'clock today. I saw it just a few moments ago. It is rather vague. "Is the Canadian government participating or willing to participate?" I do not know whether that refers to the discussions that are taking place, or if it seeks to get a declaration as to whether the Canadian government is willing to participate in a security arrangement for southeast Asia.


Howard Charles Green: That is what I had in mind.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: That matter has not come up for consideration by the Canadian government. As I understand the hon. gentleman's question there is very little information I can give him about it; it is based on the statement made yesterday by President Eisenhower in which he referred to the suggestion made by Secretary Dulles in his address of March 29. The President goes on to say:
Obviously, it was never expected that this collective security arrangement would spring into existence overnight. There are too many important problems to be resolved. But there is a general sense of urgency. The fact that such an organization is in process of formation could have an important bearing upon what happens at Geneva during the Indo-China phase of the conference.
The countries of the area are now thinking in constructive terms, which include the indispensable concept of collective security. Progress in this matter has been considerable and I am convinced that further process-
It must be "further progress".
-will continue to be made.
As I said in the house the other day, if and when the question as to whether Canada should make further commitments arises for decision it will be given very careful consideration, and our conclusions, if they are that we recommend further commitments, will be brought to the house and the reasons for these conclusions explained before we take the responsibility of making commitments for the Canadian nation.
I cannot add anything to that. We are, of course, very much concerned with what is
IMr. Pinard.l
going on at Geneva and elsewhere. In connection with that I might perhaps take advantage of this occasion to clarify the answer I gave to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) a week ago. My attention has been called to the fact that the hon. gentleman's question and my unqualified answer might have given the impression that we were taking no part whatsoever in discussions affecting the position in Indo-China. Well, that would be quite contrary to the statements which have previously been made in the house, and quite contrary to the facts.
The situation with respect to Indo-China is that so far as the formal phase of the Geneva conference is concerned the sole responsibility for deciding its membership rested with the inviting powers under the decision taken by the foreign minister of France, the Soviet union, the United Kingdom and the United States at their conference of last January in Berlin.
That information has already been given to the house and the fact is that these powers have now decided in Geneva that membership will be restricted to themselves and communist China, the three associated states of Indo-China, and representatives of the Viet Minh. Canada has not been invited to participate in the formal discussions which are about to take place in Geneva.
The problem of Indo-China is a most complex and difficult one. There is much to be said in favour of the inviting powers' decision to keep the formal discussions on Indo-China to those parties principally and immediately concerned. In the interest of the solution we had no grounds to complain of not being included. Such neighbouring countries as Thailand, the Philippines and Australia, which are more closely concerned with developments in Indo-China than are we, are not being brought into the formal discussions. On the other hand, informal discussions on Indo-China have been and are taking place all the time at Geneva because it is a matter of such vital interest to world peace.
The report we receive from the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson) is that he and members of the Canadian delegation are participating in those informal discussions about all those matters as actively as is any other delegation outside of the countries immediately concerned with the problems of Indo-China. As was stated in the house, we were invited to the conference that would take place on the Korean problem but we were not invited-and others that are more directly concerned than we are were

not invited-to participate in the formal discussions in respect of the Indo-Chinese situation.
I am sure that all those who are really interested in peace are much concerned about what can be done and about security pacts that could be useful anywhere. But as to whether or not Canada should be a participant in other security pacts than the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is Something which we have not yet had to consider and about which we have not yet had to come to any conclusion. The statement I made in the house stands. If we come to the conclusion that it would be helpful for world peace-and that would mean that it would be helpful to and in the interests of Canada-and decide to make recommendations, we would bring those recommendations to the house and have them discussed here. In the meantime there is nothing I can usefully say following this declaration of yesterday by the President of the United States. The matter is certainly being investigated. Exploratory talks are taking place but they have not yet come to the point where it would be required of us to say whether and under what conditions we might feel it was in Canada's interests to be a participant.


Howard Charles Green: May I ask a supplementary question? Can the Prime Minister explain how the statement that the Secretary of State for External Affairs is reported to have made in Geneva fits into the picture? From a press report which appeared yesterday purporting to quote the Secretary of State for External Affairs, I quote as follows:
"Failure here"-
That is at Geneva.
"-may well necessitate further collective consideration by those who, as a result of such failure, will feel increasingly threatened, of further ways and means to meet that threat . . ."


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I cannot add anything more than what the Secretary of State for External Affairs is reported as having said to newspapermen who inquired from him about that matter. This is a dispatch as published last night in the Ottawa Journal:
External affairs minister Pearson said today that when he wrote his speech for the Geneva conference he had not had in mind the specific possibility that Canada might join the projected southeast Asia security pact.
He made his comment when asked about the significance of the statement in his speech yesterday that failure of the Far East conference here might result in further collective security measures by the western powers. This would apply particularly in respect of Xndo-China.
I cannot add anything to that. At the present time there is sometimes a tendency to try to read into anything that is said
Inquiries of the Ministry meanings that were not intended by the one who said it. That is quite natural because, as individuals, we are all concerned with the security of the world at the present time and we are all anxious to get as much information as we can get about it. Because of that feeling it is quite natural that there is sometimes read into anything that is said a meaning that was not intended.


Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops):: I should like to ask the Prime Minister this question arising out of the answer he has given to an earlier question. Since Canada is so obviously and, as the hon. gentleman has stated, so properly concerned about the prospects of success or failure of the conference on Indo-China, did the Canadian government make any representations as to whether or not we should be asked to participate in formal discussions of that conference?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: The answer is a negative one, Mr. Speaker.
lLater:l



GENEVA CONFERENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinton):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Prime Minister a question that bears to some extent on the answer he gave to the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra (Mr. Green). Is it intended that the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson) should continue to lead the Canadian delegation at Geneva throughout the entire conference or is he coming home? Can the Prime Minister give any indication, in that event, as to how much longer the Secretary of State for External Affairs intends to remain at Geneva?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: No, Mr. Speaker; I am not in a position at this moment to say when he might expect to be home, nor do I think the Secretary of State for External Affairs himself would be able to do so.



PRIVILEGE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. J. Coldwell (Roselown-Biggar):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to rise on a matter of privilege. Several papers today carry stories which misconstrue our vote on the budget yesterday. May I just refer to a dispatch
4452	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry of the Canadian Press in the Montreal Gazette of today. It reads in part as follows:
A Liberal member of parliament today voted against the government on the Quebec income tax issue.
Wilfrid LaCroix (L-Quebec-Montmorency) sided with the opposition as the Commons voted 136 to 70 to approve the government's 1954-55 budget.
He was the only Liberal to criticize the budget decision against granting Quebec's request that the province's new 15-per-cent personal income tax be fully deductible from federal tax payments.
May I say that we voted against the budget because of the criticisms we made here. Contrary to reports, we are thoroughly insupport of the government's stand on the Quebec tax issue.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. K. Fraser (Peterborough):: I should like to address a question to the Minister of National Defence. Having regard to the loss by fire of national defence service buildings this year and the announcement of new construction at Petawawa, including barracks buildings, administration buildings, mess halls, garages and so on, is consideration being given to seeing that those buildings are fireproofed?


Hon. Brooke Claxton (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, the assumption that the hon. gentleman makes seems to be that the loss by fire of defence property is out of all proportion to what it should be. There is no justification for that assumption. The loss is much lower than is the loss in respect of corresponding civilian properties in Canada.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: That is a matter of opinion.


Brooke Claxton: It is a matter of statistics. Whether or not it is worth while to build a completely fireproof building depends on the nature of the building and the fire hazards. The type of construction we use is partly fireproof, partly fire-resistant and sometimes not fireproof at all, depending on the type of construction. But to fireproof all the buildings would give rise to an expenditure out of all proportion to the savings in connection with loss by fire.



POTATOES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. W. Montgomery (Victoria-Carleton):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. I did not give him


notice because I think he can answer it. If not, he can take it as notice. In view of the rather serious situation among the potato farmers of New Brunswick, has the minister or his department or the government received any request from the potato marketing board of New Brunswick for further assistance in the handling of the balance of the 1953 potato crop?


Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture):: We are in communication with the boards of both New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island with regard to the situation that is developing in connection with the marketing of potatoes. If my hon. friend will allow me to take the question as notice,
I	will obtain for him the exact figures as to what the position is at this time and give them to him tomorrow.


Gage Workman Montgomery: Thank you very much. That is all right.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL RESOURCES National parks branch-
National parks and historic sites services-
304. Administration, operation and maintenance, $4,397,820.


The Chairman:: Hon. members will find this vote on page 44 of the blue book and the details on page 374.


Mr. Shaw:: On April 29 when these estimates were last before the house I brought a matter to the minister's attention and requested certain explanations and clarification with respect to it. The minister indicated that he would secure the information. If he has it here I should like to know what it is.
Kon. Jean Lesage (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):	I have
secured the following information with respect to the operation of the Ya-Ha-Tinda ranch. This ranch comprises an area of some eighteen square miles in township 32, ranges
II	and 12, west of the 5th meridian in the province of Alberta. It is completely separate from Banff park, being about one and a half miles from the eastern boundary of the park at the nearest point. The property is owned by the federal government and administered by the national parks branch. It is not, however, a national park, nor is it subject to the parks act or the regulations made thereunder. Up until a few months before the transfer of natural resources agreement of 1930 the ranch was within the

boundaries of Rocky Mountain park and was administered under the Dominion Forest Reserves and Parks Act.
The area comprising the ranch is particularly good grazing land for horses and has been used for this purpose by the parks service for many years. When the transfer of resources agreement and the new National Parks Act were being prepared to come into effect simultaneously it was realized that the Ya-Ha-Tinda ranch would be outside the boundaries of the new Banff park which would replace the Rocky Mountain park. As the area was still required as grazing land for park horses belonging to the warden service it was withdrawn from the Rocky Mountain park by order in council P.C. 565 of March 14, 1930 and therefore was not included with the federal crown lands transferred to the province of Alberta a few months later. It was this order in council that was referred to by the hon. member for Red Deer when he discussed the ranch last Thursday evening.
Since the passage of the order in council the land has continued to be administered by the parks service but, as I mentioned before, it is not subject to the National Parks Act and it is in effect similar to any privately owned ranch in the province of Alberta. The hon. member raised the question of hunting privileges within the ranch boundaries. We have checked with the superintendents who have been in charge of Banff park since 1947 and I have been assured that at no time have they given permission for hunting on the ranch property. As a matter of fact when the then park superintendent visited the ranch in September, 1952 he found a number of hunters on the premises. They were requested to leave and signs were erected prohibiting hunting and also motor traffic on the property. These signs have been maintained and to the best of our knowledge no hunting has taken place on the ranch since that time.
There is one feature that may have led to a misunderstanding about hunting. A trail, which is passable at times to motor traffic, leads to the ranch, and an extension of this trail crosses the ranch and leads to excellent hunting grounds to the north and west of the ranch. We have permitted hunters and pack trains to cross the ranch on the way to the hunting grounds beyond. Many return through the ranch bearing their kill. This may have given the impression that the game was shot on the ranch property. I might add that we do not have any intention of opening the area to hunting and the foreman in charge has been instructed that hunting is prohibited.
Supply-Northern Affairs


Frederick Davis Shaw: I appreciate very much the information that has been given. May I ask the minister whether the area has been leased to any individual or group of individuals?


Mr. Lesage:: If the hon. member means the ranch area there is no lease and there is no intention of leasing it.


Frederick Davis Shaw: The word "ranch" rather confuses me. Who operates the ranch in this area?


Jean Lesage: As I said a few moments ago, the national parks service operates the ranch for the grazing of horses which are the property of the parks administration.


Frederick Davis Shaw: There is one other matter. The minister has indicated that we may have been confused with respect to hunting in the area.
I would suggest to the minister that possibly that aspect of it should be checked a little more carefully because hunting has been conducted in the area. Hunters have been seen shooting in the area, and that led to much of the difficulty. Other hunters have been forbidden the privilege while they themselves have witnessed hunters hunting in the area. As I say, that led to a good deal of criticism because it did appear to the people to whom I spoke, hunters and others, that certain persons were being granted the privilege of hunting there. The minister has given the assurance that there has not been any hunting in the area and that there will be none, but I am more concerned with the policy. I certainly hope that that is the policy and that every effort will be made to enforce it rigidly. Otherwise there is bound to be no end of trouble.
There is one other matter I should like to clear up. I should like to know why this is a more or less privileged area in relation to park areas? Why is it that the public are prohibited from entering? The minister has said certain pack outfits have been permitted to pass through. That is news to me, and I am sure it is going to be news to many of those hunters with whom I spoke and who were told to pay attention to the no trespassing sign on the gate. Personally, I cannot understand why people who desire to spend a Sunday afternoon, for example, by those falls, which are very beautiful and are just two or three miles inside the area, are prohibited from entering. I should like to know if any similar situation exists anywhere else in Canada? Can the minister give me any information about that? I want to know specifically why the public should be barred from entering there as they would any park area?
4454	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs


Jean Lesage: This is not a national park. As I have already explained, this is the same as private property. It is being kept in order to have a place for these horses to graze. We need a place and that is the place that is used. It has been used for years, and there is nothing I can add.


Frederick Davis Shaw: I have no argument with the minister's declaration that they require an area for grazing purposes, but I cannot understand why we should have an 18-section area like that from which the people are barred. As I say, people may desire to go there to spend a Sunday afternoon. Secondly, I should like to know how many horses are owned by the federal parks branch that are pastured in the area?


Jean Lesage: The number of horses, I am informed, is approximately 150.


Frederick Davis Shaw: May I just pursue the one aspect further, and that is with respect to this no trespassing sign. It is very prominent on the gate. The road comes right up to the gate, and that is the end of it. It is a good road. Why should the public be prohibited from entering? I am not suggesting there should not be any rules or regulations. We have these rules and regulations governing the actions of people who go into the parks. I should like to know why the citizens of my community cannot go into that area on a Sunday afternoon and have a picnic lunch. It is a strange situation that has caused a great deal of criticism. In fact, the people call it the iron curtain area; that is what the people of my area call it. They say this is extraordinary. It is different from anything else of which we are aware in any other part of the country.


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, as I said a few moments ago, this is a ranch area and is only about a mile and a half from Banff national park. I believe that Banff national park is an area sufficiently large to accommodate the people from my hon. friend's riding. The no trespass sign is there because it is an area that is mainly grass but has some wood. We have to be very careful about fire and also careful, as my hon. friend was asking us to be, to do everything we can to prevent illegal hunting. That is one of the ways.


Frederick Davis Shaw: If that is the only effective method of preventing illegal hunting we may just as well bar people from the parks. Let me point out to the minister that while it can be said Banff is a large area not too far away from this area, let us not forget that the way one has to travel to get from the area in which these people live it is 150 to 175 miles, whereas many of them live


only five, ten, or fifteen miles from this beautiful spot in the prohibited area. It is true there is grassland there. There is grassland very much like our prairie wool. The minister should not be led to believe it is a section similar to areas in the southern section of Saskatchewan. There are some beautiful spots in that area.
There is always the danger of fire. Certainly there is the same danger on provincial crown lands in the areas surrounding this ranch. If a fire started in the provincial crown lands area, the Ya-Ha-Tinda area would go up in smoke, too. I do not believe that is a good argument. I do not believe our people are going to be satisfied or remain quiet until they know exactly why they, the citizens of Canada, are barred from going into an area which, in theory if not in fact, they the people of Canada own.
I should like to ask one other question. Am I to be barred, as a member of parliament, if I want to go into that area as soon as I go home? The no trespass sign I suppose refers to me as well as to any person. All I am going to suggest to the minister is-I make no threat at all-that I am likely to make a test case out of that because I am going in there. I have been asked to go in there, and I am going in. Possibly in that way we will find out who will institute the prosecution, and I believe we shall have a most interesting court case.


Mr. Knowles:: It has been nice knowing the hon. member.


Frederick Davis Shaw: After all, it may be a pleasant way to retire, if that is to be the end result. Can the minister indicate to me, in advance, so I shall know what preparations to make, if they are going to prosecute me if I go through that gate and into the area which I feel, as a citizen of Canada, belongs to me as well as to everyone else?
In the absence of an answer, I am going to serve notice now that I am going to make a test case out of it. Shortly after I get home I am going through the gate and we shall see what follows. All I can say is, if I am not back here again it has been nice knowing all of you.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I should like to ask a question about these 150 horses. Are they used by the rangers for patrols?


Jean Lesage: Yes, they are for the wardens, for patrols and for the forest fire patrols.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The Minister mentioned that during the hunting season pack trains and hunters were allowed to go through the ranch to the hunting ground. Are

there patrols at that time along the ranch road to make sure these people do not hunt at that time?


Jean Lesage: Of course they have to ask the foreman or one of the hired men who are on the spot for permission to go through. When permission is given these two hired men know the people are going across and they follow them and check on them.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: When the hon. member who has just preceded me enters the park he has to ask permission to go in.


Jean Lesage: It is not a park, and it is not a public place. It is a ranch that provides a grazing area for the horses which are the property of the park service. They have to graze somewhere, and that is where they are put. It is 18 square miles and it is not at the disposal of the Canadian public. It is the property of the government assigned to a definite purpose. There is one foreman and one hired man looking after the horses. If we permit the general public to enter, as we do in the parks, of course we shall need a lot of persons to act as wardens and the cost will be increased. We have these immense park areas like Jasper, Banff and Yoho with their warden services and they cost the people of Canada a lot of money. I do not see why we should have this little piece of property as a park when we need it for a definite and private reason. The government is entitled to use property as private property, just the same as any other citizen, when it needs it.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I am not
objecting to that. The minister has said that they will allow hunters and pack trains to go through at certain times. How are people to know when they can go through? There is a no trespassing sign at the gate. How does one know when he can go through; that is what I am getting at. There must be something definite about it; it cannot be left in this hit-and-miss fashion.


Jean Lesage: Next year, when my estimates are being considered, I shall be able to answer the question because, before the hon. member for Red Deer goes through, I shall have gone through myself-at least I shall have made a try.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The minister is going to prepare the way for the hon. member for Red Deer so that he will be able to go into the ranch; is that it?


Frederick Davis Shaw: Some reference has been made to the added cost of supervising this area. I am given to understand that one of the park rangers is spending quite a bit of time there, anyway, particularly during the hunting
Supply-Northern Affairs season. Many of these hunters have been accosted by the ranger, whose name I can give if required. I should like to know two things: Are there any other horses, outside of government-owned horses, pastured in the Ya-Ha-Tinda area?


Jean Lesage: Well, I am informed by the director of the parks branch that, to his knowledge, the answer should be No.


Frederick Davis Shaw: Then, I have one other question, and then for the moment, I shall leave the matter. Reference has been made to a ranch foreman and manager, or some such officials; I am not sure as to the exact terms used. Are those men on the payroll of the federal government?


Jean Lesage: Definitely.


Mr. Hodgson:: Does the minister say there are only two men on the payroll to look after this park or ranch, or whatever it is called?


Jean Lesage: That is correct, according to my information-except in haying time, when there is a temporary haying crew.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: The minister had better look at it again and see whether there are not some horses on the payroll.


Mr. Herridge:: I should like to say a word or two about the Revelstoke park, because many of my constituents are interested in that park, which is situated on the mountain at Revelstoke. I, too, have been interested in it since it was established. First of all I notice the minister has said that he is going out west to take a look at things. I do urge that he get off the train at Revelstoke and that he should not fail to visit the Revelstoke park. It is a very beautiful one on the top of a mountain, with a beautiful eighteen-mile drive leading up to it.
I would bring to the minister's attention the manner in which the records for that park are kept. According to those records only Canadians visit the park, and there is no reference to citizens of the United States or of other countries visiting there. I know the record is quite incorrect because on a number of occasions I have been to the top of the mountain with visitors from the United States and Great Britain. I have met hundreds of people from places outside Canada who have visited the park during my residence. I suggest therefore that it should get credit for having entertained these outside visitors, because those visits indicate an interest in the park far beyond the confines of Canada.
I suggest further that when the minister visits the park he should take a good look at the construction of new buildings there. I shall not say more on the subject but I would

Supply-Northern Affairs like to have his opinion as to whether those buildings are the right type to be built at the top of a mountain, in a park.
In view of the unique nature and the elevation of this park, as well as its beauty, I suggest more money should be spent in its development. I happen to know that people from the United States and from the old country visit it whenever they come to British Columbia, and that they are keenly interested in it. I do suggest that more money should be spent in the development of the Revelstoke park.
I do not know what the government's policy is and whether it would spend more money on the park if the Canadian Pacific railway were to build a hotel at the top of the mountain. However I have noticed that advertising by the travel bureau is coincidental with the information sent out by the two railway companies. I would urge again that the minister look into the possibility of spending more money on the development of this park.


Mr. Dufresne:: A short time ago we heard reference to one hundred and fifty horses living in an area of eighteen square miles. Well, if hon. members do not like the sound of that, I would point out to them that we have labouring people in my home city, families of eight or ten, living in three-roomed apartments. Do you not think, Mr. Chairman, that it would be reasonable to keep these horses in an area of possibly a couple of square miles, instead of eighteen square miles, and thus permit the people of Canada to have access to this park?


Mr. Harkness:: I should like to make a plea to the minister, one which the late Mr. Adamson and I have been making to successive ministers who have been in charge of the national parks over the last nine years. It is a matter concerning which, unfortunately, very little has been done. I refer to the improvement of skiing facilities in the western Rockies, particularly in the area leading out from Banff and Lake Louise, and crossing the Alberta-British Columbia border. We have in that area, and perhaps to a somewhat lesser extent in the Jasper area, the finest skiing to be found anywhere in the world. Unfortunately it is not used to any great extent because the number who visit there from eastern Canada, as well as from the United States and other countries, is relatively small. The number is nothing like as great as the number who go to much less desirable skiing areas in the United States and, of course, there is no relationship whatever to the great numbers who visit Switzerland, the Austrian Alps, and places of that kind.

We do not expect numbers as great as those who visit the European skiing resorts because we realize that there are not such great numbers of skiers on this continent. I am convinced however that the number of tourists and, of course, the revenue to the country and to the parks in particular, could be greatly increased by the improvement of skiing facilities. Those now available are limited and relatively expensive. For a number of years the late member and I advocated that the department should do a great deal more work by way of clearing ski trails so that people could go on ski trips to the mountains. It might make some effort to provide huts, such as are found in large numbers in the European skiing areas. These huts could be built at a relatively small cost and could be used by those skiers for overnight shelter, and things of that sort. The same trails, of course, could be used in the summertime by hikers. That is one thing which would not cost a great deal of money and it would greatly add to the number of people who could make use of skiing facilities in our Rockies during the winter months.
Another matter is the provision of a somewhat larger and better airstrip than exists at Banff at the present time so that the people can come in by air. To some extent that has had an effect on the number of people who go there to ski. In view of the present transportation methods and so on, one of the facilities that could be improved is the airstrip at Banff, which is quite small and undeveloped. Perhaps an expenditure of a considerable sum of money is not justified on that airstrip, but a certain amount of expenditure in order to increase its size is justified.
I wish the minister would go very closely into the question of the improvement that could be made as far as skiing facilities are concerned. I am absolutely certain an improvement in those facilities will pay big dividends, not only as far as this particular park is concerned, but as far as the entire tourist industry into Canada is concerned. If he will consult with the director of the Canadian travel bureau-I believe that comes under his department-he will agree fully with that view that that is one way in which we can materially increase the number of tourists, and therefore the number of tourist dollars we see in this country.
In addition to these general remarks, I may say that the youth hostels have increased quite considerably in the national parks out there, the Banff and Jasper national parks. I do not know about the British Columbia parks, but I think there has been some development of youth hostels in them also.

Can the minister tell us under what conditions those youth hostels are erected? What assistance is provided by the parks branch, if any, in addition of course to providing the site? How many of those are in existence at the present time?


Jean Lesage: There are seven or eight of those hostels, and they are provided free of charge to the youth. We supply them with fuelwood, and all necessities of life, except food, of course, garbage facilities, public services.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The service that is provided to the youth by the parks branch is the provision of a site to erect the building on and the provision of fuel. Apart from that no other assistance is given; is that correct?


Jean Lesage: The buildings are the property of the government and the parks service has erected and maintained them, except for those at Eisenhower junction and Lake Louise.


Douglas Scott Harkness: That is the point I am getting at. The parks branch actually erects and owns the buildings. In other words, all of the cost of the construction has been carried by the parks branch?


Jean Lesage: Yes, with the exceptions mentioned.


Douglas Scott Harkness: And the buildings are, you might say, operated merely by the youth hostel association?


Jean Lesage: That is right.


Douglas Scott Harkness: As I think I said before, the development of this youth hostel movement is an exceptionally good one. It has made the use of our national parks available to a large number of young people who otherwise could not go there because they could not afford the charges of the hotels and so on. I hope the erection of those hostels will be continued and expanded. It is one of the finest things that has been done in the national parks in the last two years, and I am extremely glad to see it.
The other matter which I mentioned was the provision of better skiing facilities. Perhaps it can be tied in with the erection of those youth hostels. Some of those youth hostel buildings could be used for skiing purposes in the wintertime. Can the minister comment on the general matter of improvement of skiing facilities which I spoke of a few minutes ago?


Jean Lesage: I have not been there since the spring of 1946, but I expect to be there this summer and I intend to meet the people who operate under licence at Mount Norquay and to discuss with them facilities there and
Supply-Northern Affairs any improvements that can be made to the present facilities. The hon. member can rest assured that I shall keep his representations in mind when I am there.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I may point out that this business of discussing with the concessionaires of Mount Norquay what further improvements may be made does not even touch on the representations I was making, namely, the provision of ski trails through these mountains, thereby making much more territory available to skiing than exists at the present time. That is one of the difficulties of skiing out there. That is one of the reasons why fewer people go there than otherwise would. The number of places where you can actually go to ski and where there are facilities for people to get in out of the cold are extremely limited. You have only Norquay besides Banff, Sunshine and two or three other places. That is all we have. The very point I am making is that these ski trails and other things that could be used as youth hostels in the summertime are just straight shelters, cheaply constructed. Huts or lodges should be provided so that a much greater area could be opened up to skiers.


Mr. Brooks:: Where are these seven or eight hostels located? At what parks in Canada do we have them? Are there any in eastern Canada?


Jean Lesage: They are all in the mountain parks.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Is it the intention to have any constructed in eastern Canada? We could do a bit of skiing down east, you know, as well as out west.


Jean Lesage: I will consider it.


Gage Workman Montgomery: I have a question or two to ask the minister. This may not be the right place to ask it. If it is not, I would like him to tell me. I heard nothing about the revenue derived from these parks. Does the government get any revenue from these national parks? If so, where can we find it?


Jean Lesage: At page 379 of the estimate book.


Mr. Johnston (Bow River):: Before the item is carried I want to bring to the attention of the minister something that has bothered me for some little time in connection with the Banff national park. I refer to the buildings erected in the park area. This is in the town of Banff. I have had several instances of people writing to me in regard to the regulations concerning buildings. I have taken some of these cases up with the department and the officials, and they are working on them now trying to evolve some sort of a solution.

Supply-Northern Affairs It is a very bad situation, and I am not bringing any particular instance to the attention of the minister at this time because, as I said a moment ago, the departmental officials are looking into some of them. There has been a great deal of complaint, particularly in regard to the erection of duplex buildings in a single-dwelling area, and then in erecting a multiple dwelling in a duplex area. These areas are divided into A, B and C in the park, in the town of Banff itself. I have complaints in this regard. I understand the minister's position and the position that the park officials find themselves in, in regard to these particular grievances. There has been a great deal of lax administration-shall I put it that way-in the past in regard to the construction of houses in the Banff area.
For instance, I know people who have built a duplex in a class "B" area and then having gone ahead-some with the permission of the park authorities and others without permission-and put in an extra suite they of course get into trouble because they have done that. They point out to me that while they themselves are in trouble with the park officials there are many other people living around them who seem to get away with it. I had a list sent to me the other day involving, I would think, about 50 people who are living in areas apparently in violation of the regulations. Now, as I have said, I am not going to make these names public because the park officials are looking into some of these cases. I think though, generally speaking, that the department will have to make a complete revision of the regulations, particularly those in relation to the town of Banff and the national park area, because there are so many conflicting rules that I cannot see how this building problem can be solved within the town of Banff until we start off with a completely new form of regulation.
I am not one of those who wishes to bring problems before the minister when I know that these problems have arisen because of violation of the existing regulations, but I am placed in a very peculiar situation, particularly when people come to me and say, "Well, I have violated the regulations and the park officials are taking it up with me but there are dozens of people living around me who have also violated the regulations and are getting away with it." I hear the remark "Well, they are probably Liberals." I am not going to make that assertion because so far as I know, since the election, and I emphasize that, I do not think there has been too much political interference in Banff. We cannot help having a little of that I suppose, but if there is anything


like that I can assure the minister he will hear about it. However, up to the moment I do not think there has been too much interference in that regard.
On this occasion I would like to suggest to the minister that in view of the fact that I have had so many complaints in regard to the building regulations, something more concrete will have to be evolved and there will have to be some further revision of these regulations so that people will know that one family is treated exactly like another. That is all I want to say on that topic at this time.


Jean Lesage: I would just like to point out to the hon. member that it is quite possible these houses which were not built according to the present regulations might have been built before the present regulations came into force. But if the hon. member has had complaints from people about homes built contrary to the regulations and since these regulations were put into force I would appreciate it if he would let me know the names of the people involved and I will look into the matter.


Charles Edward Johnston: I thank the minister for these observations. Departmental officials are aware of some of these cases and are looking into them now in an attempt to straighten out the situation. But the minister has put his finger on a point there. He has stated that some of these people might have had their homes erected before these new regulations went into force. But I would point out to the minister that that presents a difficulty because if you have a family living in a designated duplex area and there are multiple dwellings in that duplex area it does not make any difference when they were built, trouble is bound to arise. Then again we have people who have a duplex with a suite in the basement, and it is rather difficult to explain to an individual why he cannot go ahead and build a duplex in the same area and put a suite in his basement when the neighbour has one and has had it for a number of years. It is all very well for the minister to say that perhaps that fellow built his house a few years ago. Perhaps he did. I am not going to argue about that. But it is difficult to explain to them why they cannot do the same as their neighbour has already done. That is why I am pointing out to the minister that I think it is high time these regulations were given a thorough overhaul so there will be no misunderstanding on the part of people who build homes in the Banff park area.


Mr. Nickle:: Mr. Chairman, there was some discussion earlier this afternoon about the barring of the public from public land, and in connection with that I would like to make a brief reference to another case in perhaps a slightly different category which aroused a great deal of ire and resentment on the part of visitors to Banff last fall, and also considerable resentment on the part of the local people. I refer to the erection of a fence around Chateau Lake Louise which, I am told, rather effectively barred public access to one of the showplaces of western Canada, Lake Louise itself. I would like to ask the minister whether his department plans to take any action to prevent a repetition this year of what occurred during last summer and fall.


Jean Lesage: You mean at Lake Louise?


Carl Olof Nickle: Yes.


Jean Lesage: That whole matter was discussed when I brought in the amendment to the parks act during this session and I have nothing to add to what I said at that time.


Gage Workman Montgomery: I would like to ask the minister another question in connection with the matter I raised a few moments ago. Could the minister give us a breakdown of the amount of revenue which was obtained from each park. Perhaps if he cannot do that at this time he would be kind enough to supply the information later.


Jean Lesage: I can give the figures for the last full year.


Gage Workman Montgomery: That is what I am referring to for the others are only estimates.


Jean Lesage: The figures are as follows: Banff, $350,307.43; Cape Breton Highlands, $9,149.00; Elk Island, $52,205.00; Fundy, $13,584.00; Georgian Bay, $396.00; Glacier, $3,085.00; Jasper, $127,281.46; Kootenay, $92,691.00; Mount Revelstoke, $485.00; Point Pelee, $20,487.00; Prince Albert, $79,304.00; Prince Edward Island, $9,472.00; Riding Mountain, $128,050.00; St. Lawrence Islands, $200.00; Waterton Lakes, $48,590.00; Yoho, $47,351.00.


Mr. Campbell:: Mr. Chairman, I was very glad to hear the minister say a few days ago that it was his intention this summer to visit Fort Battleford, Saskatchewan. I am sure he is going to find a great many things of interest to him there and I would add that if I knew when he was coming I would like to be there to welcome him. It is only about three or four years since his department took over the operation of this fort. There is a great deal to be done. I was wondering what the plans of the department are for
Supply-Northern Affairs this summer. Is the minister's department planning for new buildings or for any improvements to the grounds or roads?


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, we are on item 304. Any questions about new buildings would come under item 305. It would make it much easier for me if such questions were asked under that item. I have quite complete information on each vote, but if I have to go from one to the other, I find myself in difficulties. I should appreciate it greatly if the hon. member would ask his question under item 305.


Charles Edward Johnston: There is one matter about which I want to ask the minister. I am quite sure it does not come under this estimate, however. Probably I should have raised it under the estimates of the Department of Public Works because it has something to do directly with the trans-Canada highway. However, it is a matter which certainly affects our tourist traffic. In the figures which the minister gave a moment or two ago he indicated that Banff national park receives more visitors than does probably any other national park in Canada. One of the things I want to bring to the minister's attention is this. Last year during the tourist season the road going from the Banff gate- that is the east gate-to Banff itself was a disgrace. Then to top it all off, right in the middle of the tourist season, when the tourist traffic was the heaviest, they put about two inches of oil over the top of that road. You should have seen the condition that tourists' cars were in after they had passed over that five or six miles between the east gate and the town of Banff. I would not ask you, Mr. Chairman, to listen to some of the remarks that some of the tourists made when they got to the end of that road.
What I should like to draw to the minister's attention is this. Something should be done before the tourist season starts-I suppose the minister would have to go back to the Minister of Public Works who is the minister responsible for the building of the trans-Canada highway-to see to it that that road is not left in the condition in which it was left last year. In fact, the condition became so bad that Mr. Strong, the superintendent of Banff park, I understand had to go himself to the contractors about that road and appeal to them to do something about it. I understand that was not part of Mr. Strong's duties either, but that he did so in view of the fact that so many complaints were coming to him and so widespread was the dissatisfaction that was felt because of the deplorable condition of that highway. There were holes in it of such a size that a car would almost drop out of sight; and

Supply-Northern Affairs that is not exaggerating the situation either. It was a most deplorable condition. I would ask the minister, if it is necessary that it should be done, to draw this matter to the attention of the Minister of Public Works; and I would ask them to see, between the two of them, whether that road cannot be put into some decent shape for our tourist traffic this year.


Jean Lesage: I will talk to any colleague,


Mr.   Chairman.Mr. MacLean@: I should like to ask the
minister a question or two about parks generally. I notice that the parks under his department are of three types, namely scenic parks, animal parks and historic site parks; at least that is how the Canada Year Book differentiates between them.


Jean Lesage: There are the two types of
parks, national parks and national historic parks.


Mr. MacLean:: The scenic park is a national park. I do not want to split hairs. In any event, some of the national parks are for scenic purposes and some are for the preservation of wild animals. Is that not correct?


Jean Lesage: There is only one, namely
Wood Buffalo, which is specifically for animals. Even Elk Island park is also for recreational purposes.


John Angus MacLean: I understand. I am concerned chiefly with historic site parks. The minister has a number of those. I was wondering when a historic site is considered to be suitable for the establishment of a park or when it is considered to be justifiable to establish a park at a historic site. Can the minister give any indication as to what are the deciding factors? As far as historic site parks are concerned, I understand that up until recently there was only one west of Ontario. Now I believe there are three on the prairies. As far as I know, however, there are none in British Columbia and none in Prince Edward Island or Newfoundland. I was wondering whether consideration is being given to preserving such places as Fort Macleod in southern Alberta and perhaps Fort Lajoie across the harbour from Charlottetown or any places in Newfoundland. As far as parks generally are concerned, I think Newfoundland is the only province in Canada that has no national park. Is consideration being given to the possibility of establishing a national park in N e wfoundland ?


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, this department sets up historic parks or declares a certain place to be a historic site on the recommendation of the historic sites and monuments board of Canada. There is on this board a representative of Prince Edward Island. We always seek the advice of that board before we make any decision. Maybe my hon. friend knows about it, but I do not know whether he or any other persons have put before the board a request for the establishment of a historic park or some historic site in Prince Edward Island. That is the normal procedure. Then we get our recommendations from the board.
Do I understand that the hon. member asked a question about the national park in Newfoundland?


John Angus MacLean: Yes.


Jean Lesage: I do not know whether my
[DOT]hon. friend noticed it or not, but when the Prime Minister announced on Friday the legislation that was still to come before the house before the end of the session he mentioned as a possibility legislation with regard to a national park in Newfoundland. The government of Newfoundland has offered to the Canadian government a certain area for park purposes. We have examined the area. We believe it is a good area for park purposes but we are obliged to wait until the government of Newfoundland can offer this area free of all encumbrances. I realize that some negotiations are going on between the government of Newfoundland and some owners of timber rights so that the latter will give up their interest in the lands which would be in the park area.


John Angus MacLean: I thank the minister for
his answer. I have another question. It occurs to me that since Newfoundland has come into confederation so recently, unless they previously had some system of marking historic sites that have now been taken over by the historic sites and monuments board there would naturally be a great backlog of work to do with regard to marking historic sites in Newfoundland. What progress has been made or what is the position?


Jean Lesage: Some historic sites have already been marked in Newfoundland. Two were marked in 1952 and two in 1953. Does the hon. member wish to have the list?


John Angus MacLean: No. I think I am correct in saying that in Canada as a whole there are over sixty provincial parks. I believe six provinces have provincial parks and the other four have not. Is any assistance given to

provincial governments with the idea of establishing provincial parks in those provinces where there are none?


Jean Lesage: My attention is drawn to one recent case where we sent somebody to Newfoundland to help the authorities there to set up a provincial park in Newfoundland.


John Angus MacLean: I notice that this department engages in hatching fish, as does the Department of Fisheries. It seems to me that might be duplication. Has any system been worked out whereby that type of work might be done for the department by the Department of Fisheries? I also notice that the department employs weather observers. The Department of Transport is the largest employer of weather forecasters and observers. Has any effort been made by the minister's department to borrow such observers from the Department of Transport rather than the department hiring such people?


Jean Lesage: So far as fish hatcheries are concerned, I visited the hatchery at Banff, and I understand that the fish kept there are trout. Maybe there are other kinds. I am not an expert on fish, but I saw beautiful trout there and I realized that they were not for commercial fishing purposes but for sport fishing, which is quite different from the operations of the Department of Fisheries.


John Angus MacLean: Perhaps even more beautiful trout are hatched in a hatchery in my riding and I do not think it is operated by the minister's department; I think it is operated by the Department of Fisheries.


Jean Lesage: You are very lucky.


John Angus MacLean: It aroused my curiosity to notice in the list of employees of the department that there is a sailmaker. What does he do?


Jean Lesage: I did not hear what the hon. member said.


John Angus MacLean: A sailmaker is employed by the department. I was curious about his duties.


Jean Lesage: He repairs tents and canvas for construction camps in the parks. There is no position of this kind, this year.


Mr. Dinsdale:: I have a question with respect to traffic regulations in the parks. As the minister knows, Manitoba highway No. 10 passes through Riding Mountain national park. About a year ago, I believe, a bus service was established between the southern part of the province and Flin Flon. I understand that a trip charge is made for buses moving through the park and also that the
Supply-Northern Affairs matter is under consideration. Has there been any change? It is not a heavily populated route at all. The passenger revenue is rather small and as a result the situation is rather awkward.


Jean Lesage: This is not a main highway but a park highway. There is an alternative route to Flin Flon, which is the provincial highway. I understand that the road through the park is shorter and that is why many of these buses follow that route. But we must not forget that these roads are built for park purposes out of moneys that come from the general taxes of Canada and not from gasoline taxes collected by the provinces for the building of roads. There is a nominal charge, the revenue from which represents a very small amount of the cost of the building of that road which should be preserved for park purposes, especially when there is an alternative highway by which to go to Flin Flon and northern Manitoba. We do not prevent the use of it, but if somebody uses it he has to pay the entrance fee to the park in the same way as anybody else. Incidentally, it is a very small fee.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I think the purpose of the service is to serve points other than those located on the roundabout route to the north. The service was put into operation by request as a convenience to the people of the northern part of the province.


Jean Lesage: That does not change the principle.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I take it that the basis is still the same. The matter is not under consideration at all?


Jean Lesage: No.


Mr. Knight:: Is there any timber being cut in national parks anywhere in Canada with the exception of such timber as is required for the administration of the parks? Is there any such thing as timber berths being granted to commercial lumbermen or lumber companies in the parks?


Jean Lesage: Generally there is some timber cut for use in the parks, but with respect to Riding Mountain park-the hon. member for Dauphin is quite aware of this-some cutting by settlers is allowed under permit from us. However this is done according to well known forest management regulations. In Wood Buffalo park we allow some timber cutting by Eldorado Mining and Refining company but the company of course pays the regular dues for it.
4462	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: But in the sense of my question I take it that there is actually no commercial cutting of timber in the national parks of Canada?


Jean Lesage: No, except in Wood Buffalo for Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited. I am also informed that there are four or five permits which existed before the western parks were created. These permits were not abolished and the people who held them still can cut, but according to well known rules of forest management which are pretty severe in our case.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I hope the minister's face is set against that sort of thing. Certainly mine is.


Jean Lesage: Definitely.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I am a little worried about when the leases expire to which the minister has referred. Are they in perpetuity?


Jean Lesage: I will have to look into the matter of the expiration dates. It is of no relative importance.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: If any of it is being done it is of importance to me and I think to the people of Canada. I should like to remind the minister of what, in my opinion, was the rather scandalous situation that existed in the park to which he has made reference, Riding Mountain park in Manitoba. It was before the minister's time in this department, but I believe it is a fact that the particular lease that was held by a lumber company for that area allowed this company to cut timber there as long as there was anything of any commercial value. It eventually got to the point where the company was cutting the small trees for fence posts.


Jean Lesage: That is all over.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I am pleased that it is all over, and I think it should be kept that way. I directed my question to the minister to ascertain if these leases had run out. So far as Riding Mountain park was concerned, the company got the timber and the people of Canada got the stumps. I think that was true in that particular case. A few years ago I was assured that so far as Riding Mountain park was concerned the matter had come to that conclusion and there were no longer any leases in that park.
I should be sorry if this idea of giving leases for almost any purpose in these parks were continued. I was a little worried when the minister admitted that certain timber concessions had been given to certain mining companies-


Jean Lesage: That is not what I said. I am sorry, but I said that one crown company, the Eldorado Mining and Refining company in the Northwest Territories, had been given the right to cut timber in Wood Buffalo park. The cutting of this timber is permitted under severe forest management rules and under our supervision for something which is considered as essential to Canada. It is only mature timber that is cut at Wood Buffalo park, which is in the far north.
I can assure my hon. friend that I am in complete agreement with him. The reason Newfoundland has no national park yet is that the authorities there are negotiating with some people who hold timber limits and the authorities have to have the land set free of those rights before we accept it. That is the policy of the department.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I should like to ask the
minister a question which may be a legal question, and that is something I do not know anything about. Where timber leases are given-I have nothing against that-or sold-


Jean Lesage: We do not give any.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: -is there some legal method by which it can be arranged that such leases would be automatically cancelled in case that area were taken over later by the nation as a park?


Jean Lesage: No such leases are given. I have said that once. The ones that are left have existed for years and years before the parks were parks.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Once more the minister has not understood my question. I am not talking about leases that are given for national parks. I am talking about leases that are given on public lands of some sort, where there is no park, but if that land later becomes a park is there some way by which a provision could be written into that lease stating that the lease would be terminated when and if the nation assumed control of that property as a national park? This would avoid the situation that arose in Riding Mountain park in Manitoba. As I say, it is a legal question and I do not know whether or not the minister can answer it. I believe I have said enough to at least impress upon the minister the desirability of keeping the property of national parks for the people of the nation.


Jean Lesage: That is the purpose of
establishing national parks. The hon. member and the committee may rest assured that it is my utmost desire there shall not be

commercial activities in the parks. According to section 4 of the act, these areas are reserved for the enjoyment and recreation of the people of Canada.


Mr. Bell:: With respect to Fundy national park in New Brunswick, can the minister tell me without too much trouble if the covered bridge at the eastern approach to the park is within or without the park area?


Jean Lesage: I am informed that it is probably within the park's property.


Thomas Miller Bell: Has the minister given any consideration to the possibility of correcting a dangerous highway hazard where this bridge now exists?


Jean Lesage: I shall look into the matter.


Thomas Miller Bell: I believe this past year it was necessary to shoot some moose in Fundy national park during the closed season for moose in New Brunswick. After these moose were killed there was some argument as to who had the legal property, the federal or provincial government. I was wondering if it had been decided who actually had the property of these bodies?


Jean Lesage: Was this last fall?


Thomas Miller Bell: I believe it was.


Jean Lesage: It was never brought to my attention that there was any difficulty about shooting moose in Fundy national park. I understand that at some time last fall the matter was referred to the Department of Justice, who advised us we had the right to control the shooting of game within the boundaries of national parks.


Thomas Miller Bell: I have another question in connection with the historic sites part of this item. I believe the minister will recall that I have been communicating with him about Fort La Tour in Saint John and the possibility of erecting some monument there. We are agreed there is some difficulty in getting a suitable property for it. Could he tell me if this is just to be a cairn or is it going to be a large site?


Jean Lesage: Can the hon. member tell me if the question has been submitted to the historic sites and monuments board?


Thomas Miller Bell: Yes, it has gone all through those channels.


Jean Lesage: And it is now a recommendation to this department?


Thomas Miller Bell: Yes.


Jean Lesage: I shall look into the matter and let my hon. friend know.
Supply-Northern Affairs


Thomas Miller Bell: I pointed out to the minister in the letter that we would like to have something done this year because we are recognizing one of our early colonists in the person of Mr. de Champlain. It will be the 350th anniversary, and we hope also to be able to unveil a suitable monument to Lady La Tour who made an historical defence in Saint John. This was in early Saint John history when there were Indians running around in central Canada. We would like to see some consideration given to this matter.


Jean Lesage: I shall have a look at the file.


Mr. Holowach:: Can the minister tell us if the government maintains any historic site in Elk Island park in Alberta? If so, what was the cost of that historic site?


Jean Lesage: I am informed that in Elk Island national park there is no historic site as such, but there is a building that recalls the activities of the Ukrainian settlers in Canada.


Ambrose A. Holowach: What was the cost of that building?


Jean Lesage: It was erected some years ago. I did not bring with me all the detailed expenditures in the parks branch over the last twenty-five years. My hon. friend will understand that I could not do that. I have the expenditures for last year and for two years ago, and the estimates of what we expect to spend next year. But it was difficult for me to bring a complete library into the house.


Ambrose A. Holowach: Was it not put up two
years ago?


Jean Lesage: A few years ago; before my time. I do not know just when it was.


Mr. Yuill:: Are there any plans for extending the scenic routes in Jasper national park? I understand there has been some correspondence on that point from the chamber of commerce in Jasper requesting the extension of certain routes within the park.


Jean Lesage: I suppose the hon. member is referring to the Banff-Jasper road. We are going to pave ten miles of that road at what we call the Jasper end, and rebuild ten miles this year starting from Lake Louise in the direction of Jasper.


Charles Yuill: I am glad to hear that.


Jean Lesage: It is very costly.


Charles Yuill: Those were not the roads to which I had reference. I was attending the committee on agriculture when the earlier
4464	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs discussion took place on this subject. However there are other roads in the area to which the chamber of commerce referred in its letter to the minister which, I understand, he received recently and of which I have a copy. Would the minister's department take kindly to the establishment of a winter as well as a summer resort at Jasper? We have at that point facilities unsurpassed in Canada. I understand some representations have been made along those lines.


Jean Lesage: I have received representations from the Jasper chamber of commerce and from others, and the matter is under consideration.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: What price does Eldorado Mining and Refining pay to the department for the timber cut in the park, and is it purchased on a stumpage basis, or so much per thousand log feet? How much have they taken?


Jean Lesage: So much per thousand board feet.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: How much?


Jean Lesage: I do not know.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Your officials should know.


Jean Lesage: I shall have to look into it, and send the information to the hon. member.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Is any reforestation being done there?


Jean Lesage: The cutting being carried out by Eldorado Mining and Refining affects only the mature timber.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Is that timber being cut under the supervision of the parks board?


Jean Lesage: Definitely, yes, under supervision of the department.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: They are not just slashing it out?


Jean Lesage: No. It is done according to the rules of forest management as set down by the forestry branch. Our officials are following the work all the time. I suggest it would be easier to discuss the matter when we are considering the estimates for that branch.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: In many places they reforest at a rate of two trees for each one cut. What is being done there?


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the item carry.


Mr. Churchill:: I should like to refer to Riding Mountain national park. The figures given by the minister indicate that this park is the second greatest revenue producer of all our national parks. I note from the report


of the department of resources and development, as it was then known, for March 31, 1953 that in point of attendance it ranks second, with a visitor roll of 409,518 for the year 1952-53.
When on December 11 of last year we were considering the amendment to the National Parks Act I discussed with the minister the necessity for a bus depot at Riding Mountain national park. In view of the large number of visitors who go there I advanced at that time an argument in favour of the establishment of a bus depot. The minister said that it was up to the bus company to establish such a depot. However he concluded his remarks by saying that of course he would look into the matter. I wonder if in the interval the minister has looked into the matter and whether he is now prepared to make some announcement.


Jean Lesage: I have looked into the matter and the announcement I can make at this time is that the more I have looked into it the more I have been convinced that the present policy is the right one-that any bus depot would have to be built by the operators of the buses.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I do not disagree with that; but my point is that a bus depot should be established there, and that the department, which permits the buses to enter the park, to operate on the roads of the park and to stand at the sides of those roads, has certainly made some concessions to the bus operators and might very well request them to establish suitable accommodation for the people who go in. The number of people who enter Riding Mountain national park each year by bus is very large and, as I pointed out in December -and I regret having to repeat it-there is no suitable accommodation for the passengers. They have to debus into a lane and there is no place under cover for their luggage or for themselves, with the exception of a workroom in a garage. There is no rest room for bus travellers; in other words there is no accommodation whatever. The substitute for a bus depot is a filling station, at the front of which the tickets are purchased. The luggage and the passengers are placed in the centre of the filling station where work on the repairing of cars is carried out. On a rainy day anyone who is waiting for a bus must crowd into that area to get shelter.
The condition is far from statisfactory. This is the second most important national park in Canada from the standpoint of revenue received from visitors. It is visited by people from the western provinces and the United States. In some respects it has been kept up to a high standard. However one of the

lamentable omissions has been the lack of accommodation for people who come in by bus. Those who enter by car have places to go, and may rest in their cars; but bus travellers receive no consideration at all.
Let me make it clear that the people who are looking after the interests of the bus company by way of selling tickets and arranging for travelling on the bus are performing a very efficient service, within their limitations of space. I would point out, too, that there is ground available for a bus depot. I think it has been left vacant purposely all these years in the hope that a bus depot would be established there. How does one have it established? I am asking the minister to urge upon the bus company the establishment of a depot for the accommodation of visitors to the park.


Jean Lesage: I will send them Hansard.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I think the minister has to do more than send them Hansard. I am perfectly sure they will be quite pleased to read what I am now saying, but I should like some better action than that. If it is left to a casual remark, or something of that nature, I am sure nothing will be done. In the interests of the national parks and of the public does the minister not think this is essential accommodation? Other things are provided in the national park for the accommodation of visitors, and a bus depot would fill a long-felt need. I am pressing the minister to continue his investigation. Surely he is not just going to leave it at this stage, at which I say something about it in the house and he makes a remark about it and it is just left there. Can the minister not consult with the superintendent of the park and see what arrangements he may have attempted to make in the past with the bus line? He can communicate directly with those who operate the buses and suggest to them that this is an essential part of their service to the public, and if they-


Jean Lesage: That is what I wanted to hear. And if they-


Gordon Minto Churchill: These are things-


Jean Lesage: What is the threat?


Gordon Minto Churchill: -that can be done.


Jean Lesage: And if they do not?


Gordon Minto Churchill: The bus line would not be running its service into that park unless it was at a profit.


Jean Lesage: That is none of our business. The franchise is provincial.
Supply-Northern Affairs


Gordon Minto Churchill: That is quite true. I was interested in that some years ago and had something to do with arranging for a direct bus service from Winnipeg to the park instead of a change of buses at Neepawa or Minnedosa and the provincial authorities and bus lines co-operated magnificently. Now there is a direct service right to the park from the city of Winnipeg. What I want to impress upon the minister is that the number of people who go in by bus is very large. I have travelled up there by bus several times during five successive summers. I know the circumstances extremely well. I have gone there and this business of standing out in the rain or enduring the dust and having no place for your baggage is not pleasant, and 1 have seen other people enduring the same difficulties which are not necessary in a national park of this standing.
The erection of a bus depot at the Riding Mountain national park would not be a very expensive undertaking because naturally it does not have to be of the same standard as one that faces winter conditions. It would be used only in the summertime. These parks are established for the convenience of the public as recreational areas, and surely we should make sure that in those recreational areas proper accommodation is provided for all types of travelling. I reiterate that at Riding Mountain national park, which is the second most important park from the standpoint of attendance and revenue, there is no suitable provision for those who come in by bus. What will the minister do about it?


Mr. Zaplitny:: Mr. Chairman, I first want to say that I agree thoroughly with the representations just made by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre. May I suggest a solution to the difficulty, if the minister does not have one handy? He could satisfy both the request made by the hon. member for Brandon-Souris and the one made by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre, if he would suggest a deal to the bus company of relieving them of the fee that they now have to pay in order to drive through the park in return for proper bus accommodation.
I have two questions I should like to ask the minister in connection with the Riding Mountain national park. First, I believe last fall or last summer recommendations were made to his department in connection with skiing facilities at that point. At the present time there are no skiing facilities and, as is well known, the park is inactive during the winter months. There has been

Supply-Northern Affairs considerable investment, both from the point of view of the treasury and privately, in the facilities of that resort.
If investigations were made the minister would find that there are good possibilities for skiing in that area. It would bring additional revenue and make greater possible use of the Wasagaming resort. I believe it would be desirable. Has the minister looked into that question?


Jean Lesage: This is one of the things we have under active consideration. We are investigating now what the effects of the necessary cutting of timber and wood on the slopes would be on the run-off of water. The setting up of a skiing resort in the Riding Mountain park is under active consideration. The possibilities are being studied very carefully at this time.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: I am glad to hear that. I shall leave it at that. The other question is in connection with big game animals within the boundary of the park. I was very interested in the exchange of opinions a few moments ago in connection with another park. I am not sure that I have the name of the park, but I think it was the Fundy park in the maritimes. The minister related the opinion of the Department of Justice that so far as all game within the boundaries of the national park is concerned, it is under the jurisdiction of his department. In other words, the proprietors of those animals are the department which administers it. That is a very interesting point, and I am glad he takes that attitude because we have a problem in connection with the Riding Mountain national park which has been causing some headaches for a number of years and has given rise to considerable dispute as between the province and the federal department.
Every few years that there is a late harvest -and there appears to be some danger of a late harvest this year again-large numbers of elk particularly and some deer come out of the Riding Mountain national park and damage the crops of the farmers who were unable to harvest them in time. If the crop is early and they can harvest it at a normal date not too much damage is done because the tendency of these animals is to come out late in the fall, particularly after the first snowfall. On several occasions elk have done serious and widespread damage. I have inspected it personally, and I speak from personal knowledge.
I have seen fields of flax which would have yielded from 20 to 25 bushels an acre completely destroyed and trampled into the ground. The same thing has happened with wheat, oats and other crops as far as a mile and a half, and in some instances two or three miles away from the boundaries of

the park. When those farmers whose crops were lost attempted to obtain some compensation they were given a sort of classic runaround between the provincial government and the federal government. The province maintains that since these animals belong to the federal government-


Jean Lesage: They do not.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: -then, they are the ones who are responsible for their actions. The federal government has taken the attitude that the game laws of Manitoba, of course, are under the jurisdiction of the provincial government, which is true, and therefore they feel they do not have the responsibility. Of course there can be a delightful debate from the legal standpoint, but it does not bring any compensation to the farmer. Leaving the legal angles aside there is a feeling that there is a good moral case at least, because if a farmer living near a national park owns a herd of cattle, or horses, or any other animals and these animals find their way into the park and destroy property which belongs to the park authorities, then I am sure the federal government would be quite ready to prosecute the owner of that livestock and claim that he is responsible for the actions of his livestock. I do not think there would be any dispute about that. However, when the reverse happens, when the livestock which is owned by the federal government goes on to a farmer's property and causes damage-


Jean Lesage: They are not livestock. They are wild animals.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: But who owns them?


Jean Lesage: Well, who could own free wild animals? If they were owned they would no longer be free wild animals.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: Perhaps if they were a little more domesticated they would do less harm. I might point out that perhaps one of the reasons why they do leave the park is because of the crowded conditions. I notice in the case of the park mentioned by the hon. member for Red Deer the authorities see fit to provide 18 square miles for a herd of 150 horses, which works out mathematically at 77 acres per horse, so they must have Trojan horses there to provide such an area. In addition, perhaps if the elk had most pasture facilities within the park they might not leave it. But the legal point, or shall I say the question of justice, is that the minister has just taken the attitude this afternoon that wild animals within the park are the property of the government of Canada.


Jean Lesage: I have never taken that attitude, Mr. Chairman. When they are in the park they are under our control, but when

they are outside the park they become the control of the provincial authorities. We are doing our best, in collaboration with the provincial authorities, to restrict the wild animal population in Riding Mountain park in order to prevent grazing outside the park limits.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: But that hardly covers the point. The minister now says that wild animals are under the control of his department so long as they stay within the confines of the park but that the moment they cross the boundary line and go outside the park they come under the control of the provincial authorities.


Jean Lesage: That is correct.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: But that does not cover the point at all. Because if the federal government is responsible for the actions of those wild animals which are under their jurisdiction, they are also responsible for keeping them within the confines of their property. I am sure the minister, who is familiar with herd laws passed by rural municipalities, is aware that it is not the responsibility of the municipalities to keep livestock off farms in certain areas. It becomes the responsibility of the owner of that livestock to keep his livestock fenced in or confined to a certain area so that it will not damage other farms. If the same principle holds good in this case, it is the responsibility of the federal government to keep their wild animals within the confines of their property. Of course, I am aware they cannot do that unless they round up some of the horses they have at the other park, put on spurs, and ride herd. But if they are not capable of keeping them on their own property, then the least they can do is to be responsible for the actions of those animals.


Jean Lesage: What do you want to do, kill the elk and abolish the park?


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: No, not at all; for all I am asking is that the federal government, which has a proprietary right over these animals-


Jean Lesage: It has not.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: -or have control-


Jean Lesage: When they are in the park.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: Well, the minister is a lawyer and I would hate to see what would happen if he took that kind of case to court. I am glad-


Jean Lesage: It is a very good case.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: I am sure he is quite in the wrong if he is trying to tell me now that if the wild animals under the jurisdiction of his department damage someone else's property then he is no longer responsible for their
Supply-Northern Affairs actions. That sort of legal philosophy would not go very far under property and civil rights. I am not asking that these animals be destroyed or the park abolished. On the contrary, I am asking the federal government to be responsible for the actions of the wild animals which come under their jurisdiction and which stray on to farmers' property and cause damage to their crops. The government should be willing to compensate such farmers for the damage done. It would not involve a large amount of money and it only happens once in every two or three years, but certainly it is time we should have a clear-cut arrangement so that the farmers who have suffered damage will know to whom they can apply for compensation or, if necessary, whom they should take to court to sue for damages. So far they have been given a runaround by the federal government and there is no one to whom they can apply in order to collect damages. I would like the minister to make a categorical statement as to whether he feels the federal government has any responsibility under the conditions I have described, and if so, to what extent.


Jean Lesage: I cannot add anything to what I have already said. These wild animals are under the control of the park authorities when they are in the park. The moment they go outside the park boundaries they become a provincial responsibility and there is nothing I can do about it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Like a Liberal when he gets out of caucus.


Mr. Weir:: Mr. Chairman, I am sure we all know of other parks in which there are deer which often take the notion to run away and visit open farmland and sometimes damage grain, and there simply is not anything one can do about it. As far as responsibility is concerned, what I rose to say to the minister is that if he is having trouble with crops being damaged by wildlife which has strayed from the parklands, and he is considering compensation in that respect, then I think he should also consider the Migratory Birds Convention Act and give consideration also to damage done to crops by wild ducks from nearby lakes. We have ducks from areas not far from those mentioned by the hon. member for Dauphin and I am bound to say that, at certain seasons of the year, I have had many more complaints presented to me in regard to damage done by wild ducks than that caused by deer. This, of course, is a seasonal matter, but if the question of compensation is going to come up in this regard I frankly cannot see why the federal government should be held responsible for such damage. After all, while the game is in the park there is no
4468	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs problem in so far as damage to the crops outside is concerned. When they are outside the park they are free game for hunters from whom the federal government secures a moderate amount of money through issuing licences. I presume the same applies with respect to birds, and if it is a question of compensation for damage done in a matter of this kind I believe it comes down to a question of the licence fee charged to the hunter to hunt this game and I frankly do not know where one can draw the line in so far as damage done to crops is concerned. They should be limited to the area within the national park, though that is difficult to achieve because these animals can move a considerable distance in a relatively short period of time and if good foliage or greener fields are farther away then the animals will go that distance in order to obtain good feeding. I am wondering where the line should be drawn.
While I am on my feet I want to make reference to what was said earlier in connection with the proposed ski slide in the Riding Mountain national park. This would be a very desirable undertaking and perhaps if we had a greater population in the immediate area the project would meet with even greater enthusiasm than it has so far. The minister has referred to the problem of removing trees from the Riding Mountain area where the ski slide might be established, and the possible effect there might be resulting therefrom because of quicker run-offs, and maybe adding to a rather difficult problem that exists in that area now in so far as flood conditions are concerned. But along with it, as I have understood the situation, arises the problem of winterizing facilities in the park area. My understanding is that the facilities there for the accommodation of the public are privately owned and that, as such, it would be private initiative that would have to winterize those things to make suitable accommodation out of them.
There is another problem that arises in this same connection, namely the facilities for reaching the park. The railway facilities are not immediately adjacent to the park. You have to go in either by way of McCreary or Erickson which are some little distance out of the park area. Otherwise it would be largely a matter of automobile or bus travel. However, that is perhaps something that does not stand completely in the way but it is one of the problems that arise therefrom. But having regard at the same time to the people who would use the skiing facilities, it would look to me as though it would be largely a holidaying crowd there for week ends or longer periods. Perhaps we should assist in


providing facilities for those people, but I cannot see it immediately as a place where people would go in only for the week end for skiing purposes. It would look to be a project for a sort of winter resort. Maybe that has something to commend itself and perhaps it will as time goes on. But in the same light I point out this other fact in so far as skiing is concerned.
I must confess that I do not know where our skiing enthusiasts in Manitoba reside. We have had two ski undertakings in the southern part of Manitoba, one at La Riviere and the other at Roseisle, that were given considerable encouragement by week-end excursions by both our railways. I think a good deal of pleasure was gained therefrom and to some extent they are being continued, but the railways have discontinued the service which was a week-end service, I think maybe largely on Sunday. I would hope that the minister would continue to give his usual careful attention to this undertaking. If we can have a winter resort in Manitoba, I am all for it. But at the same time I think that a careful survey should be made of the population that is likely to use those facilities and to what extent tourists or ski enthusiasts from outside of our province might be induced to use those same facilities and certainly those from areas other than those immediately adjacent to it. In reviewing this matter I hope the minister will continue to keep those areas in mind.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to say just a word once again in support of the request and the very good case made by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre in respect of the establishment of a bus depot at Wasa-gaming in Riding Mountain national park. I need not develop the argument because it has been put very well, but I should like to ask the minister specifically whether his investigation in this matter included conversations or correspondence with the bus people. If so-well, I need not pursue that question because I see him shaking his head.


Jean Lesage: No.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister did not get in touch with the bus people?


Jean Lesage: No; I did not.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I do not think that is a satisfactory situation. I realize it was the minister's predecessor whom we addressed on this question-


Jean Lesage: No; it was myself.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It was in December of last year.


Jean Lesage: It was I.


Stanley Howard Knowles: However, it seems to me that to deal with this matter at all would require contact with the bus companies. I will go a little bit further than did my neighbour the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre. He suggests that they might be requested to establish a bus depot. It seems to me that since they get their permission to do business in the park from the park authorities-the minister is shaking his head.


Jean Lesage: No, no. The bus company does not get permission from the park authorities. There is an entrance fee for buses.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Oh, yes.


Jean Lesage: They pay the entrance fee at the gate and they are entitled to pass just as any other motor car is entitled to pass. The franchise to operate from one point to another in the province of Manitoba is under the jurisdiction of the provincial authorities as it is in any other province.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Who is responsible for the roads inside of Riding Mountain national park?


Jean Lesage: That is the point. We are building and maintaining the road, but we are not collecting the gasoline tax to do that. We are doing it for park purposes. The road is open because it is an alternative route by which to go up to the northern part of Manitoba, a fact which the hon. member for Brandon-Souris mentioned a few moments ago.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister says that the federal government is not collecting the gasoline tax but he admits that the federal government is building and maintaining roads in the park.


Jean Lesage: Surely.


Stanley Howard Knowles: And that the federal government collects a fee from every vehicle that goes into the park.


Jean Lesage: Yes; but that fee does not begin to pay for the roads.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Whether it is a fee for one trip or is a one-season fee, I suggest that the authority which collects that fee from the buses is certainly in a position to lay down the conditions under which those buses will go into the park. I should be perfectly willing for the minister, in the first instance, to follow the suggestion made by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre and request that they give consideration to this matter. But if they are not willing to consider it on the basis of a request, I think the government should go further and require it.
Supply-Northern Affairs I submit that it is a matter of some disappointment-I am sure the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre will feel that way as I am sure will all of us in Manitoba-to discover that the minister has done nothing about the matter since it was presented to him, except his claim that he has gone into it and that he has considered it.


Jean Lesage: Surely.


Stanley Howard Knowles: He has considered it but he has not taken it up with the people who might do something about it. I hope we will get a better report next time.


Jean Lesage: I was asked to consider the advisability of having this department pay for the building of this bus depot.


Gordon Minto Churchill: No.


Jean Lesage: I said at that time that I believed it was up to the operators of the buses to build that station. The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre insisted that 1 again look into the matter more carefully, and I did so. But I never could come to the conclusion that it was up to this department to build a bus depot. My view was that it was up to the bus operators to do that, as was done in Banff national park.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Did you tell them that?


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, if the bus service there is not under any permit or licence from this department, it seems to me that the request for the building of a bus depot which is now made by the members for that region, shall I say, instead of being addressed to me, one who has nothing at all to do with this service, should be addressed to the bus company. That is what happened in Banff park. The Greyhound bus company has built itself a bus depot. A few moments ago I said I was going to send Hansard to the bus operators. More and more I believe I am going to do it.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, I hope the minister does send Hansard. Then the people who read it will get the correction which I now offer. As I recall it, the minister said that I was insisting that the department build a bus depot in Riding Mountain national park.


Jean Lesage: That is what the hon. member did last year.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I said no such thing at all. In my remarks last December-and repeated today-I stressed the necessity for a bus depot. I was not asking the department to build it or insisting that the department build it. If it is more proper for the Greyhound bus line to build the bus depot, well and

Supply-Northern Affairs good. My point is that the department has a responsibility to the visitors to that national park whose numbers are in excess of 400,000, many hundreds of whom enter that park by bus. How the department discharges that responsibility is in the lap of the minister.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What a lap!


Gordon Minto Churchill: When the hon. member for Portage-Neepawa was speaking he suggested that he was confident that the minister would give his usual careful consideration to the point that the hon. member was raising. I have not the least confidence that the minister will give careful consideration-


Jean Lesage: If the hon. member keeps on like that there will be a good chance that I will not.


Gordon Minto Churchill: -or that he has given careful consideration to this point. There is nothing usual about what he has been doing that has any relation to careful consideration. But there is a responsibility on the part of the department to people who visit our national parks. We provide many other things for them in the national parks. As my colleague from Winnipeg mentioned, a road system is provided in the national parks. Golf courses, swimming facilities, bath houses, tennis courts, bowling greens and all sorts of things are provided. In Riding Mountain national park there is a museum and beautiful flower gardens to interest those who go there.
National parks exist for the pleasure, enjoyment and recreation of the people of Canada. A bus depot at Riding Mountain national park would simply be proper accommodation for those who enter that park by bus. We have suggested to the minister ways and means of getting that accommodation provided. I feel he has brushed us aside a little bit when we have asked that he correspond with the bus company, take up the matter with the superintendent of the park, investigate the various angles and find out for himself the number of people who go there by bus. I do not have accurate figures, but I have been there when three buses fully loaded have arrived at the same time, followed in the afternoon by others. That goes on during the summer season day after day with, of course, the main emphasis on the week ends. I have arrived there with over one hundred people coming there at one time by bus just on one day. Therefore I feel safe in saying that hundreds of people enter the park by bus, and they have no suitable accommodation when they debus or when they assemble to catch the bus for the return journey.


In my opinion the minister must apprize himself of the facts and discharge his responsibility to those who visit Riding Mountain national park. I would stop at this point and wait for a reply from the minister but I feel that he will make some noncommittal remark. Therefore, having now interested him in Riding Mountain national park, I will go on and suggest certain other things that might be done there for the convenience of the visitors and for the protection of the park.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I suggest that he go there, and that he go by bus.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I hope he will. I would be very happy to travel with him by bus. We might have an interesting conversation en route and when we got to our destination. I have been familiar with Riding Mountain national park from its inception and have resided there in tents and cottages since 1930 with the exception of the war years. Therefore I know something about the place. My impression is that just prior to the war it was in better condition than it has been since, although the last two years have seen considerable improvements made in the road conditions and so on.
I was very much concerned to note that some time during the war years certain facilities disappeared from the bathing beaches at the park. There used to be a high diving board on which the young people enjoyed themselves. That disappeared in the interval and so far as I know has not been re-established. I would point out to the minister that it is rather important to check the small piers that are dotted along the shore of the lake in the settled area. There are quite a number of them and he should check them to see if suitable repairs cannot be made. A few years ago they were damaged considerably by ice and high water. As a result they have become shortened leaving at the end of them, submerged under water, rocks and shortened piles. This creates an extremely dangerous condition for people who want to dive off these piers. The small piers are used by people for bathing and diving purposes.
We know that every year at some summer resort someone dives into shallow water or into a place where there are rocks and suffers serious injuries. Two years ago I drew this matter to the attention of the department by letter and some adjustments were made. The piers were repaired to a certain extent, although not necessarily as the result of my letter. Small signs were placed at the end of the piers saying "danger" but I think that is not sufficient. I think the piers should be

rebuilt to their original length thus covering up the rocks and piles that are under water. Strangers coming there late in the evening sometimes go down to bathe and in the excitement of the moment, and unaware of the condition, they might dive off the end instead of the end of the piers. It would be very serious for anyone who suffered this misfortune.
I also suggest to the minister that in view of the steadily increasing attendance at Riding Mountain national park-the report for 1952-53 shows an increase in attendance of 75,429 just in one year-more facilities should be provided at the beaches. There is a long pier which is crowded on holidays and Sundays by hundreds of people milling about and jostling each other. After almost twenty years of existence of that pier it might well be considered that a second pier should be constructed. The present long pier is used of course by people who are going on boat excursions and by the launches which take visitors around the lake. It is also used by people who swim off the pier. It is very crowded and tends to be very dangerous for the swimmers with launches coming in and out. Perhaps after twenty years a second pier should be constructed.
I suggest to the minister that, in keeping with developments at other summer resorts, better facilities should be offered for young children. I have seen summer resorts where small slides were provided near the shore for young children. There is nothing at all of that kind at Riding Mountain national park. There is just the beach. There are similar things that might well be done.
In the time of high water a few years ago the walk along the beach that extended for a mile or two was destroyed. It has been repaired in part during the last two years. That again is something that needs looking into so that the standard of the park will be maintained as it was before the war. In some places where the cliff is a bit steep, wooden steps were built down to the shore in the early stages of the park. These suffered from decay, and in some instances they have been taken out and replaced only by gravel. The steps are steep and slippery, and I have wondered why the wooden stairways were not maintained or replaced. These are some of the things with regard to Riding Mountain national park that deserve attention and consideration. In its general appearance it is a credit to Canada. It is a credit to those who have been in charge of the operation over the years, and certainly it is a credit to the gardeners who look after the lawns and flowerbeds. But the standard of the park needs constant supervision and main-
Supply-Northern Affairs tenance. I suggest the minister make it one of his main items of investigation when he goes there this summer to make final plans for the construction of the bus depot.


Mr. Regier:: I should like to say just a little bit about one of the national parks that is under consideration. I should like to say how pleased the people of the lower mainland of British Columbia were at hearing that some active consideration is being given to the establishment of a national park in Newfoundland. However, we would like to point out that there are upwards of 700,000 people living within a very closely confined area on the lower mainland of British Columbia.
Not long ago we had a return tabled in this house including some correspondence that had taken place in regard to this matter. The people of the lower mainland immediately took great interest in the contents of that correspondence. I can assure the Minister of Fisheries that the people there are not going to easily forget the letter he wrote to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, in which he advocated and held forth the possibilities of the area known as Garibaldi provincial park. We were happy also to notice the answer the minister sent to the Minister of Fisheries. The answer indicated that if and when the government of British Columbia was willing or able to build a first class highway to the entrance of Garibaldi park, and if and when the government of British Columbia was willing to offer the unencumbered title to the lands to the federal government, then the minister assured us he would give the matter most sympathetic consideration.
I know we do have some national parks in British Columbia. However, these national parks are hundreds and hundreds of miles away from where most of our people live. Most of our people live in an urban area and many have not the automobile that is necessary to take advantage of the national parks we have. A lot of these people are old age pensioners and people in receipt of war veterans allowance. We have more than our share of these people. They have no park facilities available to them except those provided by the local municipalities. It is true we have the world famous Stanley park. However, when you go there on a Sunday afternoon you are able to see very little because the park is literally overloaded with human beings.
I should like to commend the ministers concerned in this exchange of correspondence. I know that possibly the highway in mind was a Howe Sound highway, leading to the northern entrance of Garibaldi park. I noticed that

Supply

Northern Affairs some oi the local Liberals in British Columbia used the minister's answer in an effort to hamper the attempts of the British Columbia government to complete the Pacific Great Eastern Railway. An attempt was made to tell the people that if we did not finish the Pacific Great Eastern but had the Howe Sound highway, the federal government would take over the development of this great national asset, Garibaldi park. I do not know whether the people concerned did not realize or were not aware of the fact there is a new highway within a very few miles of the southern entrance to Garibaldi park. I hope the government will soon build a main highway off that to the entrance to Garibaldi park, and will at that time offer to hand over the unencumbered title of Garibaldi park to the federal government.
I am firmly convinced the resources of the provincial government are not nearly sufficient to develop Garibaldi park. If the park is developed by the federal government as a national park, and if a highway is built from the southern end of Garibaldi park to the northern end, it will do a lot for the economy of the province. It will help Canada and it will make new recreation facilities available to some 10 per cent of the people of Canada, not to mention the tourists who would visit this park from the United States.


Mr. Maclnnis:: I should like to say a few words, Mr. Chairman, in support of the argument the member for Burnaby-Coquitlam has made in connection with what is known in British Columbia as Garibaldi park. Strangely enough, shortly after I became a member of this house I had some correspondence with the former minister of the interior, which he passed on to the then minister of trade and commerce, who was a member of the cabinet from British Columbia. I believe it is a fact that the former government of British Columbia, that is, the government of the late Dr. Tolmie, in 1930 or 1931 offered the Garibaldi park area to the federal government for development as a national park.
I was informed by Mr. Stevens, who was then the minister from British Columbia in the cabinet, that the reason the federal government did not accept at that time was that there was no money available for the development. I do not believe that excuse holds today. I am rather sorry that I did not look far enough ahead to have this correspondence with me. It is now hoary with age, but I assure the minister that what I am telling him are the facts, and they can be proven by reference to the correspondence. Everything the member for Burnaby-Coquitlam has said about the beauties of Garibaldi
[Mr. Regier.l
park and the advantage it would be to the large population in British Columbia, which is congregated in that small section of the lower mainland, is quite correct. I would be glad indeed if the minister would give some study to this matter. I can see no reason why he should not study it, because it is so important to British Columbia. In doing so I am sure he would have the support of 'his colleague who represents that area.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I have been encouraged by the minister to ask one or two further questions. What is the basis of the minister's estimate of expenditures in the various national parks? Does it bear any relationship whatsoever to the number of visitors? Upon making a hasty calculation from the estimates for this year and the number of visitors as shown in the report for 1952-53, I find that at Banff national park the expenditure would be about $2 per visitor, at Jasper about $5, at Prince Edward Island national park 70 cents and at Riding Mountain national park 50 cents. Is there any relationship between the expenditure and the number of visitors?


Jean Lesage: There is of course to a certain extent; it is one of the factors. But the factors to be considered are numerous and varied. Much depends upon the stage of development. So far as I am concerned, I receive reports from the director of the parks branch in respect of the various parks, setting out what is required by way of improvements in a given park for the coming year. We establish an order of priority, and look into the matter ourselves. We must decide what is a reasonable amount to be spent in a park in any given year, and the order of priority of the various projects. Of course the number of people attending the parks is one factor, and the stage of development is another. The encouragement given to tourists is another. It must be kept in mind that costs in the mountain parks are higher than they are elsewhere, and there are various other intangibles that must be considered. I am sure my hon. friend, with his experience, knows very well the kind of study that must be made, when it comes to a decision as to what will be spent in one park and what in another.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National parks and historic sites services-
305. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $3,640,735.
Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: Would the minister answer the question I raised a while ago?


Jean Lesage: We propose an expenditure of $21,000 this year for the construction of an

administration building and a residence for the museum assistant at Fort Battleford national historic park.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: Is any work to be done on the ground, by way of a water system or anything like that?


Jean Lesage: I am informed a water well has been dug.


Mr. Blackmore:: Mr. Chairman, there are several matters I should like to bring to the attention of the committee in respect of Waterton Lakes national park. Those who are not familiar with Alberta will not know that the Waterton Lakes park is located in the southwestern corner of Alberta, bordering on the state of Montana. It is the first of a series of parks running from south to north, including the Banff and Jasper national parks, as well as others.
Waterton Lakes park, as I pointed out to the committee last fall, is in many respects the show-window of Canada owing to the fact that to the south of it is the great Glacier national park in the United States, through which runs the famous Logan pass highway, to travel over which people often journey more than a thousand miles. The fact that so many people go to Glacier park, and that Waterton Lakes park adjoins it, suggests to the average mind that if we could make Waterton Lakes park sufficiently attractive we would bring into Canada those tourists who visit Glacier national park in the United States.
There are other reasons why Waterton Lakes park serves as a sort of show-window for this country, one of which is that the southernmost route of the trans-Canada highway, which runs through the Crowsnest pass, passes within thirty or forty miles of the Waterton Lakes park. It passes through Macleod and past Pincher Creek, so that people who are on that highway running east and west across Canada could visit the Waterton Lakes park; and each one of them who could spare the time and money would certainly do so if we could only make of the park the kind we have dreamed of making it.
In what I am saying I am not depreciating the park in any way. It is very beautiful and is becoming well known. It has tremendous potentialities. In addition to what I have said, it is not very far from the main trunk highway running from south to north in Alberta, entering at Coutts, and going through Lethbridge, Calgary and Edmonton up into the northland which, everyone agrees, will become a veritable fairyland of tourist attraction before very long.
Supply-Northern Affairs
There is one other aspect to which I referred last fall and which I believe is worth repeating. For some reason or another there has not been the amount of development in Waterton Lakes park that it deserves. It has been more or less neglected since around 1920, or perhaps right from its inception. This becomes clear when one considers the amount of money spent there in comparison with the amount spent at Banff, Jasper, and other parks in Alberta. I believe, as do the people of Lethbridge, that somehow or other we should manage to catch up in the development of this park, because money has not been spent there as it has been in others.
With this brief review as a background I wish to ask several questions and make several comments. In the first place the people of Lethbridge riding are very thankful for the work the minister has done within the last year. In thanking the minister, I wish to recall for all hon. members, and particularly those in the country who might not know, that much of the fine development that has taken place in Waterton Lakes park in the last few years has been because of the active interest of the man who just preceded the minister in his position, namely, the present Minister of Public Works. Therefore in thanking the minister we have those two men to thank. As far as I have been able to gather from the way the present minister is attacking his work, I would say that he is going to be one of the greatest ministers that we have had in this department in the history of Canada.
The Lethbridge riding, as I was saying, is grateful for the amount of money which has been spent and which is appropriated to be spent in the Waterton Lakes park in the near future. According to the record on page 380, we find that the amount of money appropriated last year was $190,000 for the building of new constructions in the park, general improvements, and the amount of money appropriated for the present year is $211,725. We are grateful for this. It does not include upkeep of the park, as hon. members know. This is the amount of money that has been set aside for making new improvements and generally increasing the beauty of the park.
I should like the minister to give the committee several sets of details, if he happens to have them convenient. I should like to know how much money has been appropriated for the Waterton Lakes park, for improvement in buildings and the like in the park from the year 1924 down to the present time. That would give us a chance to get a general idea of how much money has been appropriated. Then I should like him to tell,

Supply-Northern Affairs if he has the figures at his disposal, how much of that money that was appropriated for improvements of the park was not spent in the park but was returned to the department unspent. Can the minister give those figures?


Jean Lesage: The hon. member was good enough the other day to tell me in advance that he would ask these questions so that I could obtain the figures. I have no record of the appropriations from the fiscal year 1924-25 to the fiscal year 1934-35, but with the consent of the members of the committee I can put on Hansard a list of the expenditures year by year from 1924-25 to 1934-35 exclusive and then-


The Deputy Chairman:: Is it agreed that the minister can put this table on Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Jean Lesage: The table follows:
Year	Expenditures
1924-	1925	
$40,1301925-	1926	
45,4991926-	1927	
47,4761927-	1928	
50,9991928-	1929	
52,4711929-	1930	
68,8701930-	1931	
104,3601931-	1932	
69,6371932-	1933	
78,1361933-	1934	
99,505
From 1934-35 to 1953-54 I can give a list showing the amount appropriated in each fiscal year, then the amount of actual expenditures made and then the lapsing balance for each year. With the consent of the committee I should like to place that on Hansard.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Has the minister the unanimous consent of the committee to place those figures on Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Jean Lesage: The table follows:
Year	Appro- priation	Expenditures	Lapsing Balances1934-1935	. .$138,126	$137,234	8921935-1936	.. 194,552	194,717	-1651936-1937	.. 115,439	114,102	1,3371937-1938	.. 83,683	83,363	3201938-1939	.. 80,060	79,740	3201939-1940	.. 164,301	163,816	4851940-1941	.. 79,633	79,681	21941-1942	.. 93,980	92,965	1,0151942-1943	.. 69,768	69,577	1911943-1944	.. 72,337	62,364	9,9731944-1945	.. 68,230	64,984	3,2461945-1946	.. 115,000	100,243	14,7571946-1947	.. 118,000	116,348	1,6521947-1948	.. 141,200	140,988	2121948-1949	.. 401,763	382,137	19,6261949-1950	.. 580,316	557,768	22,5481950-1951	.. 393,799	297,613	96,1861951-1952	.. 618,608	464,970	153,6381952-1953	.. 530,090	515.113	14,9771953-1954	.. 400,410	356,573 (Mar. 31, 43,837	
1954) 

$4,731,379	$385,049
I should like to give the following explanations, though, for the lapsed balances for 1950-51 and 1951-52, which are quite large. In 1950-51 the lapsing balance was $96,186, as will be seen from the table on Hansard. This amount was made up of lapsed balances in a number of different works and projects. The largest lapsing amount was $20,705 in the replacement of an old bridge over Upper Cameron creek. These lapsed balances occurred for various reasons, such as noncompletion of projects due to weather conditions and changes in plans resulting in savings of funds.
In 1951-52 the lapsed balance was $153,638. There was one large project for the hard-surfacing of a number of park roads at a total estimated cost of $323,500. Of this amount, $128,452 lapsed, about half due to non-completion of work, and the other half due to the work being done at less cost than had been expected. The remainder of the over-all lapsed balance for the park was comprised of minor amounts in a number of projects.


John Horne Blackmore: Has the minister at his disposal immediately the amount of money that was appropriated for Banff and Jasper over the years from 1924 to the present time? Does he happen to have those figures or can he give us those?


Jean Lesage: No. The hon. member drew to my attention the questions that he intended to ask as to Waterton Lakes park, but I did not gather that he wanted the same figures for Jasper and Banff. These questions require quite an amount of work, as he will realize, and I did not think that he would ask the question that he has just asked.


John Horne Blackmore: I wish to thank the minister for his care in giving us the figures which he has already given. I wonder whether the minister happens to have at his disposal the materials from which he can give us an account of the improvements which have been made in Waterton Lakes park during the last year? Does he happen to have those readily at his disposal?


Jean Lesage: I am sorry. I have what is proposed for this year, though.


John Horne Blackmore: I would rather the minister would keep those and give them to us at a future time.


Jean Lesage: I do not have the details of the expenditures for 1953-54.


John Horne Blackmore: I just add one request at the present time. In addition to what has been done recently, may I say that, as far as I can judge, during the past two years
rMr. Blackmore.]

the progress in the park has been just about as rapid as one could expect it to be. All we needed was a little more money. Possibly it would not have been easy to spend that money if we had it. There is one important improvement which I feel the country ought to make in the park rather soon. There should be a good swimming pool in the park. In rather earlier times past private enterprise provided a swimming pool, but that swimming pool was condemned. It was thought by those who had charge of such matters that it was hardly suitable and probably not safe enough; therefore it was closed. Since the closing of that swimming pool the deficiency has been noticed rather painfully in the park. I would suggest to the minister that if it can possibly be done in the very near future, a fine swimming pool should be built. It should be in a large, commodious, beautiful building which could be used on stormy days so that the people could come in out of the rain or out of the cold winds such as we sometimes get there in the summertime, and enjoy themselves just as well inside that building as they would if they were outside. Sometimes we have stormy weather on three, four and five days in a row, in the summertime. And in the park, for reasons that do not need to be gone into, it becomes a very disappointing situation to those who happened to choose those particular days for their holidays. Therefore, if we could have a building such as I have indicated, we would be additionally grateful to the minister.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Item 305 is a large item consisting of $3,500,000. A little over $1 million is allotted to roads in the park. Can the minister give us a breakdown of the money that will be spent on roads in each park?


Jean Lesage: This involves some research and I do not think I have a breakdown of the figures now. The main item is in the Banff national park covering the reconstruction of the Jasper highway from Mile 0 to Mile 10, that is from Lake Louise. The estimated cost of that is $602,000. At Jasper there is another item of $148,000 for the completion of another portion of the Jasper highway. There is an expenditure of $350,000 for surfacing the Cabot trail between Mile 0 and Mile 18-5 in Cape Breton Highlands national park. In the Fundy national park there is an item of $30,000 and another for $10,000. In the Jasper national park there is an item for the replacement of a bridge at Mile 15 on the Banff-Jasper highway at a cost of $100,000. And there is another item for the Banff-Jasper highway at a cost of $53,000. I am just going through these items now.
Supply-Northern Affairs


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: It is quite all right. The reason I ask this question is that I have some very close friends who live near Jasper park and I have some other friends who also visited the park in Manitoba and both complained bitterly to me as a member of parliament at the state of the roads and said the worst road they had come over was in the Manitoba national park, and I believe roads through other parks in the west are in the same bad state of repair.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am very glad to hear that the Banff-Jasper-Lake Louise highway is now being improved. I was over it last summer and I am sorry to say that the American tourists with whom I spoke who were going up to the ice fields at Columbia all complained bitterly about the state of the highway. There is no doubt it is extremely bad as far as the national park is concerned and the state of the road undoubtedly means that we are not getting as many customers in that area as we might have and therefore I think it is quite essential that the road be improved. Apparently about 10 miles of that road from Lake Louise up is being rebuilt and a certain amount of resurfacing being done. But I wonder if the minister could tell us how soon it is expected the whole road will be surfaced.


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, as the hon. member will appreciate, it is a very costly operation. We are spending over $900,000 this year on the improvement of that road.


Mr. Macdonnell:: What's that?


Jean Lesage: The road from Banff to Jasper. Oh, you mean what is $900,000?


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Yes.


Jean Lesage: The financial critic of the opposition should know better than I.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am just quoting from the authority across the gangway.


Jean Lesage: We will complete that road as rapidly as possible and have it all in good condition. I agree the scenery along that road is really beautiful, perhaps the most beautiful in Canada, and it is a great attraction for tourists. I can assure the committee that the improvement of that road has very high priority.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am glad it has priority, but the minister has not yet indicated how soon the road will be completed. He has mentioned the fact that it is an expensive operation and that he expects to spend about $750,000 this year on that project. There are some expenditures which make money and some which do not bring in any return at all, but this happens to be an expenditure which, in my opinion, is going to bring in a

Supply-Northern Affairs great many more tourists and therefore many more tourists' dollars. Certainly the condition of that road was so bad up until recently that it caused a great deal of damage to the tourist industry. This is therefore one project which is likely to pay for itself and it is likely to provide a return on the money already invested there. But if the road is allowed to remain as it is this investment will be lost. From that point of view I do not think the fact that this project is going to be so costly should deter the parks branch. Even if the road is not surfaced I would suggest that the number of maintainers could be increased. A great deal could be done just by improving the maintenance of the road. As the road was last year you would get a fair stretch which would enable you to travel at about 50 miles an hour. Some would go even faster than that at, say, 60 or 70 miles an hour, which I agree is much too fast. Nevertheless, no matter what speed you were doing, you would suddenly strike very bad chuck holes which would almost shake the car to pieces. Short of paving the entire road, what I think could be done is to increase the number of maintainers and graders. In other words, you could have much better maintenance at a relatively low cost and I hope that this will be done so as to eliminate the very rough conditions which existed last year.


Jean Lesage: I can assure my hon. friend that the superintendent of parks, who is on the floor of the house at this time, has listened very carefully to the hon. member's remarks and instructions will be issued accordingly. We are spending a little more on maintenance this year, but this is a very difficult task, because the old road has a poor base. That is why we have to rebuild the road and that is why it is so costly. However, I have taken particular note of the hon. member's remarks and he can be assured that steps will be taken to avoid a recurrence of the conditions he has described.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I might just add that I
drove back from Jasper park and the road was in much better condition.


Jean Lesage: Much depends on the weather.


Douglas Scott Harkness: No, the maintenance men had been over the road fairly recently and I think that proves my point, that a few more maintenance men on that road would make a great deal of difference. There is one other point I would like to raise and that is in regard to the item which deals with buildings as well as roads and parks. The item amounts to approximately $800,000 and I would like to ask the minister what type of buildings are included in that item.


Jean Lesage: For each park?


Douglas Scott Harkness: No, but I would like to
know the situation particularly with reference to the Banff, Jasper, Kootenay and Yoho parks, and I would especially like to know if this item provides for any more youth hostels such as I described an hour or so ago, and also if it provides for any of these ski huts or anything along that line.


Jean Lesage: No. Neither one. Not this year.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am sorry that it does not provide for any of those buildings this year. I would hope perhaps that the estimate might be moved around a bit. I do not know just what construction has already been started, if any, but I would hope that some buildings along that line might be provided for. The minister was going to give me what buildings are provided for in those mountain parks.


Jean Lesage: Yes. Here are a few. For instance, in Banff, construction of a combined caretaker's residence and heating plant at cave and basin bathhouse, $53,000; water and sewer installation, centralized service, $57,500; construction of a park warden's residence for the Banff district warden-the present building is old and rotting-$11,000. The replacement of kitchen shelters at Tunnel mountain camp grounds at a cost of $8,000; the completion of a staff quarters building at the east gate of the park, $12,000; construction of a patrol cabin on the Howse river in the vicinity of Howse river pass trail, $5,000. There is $25,000 for the continuation of reconstruction of the Norquay road this year, sanitation, cutting and hauling of mature and diseased timber and operation of sawmill and planer, $20,000. The others are small items.
In Jasper, construction of headquarters warden's residence, $19,852; construction of lookout cabin at Maligne lake, $2,500. In Kootenay national park, construction of a garage and a maintenance compound area, $107,000; construction of a semi-detached staff residence at Radium townsite at $23,000. There is a truss bridge in Yoho, at Mile 4 from Yoho valley road, $72,000. Extension of existing administration office in Field town-site; $15,000; and various other small construction items.


Douglas Scott Harkness: My only comment on that would be that I do not doubt that all these buildings will be useful and so on, but I would think that some of the money that is appropriated for these various residences would really be much better spent and would give a greater return to the Canadian people as far as enjoyment is concerned-and that is what the parks are for-in the use of the

parks and would also attract tar more visitors if some of it were put into buildings of the sort that I have mentioned such as youth hostels, ski cabins and things of that sort. I would hope that, in making up the estimates in future years, the minister would keep that matter in mind. I think I noticed an item of $53,000. Was that the amount the minister mentioned?


Jean Lesage: The answer is yes, Mr. Chairman.


Douglas Scott Harkness: $53,000, for a residence at the cave and basin. That seems to be a little bit excessive.


Jean Lesage: There is a heating plant.


Douglas Scott Harkness: That includes a heating plant as well as a residence.


Jean Lesage: Yes.


Douglas Scott Harkness: That is a heating plant for the residence?


Jean Lesage: For the bathhouse; the heating plant is for the bathhouse.


Douglas Scott Harkness: For the bathhouse? Is the water not hot already? It was when I was in it last. It pours out of the rock quite hot. I do not see that you need any heating plant. As I say, no doubt it will add to the amenities there and so on and particularly to the comfort of the caretaker. However, it is quite a large amount of money and I would think that some of it or perhaps the whole amount might much better be spent on this other type of construction that I have mentioned.


Mr. Noseworthy:: Will the minister tell us why each year we are asked to appropriate twice as much for Banff, which is served by the C.P.R., as we are asked to appropriate for Jasper, which is served by the C.N.R.?


Douglas Scott Harkness: It was the reverse in previous years.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Not last year.


Jean Lesage: I am told that it varies. Some years the expenditures at Jasper are higher and some years the expenditures at Banff are higher. It happens that this year it is higher at Banff. But in the Banff expenditures let us not forget that there is $600,000 for the Banff-Jasper highway. Last year there were a few hundred thousand dollars on the Jasper-Banff highway because the reconstruction was made at the Jasper end. Hence it was under Jasper. This year it is made on the Banff end so it is under Banff.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the item carry?


Joseph William Noseworthy: I am serious.
Supply-Northern Affairs


Jean Lesage: I believe that is the best explanation I can give.


Joseph William Noseworthy: What I notice here is that both last year and this year the amount for Banff is really more than twice that for Jasper; that is the situation in the last two years.


Jean Lesage: I do not know what the hon. member is talking about. Is that construction or maintenance?


Joseph William Noseworthy: It is on pages 379 and 380.


Jean Lesage: On page 380 I see that in 1953-54 the proposed expenditures for Jasper park were, in round figures, $640,000 and for Banff they were $530,000, which is less.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: They did the work at the opposite end of the road.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Will the minister give the figures as to the number of visitors to Banff and to Jasper? I think those figures would provide a sufficient answer to the hon. member for York South.


Jean Lesage: Yes; I can give those figures. The total number of visitors at Banff in 1952 was 582,434; at Jasper, 104,047.


Douglas Scott Harkness: More than five to one.


Jean Lesage: That is right.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the item carry?


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: No. I should like to ask the minister about these cars. At page 379 I see an item "Acquisition of Cars and Trucks, $141,950". How many cars and trucks does that represent? If the minister has that information handy I should like to have it.


Jean Lesage: I will have to pick them out of each park in order to give the total number. Is there any particular park in which the hon. member is interested?


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: No. I just wanted to know how many vehicles it represented.


Jean Lesage: I can give the hon. member some examples. I will take the largest park, namely Banff park. That will give a good indication, without listing all the equipment. Under this heading in Banff national park there are six 5-ton dump trucks which are replacements.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: They were replacements? They are new but they are replacements?


Jean Lesage: Yes, they are replacements. The hon. member will realize that this new construction and maintenance of roads takes a great many of these trucks.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: That is right.

Supply-Northern Affairs


Jean Lesage: But these are all replacements; these six 5-ton dump trucks at Banff are replacements. So far as I can see, they are all replacements at Banff.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: I was wondering how many were cars. I hope you are not buying all these engineers new cars to ride around in.


Jean Lesage: From what I can see here they are all replacements. There would be one or two exceptions but mainly they are replacements.


John Angus MacLean: I see that there is an amount of $38,825 for new construction at Prince Edward Island park and that last year the amount was $67,695, almost twice as much. I should like to know whether the item voted last year was actually spent or whether this is partly a revote. I should also like a breakdown of the proposed new construction for the year ahead.


Jean Lesage: I can tell the hon. member now what the new construction will be. For the continuation of the development of camp grounds at Stanhope and Cavendish there is an amount of $4,850; construction of laundry, shower and toilet building at Stanhope to service the camp ground-there are no facilities now-$9,500; construction of refreshment booth at Cavendish, $3,000; construction of kitchen shelters at Stanhope lane, Rustico and Cavendish, $4,000, or a total of $21,350.


John Angus MacLean: The total amount is $38,825. Is there any provision for improvement of roads in the park this year?


Jean Lesage: No, there is no provision for roads this year. Last year the proposed expenditure was $67,695. Up to the 31st of December, which is the last figure I have, actual expenditures amounted to $43,376. The largest item, roughly $22,000, was for seal coating with asphalt and chips of the Dalvay-Stanhope road. The second largest was approximately $16,000 for the construction of a garage at Dalvay for car and equipment.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I should like to ask the minister about Prince Albert national park. We call it Waskesiu. Is any new construction proposed there this year either in the form of roads or administration buildings?


Jean Lesage: Yes. The items are as follows: Construction of a semi-detached staff residence, $25,000; continuation of construction commenced in 1953 on trailer park in Waskesiu townsite, including the installation of power and water services, $15,000; completion of camp ground development, $5,000; continuation of program of reconstruction of fire trails, approximately twenty miles,

$7,500; continuation of the program of replacement of street lights, $8,000; continuation of logging and lumbering operations, $12,000. Then there is a long list of items under $5,000. Does the hon. member wish me to give those?


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: No.


Mr. Byrne:: I find it rather disconcerting that the minister has given priority to the Lake Louise-Jasper highway. I am sure he still has in mind the very important link in the Banff highway from the boundary at Kingsgate in southern British Columbia. There is a section from Radium to Banff that has had the prime coat and requires the finishing surface. I hope the minister will keep that in mind. He also said that he felt that on the highway from Jasper to Lake Louise there was some of the greatest scenery in Canada. I am sure he will change his mind if he visits Yoho and Kootenay parks this summer. The facilities in both these parks are excellent. While there may be room for improvement, nevertheless the tourist attractions are first class. It is not necessary to build an indoor swimming pool in either of these parks. From May until October they are open, and in Kootenay park one can swim the year round. Certainly you can play outdoors from the early spring to the late fall. I think the minister should give first priority to the hard surfacing of the road from Radium at least to Eisenhower junction.


Jean Lesage: I understand that is the Banff-Windermere road. Some work was done on it last year and it is under active consideration for some expenditure next year.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I note that there is an item of $452,000 for historic sites which is a considerable increase over the $286,000 of last year. This is for the acquisition of property and buildings so that I presume the department intends to secure certain historic sites which they have not owned heretofore or to erect a greatly increased number of markers or monuments, or both. Can the minister tell us something about what this vote is intended to cover?


Jean Lesage: May I just read quickly the main items that make up this figure? They are: construction of museum building at Baddeck, Nova Scotia, the house of Alexander Graham Bell, $150,000; continuation of renovation and repairs to the Halifax citadel, $100,000; continuation of restoration, construction and preservation work for the fortress at Louisbourg, Nova Scotia, $5,000; repairs to the fortification walls at Quebec city, $25,000; restoration and repairs to Duf-ferin terrace, Quebec city, $56,000. We will

recoup two-thirds of that last amount. The city of Quebec and the C.P.R. are to pay one-third each. Repairs to buildings and walls at Lower Fort Garry, Manitoba, $29,000. We hope to acquire the Batoche rectory at Batoche and have provided $5,000 for acquisition of and repairs to the Batoche rectory.
Then there is construction at Battleford, as I said a few moments ago, to the extent of about $21,000. Then there is $20,000 for the erection of new memorials. This item is for a long list of places. Then there are various smaller items.


Douglas Scott Harkness: It would seem that the bulk of this increase is in these two items in Nova Scotia, Alexander Graham Bell house and the Halifax citadel. What makes the Alexander Graham Bell house so expensive? I think the minister said $150,000?


Jean Lesage: It is a new building, a complete museum to house the Alexander Graham Bell relics.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I thought you meant you were buying his old home.


Jean Lesage: No, that is to build a museum.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
National parks branch-
306. Grant to the Jack Miner migratory bird
foundation, $5,000.
Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Mr. Chairman, I am not complaining about this grant, but I should like to know if there are any conditions imposed in connection with it. I know that this family has done valuable work in connection with the conservation of the Canada wild goose, in particular. It has tagged these geese, with the result that certain scientific findings have been made in regard to bird habits.
Are there any conditions attached to the grant, or is it simply an amount given to the family to carry on the work they are now doing? Is there any accounting kept, or any definite research other than the work I have described?


Jean Lesage: This is an annual grant to the foundation, and there are no strings attached. The grant is to the foundation, not to the family.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: It is to carry on the work they are known to be doing?


Jean Lesage: Yes, this conservation work.
Supply-Northern Affairs


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: There is no accounting made by way of definite findings to the department? Is there a report?


Jean Lesage: I believe the foundation makes a report every year which, if my memory serves me correctly, is received by all members of parliament.


Mr. McBain:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask a question regarding the Jack Miner bird sanctuary. I happen to know that the late Mr. Miner took a great interest in this sanctuary. I have no doubt that when it was established a number of years ago he spent untold sums of money out of his own pocket. We know that costs have been mounting, and that they will have affected costs in connection with this foundation the same as they have other lines of business in the last few years. I am wondering if the minister has given consideration to increasing the grant, because my understanding is that last year the foundation operated under a deficit of $5,000.


Jean Lesage: From the fiscal year 1940-41 to the year 1945-46 the annual grant was $2,500. Then in the fiscal year 1946-47 it was doubled to $5,000 a year, and has remained at that figure since that time. We propose the same amount this year.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: The foundation does send out a statement of its affairs each year-at least I have received one. It shows that they have been operating on a deficit which now amounts to about $5,000. I should think it would be well if the department would consider allowing them another $1,000 for a year or two until the deficit is wiped out.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National parks branch-
307. Grant in aid of the development of the international peace garden in Manitoba, $10,000.
Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I should like to comment briefly on this item, mainly with a view to bringing hon. members up to date with the progress in connection with the development of the international peace garden on the North Dakota-Manitoba border. Even though the minister has only recently assumed responsibility for the department, I am sure he is well informed in this matter. During recent years the peace garden has come prominently to the attention of the Canadian public as a result of the disturbed conditions on the international front.
Three years ago the grant to the international peace garden was discontinued. We were delighted last year when it was restored, and we are happy again this year
4480	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs to see it in the current estimates. Before the grant was discontinued for one year it was fixed at $15,000 per annum.
Originally the grant resulted from the interest shown by the former member for the old constituency of Brandon, the late J. E. Matthews, who always took a most vital interest in this significant project. While we are grateful for the annual grant of $10,000, there is hope that it will be restored to its former level of $15,000.
In saying this I would point out that just within the last few weeks the congress of the United States voted the sum of $100,000 for development on the United States side of the peace garden. It seems to me that $15,000, or even more, would be a reasonably proportionate sum to be devoted to the project on the Canadian side of the boundary.
During the discussion today the minister indicated that he intends to make a complete survey of departmental activities across the country during the forthcoming summer. I am pleased to note his intention. So far as I know, I do not think any of his predecessors in the department has had the privilege or opportunity of visiting the international peace garden. I take this opportunity to extend a very cordial invitation to him to inspect the garden when he is out in that part of Canada. And if there is no other means of transportation available I shall be happy to see that he is taken down the beautiful highway No. 10 to the border. I am sure he will be tremendously impressed by the development that has taken place in the garden since world war II.
I do not want to prolong these remarks, but while I am on my feet there are one or two points I should like to bring forward. I am sure that eventually Canada will have a chain of botanical gardens right across the country. I know there are groups working toward this end at the present time, and that they have been so engaged for some considerable period. The nucleus of such a garden is already being established at the international peace garden, and it is the hope of those who are most vitally interested that eventually the peace garden will be included within a group of government-sponsored botanical gardens.
The idea was first conceived by the international horticultural society, and was largely the brain-child of the late Henry J. Moore of Islington, Ontario. That was one of the thoughts he had in his mind back in 1929 when attention was first given to the establishment of a garden of this nature.
Then I should like to make only a passing reference to a matter that might more properly be discussed under item 310. It is hoped, too, that some consideration will be
[Mr. Dlnsdale.l

given to the establishment of a museum at the site of the international peace garden. The number of people visiting there annually is increasing. That fact has been recognized by the construction of a new customs port during the present year right at the entrance to the garden. I believe that eventually Canada will have a system of decentralized museums which will bring together all the cultural artifacts gathered from each of the districts, and that we may preserve in that fashion the cultural history of the area in which the museum is located. Quite recently some very significant discoveries in regard to Indian lore have been made in the vicinity of my constituency, and I presume that all the artifacts that have been uncovered in these discoveries have been moved to the national museum. It seems to be much more highly appropriate that these artifacts should be retained in the province in which they belong and form a part of the story of that particular area.
In concluding my observations, I once again extend the most earnest invitation to the minister to visit the peace garden to see for himself the numbers of people who visit there, and get a more personal appreciation of the significance of this important park. I hope he will accept the invitation.


Mr. Mclvor:: Since I lived in Souris for a number of years I know the importance of this peace garden. I will back up the hon. member completely in supporting $15,000 to be spent because it would be money well spent.
My other reason for rising is this: When the minister is making the trip I would invite him to stop off at Fort William, where he would see some scenery worth looking at, in order that we might have mount McKay as a national park. We have been trying for this for a number of years, and if the minister gets a look at it I know what will happen.


Jean Lesage: I wish to thank hon. members for all the very kind invitations they have extended to me. I would be delighted to accept all of them, but if I do I hope that the criticism of the opposition on the amount of my travelling expenses since coming here will not be too harsh.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: That gives me an idea. Perhaps we should check up on these travelling expenses. The expenses in this item are not the minister's personal expenses.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I should like to support what the hon. member for Brandon-Souris has said with regard to the international peace garden. I know it is a very worthy project and deserves all the assistance that

can be given so that Canada's share of that international peace garden may match the project that has been undertaken on the other side of the border.
However, I do not propose to speak at length except to draw to the minister's attention the fact that an admirable map in the back of the report of the department of resources and development, for which of course he is not responsible, does not indicate the international peace garden. I would suggest that he draw to the attention of those officials who are responsible for producing a map of this sort the fact that the international peace garden should be properly marked in the future.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canadian wildlife service-
309.	Wildlife resources conservation and development, including administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, $437,271.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Will the minister tell us what the buffalo population is at the present time, or does he know that?


Jean Lesage: About 12,000.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Are there any musk-ox in Canada now? And where are they?	.


Jean Lesage: There are musk-ox in the
north.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I know there are, but has the minister any under his control?


Jean Lesage: I would not like to be asked to control a musk-ox.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Are they under the minister's department?


Jean Lesage: That comes under the northern administration and lands branch, Northwest Territories; that is where the musk-ox are.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I wondered
whether they came under the minister's department.


Jean Lesage: Yes, under the northern division, not under the parks division.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: We have to wait until we come to that.


Jean Lesage: I would rather wait until the director of the northern division is with me to answer detailed questions on the musk-ox.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: What about elk? How many elk are there in the parks, and has the disease that they had a few years ago been cleared up?
Supply-Northern Affairs


Jean Lesage: I am not in a position to give the population figure at the moment, but they are very healthy. There was a disease amongst them a few years ago, of which I am not personally aware, but it is not of much concern today.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Will the minister tell us what species of fish are being propagated to be placed in the lakes of the national parks?


Jean Lesage: It is trout, salmon trout, speckled trout, rainbow trout and all the very nice species of trout which it is pleasant to catch with a fly.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: And good to eat.


Jean Lesage: And good to eat, as the hon. member says.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I understood that eastern brook trout were being raised.


Jean Lesage: Yes, that is one of the species.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: It does not compare with the Kamloops trout. We do not want them in our lakes.


Mr. Stick:: Has any survey of wildlife in Newfoundland and Labrador been carried on lately, or is there any contemplated? I understand a survey was supposed to be taken in the last year or so.


Jean Lesage: Yes, there is one investigation of Brunnich's murre populations. The investigation is being made for the purpose of securing data on the status of these birds which are used extensively by the coastal residents of Newfoundland for food purposes. There is also a study going on of the eider duck farming possibilities, of natives collecting their down in the Arctic and sub-Arctic regions.


Mr. Nesbitt:: There is one item I want the minister to satisfy me on and that is the matter of northern allowances. Can the minister explain exactly what it entails?


Jean Lesage: The cost of living in the Northwest Territories, the Yukon and the Arctic of course is much higher than in the rest of Canada, and that amount is to help the civil service employees to cope with the very much higher cost of living in those regions.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I have one further question on the matter of rental of equipment. I see the amount has more than doubled over last year. Can the minister make any comment on that?


Jean Lesage: Yes, the increase is due to the extended use which will be made of boats, equipment, horses, dogs, and especially
4482	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs aircraft on field projects. The cost of hiring aircraft in 1953-54 was $10,000 and the estimate for this year is $28,340.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
310.	National museum of Canada, $305,681.
Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I presume, Mr. Chairman, that "national museum of Canada" refers to one central museum. During the discussion today there has been reference to other museums located across the country. Are they considered to be part of the national museum, or are they quite distinct?


Jean Lesage: No, the others come under the heading of historic sites. This item refers to the national museum of Canada located here in Ottawa. The others are historic sites in which are located articles of historical value. For example, the Alexander Graham Bell museum which is to be built will contain items pertaining to the development of the telephone invented by Bell. Most of these, though, come under the historic sites division.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Can the minister indicate whether articles of historic interest located across the country are brought to the national museum or whether they are retained in the locality in which they are found.


Jean Lesage: Some of these articles are housed in provincial museums. It all depends on who finds them. The individual who finds such objects might offer them to the national museum, to a private museum, or to a provincial museum, or even keep them for himself.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: The minister is no doubt aware that it used to be the general practice a few years ago for groups from the United States, for example, to carry out research on Canadian historical sites and remove these objects of historical interest. Is that still possible?


Jean Lesage: No, where there is federal
jurisdiction we do not allow the export of such articles.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: We have a museum in Fort William and it might be well worth the minister's while to have a look at it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering and water resources branch-
311.	Branch administration, $63,156.
Mr. Bryson:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to know if this is the item under which we might discuss mineral development roads?


Jean Lesage: Mineral development comes under the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, except for mineral development in the north which will come under northern administration votes. This vote has only to do with water resources.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: Pardon me, Mr. Chairman, but I said mineral development roads. Would they come under this item?


Jean Lesage: Yes, I suppose they would come under the engineering and water resources branch.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: In that case, Mr. Chairman, and in view of the many letters which have been exchanged between the minister and the Saskatchewan department of highways, would the minister care to make a statement regarding the continuation of the negotiations which have been going on during the past year in connection with the Flin Flon-Denare Beach road?


Jean Lesage: Mr. Douglas, the Saskatchewan minister of highways, visited me on or about, I believe, April 26 and we discussed the matter again but there is nothing more I can say at this moment.


John Angus MacLean: Mr. Chairman, this item
dealing with engineering and water resources is important since it covers a subject of very wide application which is of great importance to this country. We must safeguard our resources such as this, for their neglect would have a detrimental effect on soil and forest conservation. It has been pointed out by experts in this field that water conservation is not an engineering question. It is not a question of building dams after the floods have occurred. It is rather a question of developing soil conditions so that the moisture soaks in where it falls, which in turn prevents the flooding of rivers and water courses downstream causing all sorts of havoc. I say that merely to illustrate that water, soil, and forest conservation are interrelated, and I would suggest to the minister that since his department is called the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources he should perhaps take the lead in co-ordinating conservation efforts generally. Conservation is not a matter which concerns his department only. In a broad sense it is a matter in which the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys are also vitally interested. I would be very pleased to see some sort of co-ordinating committee set up which would deal with this matter not only as it concerns departments of the federal government, but also provincial governmental departments. A committee of the privy council already deals with matters

of research and I would like to see a similar committee set up to deal with the safeguarding and maintaining of our natural resources with special regard to soil and water conservation. The membership of that committee could include ministers in the cabinet whose departments deal with such matters.
Recently there was a conference here in Ottawa dealing with conservation and the use of land and water resources and a national authority to administer such a program was advocated. I would like to have the minister's views on this matter and I would also like him to indicate what steps we might anticipate in future with regard to closer co-ordination between the various branches of government at all three levels, federal, provincial and municipal, which in future will deal with this intricate and complex subject.


Jean Lesage: I believe that this government has taken the lead in conservation. Two instances come to my mind. A few years ago this house adopted the Canada Forestry Act by which this government certainly gave leadership in the field of forest conservation. At the last session this house passed the Canada Water Conservation Assistance Act- and that was also an instance of leadership -under which we agree that we will contribute 37J per cent of the cost of major conservation projects when the province itself contributes 37i per cent, the local interests contributing the balance of 25 per cent. Since the hon. member has been speaking about co-ordination with the provincial authorities, may I assure him that since the passage of this act negotiations have taken place with the authorities of various provinces who have come forward with projects which are now under study and negotiation. There is fairly close co-operation with the provinces which are interested in water conservation, as evidenced by the amount of money that we have expended under the Canada Forestry Act. A wide interest has been shown by the provinces in the field of forest conservation, together with the federal government.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: On this administration item, and having reference to the hook-up with the provinces, may I ask whether it is the province that administers this project or whether it is the dominion government?


Jean Lesage: What kind of projects has the hon. member in mind? Does he mean water conservation projects?


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Lake of the Woods control board.
Supply-Northern Affairs


Jean Lesage: Would the hon. member mind if I answered that question when we reach the vote relating to Lake of the Woods control board? It is vote 312.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: The minister may say that it is vote 312, but under vote 311 we find this: "including federal share of expenses of the Lake of the Woods control board".


Jean Lesage: Yes; but there is a special vote. That is the heading. The vote is No. 312.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Very well.


Howard Charles Green: Item 311 covers branch administration of the water resources division. Can the minister tell us the present position with regard to the plans for using the headwaters of the Yukon river for the development of a great power project? I believe it will be one of the greatest developments of this kind in Canada and perhaps the largest in the country. I understand that there is to be 41 million horsepower.


Jean Lesage: 4J million to 5 million horsepower.


Howard Charles Green: I stand corrected; 4J million to 5 million horsepower. The situation seems to be rather complicated at the moment. As I understand it, the Frobisher people, through their subsidiary Quebec Metallurgical Industries Limited, plan to put their power plant on the Taku river and then to bring in ores for smelting from all over the world. However, there is another firm, the Aluminum Company of America, which proposes to use the same water for the establishment of a power plant at Skagway in Alaska; and apparently they plan to make aluminum. It looks as though the dominion government is taking one side and the provincial government of British Columbia the other. The waters are half in British Columbia and half in the Yukon. Hence if the governments will not co-operate, there will not be any scheme. Can the minister tell us what steps have been taken by those two groups and what the situation is at the present time?


Jean Lesage: As far as this government is concerned, the only steps that have been taken are those taken by Quebec Metallurgical Industries Limited to obtain from the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources-the then department of resources and development-a permit to survey. It is not an exclusive permit and it is not a priority permit. No request for a priority permit has yet been made. We have received no request from Alcoa, the Aluminum Company of America, or from the Aluminum Company of Canada for a permit to survey. As far as this department is concerned there
4484	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs is only one permit which has been issued to survey the headwaters of the Yukon river, and it has been issued to Quebec Metallurgical Industries Limited. No request has been received from others. I am speaking of the period since 1951 or 1952. I am speaking of latest developments. I believe that is what the hon. member has in mind.
As to the alleged difference of opinion between this government and the government of British Columbia, may I say that we are not aware of it. The hon. member might have read newspaper reports about some speeches or some declarations made in British Columbia, but no representations have been made to us by the government of British Columbia. The only thing I could do, 1 believe, about the question of the export of water power or power-and I believe it is the most appropriate thing for me to do- is to refer the committee to a statement made by the Prime Minister on December 8, 1953. I do not at this moment have the reference to the page, but I know that the members of the committee will recall the statement that was made by the Prime Minister at the time he was introducing the bill to set up the new Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. There is nothing I could add to that statement at this time.


Howard Charles Green: 
Jean Lesage: I can do nothing better than to read what the Prime Minister had to say about this matter. This is the policy of the government and there is nothing to add. He said:
The hydroelectric possibilities of the region are immense. By the construction of dams at appropriate places, some of them reversing the flow of certain rivers and lakes draining into the Yukon river, and by taking advantage of the large drop of the level of that country to the Pacific, power can be developed in enormous quantities. It was suggested to me that there was more than 41 million horsepower that could be developed in that way. Hon. members will remember that some time ago there was a suggestion that these waters, or much of them, could be diverted for development into Alaska. Well, they are Canadian waters and while we do not want to adopt any dog in the manger attitude about our resources which cannot be used in our own country, I think that those which can be used in our country must be reserved for the generations that will follow us and who will develop this country. I was happy that the minister's declaration in that regard was applauded in the house on December 17, 1952-[DOT]
That was a declaration by my predecessor. -and I am glad to see that my reference to it today meets with the unanimous approval of the representatives of all the Canadian people. We do not want to be isolationists but we do feel we have a trust to future generations for the resources with which Providence has endowed this vast land over which now our people exercise sovereignty.
I believe that is a complete statement of government policy, and there is nothing I could add.


Howard Charles Green: Will the minister take steps to have this policy communicated formally to the government of British Columbia?


Jean Lesage: I had a long interview with the premier of British Columbia last December. He was accompanied by the minister of finance of his government and I was accompanied by my deputy minister. We had a long interview during which I made it clear that that was the policy of the government.


Howard Charles Green: I thought the minister said a few moments ago that he did not know anything about British Columbia's stand.


Jean Lesage: No, that is not what I said. I said that I did not know anything officially about any differences of opinion. In December, when we discussed the matter with the premier of British Columbia, there was no apparent disagreement.


Howard Charles Green: Can the minister take steps to have some further discussion with the British Columbia authorities on this question?


Jean Lesage: I have just written to the premier of British Columbia last week telling him that I intend to call on him when I am in Victoria, and of course that will be one of the questions on the agenda.


Donald MacInnis: With respect to the matter raised by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, perhaps there is another approach to it, if I may be permitted to ask a question. I do not know whether it is proper at this time to refer to priority of control, but which government, the federal government or the government of British Columbia, has priority of control as far as the waters of this river are concerned? If the federal government has priority of control I think that possibly the statement of the Prime Minister read by the minister should be satisfactory to the committee. On the other hand, if the province of British Columbia has priority in the matter the situation might be different. I would be glad to hear from the minister on that point.


Jean Lesage: Of course this parliament through the government has control over export. There is no doubt about that. We have over-all control over the export of water power. As far as the development of resources in Canada is concerned, and with specific reference to the headwaters of the Yukon river, the government of British Columbia has jurisdiction over that part of the headwaters which lies within British Columbia and we have jurisdiction over that part of the headwaters which lies within the Yukon.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: Would the minister say
whether negotiations are continuing between his department and the Saskatchewan government with respect to a division of costs in connection with the Flin Flon-Denare Beach road?


Jean Lesage: As I said a few minutes ago,
I had a visit with the minister of highways,
I believe, of Saskatchewan, Mr. Douglas. We discussed the matter, and I am expecting some more information that I have requested.


Mr. Hardie:: As the minister knows, the development of the Northwest Territories and the Yukon is dependent on cheaper transportation, cheaper power and cheaper everything. As a matter of fact, we are living in a high cost area and I think it is hindering the development of the country. With respect to the Northwest Territories power commission, I should like to ask the minister whether his department has at any time considered extending the amortization period of the Snare river power plant, the Fort Smith power plant and the Mayo power plant in the Yukon in order to provide cheaper power for the people who are pioneering the development of the country. If I may give an example, in the city of Ottawa I get the same power for
Supply-Northern Affairs the sum of $5 for two months that in Yellowknife in the Northwest Territories costs me $40 to $50. I would appreciate it if the minister would take the matter up with his department with the idea of extending the amortization period of the Northwest Territories power commission plants and helping the people who are pioneering the country.


Jean Lesage: This of course is one of the factors we have to study when we go into ways and means, as we are now doing, of bringing down the cost of living in the north country. We have started this study and we will carry it on as rapidly as we can. The hon. member is aware of my interest and the interest of my officials in the north country. I believe our north country has a tremendous future but we have to plan carefully. On the other hand, we have to act and we are preparing a basis for action. In preparing that basis we are studying all the various factors that affect the cost of living in the north in order, we hope, to bring down the cost of living so that life will be more normal and it will be easier to develop that northern country which is so promising.


Mervyn Arthur Hardie: I thank the minister for his remarks. He did say that we have to plan carefully. I hope he is not persuaded by the economists today, but remembers that the Northwest Territories will be there for 100 years, as will that power plant. It will be producing power for the mines in the north. I feel that if we do extend this we should extend it for forty years.


Mr. Simmons:: What is the present period of amortization on the Mayo river plant?


Jean Lesage: It is 20 years.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Water resources division-
. 312. Administration, operation and maintenance, including grant of $350 to the international executive council, world power conference. $669,597.
Clayton Wesley Hodgson: I asked the minister a question on item 311, and he said he would answer it under item 312. It referred to the set-up of the Lake of the Woods control board.


Jean Lesage: Here is the note I have under an item in vote 312. Following an interchange of correspondence in 1952 between my predecessor and the minister of lands and forests in Ontario and the minister of mines and natural resources in Manitoba, it was agreed that representatives of the three governments concerned should make an examination of the damages in the field and make a report. Manitoba's interest, it was clearly understood, was only in the case of properties bordering on the Lake of the

Supply-Northern Affairs Woods. That province has no statutory responsibility in respect of the regulation of Rainy lake.
The total expenditures on the investigation of damage claims, lake of the Woods, are as follows: for Manitoba, $1,547; for Ontario, $4,370; for the Canadian government, $2,230, making a total of $8,147. Apportionment of the payment according to the agreement of November 15, 1952, is as follows: the Canadian government, one-third; Ontario, approximately one-ninth; and Manitoba approximately five-ninths.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Would the minister add a word of explanation to the remark he made a moment ago, which interested me. He said the department was carrying out studies with a view to bringing down the cost of living in the north. Could he give just one or two indications as to nature of those studies?


Jean Lesage: One of the main factors in the high cost of living in the north is the cost of transportation, and of course the cost of hydroelectric power which is higher than elsewhere. The cost of transportation affects the price of every commodity.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I thought it might be that.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Does the dominion or the province control the water in the lake of the Woods?


Jean Lesage: It is a tripartite agreement between Canada and the provinces of Ontario and Manitoba. There is a statute covering the subject, and a board has been created under the statute.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Who controls the administration? Who lifts the stoplog out of the dam, and who puts it in?


Jean Lesage: The board.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: The dominion government?


Jean Lesage: No, the board.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: The board that is set up by the three governments?


Jean Lesage: Yes, that is right.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I just want to say to the minister: If he can bring down the cost of living in the north, what are the chances of bringing it down in the rest of the country?


Jean Lesage: I shall sit on a special committee with the hon. member, whenever he wishes, and we will discuss that.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I should like to ask the minister for a word of explanation concerning the international executive of the world power [Mr. Lesage.)
conference. What is the world power conference? What is its purpose, and by whom are we represented?


Jean Lesage: 
Gordon Minto Churchill: Have we a representative on the executive council?


Jean Lesage: There is a national committee in Canada of this world power conference. It is made up of representatives of this department and representatives of industry. This national committee sends a representative to the world power conference when it meets.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Water resources division-
314.	To provide for studies and surveys of the Columbia river watershed in Canada, $377,400.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: This item is of great interest to my constituents and, I know, to the people of British Columbia generally. I see the vote is $4,100 greater than last year. As I understand it, Mr. Chairman, this will be the tenth year that these investigations have been undertaken. I should like the minister to inform the house as to the total cost of the investigations to date, including this estimate. What is being undertaken by the investigation this year, and how long is it expected it will take to complete the investigation of the Columbia watershed area? If the minister can give some information, I would appreciate it.


Jean Lesage: The expenditure since 1944-45 has been $2 * 4 million, excluding the proposed estimate for this year. Now, it is believed that it will take two years to conclude the investigations. After this year's program we expect that the investigation as a whole with respect to field activities will be 85 per cent complete, and the office studies necessary for the compilation of the report will take another two years.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: That means four years in all?


Jean Lesage: The expectation is five years in all.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Another five years before
the report is completed?


Jean Lesage: Five years, counting the present one.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Before the report is completed?


Jean Lesage: I should say four, after the present year.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Thank you. What steps are taken after the report is completed by those conducting the investigation? What is the next step in the development of this area?


Jean Lesage: I believe we will look at the report first before taking the next step.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Who considers the report and then makes a recommendation?


Jean Lesage: The report of the engineers will be made to the international joint commission, which will report to both governments.


Howard Charles Green: In recent months there has been a great deal of publicity in British Columbia concerning the possibility of a power development at Mica creek on the big bend of the Columbia river. Discussion was commenced, I believe, because of statements made by General McNaughton, who is chairman of the Canadian section of the international joint commission. Can the minister tell us just what there is in all this publicity? Some of the dispatches would lead one to believe that a huge dam would be built there within a matter of the next year or two, and that there would be power for the whole of the interior of British Columbia, as well as some arrangement whereby power would go to the state of Washington.
It does seem to me either that those dispatches are very much exaggerated or that the minister is wrong in stating tonight that it will be several years before a report comes in, and then several more years before anything is done about it. We can almost see that dam going up right now in British Columbia; and it is a very important project. It may mean the settling of hundreds of thousands of people in the interior of the province. I would like to have a more definite statement from the minister as to just what is in contemplation. The department must know a great deal more than he has told us.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Before the minister replies may I supplement the remarks of the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, because I was going to ask a question along the same lines as that asked by the hon. member. I must say that I am confused by the minister's answer when compared with the published statements of various members of the government of British Columbia.
Supply-Northern Affairs
As the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra has said, one of the ministers in that government announced publicly that the Mica dam is to be commenced within eighteen months. The minister of lands and forests last week, in addressing the city council of Trail, announced that he had given the green light to the Kaiser Corporation of the United States to commence building a dam at Castlegar.


Jean Lesage: Who said that?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: The minister of lands and forests in the government of British Columbia. And at the present time a surveyor and engineer of the Kaiser Corporation are now in the area of the Arrow lakes making surveys. According to the Trail Times I received this morning, these surveys are being made in connection with the dam for which, according to the minister of lands and forests in the government of British Columbia, the company has received the green light. As the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra has said, we find this very confusing.


Jean Lesage: Of course it is not up to me to explain the declarations and statements of ministers of the present British Columbia government. That would be asking a bit too much of me. The only thing I know is that field investigations are taking place on the Columbia river. It is an international river. A reference has been made by the government of Canada and the government of the United States to the international joint commission. That body has appointed a board of engineers, and some of the engineers of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources are on that board of engineers. They are working to prepare a report, and the field investigations will not be terminated before two years have expired. It will then take two years to complete the office work, and the preparation of the final report.
It might very well be that someone might say that Mica dam would have a capacity of so many horsepower. That could be said by someone who might know. But Mica dam is only one of the possible dam sites. What the international joint commission expects is a comprehensive report of all the power possibilities of the Columbia river.
Now, as to the concurrent work that might be done on a permit from the British Columbia government-what the hon. member has said is quite possible. I am not informed in the matter. The only thing about which I am informed is the progress and the work of the board of engineers who are
4488	HOUSE OF
Supplp -Northern Affairs making the investigation for the international joint commission, and for which we are supplying the funds.


Howard Charles Green: Then we can take it from the minister that, so far as the dominion government is concerned, it does not expect there will be any actual power development on the Columbia river until these investigations have been completed, and the international joint commission has had the opportunity to decide what it will permit. Is that correct?


Jean Lesage: Not exactly. There might be some interim report from the international joint commission which at a certain time might say, "Here is a dam site where we know power could be developed at the present time without any danger of upsetting the general plan. We know that this would be an individually operated site." That may be one of the conclusions in connection with which General McNaughton might have mentioned the Mica dam; I do not know about that. There might be some individual development of dam sites. However, up to now there is nothing definite, and the general picture is the one I mentioned a few moments ago.


Howard Charles Green: These investigations are being made, as I understand it, by engineers in the minister's own department. Apparently they have not reported anything to him about the Mica dam site, have they?


Jean Lesage: They have reported some of the possibilities to me.


Howard Charles Green: Have they reported to the minister any actual plan for the development of power at that or any other site on the Columbia river in Canada?


Jean Lesage: I am informed now by one of the engineers that a plan is being obtained from an engineering company for the possible development of that dam site.


Howard Charles Green: Under whose auspices is that plan being obtained? Is it the dominion, the provincial government or a private corporation that is paying for it?


Jean Lesage: It is paid out of funds that the government provides for the international joint commission investigation.


Howard Charles Green: The dominion government is getting a report from some outside engineering company. Is that right?


Jean Lesage: No. The international joint commission is. It is the engineering board that is getting it for the international joint commission.


Howard Charles Green: What is that?


Jean Lesage: The engineering board which has been set up by the international joint commission to make the investigations which have been going on since 1944.


Howard Charles Green: Does that mean that in all probability this development at Mica creek will be undertaken fairly soon?


Jean Lesage: I cannot say. There is no reason to assume that at the moment. I do not know. The international joint commission will have to look at the plans. The engineering board will have to look at the plans which will be supplied before making any recommendation to the international joint commission, and then the international joint commission will have to make a recommendation to us.


Howard Charles Green: Has the international joint commission any jurisdiction over the Columbia river at Mica creek? The river does not flow into the United States for several hundred miles from that point, and I wonder what right the United States would have to a voice in the construction of a dam in Canadian territory at Mica creek.


Jean Lesage: I shall make it quite clear,
I hope. The two governments have asked the international joint commission to make a study of the possible power development on the whole Columbia river.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: The United States government and the government of Canada.


Jean Lesage: Yes, the United States and Canadian governments. The international joint commission has asked the board of engineers to make a field investigation, to prepare a report and to submit it to the international joint commission; but of course that does not take away from the provincial government of British Columbia its jurisdiction over natural resources, and of course water power is a natural resource of British Columbia.
Now, if the government of British Columbia wishes to develop some power on that part of the Columbia river, which would not affect the rights of the United States on their part of the river, there is no reason why that could not go on.


Howard Charles Green: Just in the same way that the United States constructed great dams on the Columbia river below the United States border, I presume?


Jean Lesage: Exactly. The study that is being made does not change the jurisdiction at all.


Howard Charles Green: Is it a fact that the power potential of the Columbia river system is about three times the potential of the whole St. Lawrence system?


Jean Lesage: Well, it all depends on what you call the Columbia river system and what you call the St. Lawrence river system. If you include tributaries in both instances, well, I do not know which would be the greater. What has the hon. member in mind, the Columbia river alone? And if the Columbia river alone, is it on the Canadian side only, or both on the Canadian and United States sides? As far as the St. Lawrence river is concerned, does it include the international rapids or all of the power which can be developed on the United States side of the St. Lawrence? It is difficult to answer the question because it is not specific.


Howard Charles Green: I shall put it this way. In the committee on external affairs last year General McNaughton told us that the Columbia river system had over three times the power potential of the St. Lawrence.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I have one question. I have listened very carefully to the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra and the minister's answers, which were as clear as possible. Is it right to assume that no dam or public work of that nature could be built on the Columbia river or any part of its system that affects the levels of waters at the international boundary without a recommendation from the international joint commission?


Jean Lesage: It is difficult to answer a question when it is not qualified. Works could be constructed downstream or upstream, and they might affect the level of the water by increasing or decreasing it. What has the hon. member in mind?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: What I have in mind is this. I presume from the minister's answers to the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra that it is safe to say no dam or work of any nature could be constructed upstream in Canada above the 49th parallel, on the Columbia river or on any of its tributaries, if that dam or other work affected the level of waters at the international boundary, without a recommendation from the international joint commission.


Jean Lesage: It might increase the level, of course, if the dam were built. For instance, take the building of a dam just north of the boundary where the Columbia comes back into Canada. The building of a dam there would have the effect of raising the waters on the United States side. The international joint commission would have jurisdiction
Supply-Northern Affairs then over that. Where it would not have jurisdiction would be if the water were held back by a dam so that the level of the water downstream would be lower. Then the international joint commission could not, as I understand it, prevent the building of the dam, but an action for damages might lie for those who were affected by the works.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I would like to follow this up for a moment, because it is an interesting question to the hon. member for Vancouver Quadra, myself and a good many other members from British Columbia. I understand the minister to say that it would not require a recommendation from the international joint commission to build a dam or other works on the Columbia river, or on any of its tributaries, if the water level at the international boundary was lowered for a certain time of the year. That is quite contrary to my understanding of the boundary waters act. I understood there had to be a recommendation of the international joint commission for any disturbance of the level of the water at the international boundary.


Jean Lesage: The director of the water resources division died two weeks ago.
Would it be possible to allow this item to stand so that I can study the question? I would not like to mislead the committee. This is a very difficult question of jurisdiction and I am sure hon. members will appreciate the circumstances under which I have to work.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Before leaving this item I think it would be well that members of the committee and the minister be reminded of the Chicago water steal when they dropped the levels of lakes Huron, Michigan and Georgian bay by 20 feet a number of years ago.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Is it agreed that item 314 be allowed to stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Water resources division-
315.	Fraser river-50 per cent of the cost of investigations to be carried out by the "dominion-provincial board Fraser river basin" (formerly under Department of Public Works), $165,000.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, the work under this item has been under way for some years. Can the minister tell the committee what progress has been made? As I understand it, it is an investigation of the whole Fraser river basin.


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, this investigation has been going on since 1948-49 and at our request we have been having an investigation made to determine how long the investigation is going to last.
4490	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs


James MacKerras Macdonnell: You are having to investigate the investigators.


Jean Lesage: We are trying to obtain a definite idea of how long this is going to take.


Howard Charles Green: That is quite funny, but really the minister's department should be able to give us a better report than that on the progress made with this investigation.


Jean Lesage: I can, of course, give an idea of the progress that has been made but I thought I would mention that the investigation is being investigated. These investigations by the board were authorized in January 1949 to determine improvements for water resources of the Fraser valley in the interests of fish, wildlife, water power, flood control, irrigation, reclamation of wet land and other beneficial purposes.
The dominion-provincial Fraser river basin board, made up of the officials of the provincial government of British Columbia and the government of Canada, undertakes the work. Fifty per cent of the cost is provided by public works and the balance by the province. The expenditures during the fiscal year 1949-50, in round figures, were $36,663;	1950-51	$76,768;	1951-52 $80,447;
1952-53 $103,695, and the forecast for 1953-54 is $114,000. The work proposed for 1954-55 by the Department of Public Works of Canada covers aerial photography, bathymetry, and sedimentation, $76,000; this department $13,250; Department of Fisheries, Canada, hydrometric stations $5,000; Department of Agriculture Canada (P.F.R.A.) dam-site investigation $60,000; department of lands and forests, that is the British Columbia department, $74,000. The board will study river pollution, domestic water supply, the provision of dikes, land-use basic mapping, and there will be $30,000 for administration. That program has been studied by the board and we are bearing 50 per cent of the cost.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Chairman, the idea of the investigators being investigated has amused me just as it has the minister and I would like to pass on to him for his edification an old rhyme which goes like this: Larger fleas have smaller fleas Upon their backs to bite 'em;
And these again have other fleas,
And so ad infinitum.


Jean Lesage: In this case there is no fee for investigating the investigation because we ourselves are investigating the investigation.


Mr. Leboe:: Mr. Chairman, I am wondering whether the minister is prepared to let us know what if anything is being done on what
[Mr. Lesage. 1

is commonly known as the north fork of the Fraser or McGregor river in regard to flood control, and also if any thought has been given to co-operation with the provincial government in support of hydroelectric power at the same time as this control set up is considered.


Jean Lesage: I am informed that any work being carried out on the McGregor river is part of the investigation being made by the board to which I referred a few moments ago.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Water resources division-
316.	To provide for a contribution to the cost of constructing a dam on the Conestogo river near Glen Allan, Ontario, for the purposes of flood control and water conservation, in accordance with the terms of an agreement entered into between Canada and the province of Ontario, $1,000,000.
Mr. Purdy:: I wonder if the minister could give us some particulars in regard to this agreement. There was $1 million last year on this item and I notice there is $1 million again this year. Is this a revote?


Jean Lesage: Very little was spent last year and this will be a revote.


Gordon Timlin Purdy: Can the minister give us some details of the agreement and the proportion of the contributions?


Jean Lesage: There was an agreement
reached by the province of Ontario and this government about the construction of a dam on the Conestogo river near Glen Allan in Ontario. The agreement was made on September 15, 1953, whereby Canada will contribute 37 i per cent of the estimated cost of $5,400,000 for the construction of this dam and the maximum contribution by Canada will not exceed $2,025,000. Under the provisions of this agreement the province is permitted to make arrangements with the local conservation authority, which in this case is the Grand river conservation commission, to underwrite a portion of the cost of construction. The province intends to enter into an agreement with the Grand river conservation commission whereby the commission will assume 25 per cent of the total cost of construction. Owing to delays in the execution of the agreement between Canada and the province of Ontario, and between the province of Ontario and the Grand river conservation commission, progress on this work has been somewhat less than was originally anticipated. As a result very little was spent last year. That is why our share for the fiscal year 1954-55 is expected to be approximately $1,000,000.
Mr. Pallet!: I would like to ask the minister if this project is now under way and, if so, when it is estimated it will be completed.


Jean Lesage: The work is not yet under way because we only received the plans and specifications from the province on March 8 last and we have studied them. We have asked for more information from the government of Ontario and we expect to receive it soon.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering and architectural division-
319. To provide for general Investigations by the Northwest Territories power commission of the electric power requirements of settlements and industries in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory, $1,000.
Mr. Trainor:: I note on page 391 there is an appropriation amounting to $21,160 for work by the Red river basin investigation commission and it appears that this is not being renewed. May we take it that that means that the work of this commission has been completed? If so, are the recommendations contained in this report to be implemented in the near future? I should also like to know whether this commission has held any public hearings, because I understand that there is some controversy over its findings. I wonder whether any opportunity has been given for the presentation of the opinions of those who did not agree with the findings?


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, what item are we on?


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Item 319.


Owen C. Trainor: The matter has to do with appropriations that are not required for 1954-55.


Jean Lesage: I came to this department in September, 1953. If my memory serves me right, it was about at that time that the report was received with regard to the Red river. It was handed to the department and to the province of Manitoba, but it was understood that the matter would be referred to the Minister of Public Works so that he could consider what works, if any, would have to be undertaken. With the transfer to the Department of Public Works of the report on the Red river investigation, this department no longer has any jurisdiction over the report.


Owen C. Trainor: Mr. Chairman, I do not think that answer is quite good enough for the citizens of Winnipeg.


Jean Lesage: I think the hon. member could ask his question of the Minister of Public Works.


Owen C. Trainor: The citizens of Winnipeg want some assurance that the 1950 flood is not going to be repeated. They want some assurance that measures are being taken to prevent a repetition of that flood.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Northern Affairs Northern administration and lands branch-
320. Branch administration, $124,626.
James Aubrey Simmons: As I understand it, this item covers the cost of the Ottawa head office administration of the Yukon and of the Northwest Territories. It is rather difficult to figure out how much of this cost is for the Yukon and how much is for the Northwest Territories. However, there is one point I should like to bring out and that is that this item not only covers the cost of head office administration on federal matters for the two northern territories but also includes the cost of head office administration of the territorial government of the Northwest Territories and it does not include the cost of the territorial head office administration of the Yukon Territory. It seems to me that the reason for this is that the government of the Northwest Territories, on the territorial level, is carried out mostly by federal employees who are paid by the federal government and there is practically no territorial civil service, whereas the government of Yukon Territory, on the territorial level, is carried out by Yukon territorial civil service who are paid by the Yukon territorial government. For instance, this item we are now discussing covers the cost of a considerable staff in Ottawa who perform the clerical and accounting work for the Northwest Territories territorial government. Similar work for the Yukon Territory is done at Whitehorse and in the Yukon Territory by employees on the staff of the Yukon territorial civil service who are paid by the Yukon territorial government from money taken out of the pockets of t'he residents of the Yukon Territory.
In addition, the federal government pays the school teachers' salaries and the cost of running the schools in the Northwest Territories, except in Yellowknife, whereas in the Yukon the school teachers' salaries and the cost of running the schools are paid by the taxpayers of the Yukon Territory. We have the same thing, I understand, for game protection. Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to complain of these things but I would ask the minister and the hon. members of this committee to bear them in mind when considering the provision of funds for the development of the Yukon Territory.
Canada's north holds the key to this nation's future strength and greatness. Its possibilities are just beginning to be widely understood. There are in all of Canada no more virile people than are to be found there, nor is there a potentially more valuable area.
There are government actions that stimulate and encourage incentive on the part of the individual Canadian. These are measures that show a practical understanding and recognition of the vital importance to the

Supply-Northern Affairs future of this country of combining the spirit of private enterprise with the wealth of natural resources yet to be developed. If this process is helped along and given freedom to operate properly, Canada can and will attain a level of prosperity never before experienced anywhere in the world.
In the general area of northern British Columbia and the Yukon there is a veritable inland empire "on the make". The foundations of a great northern industrial community are there. Preliminary investigations and surveys have disclosed a wealth and variety of natural resources previously undreamed of. These include many kinds of metals, besides huge reserves of coal, iron ore, asbestos, and other resources, plus an immense potential of hydroelectric power. It takes little imagination to envision the industries of the future, such as smelters and manufacturing establishments, supporting many thousands of people in that part of Canada's northland.
One cannot overlook or fail to mention the vast and stirring project that promises to usher in a new era of development and settlement in that northern part of Canada. Certainly I for one am confident that the production potential of that Yukon-northern British Columbia area, with its wealth of minerals and other resources linked to huge waterpower developments, will prove to be an enormously influential factor in future national budgeting.
I have in mind, of course, the proposal of the Ventures-Frobisher interests to develop in Canada, for the use of Canada in Canada, between 4J million and 5 million horsepower of hydroelectric energy, generated from the upper waters of the Yukon river watershed and waters in northern British Columbia. I was extremely glad to hear my friend the hon. member for Van-couver-Quadra this evening ask questions of the minister with regard to this matter. The plans of these Canadian concerns include the largest waterpower development ever yet visualized in Canada or in the Americas. Not only will all Yukon river water be available in the Whitehorse area but waters from other watersheds east and west of the main Yukon river can, by planned diversions, be utilized under high heads as well.
The Ventures-Frobisher interests have been carrying on field surveys and investigations for well over a year, and these are continuing. Over a quarter of a million dollars have already been expended to date on these preliminary steps. Ample information will thus be available to the provincial and federal governments concerned when the moment arrives for the issue of necessary preliminary licences to proceed with development.


The advantages and stimulation that will be provided to local mines by the establishment of smelters and metallurgical plants-in the north are quite obvious. The plants will be built to accommodate everyone. In addition to local ores, raw ores will be brought in from various parts of the world for processing in Canadian metallurgical plants, which is a wonderful conception from the Canadian standpoint.
I understand that the Ventures-Frobisher interests through their subsidiary company, Quebec Metallurgical Industries Limited, have already begun their 1954 survey program and that this program includes detailed surveys for design of initial power plants, so that by fall it will be possible to begin actual preliminary construction work. However, some form of preliminary licence is required before any actual construction could be permitted.
The construction of power plants, producing between 4-1 million and 5 million horsepower, with industrial plants to use this power in the Taku river area of British Columbia, will without doubt have a tremendously favourable impact on Canada's export trade. Even with a conservative estimate of a million tons of ore annually being treated in the plants, the volume of business that results will be tremendous and will mean purchases of Canadian mineral products running into the hundreds of millions of dollars a year.
The extent of the contribution which the northland can make to the growth and strength of all Canada staggers the imagination. But that development must rest on the firm base of individual freedom and private enterprise plus government encouragement and alertness to the special needs of the north. The northland's future will come to full flowering through the triumph of the human spirit, struggling with and winning over the tough challenges of nature, unhampered and undismayed by any restrictive practices.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: With respect to the organization of the department, I see that we have item 320, branch administration, and then I turn over the page and find item 323, operation and maintenance, item 325, also operation and maintenance, and item 327, another item for operation and maintenance. Does that indicate that there are four different branches? Will the minister indicate the organization?


Jean Lesage: This is the northern administration and lands branch. There is the northern division and the lands division. Item 323 is operation and maintenance for the Northwest Territories. Item 325 is

operation and maintenance of forest conservation and wildlife management in the north. Item 327 is operation and maintenance in the Yukon Territory.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: These are all separate
organizations, separate branches?


Jean Lesage: Separate functions, not
separate organizations.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mr. Harris:: Would you rise and report
progress, Mr. Chairman?
Progress reported.



ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY PASSAGE OF BILL BY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AUTHORIZING UNITED STATES PARTICIPATION

Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Speaker, if I may have the unanimous consent of the house to revert to motions, I should like to make a short statement about the St. Lawrence seaway project.


Mr. Speaker:: Has the Prime Minister leave of the house?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: According to press reports, which have been confirmed to us by the embassy in Washington the Wiley bill which would provide for the establishment of a United States authority to participate in the St. Lawrence seaway project, was passed today by the United States House of Representatives and our own newspapermen in the press gallery have been anxious to have some statement about it from the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) or from me and have been told that any statement should first be made here in the house.
It is my understanding, Mr. Speaker, that the legislative processes in the United States are such that several steps yet remain to be taken before this bill becomes law.
As hon. members well know, the governments of Canada and the United States have for several decades now made every effort to get the St. Lawrence seaway and power project under way. In the past, several agreements have been negotiated by representatives of both countries, but for one reason or another difficulties have cropped up which prevented these agreements from being brought to fruition.
In view of these perennial difficulties and of the very urgent need for additional hydroelectric power in the province of Ontario, the Canadian government, in 1951, undertook to construct, maintain and operate an uninterrupted deep waterway between lake Erie and the port of Montreal provided
St. Lawrence Seaway
arrangements were made for the concurrent development of the power project in the international section of the St. Lawrence river by fully qualified and authorized agencies of Canada and the United States. It was after this undertaking was made by the Canadian government that the governments of Canada and the United States submitted joint applications to the international joint commission for the development of the international rapids power project. This application was considered and approved by the international joint commission, and the Ontario Hydro Electric Power Commission and the New York state power authority have been designated by the Canadian and United States governments respectively to do this work.
The undertaking of the Canadian government, in 1951, to construct the whole seaway was given parliamentary sanction when the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act was passed. The government's position has not changed since then and we are still prepared to undertake alone the construction of the seaway. However, as I stated in my memorandum of January 9, 1953, to the ambassador of the United States in Canada, the government was and it still is willing to discuss any specific proposal the United States government might wish to put forward once an entity is designated and authorized to proceed with construction of the United States share of the power works and provided that such discussions do not delay either the power or the seaway project.


Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of ihe Opposition):: I am certain, Mr. Speaker, that every hon. member in this house will welcome the decision of the United States House of Representatives today, not only as an indication of the possibility of an early decision in regard to this long-standing question but also as evidence of an understanding of the importance of this as a mutual undertaking between two nations whose friendship today is an example to the whole world. It does seem to me there has been some misunderstanding both in Canada and in the United States, in regard to what is proposed in connection with the navigation canals on the St. Lawrence.
On a number of occasions discussion of this subject has arisen and has created the impression that an entirely new venture is contemplated in the arrangement for a 27-foot depth of the canals on the St. Lawrence. As we consider this subject and express our hope of success, may I point out there is nothing new whatever in this scheme. On the contrary. this is a very old question. The St. Lawrence canals are old canals. They have
4494	HOUSE OF
St. Lawrence Seaway
been there for 100 years. They are part of a canal system connecting the ocean with the head of the lakes. In the past there have been canals in the St. Lawrence, across the Niagara peninsula and at Sault Ste. Marie. With the constant dredging of the St. Lawrence river, in the past we have been able to maintain an even depth for all navigation right to the head of the lakes.
In more recent years there has been great construction at different times in what is known as the Welland canal; there has been a deepening of the canals at the Soo, and there has been a deepening of the river depth in the St. Clair river; but we are long years behind in bringing the St. Lawrence up to the standard of the whole system that was established 100 years ago. If this project goes ahead, as I hope it now will, we will simply be bringing to a uniform pattern a navigation system stretching from the Atlantic ocean to the head of the lakes, which, at all times, should be regarded as an integrated navigation scheme. Perhaps it would remove some of the resistance that has from time to time been raised against this undertaking if that thought were borne in mind.
So far as this navigation project is concerned, the importance of it is that it has become associated so closely with the power development. The Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) has indicated that the government of Canada has expressed its support of the program for the development of the power. The development of these power sites on the St. Lawrence is now long overdue. I would point out that it is not only the government of Canada that has been dealing with this subject. In 1946 the government of Ontario entered into negotiations with the government of the state of New York, both governments recognizing it was possible for them to construct joint power plants along the St. Lawrence.
The problem that arose, however, was the necessity for obtaining permission to use water that was part of an international system of navigation. It is only for that reason there has been any delay in the construction of power sites on the St. Lawrence. As hon. members know, I am able to speak on this subject with a personal knowledge of what took place. The government of Ontario and the government of the state of New York were ready to proceed with the construction of these tremendously important power plants on the St. Lawrence in 1946. The use of the water for navigation has constantly presented a problem. It is important we bear that in mind. I think, therefore, it is important that the government of Canada not only


welcome what is now taking place, but indicate and express the hope, which in fact has been expressed by the Prime Minister tonight, that these proceedings will move forward rapidly to a conclusion.
I believe there is another reason why we should hope the power development, which is so important to Ontario, a:>
it is to New York, Canada and the United States as well, should proceed as rapidly as possible and also that this development take place as a joint development. These two nations stand today as a unique example of the way nations, with an intense pride in their own authority and their own strength, can co-operate for their common good. Surely, at this particular time, with all the uncertainty and all the antagonism that is being developed in other parts of the world, it would be a very happy augury for the future if these two nations were to develop joint power production on the river which, shall we say, does not divide them but keeps them together. May it be shown also that we have found the way in which, to our mutual advantage, we can use that waterway for the carriage of important trade to the inland waters of this continent. I believe that, for us and for the world, that would be a bright and shining example of the kind of international co-operation out of which will grow real hope and peace.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I wonder, Mr. Speaker, whether I might ask the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) a question? Before I do so, I would like to say that throughout this house generally members will welcome the statement the Prime Minister has made tonight. We also welcome the fact that he has made it here in the house at the earliest opportunity. I feel, too, that members generally will support the position taken by the government that, if necessary, Canada is still prepared to go it alone, but that Canada is equally prepared to enter with the United States into a joint development of the seaway project.
My question is this. Is the Prime Minister in a position to say whether the possibility of a joint project, as a result of the passing of the bill in Washington, is likely to alter the time schedule? Will it make any change in the time that the undertaking of the seaway project can begin?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Well, Mr. Speaker, it is not always easy to try to peer into the future. I see no reason to believe it would in any way lengthen or delay the time when an

effective start could be made. On the contrary, it seems to me that this expression from the House of Representatives in the United States, that there is a substantial majority that approves the carrying out of the project, will be a help in the removal of any further obstacles that the opponents of the project might try to put in the way.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Does the Prime Minister feel that on a joint basis it might get started even sooner than if Canada were to go it alone?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: No, I did not say that. What I meant to say was that there were still some things that have to be done in the United States. As the Leader of the Opposition has indicated, it is necessary, in order to have this kind of seaway, that there be a dam extending from one shore to the other and that that dam be built by the authorities that have been authorized by the respective governments. With respect to one of these authorities, that of the United States, though it has obtained a licence from the federal power commission, it is a licence that has not yet got beyond the period when it can be questioned in the courts. I understand that a writ of certiorari respecting it can still be applied for up to May 19, and that if it is applied for it may take some little time to dispose of. It is hoped it could be disposed of before the supreme court adjourns for the summer vacation.
Now, as soon as the United States authority is in the position to go ahead-and, as the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) knows, it has been its desire to go ahead since 1946- we know here that the Ontario power commission is disposed to go ahead. And we know that as soon as the dam can be started, if no arrangement is arrived at that would not delay the construction of the seaway, this government would be in a position to go ahead itself on the Canadian side and provide the canal required. That is the situation.
I think that this vote, following the majority vote that had already been registered in the Senate on another bill that is somewhat different but is generally along the same lines, does indicate that there now is a majority of the representatives of the American people who want this thing dealt with at this time, and who want it dealt with as a joint undertaking.


Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to take a moment to join with the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) in expressing gratification in respect of the bill passed under which the United States has indicated that it will join with
St. Lawrence Seaway
Canada in the building of the St. Lawrence waterway.
When I say that, I realize there may be some parts of Canada which will not feel that they would receive the same benefits from the building of this great project as will be received by Ontario. Even so, I am convinced that the sooner this project can be built, the sooner will Canada realize the fulfilment of a very great undertaking. I think it is in the interests of our great country that this project be proceeded with and completed as soon as possible.
But let me say while I am on my feet that I hope the program will be completed with the greatest possible expedition, and furthermore that in the process of building the seaway we buy just as much of the equipment as we possibly can from Great Britain, because I understand that they are prepared to fabricate the great head gates, and all that sort of thing. I believe it would be to our advantage to see that Great Britain is given every possible order that we can give them for supplies.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Walter Edward Harris: Tomorrow we will go on with fisheries, rather than northern affairs, to be followed by agriculture.


[Stage Direction]
It being five minutes after ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:

[Stage Direction]
National parks branch-
National parks and historic sites services-
304.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $4,397,820.
305.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $3,640,735.
306.	Grant to the Jack Miner migratory bird foundation, $5,000.
307.	Grant in aid of the development of the international peace garden in Manitoba, $10,000.
308.	National battlefield commission-to provide for special works at national battlefields park, Quebec, $6,000.
Canadian wildlife service-
309.	Wildlife resources conservation and development, including administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, $437,271.
310.	National museum of Canada, $305,681.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Northern Affairs
Engineering and water resources branch-
311.	Branch administration, $63,156.
Water resources division-
Water resources division (including federal share of expenses of the Lake of the Woods control
board)-
312.	Administration, operation and maintenance, including grant of $350 to the international executive council, world power conference, $669,597.
313.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $91,500.
315.	Fraser river-50 per cent of the cost of investigations to be carried out by the ''dominion-provincial board Fraser river basin" (formerly under Department of Public Works), $165,000.
316.	To provide for a contribution to the cost of constructing a dam on the Conestogo river near Glen Allan, Ontario, for the purposes of flood
control and water conservation, in accordance with the terms of an agreement entered into between Canada and the province of Ontario, $1,000,000.
Engineering and architectural division-
317.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $438,868.
318.	To provide, subject to allocation by treasury board, for the design and planning of deferrable projects, the acquisition of sites and the initiation of construction, $100,000.
319.	To provide for general investigations by the Northwest Territories power commission of the electric power requirements of settlements and industries in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory, $1,000.
Northern administration and lands branch-
320.	Branch administration, $124,626.