1956-04-25

Hon. W. E. Harris (for ihe Minister of National Health and Welfare) moved: that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution, which has been recommended to the house by His Excellency:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for contributions by Canada, to be paid out of the consolidated revenue fund, in respect of unemployment assistance costs in the provinces.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Question No. 47
Mr. Goode:: Have steps been taken by the government to give official recognition to R.C.M.P. corporal Johnstone and the officers and men of the Burnaby, Maillard-ville and Coquitlam detachments of the R.C.M.P., in British Columbia, for their bravery and attention to duty in thwarting an attempted hold-up at the Royal Bank of Canada, Coquitlam, British Columbia?
He said: Mr. Speaker, I understand that this matter is still under investigation and I ask that this question be allowed to stand.


Mr. Speaker:: Question stands.


WAR VETERANS' ALLOWANCE
Mr. Knowles: 1.	Has the government, at any time since July 28, 1955, given consideration to proposing an amendment to the War Veterans Allowance Act so as to prevent the amount of the allowance drawn by a recipient thereof from being reduced by virtue of the receipt of the pension under the Old Age Security Act?
2.	If so, what is the result of such consideration?
3.	If not, is the matter now under consideration?


Hon. Hugues Lapointe (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, in answer to this question I wish to tell my hon. friend that the government always has under consideration all legislation pertaining to veterans' affairs.
As regards the particular amendment suggested by the hon. member in his question, as the hon. member knows, this matter has been discussed many times before this house on the estimates; it has been discussed before
various parliamentary committees on veterans' affairs and also on the special committee on estimates last year.
As recently as July 18, 1955, I made a statement on the subject, which appears on page 6333 of Hansard. This statement still reflects the thinking of the government on this matter.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Bryce: 1.	How much assistance was paid during the year 1954 under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act in Manitoba?
2.	How was this assistance awarded, by municipalities, in Manitoba, for the year 1954?
3.	What was the cost of administration of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act, in Manitoba, for the year 1954?


TURKEY IMPORTS
Mr. Charlton: 1.	What were the total imports of turkeys into Canada for the years 1953, 1954 and 1955, giving country of origin and value for duty purposes?
2.	What are the grading regulations regarding imported turkeys sold in Canada?
3.	What are the regulations regarding packaging of imported turkeys sold in Canada?


TURKEY IMPORTS AND EXPORTS, CANADA-U.S.
Mr. Fleming: 1.	What are the volume and value of turkey importations into Canada from the United States of America during each of the last five years?
2.	What is the rate of tariff duty applied thereon by Canada?
3.	What are the value and volume of turkey exports from Canada to the United States of America in each of the last five years?
4.	What tariff duties are applied by the United States thereon?


WILSIL LIMITED, MONTREAL
Mr. Knowles: 1.	Has Wilsil Limited of Montreal had any contracts with the federal government or any department thereof at any time since January 1, 1954?
2.	If so, with what department or departments, what is the nature of such contracts, and what are the amounts thereof in dollars?
3.	Who are the directors of Wilsil Limited?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 68-Mr. Diefenbaker:
For a copy of any memoranda taken or made since March 25, 1956, by the Minister of Trade and
[Stage Direction]
Motions for Papers
Commerce, the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys, or any official of either of their departments, or by any one on their respective behalf, of any discussion or discussions with Mr. Frank McMahon, connected with or relative to any offer by him and his associates to build or construct a gas pipe line between the Alberta-Saskatchewan boundary and eastern Canada.
Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I must take exception to this motion concerning memoranda of telephone conversations. I have had a good many telephone conversations in my life, and I have never made a memorandum of any of them. This is a declaration that a minister of the crown cannot talk on the telephone or talk with anyone without tabling a memorandum of the conversation. I think that is going far beyond the purpose of motions for the production of papers. If there is a document which has been received from anyone outside of my own staff I will be only too pleased to table it, but when it comes to tabling memoranda of talks with persons or telephone conversations I must take exception.


Mr. Speaker:: Does the hon. member wish me to ask for the yeas and nays?


Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, before the question is put and since there is a Hansard record it might be well to point out that there is no mention here of telephone conversations.


Mr. Fulton:: Have there been any?


George Alexander Drew: This injection of a statement by the Minister of Trade and Commerce which seeks to create an entirely different situation than is in fact created by the question itself is something which I regret to say occurs too often. I am making this statement for the purpose of keeping the record clear that the question simply asks for any memoranda that were made. The observations made by the minister in regard to telephone conversations have no relation whatever to this question.


Mr. Speaker:: Does the hon. member wish me to ask for the yeas and nays?


Mr. Diefenbaker:: Yes.


Mr. Speaker:: Those in favour of this motion will please say yea.


Some hon. Members:: Yea.


Mr. Speaker:: Those opposed to this motion will please say nay.


Some hon. Members:: Nay.


Mr. Speaker:: In my opinion the nays have it.
And more than five members having risen:


Mr. Speaker:: Call in the members.



PASSAMAQUODDY PROJECT-ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY SURVEY

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 70-Mr. Brooks:
For a copy of all letters, telegrams, memoranda and other documents exchanged during the past three years between any department or officials of the federal government and the international joint commission, the government of the United States of America, and any other government or organization or individuals, relating to a survey or surveys of the economic feasibility of the development of the Passamaquoddy tidal power project.
Mr. Pearson:: I wonder whether my hon. friend would allow this motion to stand until I have a chance to discuss it with him.


Mr. Brooks:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: Motion stands.



BLOOMFIELD R.R. NO. 1, KINGS COUNTY, N.B.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 71-Mr. Brooks:
For a copy of all letters, telegrams, memoranda and other documents exchanged during the past two years between the Postmaster General or any officials of his department and any organizations or individuals, relating to the extension of the Bloomfield rural route No. 1, Kings county, New Brunswick.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort (Mr. Inquiries of the Ministry Bryson) asked two questions, of which one was answered but the second was not. It reads as follows:
Is it true that further supplies of Salk vaccine to Saskatchewan have been postponed indefinitely?
The answer to that question is no. Arrangements for the supply and delivery of the vaccine are worked out between the various provincial governments and the manufacturer, Connaught medical research laboratories. The federal government contributes 50 per cent of the cost of all vaccine purchased by the provinces and all provinces are treated alike both in regard to payment for the vaccine and its distribution.
Connaught laboratories, now the sole Canadian producer, have already made three shipments of vaccine totalling some one million doses, of which Saskatchewan has received its proportionate share. Further shipments will be made as additional lots are released for delivery following the extensive testing for safety and potency which is carried out both at the producing laboratory in Toronto and at the federal laboratory of hygiene here in Ottawa. All provinces are receiving equal treatment and will continue to share equitably all supplies of vaccine available for use in Canada this year.



COMBINES INVESTIGATION ACT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. S. Zaplitny (Dauphin):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Justice arising out of the answer to the question which I addressed to him yesterday with respect to the Manitoba breweries? The answer he gave yesterday was appreciated and it was interesting but it was not a reply to my question. Perhaps I may be permitted to repeat the question at this time. The question was this. In view of the recent disclosure by a representative of the Manitoba breweries that restrictive sales agreements have been in effect among the Manitoba breweries since 1936, is it the intention of the minister to order a further investigation into the restrictive trade practices of Manitoba breweries?


Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I think that my reply, if my hon. friend understood it correctly, was-as it is in fact-an answer to his question because the restrictive agreements to which he refers in his question and those to which I referred in my reply I apprehend are the same agreements.

Department of Transport Act PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS



INQUIRY AS TO RESUMPTION OF ELEVATOR SERVICE IN PEACE TOWER

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. In view of the great number of visitors that are now visiting these buildings or will be during the next few months, how much longer is it going to be before the elevator in the peace tower is in operation?


Hon. Robert H. Winters (Minister of Public Works):: I will take that question as notice, Mr. Speaker.



TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Tuesday, April 24, consideration in committee of the following resolution-Mr. Marler-Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the continuation for a further period of two years of authority to make regulations for the control of transport of goods in bulk including, amongst other things, the appointment of one or more controllers and one or more deputy controllers to carry out the provisions of such regulations and the payment of their remuneration.
Mr. Marler:: All I can say in reply to the laughter from the other side is that I shall be happy when I can speak with the wisdom of my hon. friend, the Minister of Trade and Commerce.


Mr. Argue:: So will we.


George Carlyle Marler: When my hon. friend is halfway there, I think he will find he has more chance of getting on this side of the house.


Hazen Robert Argue: Oh, oh.


George Carlyle Marler: Mr. Chairman, if the hon.
member for Assiniboia will allow me to continue my remarks without benefit of his numerous interruptions perhaps I may be able to answer some of the questions that were brought up during the course of the discussion yesterday. When we adjourned last evening I was attempting to reply to the inquiry of the hon. member for Brandon-Souris as to whether there was in fact an absolute shortage of box cars in Canada. I thought, Mr. Chairman, that the facts relating to the crop year 1952-53 were eloquent testimony to the fact that the number of box cars in Canada required to move a good crop were, available, and that what had been done in 1952-1953 when the total export shipments of wheat: and other grains amounted ter something more than 400 million bushels was a
[Mr Garson.]

demonstration of the ability of the railroads to move a crop of the dimensions of that which we had in 1952-1953.
During the course of the discussion yesterday afternoon there was some reference to the situation with regard to the position of Canadian railways vis-a-vis the United States railways in the matter of box cars.
The hon. member for Kindersley referred to some of the figures but I do not think he gave a complete picture of the situation. Unfortunately for the Canadian railways perhaps, the matter of the movement of cars is not confined solely to box cars. In their relations with the United States railways account must be taken of the over-all picture. Account also must be taken of the fact that the movement of finished paper from Canada to the United States necessitates the use by Canadian railways of the best box cars they have in their inventory. I am sure that the hon. member will appreciate that once those box cars get on to United States lines, being of good quality they are not returned with the same celerity as would be the case if they were not so suitable for all kinds of traffic.
The Canadian railways are under a disability merely because of the number of the shipments of newsprint that are taking place. This is an additional drain on the supply of good box cars in Canada, if I may express it in those terms.
I do know as a matter of fact because I have had an opportunity of discussing the question with the president of Canadian National Railways-and I am sure the same applies to the Canadian Pacific Railway- that Canadian National Railways is making every effort to get back the cars that belong to it through the American Association of Railways. The Canadian Pacific Railway, of course, is doing the same thing as far as its cars are concerned.
When one takes a look at the over-all picture one finds that in a general way there is a more or less even balance between United States cars on Canadian lines and Canadian cars on United States lines.
I will agree that the box car situation in particular is unfavourable as far as the Canadian railroads are concerned. I would like to emphasize that the transport controller has no more power over Canadian box cars going to the United States than has the president of the Canadian National Railways him-sqlfv I do not think, Mr. Chairman, that is a factor in the conditions to which the hon. gentleman referred yesterday.
When one looks at the over-all problem of transporting grain from country points to the west coast, the lakehead or the Atlantic

ports, I think one realizes that the timing *of the movement, the nature of the demand, the place where the exports leave the country and the time at which they leave are all factors which influence the immediate availability of box cars.
I think the railroads have been operating under unusually difficult conditions in this particular crop year, Mr. Chairman.
In his evidence before the standing committee on railways and shipping Mr. Gordon said, speaking of the weather conditions:
Our snow plow miles in western Canada were 270.000 compared with an average of 30,000 in some years.
I think that is a clear indication of the difficulties which the railroads have had to meet during the last season. It is significant, Mr. Chairman, that despite these difficulties, which not only affect the country in the west but also in the east, the level of shipment from the Atlantic ports this year reached what I understand to be an all-time high of some 44 million bushels up to the present time.
After listening to the discussion on this resolution I think it is reasonable to say there is a very real misconception as to the powers and duties of the transport controller with regard to the allocation of box cars.
A number of the hon. members who spoke created in my mind at least the impression that they believe it is the responsibility of the transport controller himself to allocate box cars at particular country points. This is not in accordance with the facts nor is it in accordance with the practice and I do not believe it is justified by the terms of the statute.
My understanding is that the only authority for the movement of grain is the Canadian wheat board. The board has power to distribute cars as between grain companies at a country point. It may prohibit the loading to any destination or may instruct that grain of certain grades be loaded to specific destinations. The board issues to the railways a weekly statement showing the number of cars required at each shipping point in western Canada to meet the delivery quota in effect at the point and their instructions to the railways in general are to place cars at those points where the statement indicates the greatest need. These general orders are often countermanded at specific points by orders to ship certain grades of grain required in forward positions to complete sales for export or for domestic use. The grain companies operating grain elevators, both pool and line, receive orders from the wheat board to ship specific quantities of specific grade to specific destinations.
Department of Transport Act
The grain companies decide from what point they wish to ship the required quantity and furnish a list of the proposed shipping points to the Canadian wheat board.
The board approves of the list of shipping points with or without changes and the grain companies then order the cars through the local railway agent at the points. That is the sole method of car distribution for wheat, oats and barley.
The duties of the transport controller are to see that when export sales are made by the Canadian wheat board or other exporters the grain sold will be at the ports required when ocean vessels prepare to load.
To accomplish the duties above mentioned it is necessary for the traffic controller to keep constantly in touch with country elevator shipments, the Canadian wheat board and other exporters, the railway terminals both lakehead and eastern, and vessel companies both inland and ocean going.
As the transport controller has pointed out to me, the fact that over 1,400 million bushels of grain have been shipped for export from Canadian ocean ports without delay or demurrage due to transportation reflects credit on those engaged in working out the problems of the transportation situation in Canada.
I know and the transport controller knows that there were five or six vessels in demurrage in Vancouver in the early part of this year. I understand that the difficulty arose not from any action of the transport controller or the railways but owing to the fact that the grades required were not in position at the appropriate time and this is not the responsibility of the transport controller. I am sure that hon. members will fully understand it is not the responsibility of the railways.
The duties of the transport controller, as I said a moment ago, have never included the distribution of box cars as between stations or between companies at a station but consist solely of the duties I have just outlined. I think that possibly the actions of the transport controller in the past may have perhaps fostered the impression that he did have responsibility for the distribution of cars as between stations or between companies because he tells me that in the belief he could be of assistance he has dealt with hundreds of complaints from stations in western Canada without turning them over to the wheat board, where it seems to me they belong. He tells me that there has never been a communication which he has received which has been neglected or disregarded although no part of this particular function was a part of his duties.

Department of Transport Act
I wonder if I could give some information with regard to the movement of grain during this season which is very much in our minds, that is from the middle of December 1955 up to the present time. I took the trouble this morning to get the latest information available. I am sure hon. members will be interested in knowing-this is by way of comparison-that between December 15, 1954 and April 20, 1955 the railways shipped from country points 63,011 cars, and between December 15, 1955 and April 20, 1956, despite the handicap of the weather conditions to which I alluded a moment ago and which I think are particularly well known to hon. members from the western and the maritime provinces, the railways shipped 81,546 cars. They shipped nearly 20,000 more cars this year than in the same period during the last crop year 1954-55.


Hazen Robert Argue: May I ask a question at this point. Has the minister available figures for the last crop year, that is from August 1, 1954 down to the date he mentioned, and for the period August 1, 1955 down to the comparable date? In that way we would have a comparison for a larger part of the two crop years.


George Carlyle Marler: I have figures here dated April 24 which indicate that the cars loaded during the previous crop years were 185,069, whereas in the current year from August 1 the total was 174,770, a difference of a little more than
10,000	cars.
I do not want to deal at too great length with statistics, but first may I say that I am sure that hon. members opposite will understand fully that I make no pretentions whatever to being an expert either in the transportation of grain or on wheat and such similar topics as may be more familiar to hon. members from the western provinces. Looking at the matter impartially it does seem to me that what took place this year is practically exactly what has taken place in the past. I was most interested in having the opportunity the other day to look at a comparison of loadings at country points with shipments for export. This was presented to me in the form of a graph and I was amazed to find, although it is not really surprising, that the line representing export clearances is practically always parallel to the line shipments from country points. I hope I have made that clear. In other words, there is a direct relationship between country shipments and export clearances.
I am sure that that does not surprise anybody. But just as it does not surprise hon. members, surely it is not surprising either to note that when your export shipments

drop there is a corresponding drop in your shipments from country points. I cannot help thinking that a great deal of what has been said on the subject of box cars, the difficulties of moving wheat and so on, are directly related to the volume of export shipments. When export shipments are higher the shipments from country points are correspondingly higher.
In considering the functions of the transport controller one must bear in mind that he is not the salesman of our wheat. It is his function to co-ordinate rail and water movements so that the wheat moves forward for export in an orderly fashion. I think I have enough objectivity and enough disinterestedness in looking at this question to say that I believe firmly that Mr. Milner has done an excellent job while he has been transport controller. I was sorry to hear the hon. member for Yorkton make some comments last night with regard to Mr. Milner's former occupation which it seemed to me really were not justified by Mr. Milner's record while he has been transport controller.
As hon. members know, he has been acting as transport controller, first of all under the regulations which existed before 1954 and more particularly under the act which we are now discussing since July 1, 1954. I think he has done an excellent job and I feel perfectly sure that at times when criticism is voiced rather generally in connection with conditions for which he is not responsible, he must feel greatly tempted to retire into fields where criticism is less plentiful and where commendation is more widely expressed.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, if the transport controller should be sensitive to criticism, as the minister has just now stated, I imagine that the cruellest blow which the transport controller has yet received was that delivered during the current session by the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce when he said that if there was a bottleneck in the whole grain picture it was in connection with box cars and transportation. The first prominent person that I know of having to do with grain in this country who alluded to the shortage of box cars, fictional shortage or otherwise, was the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Apparently when he saw that exports were going down he said, "Well, they would not be going down, at least not quite so far, if it were not for this shortage of box cars and this difficult situation in regard to transportation."
I listened most carefully to the Minister of Transport this afternoon and last evening and I have not heard him say what are the functions of the transport controller, what

the transport controller does. I have been endeavouring for years to find out just what the transport controller does, when he is in Ottawa or in Winnipeg and is not some other place. I do know that he acts as a kind of clearing house for beefs, that if there is a shortage of box cars at one particular point that is brought to his attention perhaps something is done to correct that situation; but apart from that I do not know what the transport controller does. The Minister of Transport this afternoon has told us that in fact the whole authority for the shipment of grain and for the assembling of grain, the authority to ban the use of box cars for various grades of grain, are all the responsibility of the Canadian wheat board, and that if there is any blame about shortage of grades and demurrage and so on it is the wheat board's responsibility. I suggest to the minister that the transport controller has ample authority to do whatever he may now be doing and, in addition to doing that, to control in fact the transportation of grain, to control in fact the allocation of box cars between delivery points. I should like to go one step further. He has sufficient authority, to see that there is a fair allocation of box cars among the elevator companies at each delivery point, so that the farmers may at long last, if such were done, have the opportunity to deliver the grain to the elevators of their choice rather than to whatever elevator may in fact be given the box cars.
The extension of the section of the Transport Act that we are now considering reads in part as follows:
Notwithstanding anything in any act, the governor in council may make regulations for the purpose of ensuring the prompt, efficient and orderly transport, by means of ships or by a company to which the Railway Act applies, of goods in bulk and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, may make regulations respecting:
(a)	the use. operation or supply of transport and storage facilities;
(b)	the quantities of any goods in bulk to be transported or stored, either generally or with reference to any particular goods, persons, time, place or facilities, including priorities respecting transport and storage;
I would like to know how legislation could be drafted with language any more allembracing and all-powerful as regards the assembling of box cars for grain or for any of the other goods mentioned a little later on. I believe that within this act to which I have now referred the transport controller has complete and adequate authority to deal with the distribution of box cars in order to remove the very grave inequities in their distribution that now prevail.
It is all right to quote figures to show that shipments of grain in this crop year to 67509-207
Department of Transport Act date-or a date approaching today

are almost as good, within 10,000 or 11,000 box cars, as they were a year ago; but, even if they were better, that does not remove the very grave inequity in the distribution of box cars. I have here the wheat review for March, and it refers to the number of elevator shipping points in western Canada on various quotas. Let us take the two-bushel quota. On April 4 of this year there were in Saskatchewan 481 points on a two-bushel quota.
I wish to explain to hon. members that a two-bushel quota at this time is a low quota. Points that are more fortunate are on four or five-bushel quotas. On the low two-bushel quota, there were 481 Saskatchewan points, but only 85 Manitoba points and only 197 Alberta points.
There is an obvious demonstration that, as between the shipping points in Saskatchewan and Alberta and as between the shipping points in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, there has been and there is a very unfair distribution of box cars.
I now refer to the one-bushel quota. We are almost in sight of the end of the present crop year. On April 4 there were in Saskatchewan still 205 points, out of 1,107 points, still on a one-bushel quota. In Manitoba there was just one point on a one-bushel quota, and in Alberta just 15 points on a one-bushel quota. Here is discrimination of the very worst kind, and I object as a member from Saskatchewan to this kind of allocation of box cars which on April 4 of this year leaves 205 points in Saskatchewan on a one-bushel quota, as compared with only 16 points on a one-bushel quota in Manitoba and Alberta combined.
Certainly there is no excuse, with the wide powers that are given to the transport controller, for this kind of situation to prevail. We in the C.C.F. now for a number of years have been endeavouring to get a fair distribution of box cars. We have been asking that the farmers be given the right to apportion box cars among elevator companies. So far the government has turned a deaf ear. It has been unprepared to do anything to establish a formula or a means by which a fair distribution of box cars might be brought about. Certainly there is no lack of power; the power is here, and I hope that the government will use that power, through the transport controller and through anyone else that may have power in this field, to bring about a fair distribution of box cars.
The Minister of Transport has said this afternoon that there is no shortage of box cars. Mr. Roy Milner, the transport controller, had this to say in Regina on March 9, 1956, in regard to this question:
Please understand I am not imputing to any person improper motives in putting this stuff in
3264	HOUSE OF
Department of Transport Act the paper about box car shortage-box car shortage -everytime I pick up the paper, but it is not fair to leave the thing-that there is a box car shortage.
I do not know whom to believe. Somebody in authority says there is a box-car shortage; somebody else says there is no box-car shortage. They are just given the run around. In the meantime thousands of producers in western Canada have been able to deliver what amounts to practically no grain in this current crop year as compared with what they might expect to deliver in a normal period.


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I ask the
hon. member a question?


Hazen Robert Argue: Surely.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Is he aware that there is 80 million bushels of unused space in the country elevators of western Canada at this moment?


Hazen Robert Argue: Now we are going to hear that from the minister. The fact remains that the situation to which I referred has not been brought about by snow, by bad roads, by weather or by an act of God. Manitoba has had far more snow than Saskatchewan; it has been a record in Manitoba. Yet the Manitoba points have much higher quotas, as I have already stated.


Clarence Decatur Howe: You are dodging my question.


Hazen Robert Argue: If the Minister of Trade and Commerce will equalize the quotas in the next two months, I assure him the farmers will take care of filling any elevator space there might be at individual marketing points. We would like to find out who has the authority to move the grain.


Clarence Decatur Howe: On that point, I think the provinces are responsible for keeping their roads in shape so that deliveries may be made.


Hazen Robert Argue: We heard that in Regina a few weeks ago. Now the Minister of Trade and Commerce implies that it is the provinces that are responsible for the fact that there are no quotas to speak of at 300 or 400 marketing points in Saskatchewan and there are high quotas at other marketing points. I think it is time the Minister of Trade and Commerce went out to Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba and saw what the conditions are, instead of this loose talk about opening roads. There is not enough equipment in Saskatchewan or Manitoba or Alberta to open ten to 20 per cent of the roads when they are blocked with a record snowfall as they were a few weeks ago.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Are we to blame the transport controller for that?


An hon. Member:: You cannot have it both ways.	.


Hazen Robert Argue: No one is endeavouring to blame anyone for the weather, but neither can the Minister of Trade and Commerce blame the weather for the bad distribution of box cars. The weather has nothing to do with it. I have never heard of the weatherman ordering the distribution of box cars yet. It is a matter of the government dividing the authority three ways and then giving parliament and the farmers the run-around. The transport controller has ample authority but the transport controller does not want to use it. On March 9 he gave evidence before a special select committee of the Saskatchewan legislature and in the transcript of his evidence I find that he said this:
Now, gentlemen, there is only one authority to move grain in Canada, and that is the Canadian wheat board.
Mr. Milner has all the authority parliament can give him, but he says the power rests with the Canadian wheat board. Donald Gordon of the C.N.R. blames the Canadian wheat board. Apparently there is a conspiracy to blame everything on the Canadian wheat board. The wheat board has by far the most efficient people to be found in the administration of the Department of Trade and Commerce. I have had certain critical things to say about the wheat board in the past and I will probably have certain critical things to say in the future, but under all the circumstances the wheat board is doing by far the best job that is being done by any branch or any other officials in the Department of Trade and Commerce.
The transport controller has the power but he blames the wheat board because he says the board has the power. The Minister of Trade and Commerce has got plenty of power also. He has never been short of power but he has been telling us this session that the trouble is really a box car shortage and the transport controller tells him in so many words that he really does not know what he is talking about because there never has been a shortage of box cars. The transport controller wants to blame the wheat board. One would expect that if the wheat board had the power to allocate box cars that would be the end of it and that would be all the transport controller would have to say on that point, but on page 25 of the same transcript of evidence Mr. Roy

Milner was asked this question by Mr. Woods, counsel for the committee:
Q. Then the railways, under a general order or arrangements, which you have given to them, or arranged with them, they, in effect then, allocate the cars?
A. That's right.
Mr. Milner has all the authority. First he said that the wheat board had the authority and then a few pages later he said that the railway companies have the authority, that they are the people who allocate box cars. The fact is that the railway companies are allocating box cars. Donald Gordon and company are in the saddle. They are the people who are allocating box cars.


An hon. Member:: The people's railroad.


Hazen Robert Argue: The people's railroad. The people were not consulted when Donald Gordon was appointed head of the railway. We have the transport controller who apparently has no authority over Donald Gordon and no authority over the allocation of box cars because he says it is a matter for the railroads. Then there was another question put to Mr. Milner by Mr. Erb. He asked him this question:
Mr. Milner, what jurisdiction do you exercise over the box cars on tracks in the Rockies?
We have heard a lot about the shortage of box cars and the fact that demurrage was paid on certain quantities of grain in the port of Vancouver. This was Mr. Milner's answer:
X have no jurisdiction over that at all, sir.
The transport controller apparently has no authority. According to him, he is not allocating box icars. It is little wonder then that the country is in the great mess it is in now as far as the transportation of grain is concerned. Under this legislation the transport controller has complete authority to carry out any order by the governor in council for the distribution of box cars. The government can take whatever action is necessary to see that the producers of western Canada are given a square deal in the distribution of box cars. But when it comes to something that affects the welfare of the western producers the government does not use its authority. It does not instruct Donald Gordon, the head of the C.N.R., to bring about a better system of box car distribution. But if the government will not use its authority, as it has not, to bring about a better distribution of box cars in the interests of the producers there is and has not been any hesitation on the part of the government in using its authority and using threats in the case of the. railway workers whenever there happens to be a discussion about increased
25. 1956
Department of Transport Act rates of pay or anything else having to do with benefits for the railway workers.
The Prime Minister made a statement in Toronto yesterday to the railway workers which they consider an unfortunate statement and an affront. I wish the Prime Minister were just as willing to use the authority of parliament in the interests of the producers and the assembling of grain as he apparently is in the case of the settlement of disputes involving the railway workers. I suggest to him that he should give Donald Gordon two orders at the present time, first, to distribute box cars on a fair basis and, second, to settle with the railway workers on the basis of the majority report. By so doing he will ensure labour peace in the country and will ensure a better and fairer distribution of box cars.
This legislation has much to commend it. The legislation as I have read it is adequate. The power and authority are adequate but the power and authority are not being used. It is high time that somebody in the grain business used the power and authority to provide farmers with a fair distribution of box cars so that they can deliver adequate quantities of grain and can deliver grain to the elevator of their own choice.


Mr. Nicholson:: Mr. Chairman, I feel that the Minister of Transport or the Minister of Trade and Commerce should make a few comments after the very constructive suggestions made by the hon. member for Assiniboia. In my opinion it just is not good enough to laugh at the situation when in the province of Saskatchewan we have a one-bushel quota at 20 per cent of the shipping points whereas in Manitoba they have a one-bushel quota for about one-quarter of one per cent and in Alberta a one-bushel quota for 3 per cent.
I realize there are people in this country who do not like the kind and quality of government we have in Saskatchewan, but there are people in Saskatchewan who support the federal government and I think it is undemocratic to put the people of our province in the position on the 4th of April, 1956 where, after having incurred all the necessary expenses in connection with farming operations, they find that at 205 points in the province out of a total of 1,107 there is only a one-bushel quota.
I think the suggestion of the Minister of Trade and Commerce that the provincial government has fallen down with respect to its responsibility is at least two months out of date. I hope it will not be very long until the roads in Saskatchewan are as good as they previously were. However, if there is a lot of space available in the province, why does the minister limit us to a one-bushel

Department of Transport Act quota at 205 points, to a two-bushel quota at 481 points and a three-bushel quota at 290 points? The great bulk of the shipping points in the province are in the category where they have a one, two or three-bushel quota.


Mr. Blackmore:: Would my hon. friend permit a question for the sake of information? Could my hon. friend give the committee any idea what percentage of the points in Saskatchewan on a one or two-bushel quota are prepared to deliver No. 2 wheat compared with the number in Alberta on a one or two-bushel quota which are prepared to deliver Nos. 3 and 4 wheat? Would that make some difference?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I can speak from our own experience. We have some exceptionally good wheat left over from last year and some very poor wheat left over from 1954 and we have a one-bushel quota. We had it when I was home at Easter time. In spite of the fact that we have that one-bushel quota, we could not deliver a bushel at all to the pool elevator in our shipping point. It is not because the grain is not available. I have not any statistics here but I am sure that there is a variety of all grades of wheat available in Saskatchewan if the orders are directed there so the elevators can ship out.


John Horne Blackmore: May I ask another question?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Yes.


John Horne Blackmore: I am just trying to get
at the root of this thing. There is a large percentage of wheat in Alberta that is No. 3 and No. 4 because of the fact that we have so much more rain and frost very often. I understand that there is a greater demand for No. 3 and No. 4 at the present time for export than there is for No. 2. Am I correct there?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Yes. I think the hon.
member is correct. But we also have northern lands in Saskatchewan where we have our share of rain and frost and where we have quite a large volume of lower grades as well. On balance I think we probably have as large a percentage of the lower grades in Saskatchewan as they have in Alberta. But in our province it so happens that the cars have not been available, and our people feel that a real injustice is being done.


John Horne Blackmore: May I ask my hon. friend one more question?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Yes.


John Horne Blackmore: I am really seeking for
information. If there is not export demand at the present time for No. 2 wheat at any

considerable number of these points on two-bushel quotas which are producing No. 2, then might it not be difficult to provide them with box cars, whereas it would be more easy to provide box cars where No. 3 and No. 4 are being produced?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I wish to assure my hon.
friend that we have ample quantities of all grades in all parts of the province and that, as far as I know, there is not any problem about getting the specific grades that are required in the export trade. But while we have had some trouble about roads in the last couple of months, certainly when parliament met here in January there was no justification then for the Minister of Trade and Commerce to suggest that we had this large volume of space available in the terminal and interior elevators because the farmers were unable to deliver. Certainly when parliament met, as far as the province of Saskatchewan was concerned, most of our roads were open and the farmers would have been prepared to deliver grain. But in answer to a question asked by the hon. member for The Battlefords on January 20, the Minister of Trade and Commerce told him that at that date we had space for
700.000	bushels at the interior elevator; that we had space for 8,200,000 bushels in Vancouver-New Westminster; for 400,000 bushels at Victoria; for 700,000 bushels at Prince Rupert; for 600,000 bushels at Churchill; and that at his own lakehead ports of Fort William and Port Arthur, there was space for
34.800.000	bushels; at eastern terminals, bay and upper lake, 6,100,000 bushels; lower lake and upper St. Lawrence, 1,200,000 bushels; lower St. Lawrence 4 million bushels; and maritimes, 1,500,000 bushels.
In the light of the agricultural crisis which exists in all parts of Canada but particularly in the prairie provinces, I can see no justification whatever for having in our terminals space available for something over 58 million bushels and then on April 4 having in our province of Saskatchewan 205 points where they have a one-bushel quota. Certainly as far as the elevators up in our area are concerned, I would say this. When I was home at Easter time most of the pool elevators found that they were plugged to capacity, and some of the people who had a one-bushel quota still had not been able to deliver the one-bushel quota to their own elevator.
There is one other factor which has not been mentioned to date and I think it is important. It has been suggested by hon. members from time to time that the Crows-nest freight rates should be revised and that the railways are not receiving a sufficiently

attractive return to move grain when it is possible to move lumber, paper and metals and a great many other varieties of goods that carry a much higher freight rate. I imagine that there is some point to the railways' claim that so long as the movement of these other commodities is so profitable they might be excused for ignoring the need for moving this grain and keeping 58 million bushels of space empty in our elevators and keeping the farmers in the position where they cannot sell their grain and cannot prepare for another year's operations.
An increase in the freight rates, as suggested by the railways, in order to give them a profitable return on the movement of grain I am told would "up" the price at least 12 cents a bushel. With our sales in the export market going down month by month and year by year I think it is fairly obvious that we cannot ask the farmers to pay an extra 12 cents a bushel on freight rates. I also think it will be generally agreed that it is not in the best interests of Canada to knock this industry out of the ring entirely. Hence I think it becomes a matter of national concern to see that there is a transport controller who has authority to see that this elevator space is filled and to see that somebody takes responsibility for the injustice which is done to the people in Saskatchewan where 20 per cent of all the shipping points are limited to a one-bushel quota compared with one-quarter of 1 per cent in the province of Manitoba.
I think it is a matter of some concern when we find that the total exports of wheat and flour have been decreasing as substantially as they have been decreasing as reported in the last Wheat Review. For the 1954-55 period we find that our total was 152-3 million bushels. This year we are down to 136-7 million bushels. Then to balance that, as of March 1 the item for export and for carryover has increased from 599-2 million to 697-1 million, an increase of roughly 100 million. Hence before the item carries I think the Minister of Transport or the Minister of Trade and Commerce on behalf of the government should make some commitment with a view to correcting the injustice which is done to the farmers in the province of Saskatchewan.
Before I sit down perhaps I should also ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce to comment on one other question. While he was in Hamilton speaking the other day his parliamentary assistant issued a statement with regard to the international wheat agreement negotiations in which it was pointed out that there is likely to be a reduction of about 50 per cent in the amount that Canada
25, 1956
Department of Transport Act will be likely to sell under the terms of the international wheat agreement. In view of the fact that over 80 per cent of last year's wheat is still on the farms and in view of the difficulty there is in getting what is on the farms moved, I wonder whether the Minister of Trade and Commerce, as the minister responsible for the marketing of wheat, is prepared to give any indication as to whether the farmers in the prairie provinces should review again their seeding plans for this year and reduce the planting for this crop since so little progress has been made in connection with the solving of the problems of the moving of this grain.


Mr. Quelch:: I should like to say just a few words on this resolution. In that part of Alberta which I represent, in the past there has been a good deal of confusion regarding the setting of quotas. In the early part of 1955 the farmers were told that there were plenty of box cars but no orders. Then, later in the year the situation became reversed and apparently there were plenty of orders but no box cars. Now, fortunately, the situation seems to be improving and the number of orders seems to be increasing at all points as well as the number of box cars.
The Alberta Wheat Pool Budget of April 20 gives an optimistic picture of the situation. It says:
Big Grain Movement Foreseen
A start has been made on what may be a record summer grain movement for Canada. With the great lakes and the St. Lawrence open for navigation the tempo of grain exports has been greatly increased. Up to April 4 Canadian exports of wheat totalled 162-2 million bushels but it was conceivable that, barring unforeseen difficulties, this figure could almost be doubled by the end of July. In 1954-55 Canada exported 252 million bushels.
It would appear as though the situation is going to be greatly improved before the end of the crop year. When I found any point which had a quota very much lower than nearby points, I used to write to Mr. Roy Milner. During the last few months it was recommended that I write to the wheat board, so I have been writing the wheat board and I must admit I have received very prompt action on every occasion when I have drawn to their attention that certain towns might have only a one-bushel quota while adjoining towns had a quota of two or three bushels. I found prompt action was taken to try to bring up that town to a similar level to the others. I might say, too, that when I used to write Mr. Milner I also got prompt action. Sometimes I would take it up with somebody in Ottawa, and apparently it was only a lady clerk in town here but I seemed to get good action just the same.

Department of Transport Act
It does seem to me that there has been an attempt here to make it look as though Alberta is getting preferred treatment over Saskatchewan. The hon. member for Assi-niboia, and I think the hon. member for Mackenzie, mentioned that in Alberta and Manitoba there were only 16 points that had less than a one-bushel quota. Well, I believe the point raised by the hon. member for Lethbridge is probably partly the explanation. Again, I should like to quote from the Alberta Wheat Pool Budget for April 20:
Last year a large proportion of the prairie wheat crop was 2 Northern and this grade has proved to be about the most difficult to sell. Most of the 5 and 6 wheat which has been plugging elevator facilities for some time has been cleared out and there has been a strong demand for 3 and 4 Northern but the top grades have been moving more slowly. This has worked against the farmers in southern Alberta and Saskatchewan as it has made it difficult to maintain good shipments out of those areas.
I think that is probably the explanation. I do not believe for one minute there would be any reason to discriminate against Saskatchewan as compared with Manitoba or Alberta. There have been times when Saskatchewan had a better quota than Alberta. I believe over a long average we will find that Saskatchewan will get just as good a deal as Alberta or Manitoba.
I am glad that this resolution has been introduced. We have gone through very difficult times, which I think are largely the result of exceptionally heavy crops. There has been a certain amount of what appeared to be discrimination, but generally when you investigate you will find there is a reason why certain points have had a poorer quota than others. I must frankly admit that, generally speaking, in all the deals I have had with the wheat board and the transport controllers a real attempt was made to solve the difficulty that was brought to their attention.


Mr. Low:: I have just a word or two to say, Mr. Chairman, before the resolution is brought to a vote. I listened to what the minister said in his initial statement this afternoon, and it did seem to me at that time that the real difficuly existed with respect to the length of time which United States railroads kept our top quality box cars in their country. In that regard I should like to ask the minister if there is anything in the international agreement or any agreement that exists between Canadian and United States railways, which would prevent Canadian railroads from imposing a very heavy demurrage charge after a reasonable time from the date when the car left Canada. Now, it seems to me that if


we did have the authority to impose such a heavy demurrage charge per diem the United States railways would be more anxious to get the cars back here in good time. As I say, there may be some reason, by way of an international agreement, that forbids us doing such a thing.
Then, I should like to say one other thing. Some mention has been made this afternoon of the discrimination against certain areas. The Peace river country has been in a difficult position with respect to car allotments over the years, largely I think for the reason it is a longer haul and is quite isolated. On numerous occasions I have found it necessary to get in touch with Mr. Milner. I thought he was the man with whom to communicate with regard to the supply of box cars in that country. Whether or not he was charged with that responsibility, each time I got in touch with him he got action. But I learned later that what he really did was to communicate with the wheat board and ask them to place orders for the shipments of quantities and qualities of wheat available, and that were needed for export, in the Peace river country. Whenever he did the wheat board did put box cars into the Peace river area and the towns and villages that had felt the discrimination were soon served.
Now, I just wanted to say that in defence of Mr. Milner. He got action, and I have no complaint whatever about the manner in which he has handled any business that I have had to take to him. For that reason I believe we would be justified, at least on the basis of my own experience, in extending the time of this amendment.
There is one thing which I think ought to be done. From what I have heard here this afternoon, considerable confusion seems to exist about the functions and powers of the transport controller. It seems to me that some very specific and clear statement ought to be made to the members of the committee about those functions so that we would know exactly where we should go to get these so-called discriminations rectified. Would the minister be prepared to give us a statement on any regulations that have been passed in his department setting out the powers and functions of the controller, and relating those powers and functions to the powers and functions of the wheat board and the Department of Trade and Commerce? If we had those things clarified for us I am quite certain there would not be the criticism of Mr. Milner that we have heard in the past few days. I would thank the minister if he would make that quite clear.


George Carlyle Marler: Mr. Chairman, the hon.
member in effect has just mentioned two

questions. One is the question of the arrangements between the railroads with regard to the exchange of rolling stock. I might refer the hon. member to what Mr. Gordon said in the sessional committee on railways and shipping. I think the reference is page 210. I think the hon. member will find there a broad statement of the situation.


Solon Earl Low: Would the minister give us the date?


George Carlyle Marler: I am sorry.


Solon Earl Low: What year is it?


George Carlyle Marler: It is this year's committee on railways and shipping, and the reference is found on page 210 and 211. I am merely going to quote one or two phrases from Mr. Gordon's evidence. He said:
Under the regulations every railway is committed to return the cars of another company by the most direct route.
That is the understanding among the members of the American Association of Railroads. He goes on to say:
When an American car comes into Montreal we are supposed to return it to them by the most direct route. We are not permitted to send it around to western Canada, for instance. We have to send it back although we are allowed to use it in load. There are, however, stipulations that we cannot keep it waiting indefinitely because we have not got a load.
Actually, Mr. Chairman, the arrangements between the railroads with regard to the use of rolling stock are, I think, mutually advantageous in a general sense providing they are carried out by all parties concerned. I think hon. members will realize the great difficulties, particularly when you have good rolling stock, in getting it away from railroads with less good rolling stock. There is a tendency in the railroad business to keep what one can as long as one can get away with it.


Solon Earl Low: The suggestion I made concerning a charge for increased demurrage for every day they keep the car out would be a good one?


George Carlyle Marler: If it were just related to box cars there might perhaps be some particular advantage. I would suggest that my hon. friend might like to see the distribution figures as between other cars. The hon. member would find that very often the balance against us is for refrigerator cars. Hon. members from the maritime provinces would be very much annoyed if anything were done to cut down the number of refrigerator cars. A good deal depends on whose ox is being gored at the particular moment.


Solon Earl Low: There would be some mutual advantage in hanging on?
25, 1956	3269
Department of Transport Act


George Carlyle Marler: It is a good idea to keep your ox out of the way, I think.
The other question was with regard to the regulations. I think what I said earlier with regard to the functions and duties of the transport controller does set forth, perhaps in a summary way, the functions that are carried out by Mr. Milner. I might draw to the attention of my hon. friend regulation P.C. 1954, No. 809, dated June 1, 1954. If the hon. gentleman has any difficulty obtaining a copy, I would be glad to make one available to him.


Solon Earl Low: Thank you very much.


Mr. Johnson (Kindersley):: Mr. Chairman, there are two questions concerning which I would like information. One relates to a question I placed on the order paper concerning the authority for making the appointment of the deputy transport controllers. The other part of the question asked who made the appointment. Am I right in assuming that it is the minister who makes the appointment of deputy transport controller?


George Carlyle Marler: No, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member is not right in assuming that. I think the statute provides that the appointment of the controller and the deputy controller is made by the governor in council and not by the minister himself. In fact, if the hon. member will refer to section 6(a)
1 (d), he will see that it refers to the appointment of one or more controller and one or more deputy controller. Both are appointed by order in council.


Willis Merwyn (Merv) Johnson: On that same point, Mr. Chairman, I notice at page 239 of the proceedings of the standing committee on agriculture and colonization, when Mr. Milner was explaining the bottleneck he said:
It was a real problem at the start, but the thing has worked itself out now to where it is working very smoothly. Some time ago I appointed a man to act as my deputy in Montreal.
He then goes on to explain that that man has since been taken over by the Canadian wheat board as their Montreal manager, and so on. I wondered about the validity of the statement Mr. Milner made. I presume he recommended that someone be appointed but it says right on the record that he made the appointment.


George Carlyle Marler: Perhaps the hon. member would permit me to interrupt him. I think that is merely a way of speaking. I do not think anyone would suggest for a moment that it is in fact the transport controller who legally appoints the deputy and I am sure my hon. friend would agree it would be only natural that Mr. Milner would be consulted although he does not legally make the appointment.

Department of Transport Act


Willis Merwyn (Merv) Johnson: Knowing that Mr. Milner is a man who likes to get things done, I thought perhaps he had.
It disturbed me when the minister pointed out that the final authority in the allocation of box cars rests with the Canadian wheat board. I was under the impression that the transport controller played a very significant part in allocating box cars between marketing and divisional points in connection with the railways. If, as the minister says, the Canadian wheat board has the complete responsibility for allocating box cars and loading them, then I would begin to wonder where the transport controller fits into the picture. The Canadian wheat board will give shipping orders to individual elevator companies dependent on the shipping orders or the sales which they have had.


George Carlyle Marler: I think so.


Willis Merwyn (Merv) Johnson: If the wheat board in allocating shipping orders to country or terminal elevators is basing that on the immediate sales, then the transport controller, if that is the only function he has, is fulfilling a very slim duty indeed, because in due time the railway cars will end up at the terminal, that grain which has been spoken for will be put in position and it will be there to load the boats.
I think the minister would be well advised to review the functions he outlined as being those of the transport controller, because when the Canadian wheat board allocates a shipping order to an elevator point there is no guarantee that the railway is going to spot cars there.
I think the Saskatchewan wheat pool association shares with me the impression that the transport controller has the responsibility of assisting the Canadian wheat board in seeing that these railway cars are spotted to fill a shipping order that has been placed. There are stations in the west where as many as 70 shipping orders have been sitting at elevator points for as long as two months without any cars being spotted, while neighbouring points with 20 shipping orders have received perhaps 10 or 15 cars.
I think the transport controller should accept the function of seeing that the railway companies spot cars in proportion to those allocated by the Canadian wheat board. In that way he would be of greater service to western agriculture than by sitting as an unpaid official taking credit for shipments the Canadian wheat board has made.
I would like the minister to give a further explanation of the functions of the transport controller. Surely his functions must extend beyond simply taking credit for the amount

of shipments which have been put in position at the terminals and at the lakehead.


Mr. Knight:: Mr. Chairman, I have been
interested in this discussion, perhaps because I was a member of the railway committee. The hon. member for Kindersley has raised a couple of questions. I think it would be interesting to put on the record Mr. Gordon's reaction to those two particular questions. At the bottom of page 222 of the report of the proceedings of the committee I am reported as follows:
As I understood it, in the old days, at least, because I remember loading my own enough over the platform, a man had the privilege of ordering from the railroad company a car. Is that still the way the thing works? -Can I ask you to spot a car for me at a certain elevator, and do you do it?
Mr. Gordon made the following reply:
No. The wheat board has to make the decision as to what cars they want and for what area. They tell us the number of cars to put into the particular areas, and we try to carry out those instructions. It is the wheat board's responsibility.
There is another statement by Mr. Gordon which I should like to put on the record:
It is vital in the whole picture that the railways in making that effort should get complete cooperation in the matter of unloads.
Mr. Gordon put a great deal of emphasis on that fact. He said that if they could not get the unloads in proper time it interfered with their operations. Then there was a question as to the duties of the transport controller and Mr. Gordon went on to describe his functions. He has been asked whether the controller gave them any definite or written directives, and he replied as follows:
Well, when you realize that you are dealing with 5,000 country elevator points you will know that formality has to be reduced to a minimum, and in point of fact, while we do not have written or formal directives, the transport controller is in touch with our railway officers day by day and sometimes hour by hour.
He went on to explain that these telephonic communications between the transport and railway men went on hour by hour. Apparently that is the way it is handled. There is one last comment by Mr. Gordon I should like to put on the record. I know that the Minister of Transport has quoted Mr. Gordon, the parts that he wished to quote and which were relevant to the questions asked, but I could not help but wonder whether Mr. Gordon was furnishing ideas to the Minister of Transport or whether the Minister of Transport was furnishing ideas to Mr. Gordon.


George Carlyle Marler: I even pick up some from the opposition.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I am glad to know that there is at least one minister who admits that he can learn.


George Carlyle Marler: I hope I did not admit that too readily.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: After that pleasant interruption by the minister, I should like to quote Mr. Gordon as follows:
We have to keep that In mind and also, in the matter of moving grain, there are a number of controlled situations in the movement of grain, and the wheat board as I understand it, has absolute authority in the matter of determining what grades of wheat should be moved. The railways have nothing to do with that at all. We do what we are told.
I smiled to myself a little when Mr. Gordon made that statement.
The transport controller has also a degree of authority to instruct how various movements of grain should be moved and what order of priority from here to there over the country, etc., etc.
Mr. Gordon then went on to deal with something else. When Mr. Gordon was giving that evidence on that particular occasion I gathered the impression that he was placing the responsibility fairly and squarely on the back of the wheat board.


Mr. Campbell:: Mr. Chairman, there are two questions I should like to ask. If the wheat board has control of the situation and controls the allocation of box cars, why is this legislation before us at all? I put a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce in January and perhaps I can get the information I was after from the Minister of Transport. Why was such a large amount of space allowed to accumulate in the terminal elevators at a time of year when there was a rush of grain and the farmers needed money so badly? Was that the fault of the controller? Was there a shortage of box cars? What was the real reason why that amount of space was allowed to accumulate at that critical time?


George Carlyle Marler: Mr. Chairman, I shall try to deal with the second question first. I suppose I could ask the hon. member why it is that there seems to be so much vacant elevator space at country points at the present time. The hon. member knows full well that the matter of filling vacant space in terminal or other elevators is not something which depends either upon the Minister of Transport or the transport controller. I am sure the hon. member realizes that that is not part of the functions of the transport controller and, quite obviously by the same argument, of the minister of the Department of Transport.
The first question asked by the hon. member seems to imply that once a car is loaded the matter is finished, but that is not the
25, 1956	3271
Department of Transport Act case. It seems to me to be perfectly obvious that the function of the transport controller is to co-ordinate the movements which take place to see that cars are in the appropriate spot when vessels are there to load. I hope it will not be necessary for me to go very much further in connection with the matter. It is not just a matter of loading a box car with grain and saying that that is the end of the operation. That is not an operation for which the transport controller is responsible. He is responsible for the co-ordination of movements subsequent to that.


Willis Merwyn (Merv) Johnson: When the Canadian wheat board authorizes a shipment from an elevator does it not authorize that shipment to a certain point? My own elevator agent has told me that a certain car was billed for Port Arthur or Fort William or Churchill. The railway just has to pick it up and take it there.


George Carlyle Marler: I think they do, but having expressed it in that simple language, to say that it is carried out in the way that it is required, perhaps I should give my hon. friend an illustration. So far as the movement of grain from Atlantic ports is concerned, I am told that one of the functions carried out by Mr. Rowan in Montreal is that of keeping in touch with agents of ocean vessels to tell them to which port a vessel should be sent in order to get the grades they wish to load. In some instances that requires direction. The cars may have been originally intended to go to Halifax but it may be necessary to reroute them to Saint John. I am merely giving that as an illustration of the fact that the primary responsibility of the transport controller is one of co-ordinating the various agencies of transport required for the movement of grain in different parts of the country and fitting that movement of grain with the movement of other bulk cargoes.
I was going through my correspondence in connection with the matter not very long ago and was interested to see that the transport controller had said that during the season of navigation he was responsible for the movement of about 7,000,000 tons of ore, about 14,000,000 tons of coal, about 800,000 tons of limestone, various quantities of pulpwood, all in addition to the movement of wheat and other grain. At first sight one might suppose that these operations could be carried out automatically, but I do not believe that an operation so complex as the movement of grain from the western provinces to the Pacific coast or to the lakehead and thence to Atlantic ports is something that can be left without direction.

Department of Transport Act
If I may express myself briefly, I think it is essential that we should have somebody in general control of this movement, somebody who has the kind of authority provided for in the legislation. It seems to me to be a difference of opinion. Hon. members opposite seem to think that the authority should start in at an earlier stage in the operation. However, all I can say is that what we are dealing with is legislation that was passed unanimously in the house in 1954. It has been carried out well administratively since then, I think, and what we are now asking is that it be continued for another two years.


Mr, Campbell:: The minister has not given the answer I want. As the minister has said, much co-ordination is needed. That is where we are critical, of the lack of co-ordination. In the first place the farmer has to take the grain to the elevator, if there is room.


George Carlyle Marler: The transport controller is not responsible for that.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: There has to be room in the elevator. It seems to me only common sense that if there is to be space provided in the elevator so the farmer can get the grain into the elevator, the grain from the elevator must be moved to a terminal or to a shipping point. Surely the job of the transport controller is to keep all these movements synchronized so the terminal elevators are nearly full. I do not say that they have to be absolutely full, but nearly full. When we have a situation such as we had last fall, what is the cause? Was it because all the cars were being used to take wheat to the shipboard, or what was the reason? That is all I want to know, and I have not had an answer.


George Carlyle Marler: If I were familiar with the operations of the Canadian wheat board I could answer my hon. friend's question, but that does not relate to the actions of the transport controller. Much as I would like to know all about it, I find that knowing about my own departments is almost more than I can manage.


Mr. Castleden:: There is one other point, in which I was trying to be helpful to the minister. I take it from the minister's statement today that the transport controller has not the power to compel railway companies to allocate box cars at specific points or to specific elevators at specific points.


George Carlyle Marler: I think I made it clear that that was done by the Canadian wheat board.


George Hugh Castleden: And the transport controller has not that power, nor the responsibility?


George Carlyle Marler: I think so.


George Hugh Castleden: If you can make sure of that it will help everyone a great deal. It is because of the discrimination that exists at delivery points where those cars are spotted that there is, let us say, a great deal of ill feeling against the transport controller and his job. It is assumed that a car is being spotted at an elevator which may have shipping orders, but we may have a point where a line elevator has no space in it and no shipping orders, and there is a wheat pool elevator sitting beside it with 15 shipping orders, and they each get one car.
The Minister of Trade and Commerce told us this afternoon that there is space for some 80 million bushels in western Canada. Why can it not be filled? I guarantee that most of the space, certainly as far as my province is concerned, is in the line elevators, and that when the farmers are able to get through the drifts of snow and the roads are passable for the hauling of grain, the space they are going to be asked to haul the grain to will be in line elevators. The whole situation militates against their organization, and they are compelled to deal with their opposition.
If the transport controller has any authority over that situation I wish he would clear that up. If he has not, I think he ought to be cleared of any responsibility. If the railroad companies are refusing to spot those cars where the orders are, then somebody ought to have the authority to compel them to place the cars where the shipping orders are. It is because of this situation that the transport controller's reputation has been lost. The powers are outlined under section I of this act of 1954, which states:
Notwithstanding anything in any act, the governor in council may make regulations for the purpose of ensuring the prompt, efficient and orderly transport, by means of ships or by a *company to which the Railway Act applies, of goods in bulk and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, may make regulations respecting:	,
Then it outlines the various powers which could be granted under this act. The minister has told us once this afternoon that he has not those powers. I would suggest to the minister in a spirit of helpfulness that if he can rectify the situation with regard to the allocation of box cars to the places where there are shipping orders, and have them placed there by the railroad company, he would do a great deal to straighten out the situation.


Solon Earl Low: I wonder if I might ask the minister one more question. I have had a chance, since he directed my attention to P.C. 1954807, to read it. I believe things are becoming clearer in my own mind with respect to the work that is being done by the transport controller. I just want to get the minister's concurrence in this conclusion I have reached.

It would seem to me after reading P.C. 807 that the transport controller does have authority even to order the allocation of box cars. If one examines subsection (g) of clause 5, subclause 1, in the Canada Gazette of June 23, 1954, one reads this:
The transport controller may . . .
(g) order any person dealing In or with bulk transport facilities to extend, furnish, supply or make use of any bulk transport facilities, services or equipment for transporting any goods in bulk at such times and places and in such manner as he directs;
I would judge that this part of the regulation does clothe the transport controller with sufficient powers that he could go so far as to order an allocation of box cars. However, as I have listened to the discussion today, it would seem to me that you have not appointed a dictator to that position. If a person were to exercise all the powers granted him under this act, it seems to me quite certain he would have to be pretty much a dictator. If I understand the matter correctly, he does not do that sort of thing. He is clothed with the power if it becomes essential to use them but, as I understand it, he tries to co-ordinate the activities of several different branches of government.


George Carlyle Marler: Of transportation.


Solon Earl Low: I should say transportation. Certainly he would first consult with the wheat board, with the department of Trade and Commerce, and then, if any bottleneck did occur or something happened that they could not straighten out, it would be essential for him to reach a decision and make an order. If I read the signs correctly, Mr. Milner has not been charged with the responsibility of simply saying "You must send box cars here," when an allocation should be made or when shippers demand that they be sent there. I think perhaps I would be quite correct in concluding that Mr. Milner has tried to act as a co-ordinator rather than a dictator.


George Carlyle Marler: I think that is right.


Solon Earl Low: I believe that is something we have to consider. If the minister had said to Mr. Milner, "We are going to clothe you with these powers, and you go out and exercise them to the letter," then you might be able to blame Mr. Milner for any failure to allocate box cars according to the desires of the shippers. On the other hand, if he has been instructed to use these powers contained in the regulations and in the act in the manner of a co-ordinator, then certainly we cannot blame Mr. Milner.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, unfortunately I was called out when the minister was making his explanation and answering
Department of Transport Act the several questions asked. I am not going to cover the ground I covered yesterday, nor endeavour to imagine what were the answers of the minister. I am one of those who do not believe in saying the same thing over and over again once an answer has been given, even if I disagree with the conclusion arrived at. But there is one question I should like to direct to the minister. No doubt the law officers of the Department of Transport have given their legal opinion on the meaning of the regulations adopted pursuant to the amendment to the Department of Transport Act passed by the house in 1954. I have the regulations before me, P.C. 1954-807. These transport control regulations were passed pursuant to the powers conferred by section 6A of the Department of Transport Act. In these regulations are set forth the powers of the transport controller or the deputy, as the case may be.
I would ask the minister to look at subsection (g) and tell me whether the legal officers of his department have come to the conclusion that the transport controller has not the power to direct specific freight cars to specific localities for specific purposes. That is the meaning I took from the words the minister used a few moments ago, that in his opinion the transport controller did not have that power, that the transport controller was in the position of merely having the right to determine, as between competing bulk commodities, the numbers of freight cars available for the transport of each of those several types of commodities.
Subsection (g) seems to me incapable of any other meaning than that the transport controller has indeed the power to direct and to designate where and in what numbers freight cars shall be available and at what points and for what purposes. Subsection (g) reads as follows-


George Carlyle Marler: The hon. member for Peace River read it just two minutes ago.


John George Diefenbaker: Yes, but he was reading the section of the act giving the power to make regulations.


George Carlyle Marler: No, he was reading the
regulation.


John George Diefenbaker: I was not here for that. I do not want to reread it, then, but I do want to say that ordinary English being what it is, the controller has the power to order the use of any bulk transport facilities at such times and places and in such manner as he directs. Otherwise the controller is simply a dispenser of car facilities between competing commodities. If that is all the power he has, I do not know on what we

Department of Transport Act spent all the money we have spent during the last year. That section is clear.
Let this be perfectly clear too; that there never was any suggestion raised prior to yesterday and today by anyone on the part of the government that the controller did not in fact have the power of designation. Let me add this. The minister says that the power rests in the wheat board. I do not have the letters before me at the moment, but on every occasion the replies I have received when communicating with the wheat board have been couched in the most co-operative language and have been followed by co-operative action, but have also made perfectly clear to me that the designation rests with the transport controller.
Indeed, as far as the Minister of Trade and Commerce is concerned, in the several replies he has made to questions that have been asked since the beginning of the session, and I referred to those replies yesterday, his stand on every occasion as I recall it was that the responsibility for the failure to supply cars and to designate the places where they were to be used rested not upon the wheat board but upon the transport controller.
I do say that wherever the responsibility lies the situation has been very serious and continues to be so. Whatever statistics may be furnished to indicate an improvement of the situation, the fact remains that there are numerous communities and marketing places in western Canada that have suffered discrimination, whether intentional or unintentional, and the farmers residing in those areas have found themselves unable to share in a reasonable marketing of a reasonable portion of what they had available for marketing.
If the regulations are not wide enough then, since the power is there, for goodness sake make them wide enough. I have never known civil servants when drawing up regulations to err on the side of restricting the ambit of the powers exercised under those regulations. I notice with interest that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration raises his head. Some of the regulations passed by that department offer the strongest possible evidence in support of what I have said.


Mr. Pickersgill:: Since the hon. gentleman has raised the point, I may say that I do not blame the civil servants. I take the full responsibility myself for what is done in my department in the way of recommending regulations and I think other members of the government do the same. Therefore I think it ill becomes the hon. gentleman to attack civil servants who cannot defend themselves.
IMr. Diefenbaker.]


John George Diefenbaker: That, of course, Mr. Chairman, is just on a par with the usual amenities of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. There was no attack on civil servants. Civil servants draw the regulations under direction. The minister gives no lesson to the house as to the responsibility of ministers and, indeed-


An hon. Member:: Let us get down to wheat.


John George Diefenbaker: -so far as regulations are concerned I may say that the Supreme Court of Canada paid its tribute to the kind of regulations the minister's department has brought into being by referring to them as inconsistent with justice and derogatory of the rights of individuals.


George Carlyle Marler: Let us get back to the Transport Act. The hon. member will need a transport controller himself.


John George Diefenbaker: We are on transport control, but I could not let the opportunity pass when there was such interest revealed by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration in a subject in respect of which the courts have been so definite in their views.


George Carlyle Marler: Get your car off the siding.


John George Diefenbaker: I would ask the minister, following that little pleasurable interlude-


George Carlyle Marler: Your box car was spotted in the wrong place that time.


Hazen Robert Argue: You will never get it unloaded. You will be paying demurrage.


John George Diefenbaker: There is the same practice in every department of the government when it comes to making regulations and denying the rights of parliament and individuals.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Surely the hon. member is not suggesting more powers?


John George Diefenbaker: There is no question of granting more power. It is simply a matter of using the powers that parliament granted, and translating the regulations so they will give effect to the powers granted by the house under the statute. Certainly in all seriousness I say to the minister that he should give the fullest consideration to the requests-and they are legion-from western farmers that something be done to equalize their opportunities, wherever they may be located, by securing that measure of transportation which will result in a reasonable degree of credit being made available to them.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Mr. Chairman, I was not satisfied with the minister's reply to the hon. member for Yorkton. I gather that the minister expressed some doubt as to whether the transport controller had or had not the

power to allocate the stations to which cars should be sent, and the numbers of cars to be sent to the elevators. The hon. member for Peace River drew to our attention paragraph (g) of the order. I might say that we have paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g) and (h), and they are all preceded by the words "the transport controller may". I am always at a bit of a loss to know whether "may" means may or shall.


George Carlyle Marler: It usually means may.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I am not sure whether "may" means that the transport controller may or may not.


George Carlyle Marler: It means may.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I think generally the judges, in dealing with these problems, would give the transport controller the right to perform the various duties enumerated in this particular order. I do not think it good enough for the minister to say that this responsibility is a responsibility for the wheat board. As far as I know the wheat board has no instructions from this parliament to take action in connection with a field such as that which has been definitely assigned to the transport controller. I believe that a good deal of confusion has been caused as a result of the failure of the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Minister of Transport to get together and decide whether it is the wheat board or the transport controller which must make the decision, and which must accept the blame for failure to act.
At the point where we deliver our grain it so happens that we have three elevators. One of the elevators is the wheat pool elevator to which we have always delivered all our grain. I have nothing against the other elevator companies. The other elevators are operated by highly respected citizens who do an excellent job. But I think a farmer who has never delivered a bushel of grain to one of these other elevators would be in the same sort of position as that in which Donald Gordon would be placed if every time he came to Ottawa he travelled on the C.P.R. instead of on the C.N.R. If he did that a great many people -would be asking why the president refused to travel on his own railway.
I think farmers who have never delivered a bushel of grain to an elevator which they do not own are in an embarrassing position, when storage is in such short supply, if they take grain away from their own elevator and take it to an elevator which is owned and operated by their competitors. I therefore believe that at some point the Minister of Transport must make up his mind that
Department of Transport Act this subsection (g) means exactly what it says; that the transport controller must accept the responsibility of carrying out the letter of the law, and that he must not place the alleged responsibility on the wheat board which is not instructed by law to make this sort of decision.


Mr. Juiras:: On this last point of the allocation of box cars at a given point, I should like to say this. I do not think the situation is confused at all throughout the country at this time. It is probably better understood now than it has been at any other time. Last year in the committee on agriculture we studied that point extensively and, as the committee recalls, we made a recommendation to the government that owing to the fact that naturally, as was the case all last fall and all last year-and the same situation still prevails-all grain movements are effected on wheat board shipping order and only on wheat board shipping order. Surely there is no point in blaming the controller or anyone at that point. That situation is quite clear.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I wonder whether my hon. friend would permit a question at this time?


George Carlyle Marler: Oh, don't interrupt him.


René Jutras: It is all right.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Would the hon. member
explain how the wheat board decides that, when three box cars are sent to Sturgis, each elevator gets one when two of the elevators have a good deal of space available and one elevator needs the three cars?


René Jutras: I am coming to that point
in just a moment. Let us start at the beginning. To begin with, movement can take place only on the instruction of the wheat board through a shipping order. That being the basis, we recommended last year that the box cars be stopped at a given point. I want to make that point clear. This afternoon there has been some discussion back and forth with regard to allocation generally. There is allocation of box cars as between points and there is allocation of box cars at a given point. Those are two entirely different things. There is no difficulty about allocation as between given points.


Hazen Robert Argue: There surely is difficulty.


René Jutras: Some hon. members contend
that there is difficulty, but generally speaking that is not too contentious a point. Today the most contentious point I think is the one raised by the hon. member for Yorkton with respect to the allocation at a given point. As I said, owing to the fact that grain is moved only on shipping orders, we recommended that the box cars at a given

Department of Transport Act point be spotted in the same proportion as that in which the shipping orders were allocated to that point.


Hazen Robert Argue: It is never done.


René Jutras: I beg the hon. member's
pardon?


Hazen Robert Argue: It is not done.


René Jutras: Just a moment. I understand that this recommendation was passed on, that this instruction was given to the railways, and that the railways now are supposed to spot the cars in proportion to the shipping orders at a given point. Owing to the peculiar condition existing early last fall I must admit that there was actually no movement. No possible system of allocation or shipment could have been put into operation in the difficult conditions under which the wheat board and everybody else were operating last fall. There was little movement of grain; the only movement that was taking place last fall was that of grain to local millers. They demand a special type of grain and they demand that it be shipped at certain points, and naturally on special orders again from the wheat board to move it out. You could not allocate that movement in any equal way over the three western provinces at any given time. It was therefore a poor time to test any new system of allocation.
There is, I must say, some doubt in some people's minds as to whether this is being carried out. It is being carried out at many points, but there is some question as to whether it is being carried out effectively at some others. I am given to understand that they are working now, trying to arrive at a method of making this system enforceable at all given points. But again it is not an easy problem to solve. I do not think there is any concrete proof that it is not being administered at any given point. The trouble is that some have claimed that they were not in a position to know whether it was.
This seems to be the biggest criticism of all. Nobody seems to be in a position to be able to tell accurately whether or not cars are being spotted in that proportion, because one does not always know what kind of orders the other man has. Sometimes people can claim they have when they have not, and so on. But I understand a system is being worked out that will probably work satisfactorily for all concerned. However, that is the system under which we are operating at the moment and have been operating for the last year. If cars are spotted in proportion to the shipping orders I do not see how you could get a better way of dealing with the situation under present conditions.
fMr. Jutras.]


Mr. Bryson:: Is the hon. member suggesting that the wheat board tells the railways where to spot cars, and how many, if they have orders for grain at any given point? Is that the implication?


René Jutras: That is in effect the implication of the recommendation. They would have to tell them where to spot the cars. They give them a record of the shipping orders, and the railways are supposed to spot cars proportionately.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: The point is that it is on the advice of the wheat board, as I gather from your remarks. It is on the advice of the wheat board that the railway move cars to the shipping point.


René Jutras: That is right.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: I do not want to pursue this subject any longer than is necessary, but as this debate continues it seems the question is getting more and more involved and confused. I can appreciate the minister's position when we are discussing things relating to the operations of the Canadian wheat board. The only reason I rise at this point is to try once again to get some clear and forthright statement from the minister as to just what are the duties of the transport controller in so far as the allocation of box cars is concerned.
This question is not only confused in the minds of a great many members here today, but there is a great deal of confusion in the minds of, say, the members of the Saskatchewan wheat pool. I should like to quote their view on the allocation of box cars. I have not a transcript of it, but I have checked the statement I have against the transcript and it is substantially correct. I should like to point out that in giving this evidence, not only were the wheat pool officials at this meeting of the select committee of the Saskatchewan legislature but Mr. Milner himself was there and also gave evidence. The Saskatchewan wheat pools believe this is the way box cars are allocated;
The Canadian wheat board allocated box cars-
That is substantially what the hon. member for Provencher, just said.
-to elevator companies on the basis of some secret formula. Mr. Gibbins said, "We have been unable to fird out what the formula is so we don't know what percentage of cars the pool gets.
Incidentally, Mr. Gibbins is the second vice-president of the Saskatchewan wheat pool. At the very same hearing at which the second vice-president of the Saskatchewan wheat pool made this statement, Mr. Milner was present. A few moments ago I gathered from the minister, and I certainly do not

want to put words in his mouth, that the transport controller exercised his authority when the box cars were loaded with grain. It was his job then to co-ordinate the movement out through the country to the terminals. Prior to that time he had no authority in so far as the actual placing of the empty box car was concerned.


George Carlyle Marler: I said that was not part of his duties.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: At this select committee hearing Mr. Milner gave evidence and I want you to listen to this. The report reads:
Very little was left to the railways to decide regarding allocation of cars.
"I tell the railways to carry out wheat board orders. I tell them, within good railway practice, to put cars where the need is shown to be greatest," Mr. Milner said.
Now certainly he has some jurisdiction-


George Carlyle Marler: Not necessarily.


Mr. Byrne:: He is just a straw boss.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: You can call him what you like, but in my opinion he has some jurisdiction.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: We have heard it a dozen times.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: I should like the minister to try to clear up this confusion so far as Mr. Milner's authority is concerned. Perhaps he could give the committee a further statement to see if there can be further clarification of this apparently very knotty problem.


George Carlyle Marler: I hope when I have said it this time it will be sufficient. When Mr. Milner appeared before the select committee of the Saskatchewan legislature, this was one of the first things he said:
It has never been part of my duties to allocate box cars to various stations or to elevators at those stations.
He continued and said:
In fact I have not the power to do so.
I am not going to deal with the question of whether or not he has the power to do so, because I do not really believe that is the material issue at the moment. It seems to me quite clear that the transport controller has never allocated box cars to specific points. I think we should agree on that. I do not think anybody should charge him with responsibility for the fact that at some points there have not been the box cars they hoped would be spotted.
The hon. member for Peace River and the hon. member for Prince Albert earlier spoke about the terms of the regulations. The hon. member for Mackenzie went through some rather extraordinary verbal exercises in saying that "may" might mean "may not" or it might mean "shall". I would be glad to
Department of Transport Act explain to him that "may" usually means "may". In fact, I think we can say it always means may. I hope when the hon. gentleman has a moment of leisure he will look into the meaning of "may" and perhaps we will get away from any further discussion of that question.


Hazen Robert Argue: He does not want to get it through today.


George Carlyle Marler: Is he thinking of "may" again? I hope we can get it through right now. The practical way of looking at this matter is not to consider whether or not the transport controller should intervene at this particular point, or whether or not he has the theoretical power to allocate box cars to a particular point. Surely we must relate the whole marketing operation of the Canadian wheat board to the matter. That is the basic consideration. How can the wheat best be moved to points for export? Surely no one can know better what has to be done than the people who are engaged in the actual operation of marketing the wheat. The role of the transport controller in the operation is that of seeing, when the board has decided at what points cars are to be loaded and shipped and where they are to go, that the movement is not interfered with by other considerations; to see that on an over-all basis cars are made available by the railroads when they are required, but not at the specific points. As I said earlier, he tries to co-ordinate the movement of wheat toward points of export with the ships that are coming to get the wheat.
So far as I am concerned, Mr. Chairman, I think I have answered all the questions that have been raised, and I hope we can get the resolution through. Everybody seems to be in favour of getting it through. A moment ago the hon. gentleman mentioned "may", and I thought he was thinking of adopting the resolution in May. My suggestion is that we should adopt the resolution and then get on with the bill and try to make some progress.


Hazen Robert Argue: The C.C.F. would like to see two things done in this present situation. First we would like to see more box cars made available immediately to those many hundreds of delivery points in western Canada that are still on very low delivery quotas of one or two bushels. We think a much better job could have been done, and should have been done, in making box cars available in such a manner as to more nearly equalize the quotas amongst western producers. Second, we would like to see a system of allocation brought about that would allocate box cars at an individual marketing point among the various elevator companies at that point on the basis of the wishes of the producers

Department of Transport Act themselves. We feel that the producer himself should have the right to deliver grain to the elevator of his own choice. That right can be brought about only if box cars are distributed at a marketing point on the basis of where farmers wish to deliver their grain.
Farm organizations in the past have advanced a method by which this very laudable result could be obtained. Frequently we have difficulty convincing the government that the things we suggest should be adopted, but I rather regret this afternoon that some members of the Social Credit group have not seen fit to support us in our proposition.


Victor Quelch: What is your proposition?


Hazen Robert Argue: That box cars should be allocated in such a way as to equalize distribution of quotas.


Victor Quelch: The hon. member knows that on every occasion such a bill has been brought before the house by him we have supported it.


Hazen Robert Argue: I will come to that in a moment. I think I can say that some hon. members of the Social Credit group have opposed a better system of box car distribution, and I shall put the facts on the record. What has been said this afternoon and last evening by hon. members of this group was that they were quite happy with the present allocation of box cars undertaken by Mr. Milner.


Mr. Smith (Battle River-Camrose):: Is the
hon. member suggesting that I made such a statement last night?


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, I think I have the floor.


An hon. Member:: You certainly have had it all day.


Hazen Robert Argue: Hon. members can reply after I have taken my seat. There is no limit on the number of times hon. members can take part in this debate. Last evening the hon. member for Battle River-Camrose said, as reported at page 3241 of Hansard:
That means to me that there is some confusion existing even now. However, I should like through you to thank the present transport controller for the co-operation and courtesy he has extended to me at all times and I say that in all sincerity. In my opinion there is no use blaming the individual who is called upon to do a job and who is doing it to the best of his ability with the machinery with which he is provided.
And so he went on to express general approval of the work of the transport controller at this time.


Solon Earl Low: On a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman-


Hazen Robert Argue: I am telling the leader of the Social Credit group-


Solon Earl Low: On a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman-


The Deputy Chairman:: The hon. member for Peace River is rising on a question of privilege.


Solon Earl Low: Mr. Chairman, my question of privilege is that the hon. member who had the floor just before I arose is stretching the truth. He is accusing the hon. member for Battle River-Camrose of speaking about one thing when in truth the hon. member for Battle River-Camrose was speaking about another matter. I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the hon. member for Assiniboia stick to the truth, something he has not shown he can do.


Hazen Robert Argue: Well, Mr. Chairman, I am not going to ask the leader of the Social Credit group to withdraw those very unparliamentary remarks-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Don't be so thin-skinned.


Hazen Robert Argue: The hon. member was speaking in unparliamentary terms when he suggested that I am not telling the truth. Last night and this afternoon some hon. members of the Social Credit group have expressed general approval of the work of the transport controller.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: So have I, and I am not
ashamed of it.


Hazen Robert Argue: I have not heard them ask this afternoon that box cars be provided in such a way as to bring about an equalization of delivery quotas on the prairie provinces. Each year since I have been a member of the agriculture committee I have heard it said that in the fall there is more grain delivered out of Manitoba, relatively, than out of Saskatchewan-


René Jutras: That helps you.


Hazen Robert Argue: -and more grain is delivered in the fall out of Alberta than is delivered out of Saskatchewan. We are given the excuse that it is because of short hauls. The hon. member for Acadia said this was an unusual situation. As I recall it this is not a particularly unusual situation, because for many years in the first part of the crop year delivery quotas in Saskatchewan have generally been late and we have asked and shall continue to ask-


Victor Quelch: It all depends on whether it is going to the Pacific coast or to the east.


Hazen Robert Argue: It always happens that we are at the peak; and whether it goes to Fort William or to the Pacific coast, short hauls

get the advantage in box car distribution and Saskatchewan is left in a very inferior position. We say that the allocation of box cars should be on a fairer basis. We also say that the formula presented by the wheat pool organizations and advanced by the Saskatchewan wheat pool in particular is a better formula; namely that farmers should have a right to state in their permit book or by some other means where they wish to deliver their grain at a given market point each year, and that the allocation of box cars amongst the elevator companies at that point should be on the basis of those deliveries and that opinion set forth by the farmers in their wheat board permit books.
It is correct to say that hon. members of the Social Credit group have usually supported that proposition, but they have not done so consistently. As far as I can recall at this time, though I would stand subject to correction, there has not been a member of the Conservative party on the agriculture committee who has opposed the allocation of box cars as advanced by the farm organizations, but I do remember very clearly the opinion set forth by the hon. member for Medicine Hat. His opinion is found at page 374 of the minutes of the standing committee on agriculture and colonization of June 3, 1955.


George Carlyle Marler: I cannot help thinking, Mr. Chairman, that this discussion, while very interesting, has no connection with the transport controller or with the provisions of section 6A of the Department of Transport Act. The hon. member will have another opportunity of talking about the distribution of box cars. He already has a bill on the order paper to accomplish that purpose. I have found myself asking for some time, Mr. Chairman, whether these remarks, interesting as they may be, are relevant to the subject now before the committee.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: I have been giving some thought to the same point myself, more particularly because there is an anticipation rule. No one knows better than the hon. member for Assiniboia that there is a bill on the order paper dealing with the allocation of box cars to the elevator, as he puts it, of a farmer's choice. At the same time there has been permitted in this debate so much discussion as to what are and what are not the powers of the transport controller that it would be difficult if not unfair for me suddenly to rule discussion of that matter out of order.
I think perhaps I would be justified in suggesting to the hon. member for Assiniboia and those who may follow him that we are
Department of Transport Act really bound in this discussion by matters which are or which should be in some people's opinions within the powers of the transport controller. While I am not at the moment ruling the hon. member out of order, I am going to request him to stick pretty closely to the terms of the resolution and the powers of the transport controller, and indicate that if he gets away from that subject later on I shall have to ask him to confine his remarks to it.


Hazen Robert Argue: I think, Mr. Chairman, your statement is completely fair in every respect. I believe that under the powers of the transport controller set forth in the act and the regulations he has the power to do the type of thing which I have been suggesting. I want to agree wholeheartedly with the minister's statement that the transport controller has never used that power, and at no time has he allocated box cars even to a given delivery point, as far as I know, and certainly not amongst the elevator companies at a delivery point. It is done on the basis of following up the over-all shipping orders of the Canadian wheat board, and this has resulted in a very bad allocation of box cars.
To support the statement I have made that a Social Credit member, the hon. member for Medicine Hat, was opposed to a change in the present system I read from page 374 of the minutes of the standing committee on agriculture and colonization of Friday, June 3, 1955, as follows:
However, I think our present set-up is about as fair as we can have it and I might say again that every witness who appeared before us with the exception of Mr. Wesson agreed that there was nothing much which could be done about any change in the box car system at the present time.
That was the dissenting voice in the agriculture committee as far as the distribution of box cars based on the farmer's own choice was concerned. I opened my remarks by saying that at the present time the farmers in Saskatchewan are asking for two things. They are asking that more box cars be made available immediately at the delivery point so there may be a greater equalization of delivery quotas within Saskatchewan and throughout the three prairie provinces. They repeat their request that steps be taken through the office of the transport controller, who has undoubtedly the power, or by some other means to establish a system of box car distribution whereby fanners may deliver grain to the elevator of their own choice.


Victor Quelch: The hon. member for Assiniboia has gone to some length to try to prove that we of this group at this time have not supported them in asking that the transport

Department of Transport Act controller allocate cars on the basis of the farmer's choice. It is true that we have not done that at this time, because we do not think it is the responsibility of the transport controller to do that. At the present time that is a responsibility of the wheat board. The wheat board decides upon the allocation of cars. They, the C.C.F., do not like to criticize the wheat board because they know that criticism of that kind is not popular with the farmers, so instead of criticizing the body which today has the responsibility for the allocation of box cars they try to make out that that is the responsibility of the transport controller.
We are not entering into that kind of criticism at the present time. We are not criticizing the wheat board nor are we criticizing the transport controller, because he is not the one charged with that responsibility.
In so far as the question of whether or not box cars should be allocated on the basis of the farmer's choice is concerned, on every single occasion that a vote has been taken in this house this group has supported that principle. In order to bolster his false charge that we have not always taken that stand, what does the hon. member for Assini-boia do? He mentions one member of our group, the hon. member for Medicine Hat. The hon. member for Medicine Hat has never announced the agricultural policy of this group. That was always done by the late hon. member for Battle River, and since his death I have made such announcements for this group. When the hon. member says we have not always supported the allocation of box cars on the basis of the farmer's choice he is just not telling the truth.


Willis Merwyn (Merv) Johnson: Mr. Chairman, I think what we should keep in mind is the resolution which is being discussed at the present time and the discussion which will provide us with some information on the bill which is to follow. I think it should be kept in mind that the tendency of the Liberal government in the past few years has been to scuttle the Canadian wheat board. We have another example of that showing up here.
The Canadian wheat board has stated that it does not want to be charged with the responsibility of allocating box cars at individual marketing points. The administration has restricted the field of activities of the transport controller in the way the Minister of Transport outlined this afternoon, with the result that the prodigious task of allocating box cars has been thrown into the laps of the Canadian wheat board who have stated in the past that they do not want that job. Their job is selling wheat. The Minister of Trade and Commerce told us that they were


not in the banking business and now we are told that they are not in the railroading business.
There is a tremendous field open for the transport controller. I do not think we can be satisfied with an appointed individual who receives no salary from the Department of Transport, who receives his salary of $12,000 a year as a member of the board of grain commissioners. I feel that the job of transport controller is one to be taken seriously. The Department of Transport should assume more authority for the enforcement of the regulations. This is where we come into disagreement with the Social Credit party, who are quite content to let the present circumstances continue. They do not agree with us when we state that we are not getting a fair allocation of box cars among the marketing points. Since the transport controller has been allocating box cars at individual marketing points, perhaps in the past he has shown the members of the Social Credit group some favours and they do not want to get on his bad side.


Solon Earl Low: That is Silly; that is childish.


An hon. Member:: Pretty small.


Willis Merwyn (Merv) Johnson: It is pretty
childish for the transport controller to operate the way he does, because on the one hand we hear that he has no responsibility for the allocation of box cars to individual marketing points yet last year in the committee on agriculture and colonization he admitted he was quite ready to step in and correct situations which might develop.
The main thing I want the Minister of Transport to keep in mind is the criticisms we have offered of the present administration of the transport controller. There is a large field of endeavour which at present is vacant. If we were to appoint two or three transport controllers to handle this job of co-ordinating the rail movements the whole movement of grain would be more efficient, and we would finally achieve that principle which western farm organizations have been so desirous of having established even in the face of an adverse government. This government would be doing the farmers of all Canada a favour by bringing in a bill containing some of these features and making it truly operative.


James Alexander Smith: Mr. Chairman, I should like to take a moment or two in further discussion of this resolution. Last evening I attempted to state in very brief terms the position of our group as far as this particular resolution is concerned. During the course of my remarks I tried in all sincerity to pay a compliment to the present transport controller. I did that knowing full well what I was doing. To my way

of thinking the transport controller is a public servant charged with the responsibility of carrying out policies which the government through parliament lays down. .1 am not prepared to attack a public servant who as far as I am concerned is carrying out policy laid down by this government to the best of his ability.
I went on further to point out that to my mind confusion has existed-here is where I must differ with the hon. member for Assini-boia-throughout the years as far as the movement of grain from the west is concerned. I said at that time that there should be closer liaison among the Minister of Transport and his department, the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Canadian wheat board to see if something could not be done to straighten out the box car mess. Those of us who come from the west are aware that this mess has existed for the past number of years.
I am not apologizing now nor will I ever apologize for paying a tribute to public servants who in my opinion are doing a good job.


Hazen Robert Argue: I rise to correct only one thing. The statement has been made that the matter of box car allocation is the prerogative of the Canadian wheat board. I want to say that the Canadian wheat board, to the best of my information, does not in any way allocate box cars among the elevator companies themselves, and that the allocation of box cars has been, and is today, a matter of the railway companies' own actions. Even though we have a transport controller who has a great deal of authority, and even though the Canadian wheat board, as it does, allocates shipping orders among various companies, the decision as to what box cars will be spotted at various elevator companies is the prerogative of the railway companies themselves. So there is no blame and there cannot be any blame on the Canadian wheat board itself for this-very bad mess as far as box car distribution is concerned.
The wheat board did not ask for any responsibility whatsoever in this field. As far as I have been able to find out, it has not been given any responsibility in the way I have mentioned or, as far as I have been able to study the Canadian Wheat Board Act, the power under that act to allocate individual box cars to individual elevator companies at a given marketing point. To substantiate my statement that it is the railway companies that spot the box cars, I read from the
25, 1956	3281
Northwest Territories Power Commission evidence of Mr. Milner before the Saskatchewan select committee the following:
Q. Then the railways, under a general order or arrangements, which you have given to them, or arranged with them, they, in effect then, allocate the cars?
A. That's right.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. Marler thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 249, to amend the Department of Transport Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



NORTHWEST TERRITORIES POWER COMMISSION ACT


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Monday, February 27, consideration in committee of the following resolution-Mr. Lesage-Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Northwest Territories Power Commission Act to change the name of the commission to "Northern Canada Power Commission"; to authorize the commission to supply public utilities other than electrical power and to operate outside the territories; also to provide a fund to enable the commission to carry on investigations; and to provide further for certain changes in connection with the administration of the act.
Mr. Lesage:: The purpose of the resolution is to permit the introduction of a bill to amend the Northwest Territories Power Commission Act. The first of the proposed amendments would have to do with a change in the name of the commission. It seems that the present name is not appropriate, since the commission has some activities in the Yukon Territory, and it is proposed to change the name to Northern Canada Power Commission. There has been a company in Ontario by the name of Northern Canada Power Company, but it wound up its activities in 1928 and the letters patent have been cancelled since January 1 of this year.
The second amendment will have to do with the provision of authority to supply public utilities other than power. Of course power would remain the main activity of the commission. However, in the north there are certain circumstances, which are known to hon. members in this house, that are such that there is an economic advantage in combining power, heating and water pumping plants. In the new Aklavik it is intended that the power will be generated through steam, which will be produced either by diesel engines or with coal. This steam will then be used for a central heating plant, and from the central heating plant there will be large insulated pipes which will go to the various

Northwest Territories Power Commission buildings of the community. In these large insulated pipes there will be first the steam pipe, which will provide the heating, and then the water pipes and the sewerage pipes. The water and sewerage pipes cannot be laid in the ground; they have to be heated or they freeze, and you know what can happen.
This experience has been gained in northern countries. In Canada I myself have visited the installations of the United Keno Hills mines at Elsa, where they have the system of large insulated pipes containing the steam pipes and also water and sewerage lines. The steam, which will generate the electric power, will be used to heat the water and sewerage pipes and also to heat the buildings of the community. There is a great economic advantage in having all the facilities administered under the same concern. This is the reason the bill will provide for an amendment to 'authorize the commission to provide these other utilities.
Another amendment will authorize the commission to operate outside the Northwest Territories and the Yukon. The purpose of the amendment is to make it clear that the commission might acquire plants, as well as construct and operate them, and to empower the commission to carry on business in a province, subject, of course, to the approval of the governor in council and in compliance with the laws of the province.
An instance of an advantage there is in regard to the Royal Canadian Signal Corps station which is situated three miles south of Fort Smith, which is built on the 60th parallel. There is a diesel plant operated by the commission at Fort Smith, and there would be an advantage in supplying the power from the commission's plant at Fort Smith to the Royal Canadian Signal Corps station, which is three miles inside Alberta.
There is also a proposed amendment which would provide for an investigation fund. This would provide the means of financing the investigation of power projects, which is generally necessary to determine the economic feasibility of projects. If a project is developed, the cost of investigation is restored to the fund and charged against the capital cost of the development; if a project is not developed, it is intended that the fund will be restored by parliamentary appropriations. The fund which will be proposed is in the amount of $50,000. The other proposed amendments are minor and have to do with administration.


Mr. Michener:: I do not propose to say anything other than to ask a question. Is it intended to give this commission a monopoly with regard to these various utilities in the Northwest Territories?


Jean Lesage: No, Mr. Chairman. As a matter of fact in Whitehorse, for instance, the generation and distribution of power for the civilian population is done by a private concern. There is quite an expansion at Whitehorse and the power facilities are not sufficient. Therefore there have to be other generating facilities. The private concern having the franchise at Whitehorse does not have the necessary capital to proceed with further developments. Therefore it is the intention of the commission to develop a hydro power plant somewhere near Whitehorse, and according to present plans the power will be sold wholesale to the airport, to the army and R.C.A.F. installations and to the private concern in question.


Mr. Simmons:: Mr. Chairman, I am sure this resolution is of great interest to the people of the Yukon and the Northwest Territories, and indicates the lines on which I think the power commission should be developed. The original act, while appropriate at the time, has been outgrown, and so that the activities of the power commission may be fully developed its scope should certainly be enlarged. I have always thought that Canada should have a federal power commission, and as the resolution indicates a forward step I am very glad to support it.
Power is so closely related to the development of Canada's natural resources that parliament should miss no opportunity to foster power development wherever possible within federal jurisdiction. The Northwest Territories Power Commission, or the Northern Canada Power Commission, as now proposed, will provide a vehicle for progress along these lines. I feel that the federal government has been lagging behind and should take the lead in establishing facilities for the development of northern Canada, though I am pleased to say there has been a decided improvement in the past few years. A major factor in this development will be the Northern Canada Power Commission, which will supply public utilities, in addition to supplying electrical power, outside the territories, where private enterprise may not be interested.
As I understand the resolution, the power commission will not only have the power to construct and operate hydroelectric plants but also to initiate and bring into being other related activities associated with power. A fund to enable the commission to carry on investigations and surveys is essential and it should be fully adequate. No other government in Canada has the authority to develop the territories and the federal government should accept its responsibility to the fullest extent.


Accordingly I am completely in accord with the resolution, and hope to have the opportunity of speaking in more detail when the bill is introduced. I am particularly interested in ample power for the Yukon, and I feel that the distribution of power developed by the power commission should be undertaken by the private facilities now available. I believe this has been the policy of the power commission in the past and I hope it will continue to be so. In other words, the commission would supply power on a wholesale basis and not adopt a policy of retail distribution and sale. This amendment will permit all departments of the government to have the benefit of the power commission's advice and action with respect to their own particular power problems in the north, particularly the departments of northern affairs and Indian affairs and also crown companies.
I am very much in favour of the resolution, as it will be of undoubted benefit to the development of northern Canada.


Mr. Harkness:: Mr. Chairman, the introduction of these amendments indicates, I think, an increased interest and determination on the part of the department to carry on development in the Northwest Territories, and from that point of view I welcome them.
I hope these amendments will result in putting the corporation in a position to carry on power development in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon to better advantage than it has been able to do in the past.
There are five separate matters dealt with in the resolution. I believe the minister commented on all except one, and I should like to ask a few questions with respect to what he had to say about them. The minister said this particular organization had some activities in the Yukon. I was not clear whether he meant that it had activities in the Yukon at the present time or that it was proposed that it would have activities in the Yukon in the future. If it has activities in the Yukon at the present time, perhaps he can tell us what those are or, if it is a proposal for the future, what the proposal is.
The second part of the resolution will give the corporation the power to deal with the utilities other than electric power utilities, and in that connection the minister gave as an example the proposed development at Aklavik. I think that development is a good one and it certainly seems reasonable that the commission should lay the water, sewer and heating pipes all in the one pipe, shall we say.


Jean Lesage: Tube.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The fact that they are providing electric power naturally makes them
25. 1956	3283
Northwest Territories Power Commission the proper people to put in the other piping and things of that sort. I wondered, as a matter of fact, whether this change was also designed to put the commission in a position to deal with the installation of natural gas facilities, in view of the fact that there has been a discovery of gas in the Northwest Territories. I know of at least one gas well that has been discovered there and I have no doubt there will be more. In view of the heating difficulties that exist in that part of the country because of the climate I think anything that can be done to provide heating facilities for the communities there by using natural gas is something which the department should certainly prosecute as vigorously as possible. Such action might very well provide one answer to the fuel problem that prevails in that northern area. Possibly the minister would comment on whether anything is proposed along that line, and if there is any immediate prospect of anything being done as far as the use of gas in the Northwest Territories is concerned.
The third change suggested will give the company power to operate outside the territories. The minister mentioned a possible development at Fort Smith, which is just south of the Alberta boundary and which development would extend south from there into Alberta. In addition, I understand that in the northern part of Alberta considerable water power resources are available from which I believe it is possible to develop about a quarter of a million horsepower through using natural falls or rapids existing there.
I wondered whether giving this authority was connected with the fact that this site exists so close to the Northwest Territories, and whether there was on the part of the council of the Northwest Territories or of this company an idea of developing that particular waterpower site, which I believe is perhaps the largest waterpower site immediately available in the Northwest Territories region. Speaking more particularly, I believe it is the closest one of considerable size to the Yellowknife district and the mineral areas surrounding the lake there.
The fourth matter is this. In the resolution it is stated that one purpose is "to provide a fund to enable the commission to carry on investigations". From what the minister said I was not clear as to what those investigations are and what the amount of this fund is supposed to be. I think some mention was made of $50,000, but I was not clear as to what is the nature of the investigations or what those investigations are connected with. I presume the investigations would be in connection with sources for power development and things along that

Northwest Territories Power Commission line, but perhaps we might have a few more details in connection with that particular matter.
The fifth thing is with respect to certain administrative changes which I believe the minister indicated did not amount to much. He might perhaps give us some indication of what they are.


Jean Lesage: The first question of the hon. member for Calgary North has to do with the present activities of the Northwest Territories Power Commission in the Yukon. I may say that the commission has one plant in the Yukon which is in operation at the present time. It is at Mayo, which is northeast of Whitehorse and it supplies the power for the zinc-lead-silver mines at United Keno. The other two existing plants of the commission are in the Northwest Territories. One is a hydro plant at Snare river which supplies power for Yellowknife and its gold mines. The other one is a diesel plant at Fort Smith. As to the projected plants, one is in the Yukon, a hydro plant for Whitehorse.
I shall immediately reply to one of the questions asked by the hon. member. The commission's engineers are now doing a survey at Whitehorse so they can choose between two sites. This is the reason for the revolving fund. That provision is made so the engineering surveys for the power sites can be made. The cost of the survey will be attributed to the project when the project is feasible. When it is not feasible, the next year we will seek a parliamentary appropriation to reimburse the revolving fund. [DOT]
In the Northwest Territories there are two projected plants of the commission. One is at Aklavik. For that one I gave details. There is also a projected diesel plant at Fort Simpson. There are many places in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon where power is supplied by private enterprise. This is a further reply to the hon. member for St. Paul's.
I believe the hon. member for Calgary North had a good point when he raised the question of the supply of natural gas. Before the bill comes up for second reading I shall take the matter up with the officers of the commission.


Douglas Scott Harkness: There is no provision in the bill?


Jean Lesage: I do not believe there is. I shall have to read the bill carefully again. I will discuss the matter with the law officers and also with the members of the commission, because I believe the hon. member for Calgary North has a good point.


Mr. Leboe:: Mr. Chairman-


Jean Lesage: May I just finish my reply? The hon. member for Calgary North also mentioned the possible development of the rapids between Fort Fitzgerald and Fort Smith on the Slave river. As he says, there is a hydro power potential there of a little over a quarter of a million horsepower. This might be useful in the future for mineral development, especially on the south shores of Great Slave lake, including the Pine Point site. Of course, according to the amendments that will be introduced, the commission would have the power to develop this potential according to the laws of the province and with the permission of the province of Alberta.
As the hon. member stated, this power could really be developed only to supply the Northwest Territories. This would not be a source of power for Alberta, because the transmission lines would be too long; it would really be a source of power for the Northwest Territories. It might well be that private enterprise would become interested in developing it. Since the commission does not operate a monopoly, the development might become a reality without the commission having to develop the site itself. But according to the amendments which are proposed, it would have the power to do it, with the necessary licensing from the province.
I believe those were all of the questions asked by the hon. member for Calgary North.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Yes.


Bert Raymond Leboe: I have just two questions. I should like to know whether the power commission is subsidized. Does it pay its own way with the revenue that comes in? I should also like to know what would be the relationship, for instance, with a power development in northern British Columbia such as Frobisher. Would there be any possibility of joint action in any way in connection with power development?


Jean Lesage: The power commission is not subsidized except to the extent that we might seek parliamentary appropriations for these surveys for sites which are not developed because the result of the survey is negative. As to the second question, this Frobisher project is a private enterprise project and there has never been any question of it having any kind of relationship with the Northwest Territories Power Commission.


Mr. Green:: The Frobisher plan envisaged the production of a great deal of hydroelectric power, far more than would be used for mining purposes in the Yukon. Apparently that plan has now been stalled. I wonder whether the minister could tell the committee

what the present situation is and, in particular, whether there are now any international complications; in other words, can he tell us whether the development is held up pending some arrangement with the United States about the use of the Yukon river? My understanding was that this scheme involved the large area which comprises the headwaters of the Yukon river not only in the Yukon but also in British Columbia. Evidently there has been some hitch in the development. It would be helpful if the minister could tell us what is the situation.
Another point is this. Has any thought been given to the use of atomic power plants in northern Canada? The minister mentioned that some of these plants are producing power from coal. We have read in the press about the possibility of using atomic energy plants in that particular part of the nation. I wonder if the minister could tell us whether this power commission has the authority itself to instal atomic energy power plants, and whether the minister considers that they will be feasible in that territory?


Jean Lesage: In reply to the second question, according to my information the possibility of using atomic energy plants for generating electricity is under constant study, but the cost of such installations is so high at the present time that they could not compete with other forms of power for generating electricity.


Howard Charles Green: Even in northern Canada?


Jean Lesage: Even in northern Canada, at least where the commission is operating. That is the answer. The commission can supply electricity, even in Aklavik, by the use of coal and oil much cheaper than it can by using atomic energy plants. We hope, of course, that atomic energy will be cheaper in the coming years so we can use it for developing electric power.
In so far as the Frobisher plan is concerned, it has not been shelved. Surveys will be conducted this summer. A note just came to my desk a few moments ago concerning this
25, 1956	3285
Northwest Territories Power Commission subject. It says that drilling operations are now proposed at the Miles canyon dam site, the tunnel invert sites at the end of Atlin lake and at Sloko lake and also at the site of the tunnel outfall of Nakonake valley as well as at the power house site and diversion dam site. All those surveys are going to proceed this year in connection with the Frobisher project which involves the diversion of the headwaters of the Yukon river.


Howard Charles Green: Are the Frobisher people giving consideration to establishing any smaller plants in the Yukon in the meantime?


Jean Lesage: Not in the Yukon, but they are going on with the Naas river project, as the hon. member is aware, in British Columbia. Of course, even the construction phase of the Frobisher plan will take a number of years, but the needs of Whitehorse for additional power are immediate. It is for that reason the power commission is making these surveys, in order to start the development of a hydro plant north of Whitehorse as early as possible this summer. This, of course, could easily be co-ordinated with any development of the Frobisher project which would affect Whitehorse in later years.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. Lesage thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 250, to amend the Northwest Territories Power Commission Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we shall take the resolution in my name and the resolution in the name of the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys; then the resolution with respect to additional judges; then second reading of the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act and second reading of the National Housing Act.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Questions

[Stage Direction]
The following answers, deposited with the Clerk of the house, are printed in the official report of debates pursuant to standing order 39:

Mr. Boisvert: What were the countries of origin of the 140 books which were prohibited entry into Canada, in 1955, under tariff item 1201, on account of their immorality or indecency?
Answer by: Hon. J. J. McCann (Minister of
National Revenue):
Country of Origin	No.
United States of America	 68
France	 68
India	 3
Germany	 1


L. CHATWIN, NATIONAL FILM BOARD
Mr. Diefenbaker: 1.	Is Mr. L. Chatwin connected with the film board?
2.	If so, in what capacity?
3.	Is he now on tour?
4.	If so, in what country is he at this date?
5.	What other countries has he visited within the past six months?
6.	What are the amounts of his travelling allowances and expense accounts, month by month, since August 1, 1955?
Answer by: Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minisier of
Citizenship and Immigration):
1.	Yes.
2.	Director of distribution.
3.	Yes.
4.	Manila, Philippines.
5.	United States, England, Pakistan, India, Ceylon, Burma, Thailand, Indonesia, Singapore, Malaya, Indo-China, Philippines.
6.	No travelling allowances; expense accounts, August $63.65, September $23.95, October $17.94, November $157.80, December none, January $142.51, February accounts not received, March accounts not received, April to date accounts not received.
In January, 1956, Mr. Chatwin was provided with an advance in the amount of $1,750 for his trip to Asia and transportation payments have been made in the amount of $1,638.60.



END OF VOLUME III


[Stage Direction]
queen's printer and controller of stationery OTTAWA, 1956
[Stage Direction]
Friday, March 16, 1956