1963-11-25

THE LATE PRESIDENT KENNEDY


Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Acting Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, we are about to resume the discharge of our responsibilities for the nation's business, which we suspended on Friday after receiving the shocking news of the death of the late president of the United States. Just two hours ago in Washington the nation that President Kennedy led so brilliantly, joined by the representatives of countries far and near, paid a last formal tribute to him. As a mark of our respect and sorrow I should like to suggest to the house that before we turn to the business of the day the members stand for one minute in silent tribute.
[Whereupon the house stood in silence for one minute.]



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Mr. Speaker:: I understand that agreement has been reached by all members that we will dispense with routine proceedings and pass at once to legislation, and that at 5 p.m. we will suspend the hour for private members' business and adjourn at 6 p.m. Is it so ordered?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



RAILWAY ACT


Hon. G. J. Mcllraiih (Minister of Transport) moved: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Railway Act, chapter 40 of the statutes of 1958, as amended by chapter 35 of the statutes of 1960, to permit certain grants to be made from the railway grade crossing fund for a further period of three years beyond January 31, 1964.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Batten in the chair.


George James McIlraith: The purpose of this legislation is to extend for a further period of
three years, from January 31, 1964, an expanded program of assistance through the railway grade crossing fund for the provision of reflective markings on the sides of railway cars, for the cost of protective work at level crossings, and for the building or reconstruction of grade separations.
In 1955, following an investigation into the matter of grade crossing protection assistance by the board of transport commissioners, section 265 of the Railway Act was amended by increasing the annual statutory grant to the grade crossing fund from $1 million to $5 million. At the same time the limits on the contribution to any single project were raised from 40 per cent of total cost or $150,000 maximum to 60 per cent of total cost or $300,000 maximum. Provision was also made for the first time to allow contributions from the fund for reconstruction and improvement of grade separations which had become obsolete in the course of time.
The result of this was a marked expansion in the program of crossing protection and removal throughout the country, and a backlog of worth while projects accumulated in excess of the resources available to the grade crossing fund. In 1958 section 265 was therefore again amended providing for a further expansion in the maximum limits of funds that could be applied to single projects. These became 80 per cent of cost to a maximum of $500,000 for projects at level crossings, and 50 per cent or $250,000 for the reconstruction of existing grade separations. Beginning that year a supplementary grant of $10 million for the fund was voted in the estimates. This legislation provided a three year period for the expanded limits just described. In 1960 the period was extended by another amendment of the act.
This period will expire on January 31, 1964. The present bill will provide for the extension of the period for a further three years, until January 31, 1967. What is being sought today is authority to continue that extended limit for the further period of three years.
This legislation also deals with another matter which has nothing to do with expenditure. Recently in the supreme court of Alberta, trial division, a decision was handed down having to do with the speed of railway trains at crossings where protection had been ordered. The interpretation placed on the section of the relevant statute is somewhat

Railway Act
different than that which had been the basis of railway practice. The effect of the decision is that once an order for protection has been approved, the railways are then required by law to pass over the crossing concerned at 10 miles an hour. It had been the practice, where crossings of this type had been involved, and the time for installing the protection had passed, that trains should be required to pass over the intersection at this limited speed. The interpretation placed on it by the Alberta judgment also meant that trains could not speed up once they had entered the crossing.


Mr. Diefenbaker:: Whose judgment is that?


George James McIlraith: Mr. Justice Manning's. Once the trains had entered the crossing it is felt they should be able to speed up. One result of the proposed change is that the board of transport commissioners can deal with the question of the speed when they are making the order. The effect of the judgment is that the practice of trying to get from the highways departments of the provinces the various crossings with which they are concerned and make the orders as early in each year as possible, although work on those orders might not be carried out until considerably later in the year, would have to be changed or discontinued; and it is thought that this would mitigate against the effective use of the grade crossing fund.
From my observations in the house over a vast number of years I must say that I think this is legislation of a nature that has commended itself to all parties in the house, and I would hope that the legislation for which leave is now being sought would appeal to the house in the same way.


Mr. Mather:: Mr. Chairman, I wonder
whether it would be in order at this time for me to ask the minister a question regarding these level crossing procedures. Has the government given consideration to the brief submitted by the Canadian Automobile Association and the representations of other road safety organizations, which I understand are advocating the arm type of railway crossing guard protection involving the lowering of the guard at the crossing? Further, has the department considered the wisdom of guarding crossing approaches by means of the standard highway safety signs used in the provinces?


George James McIlraith: I think I should point out to the hon. member for New Westminster that this is a matter that is dealt with by the board of transport commissioners, not by the department. Briefs have been submitted to them. The board of transport commissioners works very closely with the provinces in this matter. The relationship is quite close, and I have reason to believe it is relatively
[Mr. Mcllraith.l
satisfactory to both parties concerned. The program also appears to have had some effect in reducing the number of accidents. I think hon. members will be glad to know that there is a declining number of accidents at these crossings each year. That process has gone on since 1958. This is particularly significant when you bear in mind the sharply increased number of automobiles on the highways each year and, regrettably, the sharply increased number of automobile accidents taking place each year.


Mr. Howe (Wellinglon-Huron):: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words on the very important piece of legislation before the committee this afternoon. That it is important practically every member in the house will agree, because they will have memories of tragic accidents that have occurred at level crossings in their ridings. I well remember some that have occurred in my riding or adjacent to it. One accident that stands out in my mind particularly took place at Hillsburgh, a few miles from Guelph, just a few short months ago. A school bus was struck by a train. Quite a number of young students as well as the driver of the bus were killed, and there were serious injuries to others riding in the bus.
Grade crossing separation is a progressive practice that has been going on for some time, and a great many have been installed at level crossings throughout the country. The fact is that trains are not running as regularly as they used to because of the reduction in traffic, but I think it is just as imperative now as it ever was that grade crossing separations be carried out. People become careless. When they come to a railway crossing they should realize that the only way to get across safely is to proceed on the basis that any time is train time, and take all the necessary precautions.
However, at times the public have to have this brought to their attention more forcibly through the installation of signal lights and crossing arms, which are still important factors in preventing accidents. In this day and age, when people are travelling faster in their motor cars and when railroad trains are travelling faster, I think it is important that this legislation be kept in force. I was noticing that in the estimates for 1960-61 the fund stood at $10 million and was then reduced to $5 million. Perhaps when the minister is replying he might tell us just where the fund stands at the moment. He might also be able to tell us how many applications there are before the board at the moment for the installation of signals, crossing arms or grade separation, as it is called.
There is one other point I should like to mention. When this act was being amended in

1958 a provision was introduced to make it possible for the railroads to put reflective markings on the railroad cars. Periodically we pick up our newspapers and learn that someone travelling along a road at night or perhaps during a storm when visibility was poor has run into the side of a train at a crossing. I well recall the arguments put forward in this connection by a former member of this house, Mr. Gordon K. Fraser. This was one of his ideas, that railroad cars should have reflective markings on the side so they would stand out at night. We know that some of the Canadian National cars are now marked in this way, and they are more easily seen as they are moving over a crossing during a period when visibility is poor. I was wondering if the minister would have any idea how far this work has progressed, and what the plans of the railway are for the future in regard to putting these reflective markings on railway cars.
This act is to be extended for another three years, and I am sure the people of Canada who travel on our highways will be happy to learn of this fact, because we want to do everything possible to minimize the danger of accidents at railway crossings.


Mr. Thompson:: Mr. Chairman, there is just one matter I want to mention. It is simple, but I believe it is important. We all realize that we are dealing with money which will be allotted for the installation of railway crossing safety devices. We are concerned about this because everyone knows that from time to time serious accidents are occurring across this nation which in the aggregate are taking the lives of many Canadians.
Not only are our newspapers full of references to such accidents but we each have our own experiences in our own areas in this connection. Only a few months ago in my own city of Red Deer a whole carload of people lost their lives while riding in a taxi when the car collided with a train at a crossing at which there was not ample protection.
I am thinking specifically, however, of a bus accident which occurred at Lamont, Alberta, a few years ago, in which a whole busload of children were involved, many of whom lost their lives. At that time the committee investigating this mishap received evidence regarding a comparatively cheap safety device which was actually demonstrated at the time. This device is activated by a low power radio transmitter on a locomotive engine and makes contact with any nearby vehicle that has the corresponding device installed inside it. Cost of installation of this type of device, both for the railroad and the automobile, is comparatively
Railway Act
cheap and can be reckoned in terms of tens of dollars instead of hundreds of dollars, which is the cost of the normal automatic safety device. Because it is safe and simple, and because it gives a certain amount of protection, it could serve in many places where accidents take place almost daily.
I would like to ask the minister whether any consideration has been given to the acquisition of this type of safety device which could be used particularly by public vehicles, and in many cases by people who frequently use unprotected railway crossings. I do not think any of us can be complacent in the face of this appalling toll of human life which takes place month after month, and certainly this device is worth investigating. It would give much more widespread protection, at an inexpensive cost compared to the very expensive type of safety signal now being used. Does the minister have information in regard to this?


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Wellington-Huron asked some questions, and I want to point out to him that the method of voting the money in the estimates was changed because it was found that the actual expenditures were not taking place in the year in line with commitments. The form of the estimate is now really a commitment authority, but it adds up to the same thing. It is a different and I think a better way of doing it. This method was decided upon in the light of experience, and there is no reduction of funds. The $10 million which was formerly provided in the estimates as a direct vote is now provided by way of direct vote and by way of commitment authority, and it brings the full amount up to the equivalent of $15 million a year.
In answer to the questions about the application, and so on, I should perhaps inform the committee there are about 35 active applications for grade operations; there are about 400 active automatic protection projects, and the rate of putting reflectors on the cars-whatever that is called-is about 6,000 cars per year. The number of grade crossings that are having reflectorized material put on the crossing signs is about 2,500 per year. I hope these statistics have given the answer to the hon. member for Red Deer. If not, and if he will restate his question, I will try to give him the information.


Robert Norman Thompson: I am somewhat familiar with the cost of the normal automatic signal device which is being installed and being presently considered for several hundred crossings, but I am interested in something that is cheaper, which might not give the same degree of safety but which could

Railway Act
prevent many of the accidents which take place. Has this cheaper type of device, this radio controlled device activated from a locomotive installation, been considered by the department both as a safety and economy measure?


George James McIlraith: I find myself a little vague as to the device the hon. member is talking about. Is he talking about the device that would be in the automobile?


Robert Norman Thompson: Specifically, Mr. Chairman, I am thinking about the device that was demonstrated and recommended at the time of the investigation into the grade crossing accident involving a school bus at Lamont. At that time this safety device was suggested, and it certainly could protect all public vehicles. It would be a two instrument device, the controlling device being on the locomotive itself and the receiving device in the vehicle on the highway. It was also indicated at that time that it was so cheap that even private passenger cars could install the receiving end of this automatic signal device.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, I now understand the hon. gentleman's reference. The safety device was considered by the board, but the difficulty is that it would not be effective unless it were adequately maintained in the motor vehicle. That is one difficulty in the matter; nor can the board require the installation of such a device in a bus, for example. There are some other limitations of a more technical nature, but I have given the short answer to the question. There are other lesser objections to it.


Robert Norman Thompson: I was concerned, Mr. Chairman, with the comparative cheapness of this device, and I was thinking particularly of public vehicles. The accident I was talking about, which happened in the city of Red Deer only a few months ago, concerned a taxi all the occupants of which were wiped out. It would seem to me that while you could not require it to be put in private vehicles, there would certainly be co-operation on the part of provincial authorities, who would be happy to give public vehicles this protection. At the same time it should be made available to private vehicles. I think something like this should be considered, in view of its cheapness, contrasted with the expense of the automatic signal device the minister is mentioning, in terms of its being considered for 400 crossings at the present time. I believe something like this ought to be considered in every possible aspect.


Mr. Caouette:: Mr. Chairman, this resolution seems entirely in order and even

commendable, because it recommends the granting of subsidies to the railway grade crossing fund for a period of three years.
All Canadians know that grade crossings constitute a public danger which must be eliminated as much as possible through the efforts of the Canadian government.
Automatic safety signals are needed not only in some regions but throughout the country. By warning of danger, they will prevent a great number of deaths.
However, grade crossings are still tolerated in some cities. May I quote one example about which I wrote to the minister in order to draw his attention to the fact that in Noranda, in the riding of Villeneuve, two railway tracks cross Murdoch street in the very centre of town. Indeed, there are automatic signals but sometimes people must wait as much as 20 to 30 minutes before being able to cross these tracks. Traffic is at a standstill during this time. We request that a viaduct or an elevated road be built which would eliminate the dangers of these grade crossings.
We have now before us resolutions providing for works to be performed in Canada in order to give employment during winter to the greatest possible number of people. If amounts allotted to winter works were spent to build elevated tracks or viaducts wherever traffic is heavy enough, it seems to me that the grade crossing fund might make a large contribution to their erection.
Mr. Chairman, this matter is very serious and the settling of this problem most urgent.
I suggest that grade crossings should not only be equipped with automatic signals, but they should be eliminated altogether and replaced by viaducts or elevated tracks wherever there is a need for them.


Mr. Rapp:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport pertaining to this matter of railway grade crossings. What is the cost sharing arrangement among federal, provincial and municipal governments? The experience I have had with the applications presented by some municipalities is such that the railroads, it appears to me, are very reluctant to have these crossings protected, although there is a great need for this to be done. I have the impression that the cost sharing arrangement does not appeal very much to the railroads, in some cases. Also, is the cost sharing arrangement the same in all cases, or is it different in the case of some crossings than it is in others? Would the minister give me an answer to this question, please?


George James McIlraith: 
Reynold Rapp: Mr. Chairman, nothing was said about the share provided by municipalities. Is there any arrangement in this cost sharing procedure under which municipalities must also contribute to the cost?


George James McIlraith: It is the highway authority, whatever that highway authority may be, whether it is municipal or provincial.


Mr. Peters:: Mr. Chairman, this is a very important resolution in that in connection with grade crossings someone is always fatally injured before anything is ever done about the spending of money from this particular fund. I am sure every riding has had a serious accident at some time or other before signals were installed or other protection given at almost every major crossing. It seems a great waste that this should be so.
I wonder whether the government has given consideration to establishing a technical advisory staff to provide municipalities or the provinces with a survey to indicate when a certain crossing is of such a nature that it warrants this kind of assistance. I am thinking of a particular accident which happened not long ago, as a result of which there was a certain amount of politicking as well as other factors. This accident occurred at a provincial railway crossing which was not under the jurisdiction of the board of transport commissioners. I realize that the board of transport commissioners does stipulate in relation to the grade crossing fund that if the traffic over a particular railway is sufficient, then before construction of the railroad can be completed these devices must be installed or that a separation of grade must be constructed.
In the case of this accident, as an election was due the construction of a by-pass became a political issue. The by-pass was routed across a railway on the northern trans-Canada highway. The police were very surprised that
Railway Act
it took ten days before the first fatality occurred on the level crossing. To make matters worse, earth had been piled up to make a grade separation on the road itself, and the road curved around the pile of mud, putting the level crossing in a position where it was almost impossible to see. In this case the board of transport commissioners could not exercise authority, so the department of highways and the railway got together and made an agreement. To make matters even worse, I understand the agreement provided that if there was an accident on the crossing, no matter what the insurance was the provincial department of highways would cover the cost so the railway would not lose any money. The reason I mention this case is because separation of grade will eventually take place, but I imagine it will be some 10, 15 or 20 years from now.
A few miles from that crossing there was another grade separation over a railway track. For 15 years it kept settling year by year, and a little fill was added from time to time. Then an election would occur and someone would say "We have to separate the grade". A little more fill would be put in; then that fill would drop and they would say it was not possible yet. I suggest that is what is going to happen in this case. It was almost 20 years before separation of grade resulted in the first case I mentioned, and I suggest that if left to their own devices it may be just as long in this other case.
I am wondering whether the federal government should have connected with the fund a number of technical advisers who would be able to suggest alternative methods of grade separation where such was indicated. In this particular case there is a terrific problem in that there is no solid bottom at the crossing in question until 80 or 100 feet down. There is even the suggestion that there may be quicksand close by. So undoubtedly a difficult problem of construction is involved, and technical advice would certainly be advantageous. But this would bring about what everybody knows must be done, and grade separation would take place by means of either an underpass or overpass. However, it is a problem which the department of highways of Ontario is completely incapable of solving at the present time.
Another thing we are interested in and for which there is great demand in my part of the country is the amount made available for the supply of markings to give protection to traffic approaching a line of box cars crossing the road at a level crossing. Personally I had the idea that when we passed a measure similar to this some years ago, box cars would be marked in a similar fashion to the way road signs are marked and would be easily

Railway Act
discernible when the headlights of a car 500 or 1,000 feet away illuminated them. I think it would be particularly useful to have a broken line of marks which would allow a motorist to see there was an obstruction ahead even in fog or rain. Personally I have yet to see, particularly in northern Ontario, when driving around the country any of these box cars marked in a fashion to provide the protection which this house had agreed was necessary.
I realize that these devices are very expensive to instal, but I had understood it was agreed that it was mandatory to instal them on all new cars; that when locomotives or rolling stock were built it was compulsory that they be given this reflective marking, which was to be paid for by the fund. By this means, in a relatively short time we could paint all the box cars with this reflective paint so that sooner or later they would give this protection.
I have not seen, to my knowledge, any cars in northern Ontario so marked. It may be that they are marked, but if they are then the reflective material used is of no value whatsoever. The minister may have some information on this and it might be possible, before the bill comes before us, for him to indicate whether there are any of these cars in the local yards in Ottawa which we could look at. I think we have been wasting our money if this provision does not give better protection than that which I have seen on the new cars of the Canadian National Railways, the markings of which are in no way, in my opinion, reflective.
This matter is very important, Mr. Chairman. Much useless slaughter occurs on our highways because of the inability of motorists to ascertain when trains are approaching level crossings. There are no doubt many areas where the municipalities are going to have to be given some assistance to ascertain how they can provide separation of grade in a reasonable manner. One of the previous speakers mentioned that the municipalities, the towns, villages and townships, are quite often more interested in providing this protection than the department of highways. It would seem quite easy for the department of highways in most cases to provide grade separation on new track if the traffic crossing it so warrants. But for municipalities, and especially small municipalities, it is difficult to find the money and sometimes, until disaster strikes, to find the will and support necessary to provide these facilities.
I mentioned the fact that in my home town, which is a relatively small town, there was considerable complaint about children having to cross a level crossing which was situated about three blocks from where signals

were installed near the station. There was considerable debate over whether a new block signal should be installed or whether they should hook a relay on to the block system already there. While that matter was being debated, because the problem was not immediate nothing was done and a woman was killed. Within a few days these block signals were installed; it seems that the money was forthcoming.
I strongly urge that the technical advice available to the department should be supplied to the provinces and the municipalities, as well as to some of the railways which do not come under the board of transport commissioners. I do not think it would be difficult for us to furnish this information.


Mr. Ricard:: Mr. Chairman, I would not want the resolution now before us to be disposed of, without submitting to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Mcllraith) a few observations concerning the welfare of the inhabitants of my riding of St. Hyacinthe-Bagot.
The minister is well aware that my riding is criss-crossed by both our railway systems, the Canadian Pacific and the Canadian National. My riding is cut in half by two main lines operated by the Canadian National, and the numerous level crossings are a hazard to the lives of my fellow citizens. I submit that all necessary measures should be taken to avoid further accidents.
In the last few years, with the co-operation of the minister's predecessor, many level crossings were equipped with light signals. Unfortunately, at certain crossings, serious accidents have occurred quite recently. I am thinking of the accident which killed several people at St. Eugene, and of another one which killed two inhabitants of Montreal at St. Liboire.
Flashing signals have now been installed, but it is most unfortunate that action had not been taken sooner to spare lives.
On the other hand, I know that a request for flashing signal lights has been made concerning level crossings at St. George and St. Edward in the parish of St. Liboire. Orders have been issued for the construction of a protective system at those two places.
I also ask the minister if he could not use his influence to speed things up even more.
There is also the crossing at St. Augustin for which no request has been made, in view of its importance, special consideration should be given to the installation of an adequate protective system there.
I would also like to renew the request I made some time ago to the minister for the installation of flashing light signals at

the level crossing to be found on the seventh range of the parish of St. Germain de Grantham.
The provincial department of highways has recently improved the highway between the two important towns of Wickam and St. Germain. As time goes by, traffic is getting increasingly heavier over there.
I should like to renew a request I made to the minister on November 5, so that delays may be reduced to a minimum in order to provide adequate protection to the constituents of St. Hyancinthe-Bagot in particular and to the travelling public in general.
Let us not wait until further tragedies happen before taking prompt action. Let us instead apply the saying that prevention is better than cure.
I am quite aware of the minister's dispositions and I am assured of his full co-operation. Should he need further details, I would be very happy to send them to him.


Mr. Olson:: In commenting briefly on this subject, I should like to agree with the previous speaker that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The particular problem I have in mind arises because of the increasing number of school buses which use railway crossings on district and country roads where the volume of traffic is not sufficient to warrant the installation of block systems which cost from $7,000 up.
I think it can be agreed that the 80 per cent contribution made by the federal government from this fund is generous enough, and that some responsibility should attach to the railways and to the local authorities themselves. However, the minister did not mention the maintenance of these block signalling devices. I know that in some cases such costs may run from $200 to $300 a year. Where they are installed on a district road the local authority has to pay the full amount, and the result is that they are not installed on a large number of these country roads where school buses have to cross the lines twice a day.
The hon. gentleman told us, I believe, that the board of transport commissioners had rejected the idea of a radio transmitter on the trains sending a signal which could be received in school buses. I do not disagree with what has been said in that respect, but maybe there is some other means by which protection could be provided. I think some research should be done, as was suggested by the hon. member for Timiskaming, in an effort to find some low cost device, some acceptable way of getting a signal to these school buses so they may be alerted to the fact that there is a train approaching the
Railway Act
crossing. I do not say I know now of any device which could be of use. It is possible that research could bring one to light.
Certainly the problem which arises because of the use of these country roads by school buses is increasing year by year, and its solution is made difficult by the fact that on some of these roads there is very little other traffic. Perhaps some system such as has been suggested, or indeed a different system entirely, could be introduced. A number of serious accidents have occurred on these little used roads, and I urge the minister to take this matter under advisement to see whether something cannot be done about it.


Mr. Crouse:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to speak only briefly on the resolution, to commend the government for signifying its intent to amend the Railway Act to permit grants to be made from the grade crossing fund for a further period of three years from January 31, 1964. With the increase in highway traffic I would say that this type of legislation is almost a necessity. Undoubtedly it has resulted in the saving of many lives in the past and will undoubtedly save many lives in the future.
In my own constituency many beneficial changes have already been made throughout the county, but I should like to put this question to the minister. It has to do with the problem that arises when a level grade crossing within the limits of a town should be changed. I am thinking now of the town of Bridgewater, wherein lies a crossing that should be altered. To the best of my knowledge there has been some uncertainty about the authority that is responsible for implementing a change at this particular crossing. The railroad passes over the highway fairly close to the town limit sign. I should like the minister to clarify the legislation so that it will more clearly indicate the responsible people who must make the original representations to the government in order to have the crossing in question altered.
At the present time large numbers of school children travel daily along the highway between Bridgewater and the New Germany high school. There have already been a number of accidents, and although none have been serious I believe some changes should be made at this crossing. I have been informed they have not been made because there has been some misunderstanding with regard to the proper authority to whom representations should be made. I should like the minister to clarify that situation.


Mr. Herridge:: Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my wholehearted support of the principle of the legislation. I want to make a few comments in line with those made by previous

Railway Act
speakers. As you know, Mr. Chairman, I usually look at things from a nation-wide point of view, but if you will excuse me this afternoon I will become somewhat parochial for a change. The Secretary of State is laughing; I am not sure whether he takes me seriously.
This legislation is good legislation, and it has been of great advantage to many parts of the country. However, with the increasing population and the consequent increase in traffic, and the increasing development of roads where there is no great density of population, the pace is too slow. That is the only criticism I have to make of this legislation.
I happen to represent a mountainous region, and many of our people are very interested in the grade crossing situation. First of all we have the problem that is presented in areas where there is density of population, and owing to the nature of the country we also have dozens of very dangerous railway crossings elsewhere. There are many places where there is a blind cut approach with a steep grade up to 10 per cent and an acute curve all at the one crossing. Possibly at such points there will be only light car traffic during the day and two or three school buses taking children to school and bringing them home.
We have had some serious accidents and a lot of near accidents. Under certain weather conditions, such as a blinding snowstorm, it is impossible to see or hear a train coming, and the engineer is in the same position with regard to seeing a car or bus. Apparently this problem is somewhat general. I have listened to the remarks of a number of members who have indicated that the problem of railway crossings in the less densely populated areas is serious. I want to join them in urging further consideration of this particular aspect of the railway crossing problem.
I suggest that in co-operation with the provinces a complete survey should be made of all railroad crossings that present any particular danger at all, whether they are in densely populated areas or in rural areas where traffic is light. Then an order of priorities should be established for dealing with these crossings in a particular manner. The more expensive could be dealt with first, and so on.
Previous speakers have suggested that some research should be undertaken looking for a cheap form of warning device or something of that sort for such railroad crossings, and I support them in this suggestion. We know it is impossible to ask for underpasses or overpasses in many circumstances, but surely devices could be obtained as a result of research that would greatly reduce the hazard.
[Mr. Herridge.l
Third, until these crossings in rural areas are properly protected I suggest it might be possible to consider changes in railroad rules. I am thinking of one mountain valley in my constituency. Freight trains heavily loaded with lumber and travelling at a fairly good speed pass one blind crossing after another some 10 miles apart. Where a train is hauling a load of lumber 30 miles to the famous Kettle valley railroad I think under such circumstances time is not a factor, and a few minutes means very little. Possibly some consideration should be given to changes in the railroad rules to bring about a reduction in train speed until something is done to protect these crossings.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, in order to meet the present need even with low cost devices, both in densely populated areas and in rural areas, more funds are going to be required than will be available under the bill to come before us after the resolution is passed.


Mr. Latulippe:: Mr. Chairman, I would be angry with myself for not calling the attention of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Mcll-raith) to the many disadvantages of grade crossings in the riding I have the honour of representing. Several of these grade crossings have no signals.
As a matter of fact, in an accident last summer at a grade crossing in a municipality near Megantic, namely Nantes, five members of the same family were killed and two others injured.
As far as the town of Megantic is concerned, there are six grade crossings in a distance of three miles. C.N.R. tracks cross the national highway at six different places. Three of these grade crossings have signal systems.
At two other level crossings right in the heart of the town, no signal can be seen.
In the centre of the town of Megantic, there are ten, 12 and even 15 accidents each year in which vehicles are practically demolished; fortunately there is no great loss of life-a few only over several years-because the train slows down when coming to that spot, but many vehicles suffered considerable damage, of which the owners must bear the cost, because the railway is never wrong.
A few years ago the board of transport commissioners were asked, on several occasions, to eliminate all those level crossings. The records must be quite bulky, because the minister told me the other day that it was practically impossible to supply them and gave me permission to examine them at the board of transport commissioners' office.

The railroads are a serious problem in Megantic, but it would be so easy to do away with those level crossings without building overpasses. Some estimates have been prepared to this effect, and it would cost about $1 million to move the tracks. This would eliminate practically all level crossings with the exception of the two main ones going in and from the town of Megantic.
That is why with regard to this matter I would draw the minister's attention to my riding which is one of the worst localities in the province of Quebec, and perhaps even of Canada, because the railway crosses the highway six times before leaving Megantic.
The authorities of Megantic asked me some time ago to make representations with regard to the matter, and I am sure that the minister also received some requests for improvement of the level crossing situation.


Mr.   Cole@Chicoutimi: Mr. Chairman, this resolution enables me to say a few words on level crossings which are an extremely serious problem in the city of Chicoutimi.
I wrote to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Mcllraith) at the request of the authorities of Chicoutimi. I take this opportunity of pointing out this correspondence to remind the minister about the problem so that he may take the matter into account when drafting the legislation which eventually will be introduced.
In Chicoutimi there are 15 or 17 level crossings throughout the city and they are quite dangerous for drivers. In this era of heavy traffic it is ridiculous to have so many level crossings in a city of approximately 40,000 inhabitants.
It might be possible to bring considerable improvement to that situation. Indeed, a few years ago, Mr. Fairweather, one of the vice presidents of the C.N.R., made quite a thorough investigation of the matter and came to the conclusion that those level crossings had to be eliminated at any cost. Along with engineers he had prepared plans to that effect, and today the C.N.R. and the Minister of Transport must have in their possession those very important plans which would provide a solution to that problem.
That is why I ask the minister to keep that in mind because that project was brought forward more than ten or 15 years ago and the people of Chicoutimi have been waiting for it so long that it should be carried out now so that many accidents would be avoided. I nearly had an accident myself while I was with my family. That is why I call the attention of the minister to that problem.

Resolution reported and concurred in.
St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act
Mr. Mcllraith thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-110, to amend the Railway Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: When shall the said bill be read a second time?


Mr. Pickersgill:: I wonder if it would be the wish of the house to go on and consider second reading now?


Mr. Churchill:: Yes, if the bill is ready for distribution.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I understand the bill is ready for distribution.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps if the bill is not ready immediately we could take second reading after considering the next resolution, and that would give the officials time to get the bill distributed.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Later this day?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY AUTHORITY ACT AMENDMENT TO INCREASE BORROWING AUTHORITY

George James McIlraith: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act to provide that the authority, with the approval ot the governor in council, may from time to time borrow money from Her Majesty or otherwise to an aggregate that shall not exceed at any time $535,000,000 in lieu of $345,000,000 which it is already authorized to borrow by section 13 of the act.
He said: The purpose of this resolution. Mr. Chairman, is to provide additional borrowing authority to obtain the funds required to enable the St. Lawrence seaway authority to undertake the twinning of the locks of the Welland canal, as announced to the House of Commons on August 2 of this year. The amount necessary for this work is estimated to be $180 million. There is an additional $10 million, the greater part of which will be required to provide funds for the settlement of a long standing disputed claim having to do with the cost of the diversion at the Victoria bridge. This question was only decided in 1963, that is, as to how the cost of this undertaking should be borne, and according to the decision the seaway authority has to pay approximately an additional $11,700,000 for this capital work. They do not have the capital funds available, and part of this $190 million will be used for that purpose.

St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act


William Marvin Howe: Mr. Chairman, I am sure we are all interested in this measure to provide additional borrowing authority to the St. Lawrence seaway in the amount of $190 million. The minister has explained that this is necessary in order to defray the cost of the twinning of the Welland canal locks and to provide capital funds for the diversion at the Victoria bridge.
This is quite a sizeable sum of money. I think the committee is entitled to know when the pre-engineering work was done on this twinning project, how long it will take for the project to be completed, how much additional revenue is expected to be received, and whether this will be a toll free lock.
The St. Lawrence seaway was a tremendous development project, completed just a few years ago. It has done a great deal to stimulate trade and commerce throughout central Canada, and I notice its revenue increase in 1962 was 8.1 per cent over 1961. We will expect a further increase this coming year due to the huge grain sales, and I wonder if the minister can give us some idea at this stage what the increase in traffic will be for the present navigation period and when the seaway, without the twinning, is expected to pay its way, so that it would not have to be returning periodically to the treasury for assistance.


George James McIlraith: I can give some information, and the best way to get an accurate picture is to give the latest figures I have on total cargo tons for both the seaway and the Welland canal. Taking the period April to October, the figures for the Welland canal in 1962 were 30,421,305 tons, and in 1963 they were 34,192,548 tons. The figures for the Mont-real-lake Ontario section for the same period were 21,853,929 tons for 1962 and 25,732,923 tons for 1963. From those figures it will be seen that the rate of increase on the St. Lawrence section is 17.7 per cent over last year, and on the Welland canal section 12.4 per cent. Of course the rate of increase is being held up through November and it will be appreciated that the figures may vary slightly at the end of the year, but I think the picture they give is an accurate one.
Regarding tolls, in accordance with the agreement made with the United States a review of the tolls is necessary and the preparatory work is going on now. The review is required to be completed by the middle of next summer, and I do not think there is anything useful I can add at present on the question of tolls.
With regard to the $180 million which is to be spent on the Welland canal, I think I indicated in my statement to the house on August 2 that a situation would arise in which there would be restriction of shipping if this
[Mr. Mcllraith.l
work were not undertaken immediately, because otherwise the Welland canal would not be able to handle all the traffic.
The work is being undertaken in such a way that practically all of it will be done during the off-navigation season, and the engineering plans for the sequence of doing the work are made in such a way that benefits will start to flow from the work in the early years. It is a five year program and will not be completed until the navigation season of 1969, but the work will be of benefit before the end of the five year construction period.
Perhaps I could give the programming of the costs through the years. The amount to be spent this year will be smaller than in the succeeding years. Some $10 million will be spent this year, and more than that in the succeeding years.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, members of this group naturally support this expenditure as part of the development of the country, but individual members of parliament are required to justify their actions when they appear before their constituents. I think the minister should take this opportunity to give us an outline of the need for the twinning of the locks, the type of development that is intended, what additional benefits it will give to the seaway, the plan to be followed with respect to construction, and a breakdown of the expenditures for the various aspects of the work.
This is a lot of money, $190 million, which we are giving the seaway authority to borrow in addition to its present authority, and when we come to the second reading of the bill I hope the minister will give us the story in sequence, the history of the need, the planning with respect to the development, a breakdown of the cost, the time schedule for construction, and the improvement it will bring to the handling of traffic on the seaway.
If I were to go home at this time, Mr. Chairman, and were asked by my constituents to explain this matter in detail, I would have a pretty foggy idea. I know in general that it is necessary, and so on, but I think when we are considering items of this amount we should get a very clearcut and thorough explanation of the circumstances which cause the government to bring this legislation before the house. When we get to the second reading of the bill the minister will no doubt have had an opportunity to get the facts together and possibly get some assistance from his officials. I hope at that time we will get a story on the record which will be informative to hon. members of this house and of use to them in informing their

St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act
constituents as to why we gave the seaway authority this power to borrow an additional $190 million.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Mr. Chairman, the members of this group also wish to support granting additional borrowing power to the seaway authority in order to expand the potential economic activity of the country. It would appear that the required $190 million to provide the capital cost of twinning the Welland locks is to take care of the area along the seaway that is most congested at the present time. The question that immediately arises is, how long will it be before parliament is asked for additional funds to twin some of the other locks? The figures the minister has just given indicate that the tonnage going through the seaway is increasing even more rapidly than the tonnage going through the Welland canal. Therefore if the congestion at the Welland canal has now reached the point where additional installations are required to take care of the situation, when this work is completed an even greater tonnage will be carried by the other seaway locks. I would therefore be interested to know whether the department has made any studies as to how long it will be before parliament will be asked for authority to borrow additional money for some of the other locks along the seaway. Furthermore, have there been any negotiations with the state of New York and the United States government to twin some of the locks along the St. Lawrence seaway?
I have one other question, Mr. Chairman, with regard to the $10 million required for the settlement of some claims respecting the Victoria bridge. I am not satisfied that at this point we have had a sufficient explanation as to why this extra amount of money is being requested by the seaway, when apparently they had not previously assumed this responsibility.


Mr. McMillan:: St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act local resident, was the chief promoter and he made a speech at the sod turning ceremony in November 1823. It might be interesting to the committee to hear part of what he said at that time. Just previous to this time the Erie canal had been completed in New York state, and Mr. Merritt was referring to the Erie canal when he said:
If they can make a canal 300 miles long without taxation we can do the same for one tenth the distance by following similar means. When we contemplate the natural advantages we possess over the Americans in our water communications, it is astonishing to think of the apathy and indifference that have hitherto prevailed among us on this subject. If we inquire the cause nine tenths of us would blame the government. There never was a more erroneous idea. We are ever inclined to move the burden from our own shoulders and can only blame ourselves. Nor ought we to suppose that our governors are as immediately interested in any part or portion of the country as the inhabitants who are living on the spot.
Then I think the politicians in this committee will be interested in the next passage.
If you were asked from what branch of the legislature should these measures emanate, you would readily answer, the branch composed of the commons-they are sent from among us-their interest is ours and if we do not find exertion among them where do we look for it?
His idea of the legislature of that day was not very high even at that time, because he concludes with these words:
Show me a measure that has passed that body for the improvement of the country-it is a rare occurrence that measures of great national improvement originate from the administration of government.
So that is what he thought of legislatures at that particular time. He went on to say that when our legislators got to parliament they became indifferent. I am sorry to say that from reading the press and some of the letters in the Toronto daily Star, the Toronto Telegram and other papers, it seems we as members of parliament here are considered indifferent when in fact we are not. I pay tribute to the memory of Hon. William Hamilton Merritt who did so much to develop shipping in Canada.
There is a little history attached to tolls. Tolls were applied to the Welland canal right after it was constructed. I read an article to the effect that in 1895 tolls were being charged of 2 J cents per ton. In that particular year $139,000 was collected and 870,000 tons passed through the canal. The minister mentioned today that the amount this year was 34 million tons.
Early in 1900, I think in 1903 or 1904, tolls were removed from the canal. At that time boats had to provide their own men, who accompanied the boats through the locks and looked after the tying up. They tied up the boats both at the locks and at the lock approaches.

This state of affairs continued until 1931, when on the completion of the present Welland canal the government of the day supplied linesmen to tie up the boats, charging a fee to the boats to pay these employees. When the St. Lawrence seaway took over we all know tolls were imposed to pay for the operation of the canal, plus the amortization of $29 million, the cost of deepening the canal, which amount was to be retired over a period of 50 years. This continued until 1962, after the former government had taken over, but in June 1962 the tolls were removed.
I have often mentioned the question of tolls in this house. I have talked against their imposition, not so much because it would cost a great deal to industry and shipping passing through the Welland canal to retire the $29 million plus the cost of operating the canal, but because this always created uncertainty in that area on the part of canal-based industries, as well as for industry in Hamilton and Toronto. There, industries were not worried so much about the $29 million; they are more concerned about the $180 million required now, which would make their position on the canal almost unbearable or intolerable. They would not be able to continue to operate in that location if they had to pay canal tolls commensurate with the cost of operating the canal, plus the amortization of some $200 million over the next 50 years. This applies to industry in Hamilton and Toronto as well.
Let me take the steel industry in Hamilton as an example. The steel industry in Hamilton, like the steel plants in Cleveland, Toledo, Detroit and Lackawanna, gets its raw material for a lot of its steel from the shores of lake Superior, its coal and coke from the shores of lake Erie. In fact the coal mines of Pennsylvania are not far from lake Erie. All the material for United States mills comes in through toll-free areas, whereas every ton of raw material coming into the steel plants of Hamilton must pass through a toll area. This makes the steel mills at Hamilton less competitive with the steel mills along the United States shore of lake Erie. I have always maintained that this does make the steel and other industries in Hamilton and Toronto, which is supplied through the Welland canal, less competitive than some of the industries in the United States, and I therefore hope that when the question of tolls comes up the minister might be able to give the plants in our part of the country some favourable consideration. I might say that uncertainty will upset the stock market. It is just as upsetting to business, too. Certainly the canal area and certain other areas are not desirable

St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act
locations for new industry, particularly for twin the canal. One result would be the provi-heavy industry making use of water-borne sion of a great deal of employment in this traffic.	area.


Mr. Macaluso:: Mr. Chairman, 1 am also in favour of the resolution before the committee. I did want to say a few words this afternoon on this matter, but it has been so adequately covered by the hon. member for Welland, as far as Hamilton is concerned, that I need say only a very few words. The hon. member for Kootenay West mentioned in his remarks the need for twinning these canals. I agree with his remarks. However, it is both coincidental and interesting that at the present time I am conducting a study into the history of the promotion, construction and financing of the original Welland canal by Mr. Merritt, the founder of the project. If the hon. member needs a reason for the need of the canal, I suggest he obtain the books I have from the parliamentary library, from which he will see that the same reasons that the construction was proceeded with are also sufficient reason for twinning the canals today.
With regard to the question of tolls and the Hamilton steel industry, we have in Hamilton a very large industrial complex based mainly on supplying the blast furnaces in this steel centre. There has naturally grown up around it a number of secondary manufacturing industries. These industries are not wholly dependant upon the steel industry, but they are to the extent of at least 75 per cent, and perhaps even more. Canada has a tradition of toll-free inland water transportation.
I suggest to the minister that he study very carefully the briefs which the seaway authority is now accepting on the subject of tolls on the St. Lawrence seaway, including the Welland canal section. I submit the hon. gentleman should do this when the report comes from the seaway authority. I have received copies of the briefs submitted by the industries concerned and I believe they are sound. Naturally, they propose that no tolls, whether they are called by that name or by any other name, be imposed on the Welland canal section. As the hon. member for Welland has stated, any reimposition of tolls, by whatever name, would add greatly to the cost not only of steel but of many other articles in this country. It is my opinion that the Welland canal is a system which operates in the national interest, not only in the interests of the industries along the great lakes or in its immediate area. I say this because any increase in the costs of steel production, or production generally in that area as a result of the imposition of tolls would have adverse effects right across the country. I commend the government on its proposal to
I should like to conclude my remarks by saying that any decisions about the imposition of tolls, either with regard to the Welland canal or to the St. Lawrence seaway as a whole, should be considered in the light of their effects on the economy of the country generally because the burden of any such tolls on the secondary manufacturing industries in Hamilton, and the Niagara peninsula in particular, will be considerable and will be felt from one end of the country to the other.


Mr. Regan:: It is my intention to reserve the main part of my comments on this subject until the second reading of the bill which will follow the resolution, but I cannot help commenting briefly on the question of tolls on this new section of the Welland canal.
With great deference to the views of the hon. members for Welland and Hamilton West I must disagree in part with the proposition they have put forward. I would have no objection to the idea that there be no tolls on cargoes destined from one point to another within the lakes and river system, but to say there should be no tolls on cargoes which pass through this canal and which are destined to overseas points, or which have originated from overseas points, is to say that even though we have a railways system which could carry these goods to and from the ocean ports-a railways system which, by the way, is now functioning at a loss- we should use $180 million raised from taxpayers, many of whom live in areas adjacent to the ocean ports, in order to provide another means of carrying goods at a time when we are not fully utilizing the means which already exist.
I would therefore urge the minister to consider seriously the economic consequences to all parts of the nation of making a decision on the lines suggested to him. I urge that the principle of tolls be applicable at least to goods which originate outside the lakes and river area, or which are destined to points outside that area.


Mr. Cote (Chicoutimi):: Mr. Chairman, the measure to amend the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act, which is under consideration, is certainly very important when the amounts involved are considered. For instance, it aims at increasing the borrowing power from $345 to $535 million, that is an increase of $190 million.
A few moments ago I listened with great attention to the hon. member for Welland (Mr. McMillan) explaining the needs in that field.
5084	HOUSE OF
St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act
I agree that the needs are immense, and our party feels that when it comes to increasing the country's economic growth, capital expenditures which enable Canadians to live must be made. Indeed it is better to spend our money in that way rather than for social or unemployment assistance.
And now I would like to add a few words about the liabilities shown in the St. Lawrence seaway authority's report. I find the situation truly alarming. For instance, under section 25 of the act that was passed, the seaway authority borrowed $334,500,000; on December 31, 1959, it was unable to meet the interest amounting to more than $19 million, and payment was postponed; on December 31, 1961, payment of the interest was again postponed, as well as on December 31, 1962, so that those liabilities total $383,880,008.
It is quite disturbing to be faced with such an accumulation of debts.
I am wondering also what the rate of interest is going to be on that loan. Following a brief analysis, I find that on the current loan the average rate is 5.70 per cent, at least as far as the year 1959 is concerned. That is quite a high rate of interest, but this does not seem to bother the government.
Does not the government think that this will result in some serious inflation, since it is believed that an accumulation of debts and interests generally causes wretched inflation? That is where the danger lies with our present financial system.
I am convinced that the government is in the process of creating some sort of monster. It is impossible to keep on going with such a system under which interests pile up at a staggering rate and debts keep on increasing. It seems to me that other solutions can be found. That is why I am going to the trouble of speaking about it.
Finally, I was just reading an analysis by one of Canada's greatest economists, who said more or less this: Governments, once in office, always take steps to which often they were opposed when in opposition.
That is why I am hopeful that the present government will give special attention to the 11 members of the Social Credit party in this house who advocate theories that have been studied for more than 40 years by distinguished economists, and that in order to improve the financial system.
There are eleven of us representing this party in the house. On several occasions we offered some solution and more particularly we suggested creating social capital or public credit bank. Such an institution might, in a case like this, help carry out projects needed for the economic development of this country, while not significantly


increasing the debt or the interest load. That is the main point. We must stop creating such inflation.
I more particularly remember that, during the last election, our friends who are now in power had a holy terror of inflation as well as of our party, because inflation in itself is an abominable thing.
We are among the first to fight inflation by all available means. That is why we warn the government to be very careful in this respect and we would suggest to its members to delve into the economic methods which might be gradually applied at this time.
I would not say that we could change our economic system overnight. Yet, I maintain that it is possible to modify our financial system and gradually to establish a new one which would be in keeping with the age of automation and mechanization in which we live.


Mr. Belanger:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to join the hon. members who have spoken before me on the matter under study and set forth our group's viewpoint.
I understand that the resolution tends to improve shipping on the St. Lawrence seaway, more particularly by doubling over the years the traffic capacity of the Welland canal.
We have no more objection to that than the previous speakers. We are in favour of all improvements likely to promote the economic activity in our country. All this will be beneficial to everyone, not only where the improvement is being brought about but throughout Canada. Therefore, we have no objection in principle to the proposed improvements.
However, I should like to join the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge) who suggested that we did not have quite enough information about the actual need for such improvements. I also add that we did not obtain many details or explanations about the procedure to be followed in order to find the additional $190 million requested in this legislation.
I imagine that the usual procedure will be followed: money will be borrowed in order to provide the necessary funds for the payment of those improvements. This is what was done in the past; money was borrowed at interest rates that were so high that, up to now, it was impossible to repay the interest. They merely accumulated and were consolidated with the already existing debt.
In this connection also, I wish to raise a minor objection, concurring in this respect with the hon. member for Chicoutimi (Mr. Cote).

St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act
I will perhaps let him speak but not too long because he just said that his group of 11 members in the house represents the Social Crediters; I must point out to him that we are also 13 in our group which added to his group of 11 make a group of 24 members in the house which claim to belong to Social Credit.
I then sincerely support the proposal made by the hon. member for Chicoutimi. We should endeavour at least to find some other means to finance public works and other needs in Canada.
The present loan and taxation system has nothing in common with natural law. It originated from measures created and invented by men. Those measures might have made sense and been right for a certain number of years; today, however, as we all realize, I am of the opinion that we will never be able to get out of it with the system we now have, a loan and taxation system which is getting obsolescent and leads nowhere.
The government should make a careful study of this matter. We are as sincere as any other member of the house. We want the well-being of Canada as all other citizens of this country.
We are asking for a change in the economic system and especially in the financing of government projects. I feel that our group should be given more consideration and that more interest should be shown in the methods advocated by us.
A while ago there was some mention of a special bank for the financing of all social projects. We have already proposed that the Bank of Canada be entrusted with such a role.
Why should the Bank of Canada not be asked to create the required money instead of paying the chartered banks interest as at present to carry out that function? Let no one say that that would be conducive to inflation. Once again I wonder how the creation of $190 million by the chartered banks could be less inflationary than if that were done by the Bank of Canada.
The only difference between the two is that on the $190 million created by the Bank of Canada we would have no interest to pay and it would be much easier to write off the debt.
I conclude with these few remarks, but not without once more urging the government to pay attention and to try to look into the suggestion offered to them.


Mr. McNulty:: Mr. Chairman, the need for the twinning of the Welland canal locks has been apparent for some time, and I would
hope that this resolution will receive the support of all members of the house. There has been considerable newspaper publicity about the shipping tie-ups in the Welland canal. At one time there were 21 to 23 ships tied up outside the lake Ontario entrance to the Welland canal at Port Weller. It is apparent from the studies that have been made that the twinning of the locks will increase the tonnage up to 60 per cent. This will not just be of benefit locally. Special ships are being constructed at the present time to haul coal from Nova Scotia and the twinning of the locks will mean a great deal of benefit to that part of the country.
It will also mean a great deal for the commerce of the west. It will certainly mean that in the future we can go all out in seeking contracts for the sale of our grain to all countries of the world because we will be able to transport the grain at a reasonable rate and will be sure of making deliveries. The twinning of the locks will be a great benefit to industries stretching from one end of the lakes to the other. Ore is brought from Labrador and transported through the canal. Pulpwood and many other natural resources are transported through the canal for processing at both ends.
A commitment was actually made by the former government to twin the locks of the Welland canal, and for this purpose some 115 properties were expropriated in the area. These properties have been paid for at considerable cost, and I am quite sure it was the intention of the previous government to twin the locks just as soon as the time and the occasion were right. Studies have been made, and I am sure it is to the credit of the present minister that he has taken the initiative and proposed this resolution. The project will surely result in increased employment opportunities for residents of the area over the next four or five years. I am told that some 5,000 or 6,000 jobs will be created as a result of the twinning of these locks. I am sure, Mr. Chairman, that if all members look at the amount of money that is being set aside for this project and study the need for the twinning of these locks and the wonderful results that will flow from this project they will give the measure their wholehearted support.


William Marvin Howe: I have one or two further questions to ask in connection with the increase in tonnage on the seaway this year of 17.7 per cent. When the minister answers, can he give us a breakdown of that percentage? We all realize that probably the bulk of the tonnage going through the seaway is grain and iron ore. The hon. member for
5086	HOUSE OF
St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act Lincoln intimated that coal would come up from the maritimes to this seaway.
However, in considering a project costing $180 million we must realize that grain shipments may not be heavy every year. We hope they will be, but I think some breakdown of the tonnage should be given by the minister in order that the committee would have a better idea of the value of the project.


George James McIlraith: I have the figures broken down as between general cargo and bulk cargo, if that would be satisfactory.


William Marvin Howe: There is one other question that comes to mind in connection with the St. Lawrence seaway about which some concern is felt in various areas around the great lakes. I refer to the question of water levels. The question of the Chicago drainage canal has been debated in this house many times. I do know that the level of some of the lakes has dropped considerably this year. The hon. member for Welland, in speaking about this question, intimated that there was a seven-year cycle in this connection. I do not know whether we can depend on that seven-year cycle. I am wondering, therefore, if any consideration was given in the pre-engineering studies to the question of making the canal deep enough to take care of the variation in the water levels of the great lakes.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, some questions have been raised as to the need for additional capacity in the Welland canal. Perhaps I can best illustrate the need by saying that it was always felt the critical period would be reached when the tonnage figures were somewhere between 40 million and 50 million per year. At the estimated average rate of growth since the inception of the seaway, that is some 8 per cent, that period of time will be somewhere between 1964 and 1966.
Perhaps I could be a little more specific. In 1958 the total volume of traffic on the Welland canal was 21 million tons; in 1959 it was 27.5 million tons; and 1962, over 35 million tons. This year, up to November 14, the tonnage has amounted to 36,972,000 tons. This would indicate that by the end of the season the tonnage would be crowding the 40 million mark. Perhaps I could also give you another illustration. In the 1961 navigation season of 260 days, an average of four vessels were kept waiting on each of 162 days. In 1962 an average of seven vessels were kept waiting on each of 194 days and so far in 1963, an average of seven vessels have been kept waiting on each of 197 days. It will be seen, therefore, that the situation is worsening and if this work is not undertaken now we could be in a very serious situation.
[Mr. Howe (Wellington-Huron) .1

In considering this project, we should bear in mind the tremendous importance of shipping facilities to the economy and business of this country and particularly the fact that so much of that business has to do with exports. In the light of these considerations, it will be seen that the matter is both important and urgent. It is quite true that at the moment, because of the volume of wheat sales, many persons are inclined to think only of grain shipments, but these facilities are vital to all parts of the country. It has been demonstrated, of course, by our experience in the last few months, that these facilities are of the utmost importance not only to the grain trade and to the prairie provinces but they are equally vital to other parts of the country.
As the hon. member for Chicoutimi was speaking, I could not help but think of the amount of pulp that is brought through the Welland canal for the pulp and paper industry, and the importance of the Welland canal to that part of the economy of Quebec which supplies so much pulp. The canal is important also to the movement of paper to the export and domestic markets, as well as to the movement of ore from Quebec and Labrador for export to the United States. It is important, too, to the movement of steel from Canadian producing points to the different parts of the country, because of the special importance of lake shipping to the steel industry. It will be seen, therefore, that this is of vital importance to all parts of the country.
While I have picked out the bulk cargoes to illustrate the point I wish to make, I should like to give the hon. member for Wellington-Huron a breakdown of the increased tonnage this year over last year. From April 1 to November 14 the breakdown as between bulk cargo and general cargo is as follows: bulk cargo, from 30,626,427 to 34,791,000 tons; for general cargo in the same period from 1,858,711 tons to 2,181,000 tons. Therefore it will be seen that the increase is in both types of cargo.
As to the question of financing it, there is of course the larger question of the method of financing any or all public works, but for the purpose of this particular legislation we must remember that the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act of 1952 provides that the capital funds shall be obtained by that agency of the government from the Minister of Finance. There are negotiations going on from time to time as the need for borrowing arises, but I think the best answer I can give the hon. member who asked the question is that the average rate of interest on loans to date is approximately 4.5 per cent.
Resolution reported and concurred in.

Mr, Mcllrailh thereupon moved lor leave to introduce Bill No. C-lll, to amend the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Batten in the chair.
On clause 1-Power to borrow money.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the minister answered one of the questions I asked in respect to giving some illustration of the need. I thought that was pretty useful, but would he inform the committee of the timetable for construction, give a breakdown of the costs, and tell us when it is expected the works will be completed?


George James McIlraith: Assuming the authority is granted by parliament, it is expected the arrangements for the work will be put in hand immediately. I think the best way of illustrating the time of the actual construction is to give the payments per calendar year, because the payments will be made as the work progresses. The estimated expenditure in 1964 is $10 million; in 1965, $20 million; in 1966, $40 million; in 1967, $40 million; in 1968, $40 million and in 1969, $30 million. It is expected that the major portion of the project will have been completed in the first quarter of 1969.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported and read the third time and passed.


George James McIlraith: the second reading of Bill No. C-110, to amend the Railway Act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Batten in the chair.
On clause 1-Speed limit in unprotected populated areas.
George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out the nature of the amendments. The first part of the bill deals with the amendment I spoke of consequent on the Alberta court case, where section 312 of the act was interpreted in a way that had not been in accordance with the practice and what the section was thought to mean. The only change is that where the clause in the bill provides that "no train shall enter a highway crossing" the words used in the act were "shall pass" any highway crossing.
Railway Act
As I explained on the resolution stage, the control of the limit of speed has always been interpreted to be control of the speed at which a train enters the crossing, and not at which it passes over a crossing. For long trains moving slowly at ten miles an hour this actually means interference with the use of a crossing by motor vehicle traffic, instead of a measure intended to procure safety for the motor vehicles using the crossing. Therefore the word "pass" is being changed to "enter".
Also a clause has been added giving the board jurisdiction to fix the speed at which a train may enter a crossing, when the board makes these orders for works at any grade crossing.
Formerly it was statutory. The same remarks apply to the two related sections, 312 and 428. For some reason that is not wholly clear to me but is known to law officers concerned with drafting these things and is purely a legal reason, those clauses in the bill are put first, and the last clause in the bill is the one having to do with the extension of the provision of funds; that is, the limitation on the amount that can be spent under section 265 of the Railway Act. That section, although it bears a lower number, is put at the last part of the bill because it is an amendment to an amendment; the only change there is to provide for the addition of three extra years, changing the figure "6" to "9"; that is to say, nine years from January 31, 1958.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I have two questions to ask the minister, and I thank him for his explanation. Does this mean there will be a survey of railway crossings, and possibly new regulations as to speed imposed upon certain crossings where that is the most effective way of meeting the situation at the present time? My second question is: is there continuing research into the possibility of providing a cheap form of warning for those many crossings that would not warrant the expense involved in a survey?


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, there is continuous work going on in this field; the engineers are constantly at work on it. I should add, by the way, something that was not adequately clarified by me previously. While the applications originate, in the normal course, from the provinces for the start of each year, and from the municipalities, if the board hear of any case where there is a dangerous situation, they immediately investigate it. That answers the question raised by the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg. Any town or municipality can initiate such a project, but regardless of that, if the board

Railway Act
hear of any case which constitutes a dangerous situation, they will of their own volition investigate it.


Mr. Rock:: Mr. Chairman, I am happy to hear from the minister that the government intends to extend the time of the operation of the grade crossing fund for another three years. The citizens in my constituency in the county of Jacques Cartier-Lasalle will be very happy to hear this, because they are concerned about future projects within our county. At the present time all level crossings in the county of Jacques Cartier-Lasalle have signals, but the traffic count in these areas today warrants the building of underpasses or overpasses throughout the riding.
I would point out to the committee that the county I represent embraces one third of the western part of the island of Montreal. In the Roxboro-Pierrefonds area three level crossings should be changed to grade separations. We have, along the lakeshore area, the St. Charles road crossing and the Sources road crossing, which should also be changed to grade separations in the form of either an underpass or an overpass.
At the time these lakeshore level crossings were installed with signal protection an agreement was made between the municipalities and the railway companies to close certain other crossings, such as the Valois, Pine Beach, and Pointe Claire crossings. I am afraid that the legal rights attached to these crossings have more or less disappeared; the right to receive, let us say, a grant from this fund in the future has disappeared. I think these things should be taken into consideration in the future.
I can also give another example in the city of Lachine. The C.N.R. intended to build a large humpyard, which now exists. At the time, the main line going to the humpyard was two lines through the centre of the city. They also intended to build another track or so beside that one and enlarge the right of way to this humpyard. Within this right of way there were seven railway level crossings. They also intended going through from south to north to reach the new humpyard, which would have created another four level crossings. I was a city councillor for Lachine at that time. The city council made representation to the C.N.R. to relocate this whole centre track north of the city. We had something of a fight on our hands with the chief engineer of the C.N.R. and we had to make representation to the minister of transport here in Ottawa, who at that time was the Hon. George Marler. We also had to make representation to one of the vice presidents of the railway. These people apparently saw eye to eye with the city of Lachine, and the tracks were relocated north of the city.

At that time we saved the railway companies and the government millions of dollars from the grade crossing fund just on the seven grade crossings which existed, and we also saved them the expenditure of millions of dollars for the four additional proposed grade crossings. This relocation took place. The railways were to build an underpass at 55th avenue. We objected to this location; we wanted a more central location, around 34th avenue. This was refused because the C.P.R. owned industrial land right near 55th avenue. The member who at that time represented the county made representations to the board that were not in the interests of the city of Lachine and for these reasons we lost our case. They therefore built this underpass at 55th avenue, rather than at a central location at 34th avenue. We have now reached the point where the city of Lachine needs a second underpass, or overpass, around 32nd avenue, which is about the same location.
We have no way, first of all, of getting a grade crossing because it is impossible to build one there. Therefore, if we want any benefit from this fund, it is impossible for us to obtain such benefit because no grade crossing exists. It is this type of situation which I think should be taken into consideration. I believe that the limit of $500,000 should not be applicable to special cases such as this, or cases where municipalities have given up level crossings in order to put, say, signal lights on other crossings. I believe that the minister should give consideration in the future to special cases such as exist within the riding of Jacques Cartier-Lasalle.


Mr. Knowles:: Mr. Chairman, this is a point so small that I hesitate to raise it, but perhaps it is one that lawyers like the minister might consider. I notice that in clause 1, and again in clause 2, a word used in the marginal note is not the same as the word used in the text. I am sure the words mean the same thing. I have been looking the words up in the dictionary, but it strikes me that this is just the kind of thing over which lawyers spend all kinds of time in court. I wonder whether we should not look into this question. The words in the text in both places are "thickly peopled portion of any city", but in the marginal note the words are "thickly populated". It sounds the same, but why have "thickly peopled" in the text and "thickly populated" in the margin? Should they both not be the same?


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, of course they should. As a lawyer who sometimes had occasion to differ from colleagues in my own office this is the very sort of thing I would have asked about. I regret not noticing it before, but I will certainly ask about it. I am not sure where the difference is made. The

marginal note, of course, does not have any legislative bearing on the interpretation of the statute; it is the section itself which governs.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I do not wish to extend this discussion but it is precisely because Beau-chesne's fourth edition, citation 359, says that there is some importance to marginal notes that I raise the point. I am sure the minister will look at it, and third reading could be held over to make sure it is not a mistake or that we are not opening up something for the lawyers.


William Marvin Howe: There is just one question I would like to raise in connection with subsection 4, which indicates that:
No train shall enter any highway crossing at rail level at a speed greater than twenty-five miles an hour if at such crossing a person or vehicle using the crossing or an animal being ridden or driven over the same has been struck by a moving train-
In other words, if an accident had previously occurred. How are those crossings designated so that engineers on the trains will be able to know at which crossings they have to slow down to 25 miles an hour?


George James McIlraith: I am sorry I do not know how the railways so designate these crossings for the information of their engineers, but I do know that the board of transport commissioners have the required information which is carefully kept, and it is acted upon as required by statute.


William Marvin Howe: One other question. I wonder if there has been any discussion with provincial governments in connection with this particular part of the act so that similar designation might be made of highways for the protection of the motorist when approaching a crossing at which an accident had previously occurred. I wonder whether that has been discussed with the provincial departments of highways.


George James McIlraith: I think not, but I would hope that the designation would not be applied to cases like that, because it would encourage motorists to try and beat the train. That is one of the problems at such level crossings, where a motorist on seeing a train approaching wants to beat it across. If we were to indicate that a train was required to move at a slow speed at such a crossing, we would only be encouraging accidents, the whole purpose of the legislation being to prevent accidents.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Telecommunication Corporation Act
On clause 3.
Mr. McBain:: Can the minister give us any percentage figures of the advantage the railroads in Canada are taking of the installations of reflector type markings on box cars?


George James McIlraith: The number of railway cars which have so far been marked in this way is about 20,000. There is an annual rate of 6,000 additional box cars which are so marked. Of course, there is the requirements that all new box cars be so marked as they are put into use, as well as certain old cars when they are being repainted.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:: When shall the said bill be read the third time? Next sitting of the house?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



CANADIAN OVERSEAS TELECOMMUNICATION CORPORATION ACT


George James McIlraith: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation Act to extend the co-ordination of Canada's external telecommunication services to include co-ordination with nations outside the British commonwealth; to increase the number of directors of the corporation by two; to provide for the appointment and salaries of vice presidents; and to provide further for certain consequential changes in connection with the administration of the act.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Lamoureux in the chair.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, the resolution stage of this bill is not required because of any significant charge being put on the treasury but really because of technical reasons in that certain sections could conceivably have a bearing on the financial aspects of the bill. It is really a bill containing a number of small amendments arising out of administrative experience, and because of the growth in the corporation.
Perhaps I could summarize them at this stage, although they would better be dealt with when the bill is before us. The purpose of the resolution, of course, is to ask approval for leave to introduce a bill to amend the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation Act so as to provide changes in the executive structure of the corporation to reflect the expansion in its size and activities
5090	HOUSE OF
Telecommunication Corporation Act and the national importance of its work; and to insert two minor amendments, one dealing with the stated purposes of the corporation and the other with superannuation of its employees.
The bill contains provision for increasing the number of directors including the president from five to seven so as to allow for broader national representation and to make it easier to raise a quorum for meetings. It also provides that, instead of having one vice president appointed by the governor in council, there can be such vice presidents as the board may think necessary appointed by the board. At present the salaries of the president and the vice president are fixed by the governor in council. Among the proposed amendments is provision for the salary of the president to be fixed by the board with the approval of the governor in council, and for the salaries of the vice presidents to be fixed by the board. Since these officers are directing a business corporation which is in direct competition with other large private businesses in the communications field, it is desirable that the arrangement as to the designation of vice presidents, and so on, be in keeping with the practice in the competitive field in order to maintain the corporation's interest in the field of recruitment and development of senior personnel.
Among the stated purposes of the corporation in the act is that of co-ordinating Canada's external telecommunication services with the telecommunication services of other parts of the British commonwealth of nations. Because of the rapid growth in this field the corporation has become active in the opening of direct services with nations outside the commonwealth, and the bill provides an appropriate change regularizing this procedure.
The act at present provides that the Civil Service Superannuation Act is not applicable to directors, officers and servants of the corporation. In 1961, by virtue of the estimate and appropriation No. 5 of that year, and because of the change in the Civil Service Superannuation Act, the employees of the corporation were brought under the Civil Service Superannuation Act. The appropriate change is now being made in the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation Act in consequence of that step having been taken.


William Marvin Howe: I notice the resolution states that co-ordination of Canada's external telecommunication services is to include co-ordination with nations outside the British commonwealth. I am wondering which nations are involved in this program.


Does this mean that the corporation is considering laying more underseas cables to these other countries in order to extend the service?
The resolution also speaks about increasing the number of directors and providing for the appointment of vice presidents. However, the number is not given. The resolution does not say how many will be required or what their duties may be. Is there to be, say, a vice president responsible for the commonwealth organization and a vice president to look after communications with the other nations which are being linked with this organization? In short, what will their duties be and how many will be appointed.


George James McIlraith: Because of the rapid
growth in international telecommunication it is now necessary for the corporation to connect its overseas facilities in the Atlantic area with Iceland, West Germany, France, Italy, Switzerland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands and Belgium. In addition, after Monday of next week, on account of the trans-Pacific cable serving Australia, New Zealand and, ultimately, Hong Kong I believe-and here I am anticipating- that, because of the necessity of having a station in Hawaii, there will have to be an agreement with the United States.
This, by the way, is a crown venture which has been extremely successful and I think it is one in which all Canadians can take a great deal of pride. The corporation has certainly sharply improved the communication facilities between this country and countries overseas.


William Marvin Howe: The minister has answered my question regarding the other nations involved. Does the corporation already have cables running to these various countries or does it intend to instal new cables? If new cables are to be laid, will the operation be financed by the corporation itself, from its own funds, or will there be a charge on the treasury?


George James McIlraith: This is one of the corporations which pay full taxes and interest on money borrowed. It is true, it borrows from the treasury, but the corporation pays its way. There will be a new cable physically inaugurated on Monday-the Pacific cable. Her Majesty the Queen will open it officially at an elaborate ceremony, a ceremony which, I think, will be of real interest to Canadians. I would anticipate-and I do not wish to be considered as making an announcement of any kind-that additional transoceanic cable service will be required to meet the growing demand. Demands on the service have increased beyond anything anticipated when this corporation was first set up. Indeed, the

demand has been such that the capacity of the cables already in use has been taken up much more rapidly than was anticipated when they were planned and installed.


Mr. Lambert:: Does the minister anticipate, in connection with this envisaged expansion, that the corporation will come to parliament to seek more capital funds in the relatively near future? I am hazy about the financial structure of this particular corporation, so perhaps the minister could tell us what the capital requirements are likely to be in the reasonably foreseeable future, since what he has said in the last few moments indicates that a substantial investment will have to be made.
There has been an impression at times that some of these crown corporations operate in the nature of satellites orbiting around parliament. There is a means of communication, yes. You can send up a beam to the president of the corporation through the minister and there may be communication back, but that is all. Some of them have operated in the past on this basis. I am not suggesting this is the case in this instance, but I should like the minister to indicate with regard to this proposed increase in the number of directors and the naming of vice presidents, whether these appointments are to be within the strict jurisdiction of the corporation or whether they are to be the subject of suggestion- whether the board would be amenable to suggestion-from the government. I have some suspicion about the wisdom of creating these satellites. They go orbiting off and parliament cannot get at them. Does this amount to a step further out into the stratosphere for this corporation?


George James McIlraith: I think the simple answer to the question is, no. The need for this corporation arises out of the fact that it has to enter into commercial contracts with countries abroad and participate in the construction and management of these cable lines across the oceans, so that we may have the advantage of communication by telephone and otherwise. This is the system used by the press agencies, the telephone companies and others requiring to make long distance telephone calls and other communications across the oceans. I am not aware there has been any suggestion of any other way in which an operation of this kind could be managed.
There is nothing involved in this bill, other than changes required because of the growth of the operation. How does one take a cable thousands of miles to Australia without touching on an island owned by the United States? A piece of property must be acquired there so that the cable may be taken across. A similar situation arises in the case 28902-5-324
Telecommunication Corporation Act of one of the Atlantic cables running to Greenland. Once the cable has been taken across, why should it not be used by the other countries of Europe? Why should its use be limited to one or two countries? I might add that there is very close co-operation in this field, in the Pacific region between Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, and ourselves; and in the Atlantic region between Britain and ourselves. All these projects are carried out co-operatively.


Norman Platt Lambert: With the greatest respect to the minister, I must say he has done what is done by many kinds of fish when they want to escape from danger; he has obscured the waters. He has given us some technical details which I think we all rather felt we knew, but what I am concerned about is the future financial requirements of Canadian Telex and also the matter of the nomination of directors and vice presidents. Those are the questions I put to the minister, and frankly we have not had any information on them.


George James McIlraith: I think I should deal with the question of vice presidents. A vice president in the corporation has now come to be looked upon as an employee. It is a designation of an employee, as opposed to the older corporate idea, that a vice president was a part of management and the board of directors. It is to make the necessary change there, that this amendment is being made in the act. I do not know precisely what number of vice presidents there will be. I suspect it will change from time to time, but since it is the designation of an employee that is concerned I cannot see the purpose or the desirability or, indeed, the need for a limitation of the numbers because we are all familiar with the change in administration practice in this regard.
On the question of increasing the number of directors from five to seven, I would point out that this is a pretty big country. It is trite to say that, I know; but sometimes we may overlook it in considering such matters. We have to run an operation now that is almost world encircling. That means that there has to be the kind of personnel on the directorate who have a knowledge of this kind of subject matter. In addition to those who are particularly competent in the financial field we need people with a knowledge of certain more specialized elements of the communications field.
In that connection perhaps it would be useful to hon. members if I were to remind them of the fact that one of the directors is a Canadian Press representative, Mr. Purcell. The requirement for the two extra members is for the purpose of trying to
5092	HOUSE OF
Telecommunication Corporation Act bring wider representation and making a stronger board. It has also been found that with five directors it has been difficult at times to have a quorum. If there is one man ill and another unavoidably absent, the directors are down to a bare quorum and it is thought that is not sufficient to deal with some of the questions of importance that the board of directors have to deal with from time to time.
With regard to the capital requirements, at this moment I do not foresee any need for additional capital, but there has been such rapid change in the whole field of communications that I am not going to preclude that possibility. I think it would not be responsible to do so, because these contracts are quite costly so far as capital requirements are concerned, although they have turned out to be very profitable from the point of view of earning capacity.


William Marvin Howe: Mr. Chairman, in connection with the financing we are considering at the present time the resolution uses the words "co-ordination with nations outside the British commonwealth". That brings up the question I asked first of all. Are the cables already built to these other countries? If not, are the other countries going to assist in the building of them? Are they going to pay for the right to connect to the main cable across the Pacific which will be opened in a short time, and also the one that goes across the Atlantic?


George James McIlraith: The cables I have been talking about are for the most part already in position and it is a matter of making connecting arrangements at the terminal point. That is the way the cable business operates. I took the illustration of the Pacific cable. I have every reason to suspect that there will be requests for connection by other cable companies so they may use our facilities for communications to Canada. But we do not go into cable operation as such in these other countries. In other words, it is not a facility we provide in those countries. The situation is not unlike the telephone companies internally in Canada. You can make a telephone connection with another company in various ways, but you have your terminal point at which you receive the other facility.


Maurice Côté: Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I will say a few words with respect to the introduction of this resolution, which I find very interesting. This resolution tends to create more intimate relations or ties with the other countries of the world.

This offers me, at the same time, the opportunity to point out, as did the minister, that it has been decided to increase the number of directors of the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation:
The increase by two of the number of directors of that corporation.
This also gives me a further opportunity of making a suggestion. Would the minister be of the opinion that a French speaking Canadian be appointed to such directorships, in order to restore the communications between the two most important groups in Canada.
Since we are talking about communications, I may say-and no pun intended-that it would be a fine opportunity to restore the communications between the two groups which made this country.
I would also like to draw the attention of the minister to an experience which I had last year, when I was delegate to the interparliamentary union convention at Brasilia, in Brazil. I recall that we were then practically without any contact with Canada; the only link we had with North America was through the United States embassy. Each morning that embassy would present us with a short release which allowed us to keep abreast of what was happening in North America, but we had absolutely nothing from Canada.
That is how I was able to realize that means of communication between our two countries are non-existent.
Brazil, which has a population of 75 million people, is a very large country; she is very friendly and I deplored the lack of means of communication between our two countries. It must be remembered that we were at that time at the peak of the Cuban crisis, and this interparliamentary conference had a deep influence on the settling of that crisis, but few newspapers mentioned that fact. The hon. senators with whom I was will certainly be able to confirm my statement; we were in contact with parliamentarians from communist countries, etc., and the congress of the interparliamentary union had a considerable influence in the settling of the Cuban issue as well as the firm stand taken, especially by the late president of the United States, who has been the victim of a tragic assassination a few days ago.
Our country must establish close relations with the largest republic in South America, "A Republica dos Estados Unidos do Brasil". This is most important, and that is why we must establish ties with this country through cables.


Mr. Perron:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few remarks on the advisability of

bringing forward a bill to amend or change the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation Act.
I wonder whether this takes into account the fact that a few months ago the French dailies of America expressed the need of having in Canada a French language news agency because some newspapers pretended that there was a lack in the supplying of news.
I therefore wish that the communication facilities which would be provided by the extension of the telecommunication system in question be also extended, besides the countries mentioned a while ago in the list supplied by the minister, to countries of Latin America. I hope also that the prohibitive cost of news agencies will be reduced and that a new inter-American agency will be created which would be able to facilitate the relations of French daily newspapers on this continent with countries other than the commonwealth countries, since the measure under study tends to amend this crown corporation in order to promote our relations with other countries.
As far as increasing the number of directors of this corporation from five to seven is concerned, I hope that favourable consideration will be given to the suggestion of the hon. member for Chicoutimi regarding the advisability of appointing a French Canadian to one of these positions, in order to better even more the friendly relations between the two countries. This might also facilitate the creation, for the benefit of the French daily newspapers on this continent, of a news agency having easier access to the world telecommunications services.


Mr. Pigeon:: Mr. Chairman, I have before me the 13th yearly report of this crown corporation. As there seems to be no French speaking person on the board of directors, I ask the minister whether it would be possible that one of the two persons appointed be French speaking.


George James McIlraith: Yes, Mr. Chairman. The hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm, the hon. member for Beauce and the hon. member for Chicoutimi raised this question. I draw your attention to the fact that I would expect one of the directors, Mr. Pelletier, has some knowledge of French.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I understand that Mr. Pelletier is a French Canadian and is one of the directors. but I am thinking of the administration in which no French Canadian has a part.


George James McIlraith: I think the hon. member moved rather too quickly because I have not completed my remarks as yet. There is the
28902-5-321J
Telecommunication Corporation Act engineer, Mr. Pelletier, on the board of directors. With the addition of two more directors I would think-I do not know how to express this in parliamentary language-the hon. gentlemen might feel the government would give very careful consideration to their remarks today.
In so far as the service to Brazil is concerned, I can tell the hon. member that the condition about which he speaks has been improved since August of this year. There are now circuit connections with Brazil. I may have given an imprecise answer to the hon. member for Edmonton West concerning certain connections with the trans-Atlantic cable on the European side. There are certain connections already made with some of these European countries. I believe the present act does not exclude them, but it is so there will be no doubt as to the legality of these operations that these changes are being made in the bill which will follow this resolution.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I asked the minister if this crown corporation sometimes used the United States Telstar.


George James McIlraith: I will have to get an answer to that question. The whole question of using satellites in substitution for cable is something we could discuss here at considerable length. Just when this stage will be reached, I cannot say now. I do not believe in using a crystal ball; I believe in careful planning and taking advantage of these developments, as well as pressing research on them as quickly as possible. I could not conjecture as to the time when we would use this device.


Norman Platt Lambert: I have one final question for the minister. Legislation in this regard has been ready for some time, so the corporation would have looked at the persons available to fill the expanded directorate. Perhaps the minister is in a position to tell us now who they are going to be.


George James McIlraith: I regret, Mr. Chairman, I could not enlighten the hon. member at the moment.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: A few minutes ago I asked the minister if it was his intention to amend the regulations governing this corporation so there would be French Canadians taking part in the administration of the corporation.


George James McIlraith: The situation there is one having to do with the internal management of the corporation. I am going immediately to draw the situation to the attention of the management. I am not qualified to give an answer at the moment.
In so far as the use of Telstar is concerned, perhaps my answer was not sufficiently clear. We have not, of course, used Telstar.

5094	HOUSE OF
Telecommunication Corporation Act


Mr. Douglas:: The minister mentioned careful planning, and I wonder what type of economic survey has been made concerning the economic feasibility of extending these facilities as proposed in this legislation. The minister may want to leave this matter until the legislation is actually before us, but I would assume that this involves a sizeable outlay of funds to expand these facilities. I am sure some economic survey has been made as to the anticipated return and how some of these facilities would earn enough to meet the capital investment.


George James McIlraith: This bill does not involve expanding the facilities in the way indicated by the hon. member. As to the studies, there are constant studies going on in co-operation with-if I may use the term-related authorities in the different countries, namely the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, in so far as the Pacific cable is concerned, and regarding the scientific advances being made and the economics of them. But there is no completed study, and no immediate contemplated increase I can speak of today, because the developments simply are not at that stage. I thought I had indicated this earlier.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Perhaps I misunderstood the minister. I thought he spoke of additional cable facilities that are in contemplation.


George James McIlraith: No doubt there will be further requirements. The demand and the developments are so great in this whole field of telecommunications, both in this country and all over the world, that it is reasonable to assume there will be demands for additional circuits across the ocean, but at this moment there are none immediately contemplated. However, I was very careful to be cautious in this respect because of the rapidity of change.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: This crown corporation uses the Bell Telephone Company of Canada, and I would like to ask the minister how much it cost the corporation to use that company last year. I know it is a poor company, and it is for that reason I want to know.


George James McIlraith: I do know the corporation collects a great deal of revenue from overseas long distance telephone calls initiated through the Bell system. I will try to get a precise answer for the hon. member.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I would like to know if Bell Telephone imposes its tariff, or whether it is possible for the crown corporation to engage in negotiation of an agreement with the telephone company.


George James McIlraith: No, the Bell Telephone Company cannot impose the tariff. The corporation owns the facilities, and it is the one which imposes the tariff.


William Marvin Howe: I do not
remember the minister answering my question
in connection with how many vice presidents there will be, and I would also ask him if the appointment of these vice presidents will come under the civil service commission?


George James McIlraith: The short answer to the latter question is no, but I think the hon. gentleman should leave his question until the bill is being considered, because I think it should be discussed at that stage.


Gérard Perron: Could the minister tell us whether to date he has received representations from French dailies promoting the setting up of a French language news agency in Canada through the improvements in the telecommunication services?
The minister just discussed the economic soundness of those improved services. Did the minister receive representations from French dailies to the effect that this crown corporation should be encouraged to provide for the setting up of a French language news agency?


George James McIlraith: Not as far as I know, Mr. Chairman, but I want to go into that answer further and if there is any change from what I have said I will inform the hon. member.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. Mcllraith thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-112, to amend the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation Act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Lamoureux in the chair.
On clause 1-Composition of board.
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I wish to come back to the question I raised at the resolution stage. The minister spoke of extending the service of the telecommunications corporation to other countries outside the commonwealth. I take it this will not involve any additional expenditure, but will involve entering into arrangements with those other countries to use the services already constructed?


George James McIlraith: This is what I was seeking to indicate. It does not necessarily mean construction of additional cables for that purpose.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: If there are any extensions of existing cable services, will they have to come back for money or have they sufficient capital on hand?


George James McIlraith: No, under the legislation they do not have to come back but an appropriation might be required for this purpose.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Is there any limit on the amount of money granted under the act?


George James McIlraith: It is covered by section 14 of the act, and the amount of capital is $4J million. Money may be appropriated in any amount for capital purposes.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Would it not be wise to leave this now in committee of the whole? We have done pretty well today, with resolution stage and first and second reading. Hon. members now will have a chance to go through the bill and study it.


George James McIlraith: I would be quite agreeable to that procedure. I think we have done pretty well this afternoon. However, at the same time there is a suggestion I might make. There is a national harbours board bill, and we might dispose of it.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the house leader to indicate the business for tomorrow.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, in response to the request of the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre, I should first like to say how much I appreciate the co-operation that
Business of the House has been extended today on all sides of the house, in what has been the kind of day I think none of us hope we will have to go through again for some time.
Tomorrow, as I indicated earlier in my discussions with hon. gentlemen opposite, it is proposed by the government that we should start consideration of the problem of redistribution and take first the resolution standing in my name to set up a representation commissioner. There is also a bill, of which notice has been given, in regard to which I would probably move first reading tomorrow. It is on the order paper today. Before doing either of those things, if there is no difficulty we will take the third reading of the bill respecting the Railway Act so that it could go on to the other place. I assume the redistribution measure would not go through in one day, and that would also be the business for Wednesday.
It was understood that on Thursday the house would go into committee of supply as soon as the orders of the day were reached and we would have a debate on the estimates of the Department of External Affairs. The same procedure would be followed on Friday, and we would have a debate on the estimates of the Department of National Defence. I will let hon. members know a little later in the week what second department will be available for each of those days, in case hon. members run out of things to say on the first two departments. I think however, that is an unlikely contingency.


[Stage Direction]
It being five minutes after six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, November 26, 1963