In many cases, these subsidies were asked for by companies that intended to build lines that would compete with existing lines. But, in the meantime, the charters may have been acquired by the very roads with which it was intended to compete. Can we be sure that we are not granting a renewal subsidy that will defeat the very object for which the subsidy was granted in the first place?
My hon. friend's question is very pertinent. It is not easy to learn all these details in the information we receive. We have a regular form for them to fill up, and, as for the rest, we can only use our best judgment. The point is one which would come up rather on the granting of a charter, though, of course, the charter might be granted to one person and afterwards acquired by another. So far as possible, we guarded the point the hon. gentleman has referred to, but, in some cases, it will happen in spite of any information that we have.
On one point, I do not find anything in these resolutions, but to be certain, I would like to ask if, in the Bill covering these resolutions, it is intended to repeal any of the subsidies not mentioned here as revotes. Some subsidies were revoted last year and do not expire for another year. They are not revoted by these resolutions, hut I take it that they are not repealed? *
The hon. minister must have some ground for revoting the sub-
sidy, and that he ought to state to the committee. The reason against this course is that it will take all night. This is another condemnation of the government for bringing these resolutions before the House at this late date. These resolutions should have been before the House three or four weeks ago at least, and then we could have read up the information and been ready to discuss the matter intelligently. Gentlemen about me here suggest that they should have been down months ago. Certainly, we cannot intelligently discuss them within the time allowed us.
I do not see that that makes any difference. No matter who gave the charter, the minister ought to be able to tell us why he is renewing the subsidy.
To the Kettle River Valley Railway Company, for a line of railway from a point at or near Grand Forks to a point fifty miles up the North Fork, and East or West Fork, of the North Fork Kettle river, in lieu of the subsidy granted by chapter 43 of 1906, section 1, item 39; not exceeding 50 miles.