May 8, 1919


On the Orders of the Day:


L LIB

Rodolphe Lemieux

Laurier Liberal

Hon. RODOLPHE LEMIEUX:

I notice in this morning's paper that the question of the representation of Canada at Washington was raised yesterday in the Imperial Parliament. The following question was asked by Mr. Arthur Murray:

Has -any communication yet -been received from the Canadian Government in regard to the announcement made in the Dominion House of Commons recently by the president of the Privy Council (Hon. Mr. Rowell) that a permanent Canadian representative at Washington its shortly to be appointed?

Col. Amery, Un-der-iSeoretary for the Colonies replied; " No."

Mr. (Murray: Is the House to understand

that this proposed change has been arranged without consultation between the two governments?

-Col. Amery: I do not think the House should understand that. Undoubtedly when the matter is advanced to a further stage the Government will be consulted.

As the representative in Washington will have no ambassadorial powers but will act -simply as the Canadian agent, as our agent in Paris or in London acts, may I ask the

Government if it intends to submit to the Imperial authorities the name of the proposed agent and will they consult with them as regards the right of Canada to appoint such a representative?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   CANADIAN REPRESENTATIVE AT WASHINGTON.
Permalink
UNION

Newton Wesley Rowell (President of the Privy Council)

Unionist

Hon. Mr. ROWELL:

The Canadian representative -at Washington will be very much more than the Canadian agent. His status will be very different from the status of the Canadian representative in Paris or London. Therefore, there is consultation with the Imperial Government with reference to the appointment. I stated the other evening that confidential communications had been held between the Prime Minister of Canada and the Imperial Government in reference to this matter but that these were not yet concluded and that when they were the House would be advised of the whole purport of them.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   CANADIAN REPRESENTATIVE AT WASHINGTON.
Permalink

HIGHWAY BETWEEN MONK STATION AND ST. PERPETUE.


On the Orders of the Day being called:


L LIB

Joseph-Fernand Fafard

Laurier Liberal

Mr. J. FERNAND FAFARD (L'Islet) (Translation):

I would like to inquire from the hon. minister of Railways whether, he proposes building a carriage road between Monk Station and the main road to St. Perpetue.

Several times I applied to the hon. gentleman for the building of that road, the last time on January 4, 1919, and I have here his answer dated February 20th, in the following terms:

(Text.)

Dear Sir,-With reference to correspondence in connection with improvements at l'lslet, I beg to advise that it is the intention of the railway officials to have this work performed during the coming session, providing- satisfactory arrangements can be made.

Yours faithfully,

J. F. Fafard, Esq., L'Islet, P.Q.

G. A. Bell.

(Translation) It is to the knowledge of the hon. gentleman that such roads connecting stations with a main road have been built at the expense of the Government.

It is also to the knowledge of the hon. gentleman that the land adjoining the stations of the Transcontinental railway is the property of the Government.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   HIGHWAY BETWEEN MONK STATION AND ST. PERPETUE.
Permalink
UNION

Edgar Nelson Rhodes (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Unionist

Mr. SPEAKER (Text):

Order. The hon. gentleman, as I understand, is putting a question of a purely local character. He has the machinery for placing his question upon the Order Paper, or when the Estimates of the minister come up for consideration.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   HIGHWAY BETWEEN MONK STATION AND ST. PERPETUE.
Permalink
L LIB

Joseph-Fernand Fafard

Laurier Liberal

Mr. FAFARD (Translation):

It is also

to the knowledge. . .

Mr. .SPEAKER: Order.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   HIGHWAY BETWEEN MONK STATION AND ST. PERPETUE.
Permalink

SUPPLY.


government .shipbuilding programme -STATEMENT BY HON. MR. RALLANTYNE MINISTER OF MARINE The House again in 'Committee of Supply, Mr. Boivin in the Chair. Public Works-Marine Department-Government Shipbuilding Programme:-Amount required for the construction of vesselĀ® in accordance with Government's programme-$30 000 -000. . (ii Hon. CHARLES C. BALLANTYNE (Minister of Marine): Mr. Chairman, before we take up this, item in a general way, I think it would toe fitting for me to give to this House all the details that I possess in regard to the Government shipbuilding programme. A year ago I had the honour of introducing the Government's merchant marine shipbuilding policy. A great many changes have taken place since the armistice has been signed, and it seems to me to be an opportune time to furnish to this House all the information that I have on the subject for which the vote is now asked. I think it would be well for us to look for a moment at the shipping conditions of the world, and particularly as they existed in Canada when the Government deemed it wise to embark on its shipbuilding policy. Up to about February or March, 1918, the Imperial Munitions Board were occupying all the vacant steel shipyards in Canada building ships for England. I believe that the Government of Great Britain is to be congratulated for its energy and foresight in not only having ships built to the fullest capacity of the immense shipyards of the United Kingdom, tout also for utilizing all the available yards in Canada. But, Sir, when I became Minister of Marine I could not see what particular value the steel ships that were being built in Canada for England could be to our own country, and after considering the matter from every point of view I thought the time had come when Canada should have her own merchant marine. Therefore I had the honour and privilege of recommending to my colleagues in the Government that we should utilize our own yards to build up a national merchant marine, and, much as we admire the old country jand desire at all times to render her every assistance possible, more particularly when she is engaged in war, I con- sider that we were doing not only our full duty to Canada, but also to the Empire when we took that course. It will be remembered that there was an immense total loss of shipping at that time, about 15,000,000 gross tons, the war being at a very serious and critical stage, and the success of Great Britain and her Allies depending very largely on the extent of their merchant marine. So pressing was the need for tonnage that all Canadian ships under Canadian register and all ships plying in Canadian waters under British register were commandeered by the British Ministry of Shipping, a fact which left Canada devoid of a merchant marine. At that time, Mr. Chairman, all of our Allies, with the exception of our neighbour to the south, were coming to me constantly to know if I would allow them to build ships in our yards1-I refer particularly to France and to Italy, and also to Norway, one of the neutral powers. I had to reply to the overtures made to me that the policy of the Canadian Government was to utilize to the fullest extent our own steel shipyards, and that therefore we could not look with favour upon building ships for them. It was not so much a matter of price. Many of our Allies' were willing to pay from $20 to $25 per ton more than this Government was paying for the ships it was having built under contract.


UNION
UNION
?

Sir S@

Are they fitted with cold storage?

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
UNION

Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne (Minister of Marine and Fisheries; Minister of the Naval Service)

Unionist

Mr. BALLANTYNE:

Not yet, that matter is under consideration.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
UNION
UNION

Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne (Minister of Marine and Fisheries; Minister of the Naval Service)

Unionist

Mr. BALLANTYNE:

No orders has been placed with the Midland Shipbuilding Company-I will deal with that a little later.

The value of the contracts which have been placed is, in round figures, about $52,000,000. and up to the end of the present fiscal year $20,000,000 of that will have been paid- The item that we are asking the Committee to pass is for $30,000,000, which with the $20,000,000, constitutes, in round figures, the total amount of all the contracts, $52,691,450.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
L LIB
UNION

Charles Colquhoun Ballantyne (Minister of Marine and Fisheries; Minister of the Naval Service)

Unionist

Mr. BALLANTYNE:

No, for the forty-five ships; all that are under contract.

I stated in the House a year ago that it was the policy of the Government to utilize only existing s'teel shipyards. But there existed at Prince Rupert a large shiprepairing plant and floating dry dock, and considerable pressure was brought to bear upon the Government, especially as the war was proceeding at that time in a way that did not look favourable to us, and tonnage was very badly needed, to place some orders out there. I took the ground that the Government were not investing money in shipyards, but that if any firm would come along with the necessary capital the Government would be! willing to give them a share of their business. That accounts for the placing of orders for two ships of 8,100 tons at Prince Rupert

Victoria, B.C., likewise did not have a modern shipyard. The Victoria Machinery Depot had a small place there, and our Victoria friends, especially the late Premier

fMr. Ballantyne.]

Brewster, were very anxious that we should give the city of Victoria part of the Government business. We therefore placed an order with the Victoria Machinery Depot for two ships of 8,100 tons each

Enterprising capitalists of Halifax, Captain Norcross and R. M. Wolvin, said that they were prepared to put $5,000,000 into a modern shipyard there if the Government would give them some business. I shall not weary the Committee with an account of all the interviews that I had and of the requests that these gentlemen made and which the Government could not see their way clear to grant. They wanted us to allow them to bring in free of duty what plant they required; I told them we could not agree to do that. They also wanted a very large order for ships, as their capital expenditure was great; but I told them that all we could do would be to give them an order for four ships, which we have done. When that yard is fully completed- and it will be completed shortly, because the keels of two vessels have already been laid there-it will be one of the finest and best equipped shipyards in the country.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
L LIB

May 8, 1919