Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):

Yesterday the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) raised certain questions regarding the commission investigating the proposed South Saskatchewan project, and I told him I wished to get further information before attempting a complete reply. The government has given no instructions to the commission other than those contained in the order in council in which the reference has to do with the two following questions: whether the economic and social returns to the Canadian people on the investment in the proposed South Saskatchewan river project-central Saskatchewan development-would be commensurate with the cost thereof, and whether the said project represents the most profitable and desirable use which can be made of the physical resources involved.

All the information about the project that had been tabled in the house was placed at the disposal of the commission, and of course they also have access to the various departments where they can see any other material about the project that may have been gathered at any time in those departments. I am informed that there is no ground for the supposition that there is any interruption of their work, that as a matter of fact they are having another meeting in Ottawa next week, and that the matter is actively under consideration by them for the purpose of making their report on the two points set out in the order in council by which the commission was established.

Mr. Diefenbaker:

Thanking the Prime Minister, might I ask him whether the actual location of the dam on the river has been finally determined?

Mr. St. Laurent:

As to whether or not these documents determine one location and one location only, I think the hon. member will have to do what I would have to do, and that is consult the documents. They speak for themselves.. It was my understanding that there was a precise location indicated in those reports, but I would not want to assert that

they could not be construed otherwise. I am not an engineer, but two of the members of the commission are engineers, and I would not want to attempt to put any final construction upon the reports. I took them to mean that a precise location was indicated therein.

[Later: 1

Mr. M. J. Coldwell (Roseiown-Biggar):

Supplementary to the question asked by the hon. member for Lake Centre, do I understand that no instruction or authority has been given the commission to recommend a site for the South Saskatchewan dam, other than the site recommended in the various reports that the government has received?

Mr. Si. Laurent:

No other instructions have been given but those expressed in the order in council. I have been unofficially informed that the question has been raised and is under discussion between the commissioners, as to whether or not the second part of the reference gives them authority to consider whether that site would be the best use of the physical advantages. I have not any official information about that, but it may be an interpretation that would not contradict the terms of reference. I can only say that when it was drawn in those terms that is not what was intended. Of course, it is not what was intended which should bind the commissioners, but the actual language which was used.

Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport) moved

that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:

That it is expedient to bring in a measure to approve an agreement between the government of Canada and the government of the province of Ontario, respecting power development in the international rapids section of the St. Lawrence river; and to provide further for the transfer to the government of Ontario of the administration of certain lands or property pursuant to the agreement.

He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.

Mr. D. F. Brown (Essex West):

May I direct a question to the Minister of Labour? I regret that I have not had the opportunity of giving him very much notice of it. Has the minister been advised of an industrial dispute at the Ford Motor Company in Windsor, Ontario, and has he any statement to make at this time?

Hon. Milton F. Gregg (Minister of Labour):

As to the first question, Mr. Speaker, I have not been advised officially on the matter, but I am acquainted with certain aspects of it through my colleague the Minister of National Health and Welfare, and through our own offices in Windsor.

As to the second part of the question, as the hon. member knows this dispute is a matter which is entirely within the authority of labour legislation of the province of Ontario.

Mr. W. J. Browne (Si. John's West):

should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In view of the uncertainty as to the status of Newfoundlanders who make application for the old age pension, to which reference was made in the debate on the old age security measure in the other place last evening, and in view of the fact that reports of the debate have been sent to Newfoundland, will the minister be good enough to say whether or not residence in Newfoundland is equivalent to residence in any other part of Canada?

Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of National Health and Welfare):

The hon. member was kind enough to send me notice of his question. As he says, this matter was raised in the other place, and in view of its importance perhaps I should deal with it here. The position briefly is that there is no difference between the status of applicants for old age security benefits in Newfoundland and applicants in other parts of Canada. The Old Age Security Act, together with the Old Age Assistance Act which was passed in June of this year, requires that in order to be eligible for benefit an applicant must be able to show that he has lived continuously for the last 20 years in Canada.

Section 9 of the Interpretation Act states that every act of the parliament of Canada

[Mr. Chevrier.)

shall, unless a contrary intention appears, apply to the whole of Canada. Where the word "Canada" is used in the present bill it means "Canada as presently constituted". Canada as presently constituted includes the province of Newfoundland. Furthermore, by the terms of union of Newfoundland with Canada it is provided that, subject to the terms of union, the province of Newfoundland must be treated, in so far as welfare and public services are concerned, on the same basis and subject to the same terms and conditions as in the case of the other provinces of Canada. The terms of union were approved by this parliament, by the parliament of the United Kingdom and by the government in Newfoundland, and are part of the constitution of Canada. "Residence in Canada", under the terms of this bill, and under the terms of other statutes of Canada, means "residence in the territory now known as Canada".

Newfoundland is part of Canada. It follows therefore that anyone who has lived for 20 years in any part of what is now Canada can qualify in accordance with the provisions respecting residence set forth in the Old Age Security Act and the Old Age Assistance Act. The same applies to the residence provisions in the Blind Persons Act, although there, of course, the residence period is somewhat shorter.

The hon. member therefore can be assured that, for applicants in Newfoundland, their residence in that province-either before or after April 1, 1949, the date of union-will be regarded under these new enactments as being residence in Canada.

I may add that for greater certainty it is proposed to pass a regulation under the provisions of section 6 (d) of the Old Age Security Act covering this specific point. Section 6 (d) of the Old Age Security Act gives the governor in council power to make regulations defining residence in Canada and defining intervals of absence from Canada preceding an application that shall be deemed not to have interrupted residence in Canada.

Justice has given the opinion that the governor in council has, under this provision, authority to make a regulation providing that residence in Newfoundland prior to the date of union be taken to be residence in Canada. We propose therefore to include such a provision in the regulations to be passed under the Old Age Security Act as well as in the regulations to be passed under the Old Age Assistance Act and the Blind Persons Act.