Mr. Diefenbaker:

Mr. Chairman, I under-tand the item now before the committee has o do with irrigation projects. I wish to ay a few words, particularly in view of the ery frank answers given this morning by he Prime Minister to questions asked him vhen the orders of the day were called.

Certainly now no one can be under any lisapprehension that there is any possibility- ny probability-of this great project being iroceeded with in the immediate future, if t all. I know it will come as a very great hock to the people of Saskatchewan to learn hat, after all the years of advocacy of this iroject by the Minister of Agriculture and by ither members in the House of Commons, vithout regard to party, Saskatchewan finds tself now in a position where everything s up in the air, and there is almost no irospect of anything being done to proceed vith this project at all.

As one looks back over the years I am ure it will be in the memories of hon. mem->ers that this subject has been discussed iver and over again. I think one of the nost revealing of the discussions on the ubject was on October 13 and 14 of 1949, is set out in the debates for that year.

Certainly the question of cost had been dearly established in the mind of the Minister if Agriculture, for on that date, as reported it page 772 of Hansard, he said this:

Coming back to this question of whether the South Saskatchewan river project should be built vith the assistance of the provincial government, nay I say that, when the present government of Saskatchewan took over, the revenues of the irovince were about $32 million. According to the tatement made a few moments ago those revenues ire now about $53 million.

And following an intervention in the debate jy another hon. member the minister pro-:ceded as follows:

If the South Saskatchewan river project was milt under conditions that existed some three or our years ago it would cost in the neighbourhood if $60 million.

And then Hansard records that the debate :ontinued in this way:

Mr. Wright:

What would it cost today?

Mr. Gardiner:

If it had to be built under conditions

Supply-Agriculture

as they are today that amount would be increased by perhaps $10 million or maybe a little more. But it would be absolutely impossible to construct the South Saskatchewan river project in less than ten years. The total expenditure required would be averaged out over that period of time at somewhere between $6 million and $8 million per year.

The information left with the house and country was that the engineers, experienced as they were with P.F.R.A., had no doubt whatever that the total cost of the project would not be over $100 million. That it was to be a federal project was put before the committee on that occasion by the hon. member for Regina. After an interruption by the hon. member for Moose Jaw, the hon. member for Regina City is reported as saying, and I quote from page 794 of Hansard of October 14, 1949:

I have heard the hon. minister and other people discuss these irrigation matters in western Canada for a number of years. I heard the hon. minister discuss it during the last election, and I also went out and discussed it. It was always our understanding that the main projects, such as the dam at Elbow, would be purely federal projects-the hon. minister never tried to create any other impression-

All through the years-

Mr. Gardiner:

My memory of that statement is that the hon. member is not reading it all because the reason the hon. member for Regina City rose was to prove the very opposite.

Mr. Diefenbaker:

I am reading what you said.

Mr. Gardiner:

I said more than that.

Mr. Diefenbaker:

We will go on from there:

Mr. Thatcher:

The minister certainly did last night.

Mr. McCusker:

Only in the hon. member's mind. The hon. member is a little confused about it. We were getting along quite well last night until he put his foot into it.

Mr. Knowles:

Address the Chair.

Mr. McCusker:

The minister has been quite clear in stating that when the dam is completed it is the responsibility of the provincial government to provide for the distribution of water.

I have looked into this matter very thoroughly because the constituency which I represent is seriously concerned about water.

He made it very clear that there never was any question whatever-

Mr. Gardiner:

Since we are having this a matter of record may I say that the matter under discussion was a situation put up by some members of the opposition to the effect that the federal government had undertaken to do the whole project, not only the dam but everything else, and pay for it. What the hon. member for Regina City was attempting to prove was that they never said any such thing.

Supply-Agriculture

Mr. Diefenbaker:

The minister can revise his own words as to what he said and recall the memory of the house, as is frequently the case as exigencies change what is required, but those are the words of the hon. member for Regina City. I suggest that power is necessarily the responsibility of the federal government. That was the understanding because the principal use of the power will be to provide for the distribution of irrigation waters.

In 1953, after all the promises that have been made, we finally find ourselves in the position where on the eve of an election- certainly the words of the Prime Minister a few moments ago with regard to the criminal law amendments being allowed to go over to another session indicate more clearly than has been indicated yet that the election is close at hand-a new proposition is set out in the letter of the Minister of Agriculture to the premier of Saskatchewan. But the people of Saskatchewan are not going to be bamboozled into believing that they are going to secure this dam out of the kind of correspondence that has passed between the Minister of Agriculture and the government of Saskatchewan. There is not a line or word in the carefully-worded letter, to be found on page 4444 of Hansard of April 27, written by the Minister of Agriculture, that indicates an undertaking to do anything in connection with the construction of the dam. There is not one solitary thing.