February 16, 1909 (11th Parliament, 1st Session)


Edward Guss Porter

Conservative (1867-1942)


Take the case where a municipality has already, under lease from the Crown, acquired certain rights, such as the case of the town of Trenton. I can quite understand why the provisions of this Bill should not apply to the conditions existing under that old lease. But, if I understand the minister correctly, by the work that is going on in the Trent canal the power will be developed to a greater extent and the municipality of Trenton will be able to generate a greater amount of power than under the old conditions. While clause 1 of the Act should not apply to the municipality of Trenton to the extent of the power they developed under the old condition, why should it not apply to the extent of the additional power that is generated under the new conditions. In other words, the town of Trenton will be getting an additional amount of

power to sell to their customers-say in the city of Belleville or the town of Trenton-and they will be under no control at all. They can impose any terms they like, and having control of that power they can use it very much to the disadvantage of the people surrounding if they should be so disposed. It seems to me the clause might be made to apply to the extent of any additional power generated under the new conditions.

Full View