Mr. Chairman Orders of the day. Mr. Smallwood to move that
the Commissioner for Public Utilities be invited to appear before
the Convention, in public or private session as he shall prefer, to
present an account of the facts of the financing of Gander, and to be
interrogated thereon.
Mr. Smallwood Mr. Chairman, I feel that the motion is
self-explanatory and it does not need any Verbal defence whatever. I think we
all are agreed that we are not satisfied that we have the complete story
of Gander. We do not know who is responsible for the debt to be incurred, and
for that reason I move the motion.
Mr. Fowler I feel very much in favour of Mr. Smallwood's
motion and take pleasure in seconding it.
Mr. Job Mr. Chairman, I support the resolution proposed by
Mr. Smallwood, and take the opportunity to make a few remarks on
the subject which I think is allied to the resolution. My view for some
time has been that we shall not make serious progress in helping to remedy
certain existing defects in the economic position of Newfoundland until we, as Newfoundlanders,
are able to sit down at a round
table conference with appointed representatives of Great Britain, Canada
and the United States of America, to discuss not only the question of
operation of airports, and the concessions already given and asked for in
connection with defence bases, but also our general economic position. As you
are probably aware by this time, I am of the opinion that we should on
every possible occasion stress the fact that our valuable strategic position
is being utilised by Canada, the USA and Great Britain for defence and
other purposes, without any material return to Newfoundland for its
use, and without any consultation with the people of Newfoundland.
At a round table conference, at which real representatives of Newfoundland should be present, these questions could be thrashed
out and the case for Newfoundland could be properly presented. Our position is such
a strong one, that if properly impressed it could not fail to appeal
to our American and Canadian friends, who are anxious to continue to utilise to the
utmost for their own important purposes, the valuable facilities arising from our
strategic position.
The ace card we hold for negotiations in connection with the future prosperity of
Newfoundland consists of her strategic position. Our problem is in my opinion an economic
one, and not as some people seem to imagine, mainly a political one. The sooner an
attempt is made to secure such a joint conference the better, and its object should
be to discuss the degree of assistance, by tariff concessions or otherwise, to which
Newfoundland is entitled, in exchange for utilisation of her strategic position for
the benefit mainly of Canada, USA and Great Britain. I make no apology for repeatedly
stressing this viewpoint, and on some suitable occasion hope to place before the Convention
some definite plan of action to secure such a conference as that proposed.
Mr. Ashbourne I am in favour of this motion and I support
it, but it has occurred to me that there may be other matters which the
members might want to take up with the Commissioner for Public Utilities.
According to the motion as worded this interview would relate to
Gander airport and would, unless amended, debar the consideration of other
matters; possibly Mr. Smallwood could enlarge the motion to include any
other matters of public concern any member might wish to bring before him at
this time.
Mr. Smallwood I am prepared to accede to Mr. Ashboume's
suggestion. The only thing is we ought to be specific. We ask the
Commissioner to come and give a certain explanation about one particular
thing; we cannot add "such other matters as we would wish to
discuss." We would have to be specific so that he could bring along other
data on the matters to be discussed. If the house wants to add any other topic
to be discussed with the Commissioner, I am agreeable to that.
Mr. Chairman If Mr. Ashbourne wishes to make an amendment,
that would be in order, but as Mr. Smallwood has pointed out, we
cannot obviously invite the Commissioner here and
230 NATIONAL CONVENTION January 1947
adopt the attitude of a roving commission to
go into any subject under the sun, and deal with things he was not
prepared to deal with.
Mr. Ashbourne We know that the Commissioner
for Finance, Mr. Wild, appeared before the Convention before he left and
seemed quite ready to answer any questions put to him by the members. If the Commissioner
did not have all the information
available at the time, he could submit it at a later date. That would do
away with the necessity of having him appear a second time. Personally
I would not want to bring in an amendment unless I feel other
members might wish to ask for certain other information. Since no other
members have spoken, I do not feel like amending the motion.
Mr. Hickman I am inclined to agree with Mr. Ashbourne,
but as Mr. Smallwood says, we should be specific. He is responsible only for
his department; perhaps if we add the words "public works, roads and
railway." I make that as an amendment.
Mr. Chairman I do not wish to dictate to the
Convention, but may I suggest to the mover and seconderthat we add these
words: "and to discuss any other public matter with which the Commissioner may be
prepared to deal." That in itself leaves open
the possibility and probability should the occasion arise that you may have
another session with the Commissioner.
Mr. Jackman Would that take in our strategic position
as well?
Mr. Chairman If he is not prepared to deal with any
matter, we have no authority to compel him.
Mr. Jackman About two years ago in New York a prominent
member of the Republican party said, "We should turn our eyes towards
Newfoundland, and if we cannot get it by peaceful means, we
will have to do it by other means." Since then, six months ago, a very
prominent member of the Quebec legislature said they were going in and
take Labrador regardless of who is going to try and stop them. Probably Mr.
Neill might be able to tell us something about that.
[1]
Mr. Smallwood I would suggest that this afternoon we deal with the section on roads and bridges.
[3] I would ask the Secretary to read that section.
[The Secretary read the report]
Mr. Smallwood There is only one appendix to this
report,
[4] and that was prepared bythe department dealing with local roads and bridges, describing
the
system the government has of helping the maintaining of local roads. In view
of the fact that we are on the air it ought to be read, not at the
present moment, but the information in it is so important to the whole
country, it ought to be read before the debate is over.
Mr. Hollett What is intended by the comparison of
Newfoundland (1943) with Prince Edward Island? It looks to me, as far as
road revenue is concerned, we received much more revenue from fewer
cars.
Mr. Smallwood That is an important point. The
table is given to show the possibilities that exist, in Newfoundland,
at least in theory, of getting revenue from roads. We have therefore shown
what the actual revenue is in such nearby places as Prince Edward
Island, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Road revenue in Canada and the
United States is a clearly defined thing. In Newfoundland it is
not. You cannot say exactly how much revenue Newfoundland is now getting
from roads. You can only add up what they get from motor car and
drivers' licenses. That revenue would not exist if there were no roads,
What we have done is add in the customs duties received on gasoline.
Unfortunately, there is no separation made between the revenue received
from gasoline used by motor cars on the one hand, and customs duties
received on gasoline used by fishermen, mills, farms, on the other
hand. We took the total amount received on all gasoline; added that to what
was received on
January 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 231
motor car and drivers' licenses. That is where we
get the total for 1945-46 of $634,000. We took the year 1943 as a basis of
comparison. The amount in Newfoundland for 1943 was $664,492. We did
not actually get that from roads; we got it from gasoline duties collected
and also motor car and drivers' licenses.
Mr. Hollett Why call it "road revenue"? It is out of
place there.
Mr. Smallwood It is not.... In 1943 we had 6,700 motor
vehicles and only 5,100 miles of road. Nova Scotia had 59,000 vehicles and
15,000 miles of road. If we had had 15,000 miles of road then our
revenue would have been the same as Nova Scotia. It is aimed at showing that
the construction of roads in Newfoundland can be used as a means of
bringing revenue into the govemment, and to prove it we have given the
cases of these other countries.
Mr. Hollett It says here that gasoline was stringently rationed in Prince Edward Island, New
Brunswick and
Nova Scotia; you must remember you cannot run without tires either.
Mr. Smallwood In 1943, their revenue was below normal.
If they had been able to get all the gasoline they wanted, the gasoline tax
would have brought in more money. If they had been able to get more
cars and trucks, their revenue instead of being $4.5 million would have been
$55 million as compared with Newfoundland's $600,000. And not even
$600,000, actually, because that includes gasoline to fishermen
and sawmills
Mr. Butt 1 cannot remember if we made this up on a
basis of comparable rates against other places or whether we took into
account the actual duty collected as between one country and another.
Mr. Smallwood Road revenue in Canada does not include
customs duties. No province in Canada collects customs duties; these are
collected by the federal government. The $4.5 million collected does not include customs
duties. That includes the gasoline
tax ... and the money collected from licences on vehicles and licences
paid by drivers. The bulk of the revenue in Canada and United States is
received from gasoline tax and not...
Mr. Smallwood That varies in the provinces and in the
states. I do not know what a driver has
to pay for a licence in Canada or in the United States. I do know the
bulk of the road revenue is obtained through gasoline tax.
Mr. Hollett This is misleading. You added vehicular
licences and customs duties; yet you fail to mention what the gasoline tax
is in Canada.
Mr. Smallwood The gasoline tax in Nova Scotia is, I think,
10 cents a gallon That is a direct tax collected by the provincial
government.
Mr. Butt 16 cents on the Avalon Peninsula. That takes
care of something extra spent on the roads.
Mr. Smallwood If the duty on gasoline coming into this
country is 14 cents, I do not think the 2 cents extra paid on the Avalon
Peninsula takes care of the extra government money spent on roads in the
Avalon Peninsula.
Mr. Butt I did not say that. It takes care of something
extra being spent on roads. We do collect something extra, and I say that in
view of the fact that others are saying the Avalon Peninsula
is getting more than it should get.
Mr. Bailey For years the fishermen got a rebate on gas
of 13 cents; in the Avalon Peninsula they got 11 cents. That was on Acto. We
have to remember the price the Imperial Oil Co. charges — in 1929, in
Newfoundland, the price was $98 for ten barrels of gasoline to the consumer;
the price for the same barrels in Nova Scotia was $57; the price to
the fishermen, and we paid tax or duties, was $35. These are three different
prices. In Bermuda they paid the same price as in Newfoundland. The freight on crude
oil was $2.40 a ton. Yet you could not buy
a gallon of gas here under 18 cents. The Newfoundland fishermen have
been bringing into the coffers of the Imperial Oil Co. $400,000 a
year on gasoline.
Mr. Northcott As a member of the Transportation Committee, I think the time is opportune when
I should make a few
remarks regarding roads and transportation, and what they can and will
do for this country, if we go at it the right way. So, sir, in rising to
offer a suggestion, I want it to be distinctly understood that ideals are
not attained at a single bound, but only through hard work and
perseverance.
Mr. Chairman, some of the delegates mentioned
about getting three square meals a day. I, too, pray that each and every
member will see to it that we get for our people three square meals a
232 NATIONAL CONVENTION January 1947
day and also for our children's children.
But in order to be sure of getting three meals a day, we must first
put forward some form of constructive or workable plan or plans; and,
further we must try and bring into being some kind of insurance scheme
whereby, when the labourer can no longer work, there will be a little
nest-egg to tide him or her over when nearing the eventide of life.
Therefore, we must, of necessity, have some definite fixed plan or plans so
that our people can earn their daily bread.
We must have economic security and resources, in order to ensure security for our
people, and
we have that security on land and sea, especially
in the sea and around our coastline; but so far we
have not as yet developed or exploited our resources. Why? Because we have no highway
running
across our country! Mr. Chairman, when east has
met west by highway then, as follows night the
day, so will follow in large quantities from the
various harbours, bays or districts of this country,
great quantities of live lobster, fresh salmon,
fillets, smelts and blueberries, etc. to the Gander
airport to be flown to the great, unlimited western
markets of the world in a matter of only hours,
not days. All we want is to give that great
republic, America, the products they ask for and
in the way they should be delivered — strictly
fresh quality stock guaranteed number 1. Then it
will not be a matter of price, but, "How much can
you sell us?"
Therein lies a great deal of prosperity. When
once a highroad through this country is completed and the important settlements connected
to it, there will be sold by the thousands, cars and
trucks and the like, not to mention the extra
millions of barrels of gas; all of which will turn
into this country a tremendous amount of
revenue. Then will follow machine shops,
garages, restaurants, hotels, log cabins, fuelling
stations, farms and many other unknown things
and the Industrial Development Board and
Tourist Board will more than be repaid and have
its hands full catering to the many and various
requests and demands made upon it.
So this is a step in the right direction, and we
should give it very careful consideration, as roads
are the life of any country. Let us go forward
together to build a new Newfoundland that can,
and will stand up against the many, many storms
that will beat against and around our shores, and
may it be further said of this Convention and of
our children, that we have built a firm and solid
foundation; and may it bring lasting peace, contentment and prosperity to our shores
for all time.
Mr. Jackman I refer to page 4,
[1]
"The Department estimates that some proportion between 70%
and 80% of the annual road maintenance expenditure consists of wages paid to
highroads employees." I ask the Committee if the department
has a minimum wage rate?
Mr. Smallwood I think the smartest thing I could do is
to ask Mr. Fudge — he is the president of the West Coast Labourers' Union
and was involved in the wage rates. I think labourers' rates were
brought up, and maybe Mr. Fudge can give us the rates in pay on highroads
during last year?
Mr. Fudge I might say I am not here to give away any
secrets from the organisation which I represent. This is not a secret now,
but it may be valuable information to someone seeking further increases
for labour. Last year, the organisation I represent took up the matter of low
rates paid to workmen, which was 40 cents an hour. Our union secured 58
cents an hour for labourers, and 61 cents or 64 cents for truck drivers. The
labour rate is 58 cents in the Humber district. Of course we have good
men over there, who may be worth a little more.
Mr. Jackman That is not answering my question. Has the government a minimum basic rate for
labourers throughout
Newfoundland?
Mr. Jackman Are they paying an equal rate throughout
the country? I happen to know some of the men are getting only 20 cents an
hour. A highroads labourer in Bell Island gets 40 cents. The
government issues a cost of living index for a family of five at $34.80 a
week. How can a man earning $24 a week live, when the government
itself says it costs $34.80 a week? There is discrimination. I do
not see why in one section common labour should be given preference over
another part. I congratulate Mr. Fudge in getting this increase for
labourers in his section. Why should any government discriminate against its
own employees? That is not government, it is mis-government. There
should be equal privileges for all.
[There followed a brief discussion of snow clear
January 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 233ing expenses]
Mr. Smallwood I am disappointed. Here is a report which
deals with the Spending of many millions of dollars. The Committee felt it
wanted this information to help the Convention determine the
status of the country economically and financially. So far the report has
not been debated from that standpoint. We have not said one word on
what the future is likely to be.
Mr. Newell In order to alleviate Mr. Smallwood's disappointment, I would like to say I find
the report very
interesting and instructive, particularly to those of us who can
hardly remember when we saw a road last. The question of communication is an important
one. It is a fine thing to open up this country
by a transinsular road; but we should also give thought to opening up the
country inside Newfoundland as well. There are vast stretches being
impaired economically due to the lack of communications. There are parts of
this country where fishermen are impaired in getting bait because on a
day that is too stormy to go in a boat, there is no other way to get it.
Large sections have practically no roads. The section I know best has
nothing but barely community roads, you have to stretch the imagination to
call some of them roads. There are no inter-community
connections.... I would like for us to give some thought to that. Another
thing is the miles of road privately owned, but yet used by the
public. For instance the Bowater company has built a considerable number of
miles of road and done a great deal to open up the remoter parts of
the country. They deserve a great deal of credit for it. Our road policy
should dovetail into the policy of these companies in such a way that one
might augment the other. It does not come within the scope of this
Convention to discuss these things. But the economic policy of the future of
roads whether public or private is a very important
consideration.
Mr. Hollett On page 2
[1] — "It
will thus be seen that there are 1,063.3 miles of motorable road on
the Avalon Peninsula, and 978.8 miles in the remainder of the Island." I can
understand why my friends across the way should hang their heads. When
I think of the millions of dollars spent on the Avalon Peninsula, I should
have expected the Commission of Government, since they started road
building, would have built more
outside. I come from the beating heart of the country. We have very
few roads — 42 miles to Botwood; four miles of paved road to the golf
course, a few other miles to Badger; that is all apart from the track
leading to Halls Bay. I am thinking of that part of the country. The
government did think of it. They actually started out to
build a road, four miles to the golf course — they left off there. The next
year they decided to pave the road from Grand Falls to Botwood. They
spent one whole year renovating and reconditioning, spent
thousands of dollars making it ready to pave next year. The next year they
forgot about it. If they did start now, they would have to spend
hundreds of thousands of dollars to recondition it again. That is the kind
of treatment we got. Not that by talking about it I expect it is going to
mean anything. I think if the $20,000 spent on roads were spent on the
welfare of the country generally, it would have been better.
Speaking of roads (and I am going to be called a heretic for saying
this) I am wondering if we are not barking up the wrong tree when we prate
about roads. For the last 40 years we have heard what would happen if
we had a system of roads throughout. I am beginning to doubt it, because if
there was any truth in it, surely the people by now would have had the
roads. What do we get if we do get transinsular roads? I was wondering if it
would help any if we put the road there, although it is bound to come
some day. Who will use it? Where will they go? What shall they carry? Would
it be much cheaper to use the railway? When I think of the waste of
public money on roads — money just dug into the earth! If half the money
used on roads had been used to help the fishermen catch their fish,
then we would have been much better off. I do say the report is, factually,
an excellent one; but as to the future, it is in the air. They plan on
putting a road to Port-aux-Basques; all I can say is, God help the surplus
if they do it by the method they are spending now.
Mr. Higgins We have to admit that there has been a lot
of money spent around the Avalon Peninsula, and I see every justification
for it. We say, as far as the island is concerned, "Avalon first; the
rest of the country afterwards." I have to admit that the money might have
been better spent if the amount spent on paving roads, particularly this year, had
been employed joining up
234 NATIONAL CONVENTION January 1947
smaller sections outside St. John's, with
the idea of a transinsular highway. I disagree with the defeatest
ideas of Mr. Hollett. I am convinced we have to have a cross-country road.
Whatever the cost it will be well spent. We know the cost to maintain
it will be high, but while we will not have it open in winter, we will have
a road across the country in summer when produce would be made
available throughout the country, and when people would be able to move more
freely.
I notice Governor Macdonald in his year-end
talk, spoke of the transinsular highway. The plans
have been delayed too long. If it is going to take
from the railway, then that is just too bad. The
only way a country can be developed is by roads.
As far as St. John's is concerned, we do not
apologise for the money spent; our population is
greater and the roads were here before the rest of
the country was heard of. I recommend to any
future form of government that roads, and particularly transinsular roads, should
have a very
prominent part in their programme.
Mr. Smallwood What has surprised me most is the
complete silence of members who do' not come from the Avalon Peninsula.
There is one paragraph of three lines:
[1]
"Included in this is an amount of $529,464.61 spent in the past two
years on the 9.2 miles between St. John's and Topsail, to reconstruct,
recondition and pave the Conception Bay highroad." Perhaps the districts
the other members represent have not got conditions such as
they have in the parts I represent. In Gambo, the cemetery is a mile from
the settlement. I have walked over that mile — it is bog to
your ankles. There are places where you have to leave the road altogether. I
wonder what the people of Gambo will think when they hear that in the
past two years $500,000 has been spent from St. John's to Woodstock?
[2] What for? I do not know a great deal aboutthe
area, butmy guess is that that was done for a few people who have
country houses out around Topsail, so that they can get in their cars and
get out there easier. I cannot imagine what other reason there could be.
And the rest of the country is up to its shins in bog. I am thinking
of the islands down there also
— Silver Hare Island
[3] — where there is a cove
on one side where there is a school, and in order to get to that
school the children have to climb over a cliff of some 30 to 40 feet in
heightbecause the road is broken. There was a bridge there and it gave
way. Yet the government spends $500,000 to recondition and pave nine miles
of road from here to Woodstock, $60,000 a mile. And in the future they
intend to spend "in Conception Bay, to re-pave a section of the
highroad west of Topsail," $420,000. When they have spent that
$420,000, plus $529,000, that is $1 million to re-pave roughly 15 miles of
road.
Mr. Smallwood A certain proportion is wasted, but it is
surprising to me — this report is full of dynamite, and we are passing it
over talking about details. Does the House agree with the Committee's
report?
Mr. Roberts Before any of the St. John's members reply, I would like to refer to page 9 in
connection with the
transinsular highway, a nice scheme, providing we have the money to build
it. I am very disappointed that no money is to be spent on the
Northern Peninsula. For 40 years we have been wanting roads. We are very
isolated. Instead of a transinsular road they should link up the
isolated places. In the Bonne Bay area we have fared fairly well. During the
past ten years we have been linked up with Deer Lake and Corner Brook.
The distance from Bonne Bay north is 125 miles, and 75 miles of that is
without a harbour. I sent freight out of St. John's the first week in
November and where is it? At Corner Brook. In Clarenville there is a lot of
freight for that part of the northeast Coast. What are the people
going to do this winter? We are 40 years asking for a road. Do they want the
people to starve? I have been asked, "What have you got there?" We
have some of the best salmon rivers. I was interested in the tourist trade.
One tourist came down to Lomond
[4] to do some
fishing and had to wait a day to get to the rivers. He was paying $25
a day besides other expenses. We have some of the best lobster fishing
grounds on that coast, but there is no way of getting out to it.
January 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 235
Last year there were 6,000 pounds of beef waiting
in Clarenville to be taken out. People were waiting for their money to get supplies
for the winter.
When I look at the money spent on the Avalon,
it gets under my skin. Instead of a transinsular
road, give us the roads to isolated places so that
the people can live.
Mr. Hillier The section of the country I represent has received no attention. I would like to
take you all over the road
from Burin to St. Lawrence. One thing I would advise is that you have your
life insured, another thing is to bring a nice, soft cushion. The
roads are very narrow and very little money has been spent in that area. I
agree that vast sums of money are necessary for roads throughout the
country, but I do not think it is in order for so much money to be spent on
one section. In the Lamaline area the roads are eight feet wide and
the soil is soft. There has been nothing done in that area, apart from a man
going over it with a horse and scraper. You can imagine what he can
accomplish. These places should have closer attention. Mr. Reddy of Burin
East could tell a similar story of the road problem in his section.
Mr. Ballam I think every district in the country has a
road problem, and people throughout the country will hear of this ridiculous
expenditure of $500,000 on this road de luxe. But talking of it for
weeks will not bring back that $500,000. It is not our duty to define
government policy on roads. It is something we can recommend to
whatever form of government we might have in future. Iknow we have very poor
road conditions in the Humber area. We are trying to do something about it ourselves.
That is the only thing we can do at the moment.
That is why I have not spoken about this report. We are all aware that
the only thing we can do is recommend.
Mr. Reddy I am a firm believer in the building of
roads, but the Avalon Peninsula has been very well favoured in road
expenditure over the last few years. I note with satisfaction from the
report that the Burin Peninsula road is to be undertaken next year. I
assure you the people of Burin Peninsula will be very interested
in this road, which will touch four districts; so I am not speaking for
my district alone. It is essential to the fisheries, especially to the
fresh fish industry carried on in Burin by Fishery Products.... As to the
local roads in St. Lawrence, they are in a desperate condition.
Children, in many cases. cannot get to school
because the roads are too bad. I hope the government will do more than they have done
in the past
to make better local roads for the people in the
outports.
Mr. Harrington I feel just as strongly as Mr. Hollett
does about the expenditure on the Avalon Peninsula, but as a member of St.
John's West, I do not feel like hanging my head. After all, we are not
here as part of a House of Assembly which is responsible for the outlay. I
think if we were, we would be re-elected. One thing that has occurred to me as I
read the report is that since 1934 the
average mileage of roads constructed has been something in the neighbourhood
of 22 miles a year. Before we get on to the future aspects, I would
like to take a look at the past. From 1832 to 1934, the average has been 50
miles a year. In the very beginning, in the day of Sir Thomas
Cochrane, 1835, the first roads were built around Conception Bay. 1 do not
imagine a great deal of roads were built in the first 20 years of representative
government, so the annual average would be 50 or 60
miles. If we consider that was done by pick and shovel, it stands up very
well in contrast with the last 14 years with all types of modern
machinery. The amount of money spent in these recent years did not get
maximum results — the paving of Topsail Road at $60,000 a mile is
proof of that. That point should be brought to light. I would like to hear
the other inhabitants of the Avalon Peninsula — Mr. Penney, Mr. Crummey and Mr.
Jackman on that point.
Mr. Jackman Mr. Harrington referred to me as an
inhabitant of the Avalon Peninsula. I do not know if I am or not; the fact
remains that as far as Bell Island is concerned very little was spent
on roads there.... We have on Bell Island one public road leading from the
upper level of the island to the beach. We have 9,000 people. We have
not a hospital. We have had many emergency cases during the last
35 or 40 years. It is through luck and God's help that these people
reached a hospital. There have been cases where lives were lost.... This
road has been neglected for years. It is a deliberate action on the part of
the Commission of Government, because the people are urging for it and
the government does not want it to be rammed down their throats.
Mr. Chairman It does not come within the purview of this Convention to make any attack upon
236 NATIONAL CONVENTION January 1947
Commission of Government or upon its
motives. You can only refer to its suitability as a system, but not in
such a way as to make reference to individuals.
Mr. Jackman The point I want to make is that it is
important the road to the beach be attended to, and for quite a number of
years it has not been kept open. If the report shows $529,000 spent on
nine miles of road, I fail to see how we can have a transinsular road if it
is going to cost $60,000 a mile.
Mr. Burry I have not spoken in this debate, not because
I am not interested, but because Labrador was not mentioned in it. I do not
feel that there has been discrimination against Labrador. We do not
want to claim any money to be spent on opening up the various communities.
We have no roads in Labrador. There are at least 35 miles of good
motorable roads in the area of Goose Bay — Canadian and American — but
apart from that, no roads, as such. We should spend money to open up the
country, but we should be careful how we apportion the money. For so
small a country to spend a lot of money on roads, that will not mean very
much in opening up the country, would seem an unwise expenditure, when we need it
so much to develop our resources and bring
prosperity. I am wondering, when we have spent all those millions of dollars
on roads, how is it going to compare with the amount the government
has spent on fisheries which are so important to Newfoundland and
Labrador....
Mr. Vardy I do not think Mr. Smallwood or anyone else
on the Transportation Committee need worry because there has been so little
criticism. The report is so complete that there is little room for
criticism. I read it during the Christmas recess, and on the whole their
work has
been really excellent.... 0n the question of roads, I am sure we all
agree that we should offer criticism on the amount spent on Avalon Peninsula; it
is out of proportion to the amount spent in other
parts of the country. I am thinking of a funeral I attended at Ireland's
Eye
[1] during the summer, when Mr. Toope was
buried; they had to rest the casket on seven different occasions in
order to get across holes where bridges once were. There has not been a cent
spent there in 14 years, If they can spend $500,000 on nine miles,
they should spend money on isolated parts of the country. Local road
committees have done a great deal, and I agree that the department, on the
whole, has been reasonably liberal to those on the various committees
who are prepared, to some extent, to help themselves. It is not easy to
become so public-spirited, to take such a community interest as to neglect the fishing
and logging in orderto get work
done on a 50-50 basis on the roads. When the government brought in
that policy of spending the money through road committees, they were
thinking in terms of town councils. They put the cart before the horse. They
should continue to pay the people the rate of $4 a day. I am not
complaining because our friend here says the rate is 58 cents an hour; we
have not been dissatisfied. The people are willing to work for 40
cents an hour.... I do not think Trinity has been mentioned. We have been
petitioning the government for the past 25 or 30 years to put a bridge
across the Sound so that Random Island will become part of Newfoundland
also. With regard to this $6 million for a transinsular road, I think
it will cost at least $10 to $12 million at die lowest....
[The committee rose and reported progress, and
the Convention adjourned]
