Mr. Smallwood Mr. Chairman, before we go into the
section of the report dealing with posts and telegraphs, there are some
answers to questions raised in the House in the debates on previous matters, that
I have to table.
On the Railway, there was some question as
to the amount of money paid out in claims. The
Manager informed the Transportation Committee in a meeting this forenoon that in the
year
ending March 31, l946, the total amount of
claims paid out by the Railway was $36,982 and
in the previous year $26,000. The amount paid
out in claims runs from $25,000 to $30,000 a
year. We asked for some explanation of even that
relatively small amount — only 1% of the freight
handled by the Railway in the course of the year
— and two explanations were given. The first is
that, since the war especially, shippers have not
been using wooden containers but paper cartons
instead. These get broken and the contents are
strewn around or are pilfered. In the second place,
the amount includes compensation paid to
owners of cattle and horses killed along the railway. Another matter is that of free
passes issued
to persons on the Newfoundland Railway.
Mr. Figary Before we go on to the question of passes, I
would like to ask, in regard to claims, is the chairman of the Committee
aware that we could not get wooden containers, and that 25% was
charged on cardboard containers?
Mr. Smallwood The freight charged on containers was not a matter into which we went.... On the
matter of the
railway passes. In the first place, passes are issued only to employees of
the Railway. One holiday pass per year may or will be issued to any
railroader working a certain number of years, and the dependent members of
his family.... Passes are issued to no one else
except Commissioners and to His Excellency the Governor; when the
Commissioners or His Excellency, have a private or special car,
the government pays the Railway for it. This privilege is universal
practice — to give free passes to railway employees. Most railways exchange the
privilege with each other....
Mr. Starkes Does that mean that Canadian railroaders coming to this country can travel on a
pass?
Mr. Smallwood Yes, for employees of the railways
who have that arrangement with the Newfoundland Railway.... The
General Manager told us that very few Americans or Canadians travel to
Newfoundland on passes; many more Newfoundlanders go up there than
Canadians or Americans come down here.... All applications for passes go
to the head of the department and from him to the General Manager, and he
must sign them before they are any good. In that way they keep a record
and the General Manager knows exactly what is happening with regard to
the issuing of free passes on the Railway.
Mr. Crummey Could you tell us the number of passes in 1946
and the mileage covered?
Mr. Smallwood Neither I nor any member of the Committee nor
any member of the Convention present thought of enquiring as to
the actual number of passes issued. The issuing of railway passes is so
commonplace throughout the world that mere details as to the number of passes
is relatively unimportant. I ought to say that these free passes are
merely for travelling. They do not include meals on the train or sleepers. In
fact, if a railroader travelling on a pass wants a sleeper, he must buy
an upper; he is not permitted to buy a lower berth.
Mr. Job raised the question about duties col
250 NATIONAL CONVENTION January 1947
lected by the government on materials
imported to be used on the St. John's dry dock, in the repair of ships
by the Railway. The situation is this: so far as foreign ships are
concerned, any duty that has been paid by the Railway for material —
paint, plates or anything else — is paid back to the Railway. There is a
rebate. When a local ship is repaired the duty paid by the Railway on
materials used on that local ship is not paid back; it stays with the
Customs.
There was a question asked as to whether or
not there had been any general increase in passenger fares. No. Fares for passengers
on the
Newfoundland Railway are 5 cents a mile first
class and 4 cents second class. That compares
with 3 cents a mile average rate charged in
Canada, which seems to be of some importance
in view of the possibility that we may be considering whether or not the passenger
fares could
be increased on our Railway. If they are increased, they will be raised above 5 cents,
which
is now 2 cents above the average on the mainland.
We asked Mr. Russell if he could give us any
idea — making allowances for all kinds of things
that can happen in the world and in Newfoundland in the next eight or ten years —
when
the Railway might balance its budget. Perhaps it
was not a fair question, but Mr. Russell gave his
opinion that perhaps in about ten years time the
Railway might break even. Until then, obviously,
there will be an operating deficit. He is not pessimistic about it. At the end of
the last war (1914-
1918) there was a great deal of pessimism over
the losses on the Railway when people thought
that for years to come the operating deficit would
be greater and greater. It did not turn out that way.
After a number of years the operating deficit of
the Railway was brought down, and he thinks the
same thing can happen again in the years ahead.
Another point raised was this question of
shunting individual cars of newsprint paper
brought in from Grand Falls to the paper shed on
the dock at St. John's. The cost of that shunting
is included in the rental paid on the shed and
wharf. The position is this: the AND Co. pays
$20,000 a year for the use of that shed and wharf
at St. John's. Bowaters pays $20,000 for the use
of the shed and wharf at Port-aux-Basques. That
$20,000 these two companies pay gives them the
right to have individual cars of newsprint paper
shunted for them at St. John's and Port-aux-
Basques.
Then we come to the question of what we call
special rates. Mr. Russell and the General Freight
Agent, Mr. Forsey, both objected to the use of the
term "special rates." They produced for us CNR
and CPR tariffs to show, in connection with
pulpwood, paper, ore, oil and things like that, that
the tariff charged is not called "special." They
have "Pulpwood — Carload"; "Pulpwood — Trainload." This business of hauling ore
by the
trainload only happened since Buchans began. it
is a new thing. The hauling of paper happened
only in recent years, also the hauling of
pulpwood. The Railway went after those companies to persuade them to haul pulpwood
and
paper by the trainload to provide traffic in the
winter months. Then the Railway had to give the
companies a rate for hauling that. The only thing
they had to go by was the rate charged for the
same kind of work in Canada and the United
States.
[Mr. Smallwood gave detailed figures showing that the freight rates on the Newfoundland
Rail. way for pulpwood and newsprint were higher than in the Maritimes, the Gaspé
coast, and Wisconsin]
In connection with newsprint, the Railway is
negotiating right now to get the paper companies
to get the rate raised — to get more for hauling
paper. In connection with pulpwood, they have
already received increases of from 30% to 60%
over the rates that were charged by the Railway
to those companies last year. Up to a year or so
ago the Railway was making a profit on the
hauling of pulpwood, but their costs rose rapidly,
so they were not making a profit, but losing
money on hauling. They negotiated and got an
increase which came into effect on January 1. On
oil, they got an increase in 1943, and after the
present deal expires, they are looking for an
increase of 30% from the oil companies. On ore,
they got a 30% increase from the Buchans Mining Company, taking effect from January
1, 1947.
Summing it all up, by the end of 1947, the
freight collections of the Railway will rise to
something between $250,000 and $300,000 a
year. I cannot help saying that the final paragraph
in our report, where we suggest that the Railway
might get $300,000 to $400,000 a year, was not
far out after all.
Before we go on to posts and telegraphs, when
January 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 251
we were debating broadcasting, a question was
raised about the American radio stations. There
is one at Argentia, one at Stephenville and one at
Fort Pepperrell.
[1] The one at Fort Pepperrell is 240
watts and the other two 40 or 50 watts. The
agreement was this: they had the right to broadcast on those wavelengths, at that
power, during
the war and for six months after the war is officially over — after the peace treaty
is signed — whenever that is.
Mr. Reddy Are there any more companies getting concessions on freight besides the ones mentioned?
Mr. Smallwood Yes, several purely local Newfoundland companies, made up of Newfoundland capital
and shareholders in
special circumstances. For instance the Colas Company at Clarenville.
[2] There are some rates that are
made to apply to the nature of the freight carried and Mr. Reddy will
agree, if he ships a carload and I ship a quarter ton, he is entitled to a
better rate. It is not at all in the class with these big corporations,
because the amount is not so big and the amount of concession given is
not nearly so great.
Mr. Reddy Would you consider Gaden's
[3] a small company? They get a rate on Coca-Cola?
Mr. Crosbie With regard to the question asked by Mr.
Reddy, I can say "yes." Mr. Reddy is a businessman — at least so I am told —
and if he is, he knows that if he buys wholesale he gets a better
price than if he buys retail. As far as the Railway is concerned, they sell
service. If any company guarantees them a certain amount of business,
they naturally look for the best rate they can get, and it is up to the
management of the Railway to give that company the best rate it can
give.
Mr. Fudge In our last session I retired from the house
for a while, and during my absence the question of wages paid to the
highroads was raised again by Mr. Jackman and replied to by Mr.
Smallwood and Mr. Ballam. Mr. Ballam stated that there was 14 cents in the
difference between the highroads rate and the paper mill rate. That is
incorrect. The mill rate is 70 cents per hour for an eight-hour day. The
general labour rate, under the organisation that I represent, is 63 cents per hour
for a nine-hour day, and
on the highroads, including the town council, it is 58 cents. For all
these local rates none of our men require a medical examination. In the mill
the men must have a medical examination, that's why the rates are not
the same.
Mr. Ballam I don't think that Mr. Fudge got that quite
clear from what I said. I was answering a question brought up by Mr. Jackman
as to the difference in the labour rates in the same locality. I might
have said 72 1/2 cents, but I was not questioning or debating that, I just
wanted to point out where the difference was.
Mr. Smallwood Mr. Chairman, if the House desires it we
will incorporate the information in a new memo and have it attached to the
report, so that the documents taken together will show the picture
pretty clearly.
Mr. Chairman Does that answer all the questions in connection with these various matters, or
does any member of the
Convention desire any additional information? If not I think we will
proceed with the reading of the next section, posts and telegraphs.
[The Secretary continued reading the report]
Mr. Smallwood Mr. Chairman, there are two appendices, one a
report by the Secretary for Posts and Telegraphs on the alterations and improvements
that they want to make, and second an estimate of
the expenditure to get these improvements brought into force. I
don't know if you want these read now, or if you want to discuss and
read the paragraph and deal with these appendices afterwards.
Mr. Harrington Mr. Chairman, before we go on with the
appendices I wonder if Mr. Smallwood would tell us if the salaries include
cost of living bonus or not?
Mr. Smallwood The salaries include everything. That's the total amount of money they get. There
is a sentence
there which says "A recent review of salaries of all outport postmasters
etc." That review has been completed, and certain raises to the
outport postmasters agreed upon, and the cheques have been made out. It's a
rather complicated system, and I am not going to attempt to
explain it in any detail. It is based on the business done in each office.
They have a system of units. One letter received by a postmaster is
252 NATIONAL CONVENTION January 1947
counted as one unit; telegrams are in a
different class. If he is connected with a telephone, but no telegraph
office, and takes a message and telephones it to a telegraph office, that
counts for 70 units. Making out or paying out a post office order is
so many units. All the work is reduced to units, and the units are counted
for the month and the salaries are based on the number of units
handled.
That seems very good in a way, but the trouble
was that that was started in 1936. In 1937 the
department made a review of the units handled in
every office, and again in 1938 and 1939. Then
the war came, and from that day until now they
have never made a review. Well, they did make
a review in some cases if an outport postmaster
wrote in complaining that the cost of living was
going up and his wages were not going up. They
would then review the units he handled for that
year and base an increase in his pay on the increase in the units in his office for
that year
alone.... But the trouble was that between 1939
and 1945 or 1946 there was a steady increase in
the number of units handled, or business done, in
the whole country and in each individual office.
That great increase in business you have here on
the first page of our report. For example there
were nine million letters in 1938-39, and in 1945-
46 there were 13 million letters. Just as the
country's business increased, so did that of each
individual post office. That was not taken into
account, only the one particular year in which a
man wrote in asking them for God's sake to give
him an extra dollar or two to keep him out of the
poor house. Now they have reviewed the whole
business done in the whole period of the war, and
they find that the business in many places has
increased 2-5%, and on that general increase of
the last four or five years they have computed the
increase in salaries.
Now don't get excited about the increase,
because the whole amount for all the outport
offices is only up from $766,000 a year to
$880,000. In other words, the total wage bill of
the department is increased 15%. Now turn to
page 5.
[1] Taking the whole list, involving 534
postmasters, the average increase is 12.5%, but
the man who is getting $4.80 a week may not get
anything like 12.5%; a post office whose man is
only getting that, is not doing so much business,
so his increase may be only 3%, 4% or 5%.... I
see Mr. Hollett looking at me very quizzically, as
if to say if it is an increase of 15%, how can it be
only 12.5? Well I don't know, because the system
is too complicated, and 1 don't know how they
make it up. The actual increase in pay is 12.5%,
although the overall increase is 15%....
Mr. Hollett There is not much 1 can say about this
report. I assume that the members of the Committee were satisfied by the
Secretary's report that this thing is so dilapidated it has to be
scrapped and that it will cost another $500,000 to replace it. At least that
is the impression they give in the report. It seems to me that the scale of
wages is out of date. I suggest that the Department of Posts
and Telegraphs think up some new scheme whereby those 880 employees could be
better paid. I had a considerable amount to do with postal telegraph
offices in the outports, and I know the scandalous wages paid in the past. I
had thought that since the war started, they were getting something on
which to keep body and soul together. I see in this report that only a few
in head office can possibly live on what they are getting, unless they
steal it. Unfortunately, I do know that postal clerks have had to steal in
order to live. Two or three of them came before my notice. I know one
in particular, a case where a man had a wife and four children and he was
getting $25 a month. There are several cases like that — where clerks
have defaulted only, I say, by reason of the fact that they have had such
miserably poor pay. If a man has a wife and four children, I do not
see how the postal telegraphs can keep him in an office where the system can
pay only $25 a month on which to live — or on which to die. We have
only to look at the record of 534 postmasters, 356 are receiving salaries
under $500 a year, or under $9.61 a week. Over half the total number
of postmasters receive salaries (God save the term!) of under $4.80 a
week. It is about time to review the salaries of the outport postal
officials. If I were head of that department I would not take credit for any
surplus when so many are receiving salaries of $4.80 a week. If that
is not worse than slave days, 1 do not know what it is, and we are trying to
raise the standard of living of our people! I do not blame this
government only; all governments have been at fault in this respect. If the
government can do
January 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 253
no better than this $4.80 a week with the revenue
that comes in, I would suggest they spend some of that $10 million they have
overseas interest- free. That is $300,000 a year slipping away,
and it could easily go to recompense people in the postal telegraphs
department. It has not been mentioned what happens to the surplus; I suppose
it goes into the revenue.
Mr. Hollett There is not much more to be said about
this report. I believe the system is out-dated and inadequate, as the report
says, and we cannot blame the present Secretary for that. He has not
been long in this country, and as far as I can find out he is thoroughly
familiar with the big job that lies ahead. I hope and trust he will see that
the people working under him will get a decent wage. Not only in the
outports, but here in St. John's, people are not getting sufficient money on
which to live decently, and unless you have well-paid men working for
you in the government, I do not see how we can get anything like efficiency,
and you cannot be sure that you are going to get honesty....
Mr. Vardy Mr. Chairman, I presume that as this is the
last section of the report, that in winding up we can touch briefly on all
sections. Taking the report as a whole, it is generally agreed the
Transportation Committee has done a good job. It certainly covers a lot of
ground and gives the Convention as well as the whole country much food
for thought.
Now the Convention will do very little to
justify its existence unless its members are big
enough to face up to the indisputable facts as we
know them, and as they are confirmed by the
findings of the various committees. Both in our
individual and collective stands we will at times
say and do things which will be strongly opposed
by certain members who have for many years
been associated with a union, or employed by the
body whose policy or business we are discussing;
yet we are all imbued with the same honest desire
to get on with the job and do it very thoroughly....
There is only one department or utility of the
government that is not overstuffed in proportion
to our ability to pay, and the Railway, the highroads department and posts and telegraphs
are not
exceptions. While we are most appreciative of
the services rendered, those who pay have every
right to criticise their deficiencies and shortcomings.
I doubt if more than one claim out of ten
against the Railway is ever filed, and when they
are it generally takes years to get them paid.
There is a definite lack of discipline, and little or
no coordination between management and staff.
I know that many of the losses need not occur. In
most every case where I have had to make a claim
it should not have been necessary.... Some may
say these are details, but do not overlook the fact
that many details such as these go to make up the
enormous amount our Railway is losing yearly
through negligence, careless handling, inefficiency and pilfering, in at least some
cases, of
other people's goods.... Here we have a utility
crowded with traffic in the most prosperous years
that ever Newfoundland knew, sinking almost a
million dollars a year. We are conscious of the
long haul through a wilderness, the money spent
on snow clearing, the many stops at small stations
where the limited freight and mail handled did
not pay; but the past six years have been providing more traffic in passengers and
freight than the
system could handle, and I am not satisfied that
at least for this period it should have shown a
profit.
In the matter of special rates to large companies, it has been clearly shown that
while they
may be entitled to wholesale rates commensurate
with the amount of freight offered, and the saving
effected by bulk handling, the difference in rates
is far too great and altogether out of proportion
to the difference between wholesale and retail in
any other sphere of business.
As in most, if not all government departments,
there is the tendency to treat men who are comparatively young and vigorous as worn
out, when
very often they are, in reality, going through the
most useful stage of their existence. It is not
comparable or consistent with the age we are
living in to regard one group of workers as being
entitled to different privileges from another, and
it is therefore in the spirit of treating all humans
on an equality basis that I contend that their
pensionable age should come at the same time in
life....
For a small country with a struggling utility on
which we have such huge deficits, more discretion should be exercised in the issue
of passes. It
is generally conceded that far too many travel
free when their wages are on a par with those who
254 NATIONAL CONVENTION January 1947
always must pay.
Dealing briefly with the report on posts and
telegraphs, if we are to accept the Secretary's
own statement and figures as correct, it changes
the picture that was given the public for the past
several years, when they did show small operating profit. In reality, if a fair and
proper amount
had been set aside for depreciation etc., it would
have more truly shown a loss, and we can clearly
see that it will take far more than the so-called
accumulated surplus to bring their equipment up
to date — not forgetting the huge burden they
have thrown on the country by almost starving
most of the outport operators and postal staff. In
this case we do not need to mention specific cases
as the report is there — it gives you the gruesome
picture.
It has been stated by high-ranking officials
that the policy of the Commission of Government
in forcing them from 1934 onwards to close out
so many small telephone and telegraph offices
was very unsound, like the forming of road committees to replace the former road boards.
In
order to give these unfortunate people some
semblance of service, the department I understand is now considering the reopening
of a
limited number of these offices each year, thereby admitting that in the light of
new evidence the
lines should have been left standing.
Again, here we find a lack of co-ordination
between the Secretary and the staff. One can go
to one clerk or postmaster and get a rate, and go
to another and get an entirely different rate on the
same matter. When the rate is disputed it is
surprising to find how their opinions differ, and
how they entirely disagree over the wording of
the act....
Mr. Higgins I have only a few comments to make on this
report. It does strike me as outstanding that the government
should be criticised by a department of the government. Unless I am
wrong, I read this into the question outlined on page 2. The question was
put bluntly to them, "If the government told you that hard times are imminent, and
relentless retrenchment must become the
rule of conduct in all departments, what would your reactions be? What about
your plans
for a new and improved telegraph service then?"
Their reply was that in that case they would
inform the government that they could not undertake to carry on the telegraph system
as it is
practically collapsing. It strikes me that this is an
extraordinary situation. This is the position. It is
not the Committee's finding that the telegraph
system is collapsing, it is the people responsible
for its upkeep, the people responsible for having
it in shape. They knew it was collapsing — it did
not suddenly fall down and go "boom". It is a
most extraordinary policy for the government to
collect $179,000 profit for the past seven years
off a service that is dying on its feet. It seems
extraordinary that you let your machine, which is
earning you money, get into such a condition. It
seems stupid. There is no explanation except the
usual one, indifference.
On another matter I presume the Committee
did discuss the matter of this radio-telegraph
service as compared with the old land line. I
wonder if Mr. Smallwood would enlarge on what
the Committee's findings on that were, whether
it is as satisfactory as the old service, and what is
the comparative cost?
Mr. Smallwood In answer to Mr. Higgins' first point, it
was not until the war broke out that the department was even paying its way.
It lost money, year by year, as regularly as a clock ticks away the
time....
[Mr. Smallwood read a list of losses between
1919-20 and 1929-30]
What happened then was this — the slump
came and the great policy of retrenchment was
introduced. You remember when the government
brought in Sir Percy Thompson and Mr. Penson
(who afterwards became a Commissioner), and
they instituted a relentless program of economy
and retrenchment.
[1] In that program the postal
telegraph system suffered tremendously. Post offices were wiped out or closed down.
Salaries
were reduced, and the subsidy that the department was paid for carrying mails was
reduced
tremendously. It had been up around $500,000 a
year, and finally in 1934 it was cut down to
$150,000.... The operating loss took a clip from
$872,000 in 1930-31 down to $542,000; then
January 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 255
down to $136,000; then $122,000; right down to
$16,000, due to die cut in salaries, the reduction
in subsidies, and the reduction in the number of
post and telegraph offices.
The war came, and during the war, although
they began to make money and had a surplus, it
was impossible to get the material necessary to
put the telegraph system into operation. It is true
they had the radio-telegraph system before the
war began, but that is now worn out because it
was bought when radio was comparatively new
and the materials are now antiquated. Before the
war they had no money. For the 21 years between
the two wars, they lost an average of $350,000 a
year; or, taking out the war years, they lost
$500,000 a year in that department. Now that the
material is to be had, when they can they want to
buy new material for an entirely new telegraph
and land line system. The new system will cost
$1 million.
Mr. Higgins I am not averse to slamming the government
if it is necessary. I would say that your report leaves the impression that
they did have the opportunity of doing something about the system, but
did nothing. I think the point that they had not the opportunity to purchase
equipment should be in your report.
Mr. Higgins I do think it might have been included in the Committee's report rather than coming
from the Secretary. On
the other matter, that of salaries, I think it is a disgraceful thing, in
what we call a civilised country, to have a person with the glorified
title of postmaster receiving $4.80 a week. We either should cut out the
glorified title, cut out the job, or give the person a salary
consistent with the responsibility it entails. Like Mr. Hollett I
have dealt with certain cases of defaulting. I certainly can find a lot of
excuses for postmasters and postmistresses who have had to dip into
the till to support their families. You are practically driving the person
to peculation in some form or other. We have to remember that this man
or woman receiving $4.80 a week has money orders for thousands of
dollars going through his or her office. The whole system is entirely wrong.
You get a person to spend his or her time and energy, and the use of
his or her house, and at the same time take the responsibility for
very considerable monies, and she or he receives a return of $4.80 a week! I
don't blame the government any more than I blame each and every
resident of this island for putting up with that form of slavery. For that's
all it is. I think you were proper to bring out the salaries as you
did, and I believe that the general assembly here today agrees with the idea
set forth by Mr. Hollett, that that $4.80 is the worst badge of
slavery imposed by any government of the civilised world on their fellow
citizens.
Mr. Burry ....Now just why a department can show such a
fine surplus without giving better service is beyond my ability to
understand. Of course I do know the conditions that exist in
Newfoundland, but I know the conditions in Labrador better. They have
not been given very clearly in the report, although mention has been
made of them. $12 per person was what the 38 postmasters in Labrador
received, and this is just one clear case for members getting up to say that
the figures are ridiculous. But the services of the mail system, for
instance in Labrador, are anything but a credit to any government
or any department. It is an isolated region, and we do not expect the
public service that we would like to have, but there are some things that
could be improved, and the mail system is one of them.
Just a few days ago I was talking to Mr. J.D.
Williams of the Labrador Development Company,
[1] and he is worried about his people down
there on Labrador getting no mail for all these
months. He has a right to be distressed about it,
and something could be done about getting some
mail into that coast. Where I come from, in the
Hamilton Inlet area, they are still waiting for their
first mail since the first of October, and they will
have to wait yet. We do get our mail by air now,
because planes are going in from Halifax three
times a week to Goose Bay, and distributed along
that immediate vicinity; but regularly it is done
by dog team, and that is a very poor system, and
the eight carriers are very poorly paid I can assure
you. They have long distances to go, over difficult and rough terrain, and I know
because I
have travelled with them time and again. I have
helped them over the hills and have known the
hardships that they have to go through. I am able
to sympathise with their long journeys, and know
256 NATIONAL CONVENTION January 1947
they are not properly paid for that kind of work.
No figures occur here, and I am not able to give
all the figures, but I know one case where a carrier
had to go over 175 miles by dog team and he got
$20 a trip. I feel that when a department is able
to show a surplus, and we are able to give instances such as this, there is something
wrong somewhere. Why not put some of this surplus into
paying better wages and giving better service?....
Mr. Fudge The Committee made no reference to the recent
contract for mail bags supplied to the Department of Posts and Telegraphs by,
I understand, a Canadian firm. According to rumours this contract was
valued at $75,000. I think we should find out the facts about this
rumour. If it is correct, then why are local sail- makers
here in the city of St. John's left out?....
Mr. Smallwood ....It may be that in Canada they turn out
these mailbags by the millions, and they can be imported at very great
savings. I don't know, but unless it is a very considerable saving, I
don't see why the order could not be placed with a local sailmaker. But I do
know that as far back as I can remember the mailbags have been imported. I remember
there was a terrific uproar, 10 or 15 or
maybe 18 years ago, when it was learned that the mailbags, hampers, etc., had
been made by prison labour in Canada or the States.... I am not
protectionist by any means, but in a matter like this the whole thing is
relatively small, and the difference on $75,000 is not going to be so
wonderfully great....
Mr. Fudge ....I am at a loss to know why you did not
mention that in the report.
Mr. Smallwood The members of the Committee
did not consider it to be their duty to go into relatively small details. We
are dealing with a department that deals with $1.5 million a year.
Mr. Smallwood ....Anyway, to be quite frank the
Committee did not take it up. The report of the Committee was mimeographed
and tabled in this House before the matter came up at all. As a matter
of fact it was brought up by me personally. I would like to see the matter
settled.
Mr. Reddy If a local company is able to do the work I
don't think it should be sent to Canada. I wish to concur with the previous
speakers about the low salaries of the employees in the Department of Posts and
Telegraphs. I think there are some local phone offices
where the person
employed does not get any salary at all. That's a shade worse. I go on
record as protesting against those low salaries.
Mr. Bailey I hardly know where to begin in this thing here.
I was not aware of the fact that mailbags are being imported from
Canada, or else I certainly would have dug into it. I believe one time
in this country mailbags were made in our own penitentiary. I don't think
those things should be allowed whatever the saving. That is not what I
got to my feet to speak about, however.
I want to stand alongside Rev. Mr. Hurry in
the matter of the service given to the country. I
believe, in fact I am sure, that never in our history
has this country had the equipment that was fit
for the country that we are in, thatcould save lives
and give us service.... If we had a government that
had been removed a little from the ox-cart age,
this was a time when we could have got flying
boats that could have handled our mail system on
the Labrador in a matter of hours, and boats that
would be on hand in case of sickness in any part
of the island where a case wanted to be rushed to
the hospital ... and when there is ice we could
have amphibian planes. I did not intend to bring
this up until the matter of health and welfare came
in. Somebody would say it is a big expense, but
it is not as big an expense as a cottage hospital,
and we could save lives.... I believe that when the
war was over and those flying boats that I spoke
about were scrapped we could have had two or
three of those for practically nothing, and
amongst our airforce boys we had plenty of good
pilots. The Labrador could have been looked
after, whereas now it takes six to eight months to
get a letter, and I know what that means. There is
not much that we can say today except to draw
their attention to it.... There is plenty of work for
50 of these flying boats, mail, freight, and mercy
trips, and in places where men have to be moved
from one part of the island to another, I think
those boats would pay without any cost to the
country. I believe in this way our posts and
telegraphs service could be extended, and that
our hospitals could be extended and brought to
the doors of the people....
Mr. Newell Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that a discussion
of this report would be utterly incomplete if we allowed it to
pass from our hands without making some attempt to correlate the various
sections of the report. Perhaps self
January 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 257
criticism may be good for us — let's indulge for a
little. I think there is a definite correlation between the various parts of
this Transportation and Communications Report. Take for instance the
sections on tourists and Gander. Surely they must have something in common.
We have been criticised not a little because with one boot we kick
people for spending a million a year on Gander, and at the same time urge
them to spend many millions of dollars on roads to open up the country
for the tourist trade. Somebody outside the Convention asked me if I did not
think that Gander is doing a little to open up the country too. Things
like that tend to give us an appearance off colour to the public. I don't
care if the public are listening at the moment. That's one point.
Then there is a definite relationship between
posts and telegraphs and broadcasting which has
supplemented posts and telegraphs to a great
degree in this country. You have only to listen to
Gerald S. Doyle's News Bulletin
[1] to realise that
any day in the week. They spend five minutes
broadcasting telegrams for people, which, if they
had to follow the usual channels, would never
arrive, because there are sections in this country
where you cannot get a telegram through with
any speed at all, not even, as Mr. Crosbie said, if
you are willing to pay wholesale for it. They just
don't go through.
Then again roads and railways should be considered in conjunction with each other.
The question has been asked is it right to definitely endorse
a policy of building a transinsular highway, for
instance, when you have a transinsular railway,
rather than concentrating on linking up some of
the isolated settlements that need roads more? If
we look about these settlements we can do so
without any district consciousness or insular attitude at all, because they are parts
of the greater
problem. I feel that we must consider roads and
railways in conjunction with each other....
The other thing that I intended to speak about
was this: after we have read the report and discussed it, what profit has it brought
us in our
deliberation? In other words what does the report
add to this general fact-finding job that we have
to do? Now as far as Transportation and Communications are concerned, it seems to
me that
there are at least four questions we must answer:
1. What are these services costing?
2. Are they adequate?
3. If not, what should we be prepared to expend on them? And I suppose you might ask
the
question, why spend anything on them? Which
leaves the fourth question,
4. What part have these services to play in the
economic development of the country?
We must give a great deal of thought and
attention to this matter — the economic potential
value of the country, which we have not yet
attempted to assess. I suppose when the other
reports come in we will be getting down to that
phrase of the discussion. These questions are
important to me. If we are to make any intelligent
estimate let's take a look at the answers.
First, what are these services costing? The
figures I am quoting are from the report, and I am
quoting from memory. Gander, about which we
have a great many mental reservations, we think
may cost up to $1 million.... Posts and telegraphs
and broadcasting are negligible. One may have a
slight deficit or small surplus. In order to retain
our road system we will have to spend $1 million
on highroads, and on local roads roughly
$250,000. Tourists: the luscious plum was left to
the last, because there seems to be some doubt
about that one. We will call that X — the unknown quantity. As far as I am concerned
that
whole thing is an unknown quantity anyway. X
plus $2.25 million to maintain our services in
transportation and communications.
Mr. Newell Well you can work in another $750,000 for
the Railway, which brings it up to $3 million. Now as a projected
transinsular highway would cost $6 million, and something for the
tourists, which is unknown as yet, the question is, are these services
adequate? It seems that Gander is more than adequate. Posts and telegraphs
are wholly inadequate. Roads, we are all agreed that the present road
system of the country is utterly inadequate. Now what should we be prepared
to spend? There we are running into considerable difficulty. Why
should we be prepared to expend anything? Well, there are only two reasons
as far as I am concerned, one is that these services such as the
railway and roads and the others have a part to play in the economic
development of this country, which is at the present time undeveloped. I don't think
we should look at these
258 NATIONAL CONVENTION January 1947
services with an eye to what we can afford,
or with the idea of cutting our garment according to the cloth, but
with a view to finding a little more cloth somewhere. In other words,
developing our economic resources so that we can fulfill the needs and
provide a special service for the country. I am not prepared to carry the
debate any further, but I do suggest that throughout a discussion of this sort we
must keep in mind the prime purpose of this assembly,
and I suggest that we look at the whole question of transportation and
communications bearing these four simple questions in mind....
Mr. Hollett Mr. Chairman, after that rather lengthy homily
on the duties of this Convention I feel disposed to say a word. I feel that
nearly every member has the same idea in mind, that all these reports
are to be taken and criticised and torn apart, in order to give us some idea
what the services are costing the treasury, and that is exactly what we came here
for.... I agree with Mr. Newell entirely, but I do
feel that we have to find out what we can with regard to these reports, and
if there is something we don't like, and if there is something that
should be added, I don't know why we should not do something about it.
Mr. Newell I do not know when these questions have to
be answered — sometime, certainly, they must. Perhaps now is not the
opportune moment to go too deeply into that phase of it.... I do not
want anybody to infer we should not criticise anything in these reports...
Mr. Smallwood There is another side to it all. Mr.
Newell is dealing with the Convention itself — what the Convention ought to
do, and with him we all agree.
The Education Committee brought in its
report and we debated it here for a day. Perhaps
we ought to have debated it longer. The Forestry
Committee report we debated a day, or part of a
day and they are bringing in a supplementary
report. It deals with one of the basic resources of
the country. Now in comes the Transportation
Committee's report. It deals not with basic
productive industries at all, but with one of the
big spending departments of the government. As
these three have come in, and as the other six will
come in and are read out, the country hears them.
The country as a whole has no opportunity of
knowing what is in a report except when they
hear it read on the air. Most of us, just by hearing
figures and statistics read are unable to grasp
them, and that is the purpose of the debate, among
other things, to bring home to the Newfoundland
people — our masters, whose servants we are — information to pass on to them. One
of the purposes of the debate is to bring out the information
that is in the reports, cold-blooded and with no
adjectives — for instance, note the model of
restraint in "scandalously low salaries paid." In
the main the reports are just factual; it is the
debate which makes them live, that makes the
facts and figures get up and dance. Suppose we
adopt another method, suppose we brought in all
nine reports and debated them; suppose we appointed a new committee — a report consolidation
committee — to knock all reports into one.
Suppose we slapped that at the country — there
would be a lot of mental indigestion. If we give
it report by report, the country and ourselves will
understand it better. So when we make our
recommendations at last, it will not hit the
country between the eyes as a surprise: they will
have foreseen it, they will have anticipated it. I
know if you were to ask the average Newfoundlander to give you a one-minute description
of the posts and telegraphs, not one could do it — they do not realise what a monumental
thing it is.
We are educating the people of Newfoundland
while educating ourselves. We must always
remember not to get lost in a forest of facts and
statistics — always bearing in mind that what we
want to know is this: what is it going to cost the
future government of Newfoundland, and where
are we going to find it? We do not want people
to think we are bogged down in the forest of
information we have gathered. We are doing it
bit by bit and thrashing it out as we go along.
Mr. Higgins Before we get too far in the woods, and if Mr.
Smallwood is out of them, I wonder if he would revert to a question I asked
earlier. I wanted to know the Committee's opinion of the usefulness of
the radio-telegraph as against the old land line and the comparative cost of
both services. My own impression is that the present radio-telegraph
service is very much slower, so far as individuals getting messages is
concerned. It does not appear to have been gone into in the report.
Mr. Smallwood I am not evading that question. It is one
that is going to cost the country a million dollars. It is dealt with in
this rather voluminous
January 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 259
report of the Secretary. We are no authorities on
radio-telegraph; we cannot form much of an opinion as to whether land line
or radio-telegraph is best, but the department has.
Mr. Higgins Since that is a million dollar question, and my recollection of the report is that
it is not very clear, and
since I do not wish Mr. Smallwood to answer a question he does not
know, we will let the question drop.
[There was further discussion, touching on telegrams, mail couriers, casual employees,
capital expenditures, mail contracts with the railway and steamers, and service in
general. The committee of the whale then rose and reported progress, and the Convention
adjourned]
