[The committee first considered section 4.5, dealing with assistance to housing.
Mr. Smallwood
read extracts from the Black Book dealing with
the National Housing Act. There was no debate
on this point, and the committee went on to section 5 dealing with services that would
be taken
over by the federal government in the event of
confederation.
In connection with the Newfoundland Railway, Mr. Smallwood read a section of the Black
Book covering its integration into the Canadian
National Railways system. This report indicated
that the Canadian authorities anticipated an expenditure of $10 million over ten years
to
rehabilitate the railway. In addition, $7 million
would have to be spent on rolling stock.
Rates of pay would become standard CNR
rates.
The Railway deficit would be transferred to
CNR.
The Newfoundland Hotel would not be transferred unless the Newfoundland government
so
836 NATIONAL CONVENTION November 1947
requested.
Mr. Fogwill asked what would happen to the
vessels owned by the government in the event of
confederation][1]
Mr. Smallwood The reason is this — when we
went up we had a list of all vessels or ships owned
by the Government of Newfoundland. We even
had the Customs cutters; we had the Railway
steamships and Clarenville boats.
[2] The only
thing they refer to are those owned by the national
government railway.
Mr. Smallwood That is the number of vessels
owned by the government under all headings.
They segregated those not owned by the Newfoundland Railway from those that are owned;
they only deal with those owned by the Newfoundland government railway.
Mr. Fogwill The ownership of those would be
vested in Newfoundland. What would be the
position of a federallyuoperated boat and a
provinciallycperated boat in competition to the
other?....
Mr. Smallwood It would be the same as exists
today. In Newfoundland we have ships in the
foreign and local trade not owned by the government in any sense of the word, competing
with
ships that are so owned. In Canada there is the
Canadian government merchant marine, there
are privately owned ships, and I daresay there are
provincially owned ships. Various things could
be done. Maybe the Canadian merchant marine
could be asked to operate them.
Mr. Fogwill I am concerned about this. These
are now operating. What would happen then to
the vessels operating in competition between the
federal and the provincial government?
Mr. Smallwood I cannot be expected to say, if
we became a province, what that government
should do with its own property. That would be
its problem to solve in its own way....
Mr. Bailey Have you any guarantee that these
ships would belong to the province — anything
to go on? Do you know whether they would
remain with the province or whether they would
be taken over by the federal government? These
cost the government quite a bit and they are
worth a lot. In fact they are one of the best assets
the Commission of Government could have.
Mr. Smallwood I suggest the members might
help me out in this — apparently the list of ships
is not reproduced in this volume. Is no one
present who can say anything definitely about
these l9 vessels? Has the Railway got 19 vessels
including the Clarenville boats?
Mr. Miller Since we are considering clause 5, it
says, "At the union, or as soon as practicable
thereafter, the following services will be taken
over by Canada and become subject to the juris—
diction of Parliament." I think Mr. Smallwood in
his interpretation has to be governed by this Grey
Book. It says further, "Newfoundland to be
relieved of the public costs incurred in respect to
each service after it is taken over". We will be
relieved only in pan of these public costs. We will
be contributing to the taxes collected by the
federal government, we will bear a proportion of
this cost. A fair interpretation would be that the
Newfoundland provincial government would be
relieved of the cost, but Newfoundland as a
people will pay a proportionate share of the cost
into the federal government...
Mr. Smallwood Mr. Miller is right. There is not
much need for concern over the wording of the
clause. Incidentally, I hate to jump from one
subject to another, but in connection with the
Newfoundland Hotel, since 1932 it has lost
$162,000 to date on operating costs. I have that
note entered here in my own writing.
Mr. Bailey It includes the Clarenville boats, do
the others come under Customs?
Mr. Smallwood The Natural Resources own
some. Some boats owned or operated by the
Railway are owned by other departments of the
government. They are left out of the picture. This
has to do with boats run by the Railway. It looks
as though those include the Clarenville boats.
November 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 837
Mr. Bailey Apparently, according to this, the
federal government will take over the Clarenville
vessels?
Mr. Harrington Just one question comes to
mind. Clause 5, section (1), "the Newfoundland
Railway, including steamship and other marine
services." That is official. That is in the proposed
arrangements. In Volume 2, page 69,
[1] reference
is made to the condition of the property of the
railway and steamship services. The second paragraph should have been read in connection
with
the rehabilitation that is likely to have to take
place in connection with the railway and steamship service. That is provisional. That
is not
guaranteed. They presume certain works would
have to be done. There is no guarantee they will
be done, once we become a province. Was this
memorandum prepared by the Government of
Canada?
Mr. Smallwood That is a memorandum
prepared for the cabinet of Canada by the railway
and steamship officials of that government, the
President of the Clarke Steamship Company, and
the Vice-President of the Canadian National
Railways. They prepared it. If the Canadian
government were to offer, in this document, to
take over the railway and steamship service, they
wanted to have some idea of what they would be
taking over, and whether it had been making
money or losing it; what condition it is in; how
much money would likely have to be spent to put
it in good condition, if it is not in good condition.
They asked their authorities, railway experts, to
prepare a memorandum; in the next ten years, $10
million would have to be spent to put the railway
system in good condition. The rails would need
to be renewed, ballast renewed, embankments
and cuts widened.
It would appear that the rails would need to
be renewed on the whole of the railway
within a period of ten years, and that at the
same time ballast should be renewed, embankments and cuts widened, drainage restored
or improved and that a majority of the
bridges would need renewing.
Mr. Smallwood Yes. "It may be hazarded that
the cost of rehabilitating rolling stock over a
ten-year period would be of the order of $7 million." That is $17 million the railway
expects it
would need to spend. Commander Edwards,
Deputy Minister of Transport, who was one of
the Canadian government committee, met with
us on this railway question. He has been in Newfoundland and knows our railway system.
He is
an expert railway man. This memorandum is
based on the data we brought up to them; some
of it we got afterwards, at their request; and also
of their own knowledge. They have a fairly good
knowledge of the railways of other countries....
This memorandum, as Mr. Harrington says, is not
an undertaking, it is not a bond; it is not in the
terms. The Canadian government has been informed by their own experts that $17 million
would have to be spent to make it shipshape over
a period of years. I would draw Mr. Harrington's
attention to the fact that freight rates would
presumably be reduced; express rates would
presumably be reduced; passenger rates would
presumably be reduced. That is the opinion of the
railway experts of Canada. They assume that if
the Government of Canada takes over the system,
and makes it part and parcel of the Canadian
National Railways, naturally they will have the
same freight, same passenger, same express rates
as in Canada. Mr. Harrington is right, it is not
guaranteed. Personally I have no doubt about it;
still, it is not so stated in the terms.
Mr. Job When Mr. Smallwood was talking
about the Clarenville type of vessels, I understood him to say that, undoubtedly,
they would
not be taken over; but he rather altered that
opinion later on. Was that the case?
Mr. Job I imagine that they are really part of the
government set-up. They are managed by the
Railway. They are paid a fee for managing them.
They are on a different footing from the other
boats. It is important to ascertain what the facts
are.
Mr. Northcott How do our rates compare with
the Canadian National Railway freight rates?
Mr. Smallwood All I know is what the
Canadian government railway experts have said,
and what they have said is here in this memorandum of theirs. I will read it out:
838 NATIONAL CONVENTION November 1947
(b) Freight Rates:
The standard Canadian classification and
tariffs would likely become applicable, and
if the benefits of the Maritime Freight Rates
Act were to be extended to Newfoundland,
these two in combination would define maximum rates. The resulting rate structure
would be modified by water competitive
conditions and by special commodity rates in
accordance with standard Canadian tariff
practices.
Substantial reductions from the existing
freight charges on goods moving to or from
Newfoundland from or to points in Canada
and the United States would probably result.
A special feature to be considered would be
whether a special charge would be made for
the boat movement from Port-aux-Basques
to North Sydney or whether the movement
would be treated as so much railway mileage.
According to that our rates are higher than theirs
and presumably would have to be reduced. I
would not set myself up to throw any doubts on
the assumptions of the Canadian National Railway experts....
Mr. Smallwood No, I do not. Ours would be
brought down to be the same as Canadian rates.
Mr. Hickman At the present time there is a
move to increase freight rates 30% in Canada;
and where, now, the Maritimes have been subsidised for their freight rates, that is
also going to
be under discussion. I do not know if it will be
done.
Mr. Chairman Presumably the elimination of
subsidy must increase rates in Canada.
Mr. Smallwood I am familiar with the first
point. I attended meetings of the Board of
Transport Commissioners. Some friends of
yours, Mr. Chairman, were participating as counsel for the various provinces they
represented.
One morning Mr. Higgins, Mr. Bradley and
myself went up and attended the hearings of the
railways who are applying to have their freight
rates increased. They are applying to the Board
for 30% increase 'across the board' as they call
it. I attended day after day. It was never done. I
am not saying it could not be done. All over North
America the railways are trying to get the freight
rates up. They are all claiming they are losing
money. On the other point, there is not a suggestion, not a hint of the abolition
of the Maritime
Freight Rates Act. There has been 20% reduction
on freight rates in the Maritime region, which is
east of LĂ©vis; but there has never been the
slightest hint or suggestion of the abolition of the
Maritime Freight Rates Act. Mr. Hickman is
right, they have been trying to get an increase in
freight rates. But the Maritime Freight Rates Act
is there; it is a statutory act.
Mr. Hickman It has been on the carpet for some
time and I note from the papers that the question
is up again of a 30% increase, and it specifically
mentioned also the cancellation of the subsidy to
the Maritimes. I do not know if that means the
cancellation of the Maritime Freight Rates Act.
This came up for decision since Mr. Smallwood
was in Ottawa.
Mr. Smallwood Now I know what he is referring to. The Maritime Freight Rates Act is one
thing; that is statutory. What Mr. Hickman is
referring to is the subsidy paid on grains. There
are two subsidies. All feeds, all animal and
poultry feed grains from the Prairie provinces
going into the Pacific coast and Atlantic coast are
hauled freight-free.... I do not want to anticipate
it; but when it comes, that is to be applied to
Newfoundland as well. In addition to that, there
has been something else. During the war the
government has paid the Prairie grain growers a
subsidy of so much a bushel and the subsidy was
to encourage them to grow the things that the
government wanted to be grown during the war.
They have now taken that off. But as to the
hauling of it down through the Maritimes, it is
hauled freight-free. Mr. Hickman is referring to
the taking off of the subsidy given the Prairie
provinces.
Mr. Hickman I was referring to the subsidy on
freight to the Maritimes on grains and other items
you mentioned.
Mr. Fogwill On page 69
[1] — I am not sure there
is an error; but it says "It is noted that the staff of
the railway at the present time numbers 2,990 and
of the steamers 761, a total of 3,751". I would
refer you to....
[It was pointed out by Mr. Smallwood that the
figures had been supplied by the Railway.
[2]
Continuing the debate on clause 5 of the
November 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 839
proposed terms, the sub-section dealing with the
Newfoundland Hotel was then introduced by Mr.
Smallwood, who stated that the federal government would take over the operation of
this hotel
if such was desired by the Government of Newfoundland. Mr. Smallwood said that the
CNR
operated a chain of hotels, and in the event of
union it would be possible, perhaps advisable,
that the Newfoundland Hotel would be acquired
by that company. Mr. Bailey expressed the
opinion that this was the best reason for confederation which he had heard so far.
The sub-section dealing with Posts and
Telegraphs was brought up for discussion. These
services, though considered as two separate services in Canada, would be taken over
as a single
service if Newfoundland entered confederation.
A question was raised whether the federal
government would continue to employ the Newfoundlanders in the service at the time
of union.
Mr. Smallwood stated that the federal government was duty bound to employ in the public
services of a province, citizens of that province.
Mr. Fogwill wondered if the persons now
employed by Posts and Telegraphs would be
required to qualify for jobs according to standards set by the federal government:
if the
qualifications required were higher than those in
Newfoundland, would it mean that persons now
employed, who failed to meet these qualifications, would be discharged? Mr. Smallwood
felt
certain that if persons were unqualified for their
jobs, every opportunity would be given to those
employees to qualify.
Mr. Fogwill wanted to know why revenue from
Posts and Telegraphs estimated by Canada was
$1 million below the amount estimated for the
1947-48 period by the present government. Mr.
Smallwood stated that in the event of union this
service would be taken over by the federal
government. Postage rates would be lower and
wages would be increased, hence the difference
in the two estimates. He went on to say that
during the period 1920 to 1940, Posts and
Telegraphs in Newfoundland averaged a yearly
deficit of $500,000.
Mr. Miller was anxious to know if there was a
guarantee that existing public services such as
our coastal service would be continued as they
were at present]
Mr. Chairman The thing Mr. Miller asks you is
whether or not there is any guarantee that there
will be any material or other alterations in the
operations of the railway and steamship lines as
presently operated.
Mr. Smallwood If he, or anyone else, takes the
stand that because here it does not say...
Mr. Smallwood If clause 5 does not say that
"the following services will be taken over and
become subject to the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada and will be maintained
at existing levels or even better", are we to infer that
there is a danger that the services may not be
maintained at the present levels but may be
reduced?
Mr. Smallwood It may be a fair inference from
a purely legal standpoint. But to me it is not a fair
or realistic inference at all; the Government of
Canada in taking over these services will give us
much better service, but as for a guarantee, no,
there is no guarantee. That is a matter of what has
been said and of what we believe. I believe,
personally, that they will give us a little better
service. I wish Mr. Higgins were here. He was
one of the three delegates who were at the meeting. When the meeting ended we were
chatting
around in groups with the railway experts, especially Commander Edwards. The Deputy
Minister of Transport said, "If and when
Newfoundland comes into confederation, what
do you think would become of the railway? What
do you think, Captain, do you think they will do
something for the railway, put it in good shape?"
He said, "What else? Either that, or we will have
a railway hanging on us, dragging on us, a burden
on us." ....He said, "If you ever come in with us,
you will have the best railway you ever had." But
there is no guarantee of it in the Grey Book. No
guarantee about the railway and the steamship
services. No guarantee they would not even shut
them down. If anyone prefers to think that, I
cannot stop them. I do not believe that. On the
contrary, I believe the services the Government
of Canadian would take over would be operated
more efficiently and with better service to the
840 NATIONAL CONVENTION November 1947
people of Newfoundland and of greater benefit to
the employees than now....
Mr. Butt Is not that covered on page 68 of the
Black Book?
Mr. Smallwood Not exactly covered. Here is
the bond, the Grey Book. This is the offer of
Canada.
Mr. Butt Is not this a memorandum prepared by
some members of the Canadian civil service?
Mr. Butt It reads, "It would not be contemplated
that at least at the outset any substantial increase
in service would be instituted, since the present
service appears to be reasonably adequate."
Mr. Smallwood That is not, as Mr. Miller,
pointed out, in the bond; that is the expert opinion
of the railway experts.... It is not an undertaking,
as Mr. Miller points out.
Mr. Butt It gives an indication of the minds of
the people with whom you had to deal: "the
present service appears to be reasonably adequate."
Mr. Bailey A very strong point, to my mind —
I did not want to bring it up, but Mr. Miller
brought it forward. For 40 years I have travelled,
now and again, between North Sydney and Truro.
If we are going to have that class of railroad under
confederation, I do not think it is going to suit
us.... The people up there have been fighting to
get a bridge across the Gut of Canso since 1910.
Anyone who has travelled over that railway,
especially if you are coming east, would think
there are square wheels under the track. I will not
say anything about the cars. It is apparent that it
is worse today than it was back in 1911 and 1912.
If that is the type of railroad we are going to get,
I think we should hold on to the one we have. It
is not going to be good enough. I am sure there
was nothing in this country that was worse.... We
have the Grey Book and the Black Books and
other books, but there is no guarantee. I would
like to see their John Hancocks there before I
marked my "x" for confederation. I have been
doubtful about this all the time. Since Mr. Miller
brought it up, I would bring it to the attention of
the members here.
Mr. Smallwood I have travelled on the railway
line to which Mr. Bailey refers, quite recently —
a couple or three months before, going to Ottawa.
The whole delegation travelled across Newfoundland. Having crossed the Gulf and landed
at North Sydney we were all awake to watch that
railway. We left 8 o'clock in the morning. We
were travelling in the day. Everyone was watching the railway, sizing it up, getting
the feel of it.
I, for one, will say now that the worst railway
across Canada is that railway, but it is better than
our cross-country railway.
Mr. Smallwood That is your opinion. The best
way is for all of us to travel over the railway and
see for ourselves. Every man can then make up
his own mind. Now, let Captain Bailey go a little
bit further, let him go down and take a look at the
kind of service the Government of Canada is
providing for tiny Prince Edward Island, 2,000
square miles in size, with a population of
95,000.... When that Island joined the union as a
province, the terms contained a clause saying the
Government of Canada would maintain a ferry
service between the mainland and Prince Edward
Island. I wonder if Captain Bailey has any
knowledge of the monumental sum of money that
the Government of Canada has spent to keep that
promise. In 1917 the Government of Canada
spent $1 million to build a ferryboat to connect
that province. In 1927 they built another one
which cost $2 million. Remember, our
Caribou[1]
cost $500,000 in 1925.... In 1947 the Government
of Canada spent $5 million to provide a new ferry
and in addition they spent $6 million to improve
the terminals at each end of her run.... In addition
to that, they found when they took over Prince
Edward Island, that they had a narrow gauge
railway. They took over that railway. What did
they do to that railway? They made it a broad
gauge. I remember the first time I ever visited
Prince Edward Island, the broad gauge railway
ran only half-way across the Island, up to Charlottetown; then the rest of the distance
was narrow gauge. The Government of Canada spent $11
million in that little province in 1947. They have
no political influence, they count very little...
Mr. Fogwill Point of order. I think we should
confine our remarks to the report, not to what
happened to Prince Edward Island.
Mr. Smallwood It is not a good point of order.
But in order to save time, I will pass that.
November 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 841
Mr. Crosbie Do I understand the federal
government made a promise to Prince Edward
Island for that service?
Mr. Crosbie There is no clause in our terms, that
is what we object to.
Mr. Smallwood In 1873 there was a clause in
the terms given to Prince Edward Island, a perfectly innocent-looking clause saying
this, "The
Government of Canada will maintain a ferry service between the mainland and the Island."
That
is all. Nothing about how much they would
spend.
Mr. Crosbie Point of order. What is Mr.
Smallwood now quoting from? Have you that
contract and could we see it?
Mr. Smallwood It is in the BNA Act, the terms
offered to Prince Edward Island, what would
happen if she became a province. You will find
it says nothing about how much they would spend
to maintain that ferry service; nothing more than
just a simple clause saying they would maintain
a continuous ferry service winter and summer
from the mainland...
Mr. Crosbie I want the whole terms offered to
Prince Edward Island.
Mr. Smallwood It would be a simple thing to
have it copied and mimeographed.
Mr. Crosbie That would suit me fine. These
terms to us do not say they will maintain an
efficient service between the mainland and the
island. They do not contract to do any such thing.
Mr. Smallwood You will find, in the terms offered by Canada, that they have covered that very
point. They have gone further than any clause
offered Prince Edward Island in 1873. What they
have done in our case is, they have offered to
provide and maintain a service for the conveyance of motor vehicles; it will be a
type of
ferry that will take motor cars, where they will
not be dumped into the hold with a winch. In
North Sydney the cars are lowered, now...
Mr. Crosbie Point of order. We are not concerned about how motor cars get down in the hold
of the steamer.
Mr. Smallwood The last man I want to get into
a snarl with is my friend — and I say advisedly
"my friend" — Mr. Crosbie; but I do not think
that it a point of order. I am attempting to deal
with a point. I was challenged to produce the
clause offered to Prince Edward Island. I am
pointing out a similar clause, only a better one,
offered us in 1947. Perhaps in dealing with the
clause we have come to a clause which has not
been dealt with, but I have done that at Mr.
Crosbie's request.
Mr. Chairman Mr. Smallwood offered to
produce the terms in mimeographed form; Mr.
Crosbie has agreed and that settles the matter.
Mr. Reddy I understand Prince Edward Island
has been fighting the federal government for a
decent ferry service over the past 50 years and it
was only this year that they got it.
Mr. Smallwood Would not Mr. Reddy call a $2
million ferry service in 1927 a good ferry service? In the last 50 years and longer,
since 1873,
the Government of Canada has spent scores of
millions of dollars to give them a decent service.
And now Mr. Reddy says they waited until 1947.
He is completely wrong.
Mr. Chairman You are getting far outside the
original terms.
Mr. Bailey The Prince Edward Island people,
like ourselves, are on an island. They have been
paying freight rates over a number of years to the
Canadian National Railway and also when it was
a private service. They were paying for service
they did not get. I can assure you that whatever
Prince Edward Island got, they got it through
fighting hard. I have been in their parliament. I
was talking to their men. I have seen their ferries
going out and the conditions they worked under.
I am glad they got the service. They deserved it.
After all, as they pointed out, they have to ship
out a lot of potatoes and other vegetables. They
had a very hard fight. If they had the old type of
service today, it would turn people against confederation. They did not get it before.
A $2 million vessel on that strait was not good enough for
the job she had to do, especially a sea-train. I have
been on a couple of them. The cost of construction of the vessel was way above the
ordinary
class of vessel. They also had to bring along an
icebreaker with it. They did not get any $2 million
vessel in 1927, and very little in 1917.
Mr. Reddy I think the people of Prince Edward
Island have been fighting hard and I thank Mr.
Bailey for agreeing with me.
Mr. Job In connection with the Clarenville
842 NATIONAL CONVENTION November 1947
ships, it makes a big difference to the arrangements here if these are taken over
by the railway
or not. If the province keeps them, they are worth
to the province perhaps a couple of million dollars. As it is favourable to Mr. Smallwood's
argument, I thought perhaps I should mention it.
Mr. Smallwood I intended to give notice of
question to the Government of Canada to have
that matter cleared up definitely. When they say
here in the clause the Government of Canada will
take over "the Newfoundland Railway including
steamship and other marine services", I intended
to give notice of question to ask if that includes
the Clarenville boats. I thank Mr. Job for that
kindly gesture and we will have that matter
cleared up.
[Regarding civil aviation, it was pointed out that
Gander airport would be taken over by the
federal Department of Transport, which would
assume full responsibility for, and the costs of the
airport][1]
Mr. Smallwood Clause 5, sub-section 5, Customs and Excise. That means, the only customs
tariff would be the Canadian customs; the only
customs officers we would have would be the
Canadian government customs officers; they
would be the same men we now have, but they
would be employed by the Government of
Canada customs department and not by the Newfoundland customs department, because
there
would not be any Newfoundland government
customs department.
Mr. Fogwill On page 15 of the Grey Book, you
have listed estimated revenue for the federal
government, customs duties and import taxes, $2
million. I would like to know what volume of
goods that covers, and at what percentage did you
arrive at that?
Mr. Smallwood In answer to that, I have not
arrived at it; it is not my estimate; that is the
estimate of the financial, fiscal and customs experts. I would ask Mr. Fogwill if
he will be kind
enough to hold that over until we come to it, and
I will tell him why. He is aware that there has
recently been enacted 100-odd trade treaties involving tariff reductions, and that
Canada is
involved in those arrangements; they are multilateral agreements, the same with 23
countries,
of which Canada is one, Newfoundland is one. I
am hoping to get the tariff reductions to be
brought into effect at the end of the year in
Canada as in other countries, and have the information brought here, and I think we
will be much
better able to go into that matter than we are now.
Mr. Fogwill I am satisfied to that, but I would
like to know if Mr. Smallwood has any information now; we could use that, and if he
gets some
later on, we could use that.
Mr. Smallwood I would like to have the story
at one time rather than a story which would have
to be modified in the light of subsequent new
information. We have to come to it, obviously. I
think in the meantime, possibly it would be good
policy from the standpoint of making progress
here if we came to that when we came to it.
[Mr. Smallwood stated that defence was a federal
responsibility and involved military projects in
peace time as well as in war. Mr. Bailey wanted
to know where Newfoundland was going to get
the money to pay for the maintenance of any army
and navy.
Mr. Smallwood then introduced subsection 7
dealing with the pensions and rehabilitation of
war veterans and merchant seamen. After a short
discussion the committee decided to adjourn
until 8 pm][2]
Mr. Chairman When recess was taken at 6 pm,
arising out of clause 5, sub-section 7, in which
Annex 1 is to be incorporated by way of reference, it was proposed that you would
read the
annex in question, beginning page 7 and ending
on page 8. If it meets with your approval, you
might at this time read the Annex in question.
Mr. Smallwood While I was at tea I had a
telephone call from Mr. Ballam who was a member of our delegation committee that dealt
with
veterans' affairs in Ottawa. He had a very slight
operation this afternoon and on the advice of his
doctor is not supposed to go outdoors tonight. He
was wondering if the Convention would be kind
enough to pass by number 7, Pensions and
Rehabilitation of War Veterans and Merchant
Seamen — and come back to it when he is
present.
Mr. Chairman I have no objection. We have
plenty to occupy our time. If members are in
compliance with Mr. Ballam's request, may I
suggest that we defer further consideration of this
November 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 843
until his return. Therefore, we might begin business by proceeding to the next succeeding
subsection.
Mr. Smallwood Thank you. Clause 5: Canada
will take over " (8) Protection and encouragement of fisheries". I would ask members
to turn
to volume 1, page 86:
[1]
Fisheries
15. The Department of Fisheries has
legislative jurisdiction over all the fisheries
of Canada. In the administrative field the
Department has administrative authority
over the public fisheries of the Maritime
Provinces and British Columbia, where for
administrative purposes the Eastern and
Western Fisheries Divisions are established.
16. The Eastern Division is in charge of
aChief Supervisor of Fisheries and is divided
into three regions; Nova Scotia, New
Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, each
of which is in charge of a Regional Supervisor of Fisheries. Each region is divided
into
units as follows: Nova Scotia, 8; New
Brunswick, 5; and Prince Edward Island, 2.
Each unit is in charge of a. Senior Inspector,
and according to the intensity and importance
of the fisheries of each unit a number of
Junior Inspectors are employed. In many
units part time fishery guardians or wardens
are employed for protective purposes.
17. Protection of the Eastern sea fisheries
is maintained by six coastal patrol boats
owned by the Department and 13 boats
chartered for seasonal operation. The Department also operates a fisheries protection
cruiser.
18. The Fish Culture Branch provides a
field service which operates 30 hatcheries, 6
rearing stations and 6 salmon-retaining
ponds in the Eastern Division The object of
this work is to maintain and increase fish
stocks. Conservation is also achieved by
regulatory action.
19. The Fisheries Research Board carries
out investigations of practical and economic
problems connected with marine and fresh
water fisheries. It cooperates with other
branches of the Department in providing advice and instruction to the fishing undustry
regarding the most efficient methods of fish
handling and processing. Adult education in this connection is carried out at several
centres.
20. The Board operates 7 scientific stations, 4 of which are located in Eastern Canada.
The latter are the Atlantic Biological
Station at St. Andrews, NB (with a sub-station at Ellerslie, PEI), the Fisheries Experimental
Stations at Halifax and Grand
River, PO, and the Atlantic Salmon Investigation Station. There is a trained staff
of
scientists at each station and a number of
non-scientific personnel are also employed.
The Board is associated with other scientific
committees such as the Joint Canadian Committee on Oceanography and the Canadian
Committee on Food Preservation. The Board
is also responsible for the direction and execution of the work of the Atlantic Herring
Investigation Committee. This Committee
was created in 1944 as a result of negotiations
with Newfoundland and with the Provinces
of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Quebec. The Committee is
carrying out an intensive investigation of the
herring industry of the Atlantic Coast.
The Province of Quebec is the only
province administering its own sea fisheries.
Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta also have administrative responsibility
for their own fisheries but the Federal
Department co-operates to the fullest extent
with the Fisheries Administrative Services of
these provinces, as well as of the province of
Quebec. The province of Nova Scotia has a
fisheries division which works in close cooperation with the Federal authorities.
21. The non-tidal fisheries of Nova
Scotia are administered by the Federal
Department of Fisheries, but those of New
Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and of the
other provinces are administered by the
respective provinces.
22. An annual bounty is paid to fishermen
and owners of fishing boats and vessels on
the Atlantic coast under prescribed conditions.
Mr. Hickman That annual bounty paid on the
Atlantic coast. I understand it amounts to about
$21 or $22 a year per owner or fisherman. Two
844 NATIONAL CONVENTION November 1947
years ago they paid out $158,000 for 7,300 fishermen and owners. Do you know if that
is correct?
Mr. Smallwood The total amount is very small.
I have the impression that the money for it is the
annual interest on the Halifax Fisheries Award.
[1]
The interest on it is paid out each year to the
fishermen as a bounty and the whole amount of
it is small because it is only the interest on the
capital sum....
Mr. Smallwood Something like that. I notice in
the appendix to Volume 2, Black Book, page 115,
"A brief description of the Fisheries Support
Board." This is rather an important thing:
(ii). A brief description of the Fisheries
Prices Support Board and its functions.
The Fisheries Prices Support Act was
passed in 1944 and proclaimed in July, 1947,
the Board under the Act then being named by
the Government. The Act covers the fisheries
products of Canada as a whole, and if Newfoundland were part of Canada, would apply
there as elsewhere in the Dominion. In the
event of Newfoundland entering Confederation, the Federal Government would wish to
reconsider the present membership of the
Prices Support Board, with a view to having
proper Newfoundland representation on the
Board itself. Likewise the Board, which has
named three Advisory Committees (one representing the west coast fishery, one the
inland, and one the Quebec and Maritime
fishery) would probably wish to add to its
advisory groups representatives of Newfoundland fishermen, producers and exporters,
or if the people preferred to have the
Newfoundland Fisheries Board act in an advisory capacity on Newfoundland fishery
matters....
The Act outlines the powers of the Board
(section 9). It will be noted that these powers
are mainly those powers are mainly those of
buying and selling fisheries products, either
directly by the Board itself or through agents,
and the powers of paying deficiency payments. There is nothing in the Act to prevent
the Support Board from naming the Newfoundland Fisheries Board or any of the
Co-operative marketing groups in New
foundland as its agents for the handling, that
is buying and/or selling Newfoundland
fisheries products. In short, there is nothing
in the present Canadian Act that would
necessarily interfere with the present organization and methods of operation of the
Newfoundland fish trade, and the Canadian
Prices Support Board would, no doubt, wish
to take advantage of all existing machinery
that could readily be used to complement its
operations.
The Prices Support Board, it should be
noted, has no "wartime" powers such as were
held by the Wartime Prices and Trade Board.
It cannot define prices as was done during
wartime. It can influence prices mainly
"through buying and selling, or through
deficiency payments and it has no powers of
allocation and no powers of directing the
marketing of individuals or groups except
when such persons are acting as the agents of
the Board itself and handling the particular
products being bought and sold by the Board
itself. The Board can, of course, make its
purchases and sales subject to certain standards of grading.
....We had a meeting with the fisheries
authorities who explained to us fairly thoroughly
the idea of the Fisheries Prices Support Board. If
the price of fish begins to slip, especially in
foreign markets, the Board may step in and by
buying a quantity of fish help to keep the price
from sinking. A very striking example of the way
that works happened while we were in Ottawa. It
was not fish — but the same principle is used —
it was the apple crop of the Annapolis Valley in
Nova Scotia. They had a crop worth some $10
million; ... Britain was buying the apples. Suddenly Britain said it could not afford
the dollars;
they thought they could use the dollars on something more necessary. They cancelled
their order.
The Canadian government stepped in and bought
the entire crop and gave them away for relief
in Greece and Italy and sent so many to Britain
as a gift, to help out the apple growers of Nova
Scotia. This Fisheries Board is supposed to
operate in something the same way....
Mr. Hickman I am glad to note one very important clause, to my mind: "There is nothing in the
November 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 845
present Canadian act that would necessarily interfere with the present organisation
and methods
of operation of the Newfoundland fish trade." I
say that because, while I have had nothing to do
with fish for many years now, I feel convinced
that our system here in Newfoundland has been
better than the Canadian system of marketing. To
bear that out, there was a delegation this summer
from Nova Scotia to endeavour to find out the
basis of our set-up so that they could set one up
in Canada. Since then we have gone further; we
have now the Codfish Exporters Limited,
[1] or
some such name, and instead of various groups
or committees, we have now one marketing organisation. I am glad to see there can
be no
interference with Newfoundland. We may derive
benefits! We are away ahead of them so far. And
as long as it cannot be interfered with, that is
something in our favour.
Mr. Bailey I wonder if Mr. Smallwood would
read page 115 — Quebec, New Brunswick and
Prince Edward Island; also page 114, British
Columbia — coastal, not inland.
[2]
Quebec: The Canadian Fisheries Act and
regulations made thereunder apply to all
fisheries. There is also certain provincial
legislation. By an arrangement made in 1922,
the administration of all such legislation and
regulations in respect of all fisheries, whether
in navigable or non-navigable waters,
together with the administration of any
provincial Crown fisheries, is carried on by
the government of the province.
May I say that is what is known as a gentlemen's
agreement between Quebec and the federal
government made in 1922 under which the
Province of Quebec was permitted by the
Government of Canada to administer its own
fisheries at its own expense. It did not want any
money from the federal government — they did
not want anyone to administer their fisheries but
themselves.
New Brunswick: The Canadian Fisheries
Act and regulations made thereunder apply
to all fisheries and are administered by the
Government of Canada. The provincial
government leases angling privileges in the
non-tidal waters and administers these
leases.
Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island: The
Canadian Fisheries Act and regulations
thereunder apply to all fisheries and are administered by the Government of Canada
in
both tidal and non-tidal waters.
Mr. Bailey You all know we may go into confederation. I do not say I will have anything to do
with it, I may be fishing at the time, but whoever
has to do with the negotiating of it will have to be
very careful with our fisheries. I refer here again
to British Columbia. On the coast of Vancouver
Island in 1935 certain capitalistic concerns got
control from the Canadian government. I was not
able to get the whole story; but I found out that
these trapmen had gotten control of the waters
within the three mile limit and all the handline
fishermen were not allowed inside it. I was told
that RCMP were patrolling the coast. We have
full control over our fisheries, something I
believe we always had. I know something of the
rows between the trawlers and the handline men.
I was told how the trawlers had to get outside the
three mile limit and stay outside. Some of them
had been trawling since 1905-06. Should the
people vote for confederation, I want them to
keep this in mind. There should be a clause
whereby the federal government will not be able
to lease any part of our waters to the detriment of
the fishermen. I want our people, in negotiating
for Newfoundland, whatever they do, not to turn
our fisheries over to remote control. We want to
see that the rights we have always fought for are
kept for us
Mr. Smallwood That is very good advice for the
future government of Newfoundland or someone
in the future. I may say, the practice in the Department of Fisheries of Canada is
this: any regulations they make governing the fisheries ... all the
practical details of fishery, that is left entirely
completely and absolutely to the province. It is
only in other fields that the federal department
exercises its jurisdiction. For instance, you will
find in Quebec and the three Maritime Provinces
it is their practice to regulate the seasons of the
year you may fish and the distance each fishing
gear must be apart from the other; but that is upon
the advice of the local authorities in the provinces, the local interests concerned.
So that if ever
846 NATIONAL CONVENTION November 1947
the people of this country decided to make this
country a province of Canada, in the purely
mechanical, technical and practical terms of the
fishery, it will be the local will that will prevail.
Mr. Bailey That is not what I was given to
understand. That was why I asked down north,
"Why not appeal to your members?" The answer
was, it was outside provincial jurisdiction.
Mr. Chairman As a matter of fact, from
memory... if there is any competition between
the federal and the provincial occupying the same
field, then the right of the province must give way
to the right of the Dominion.
Mr. Bailey As far as I can gather, I know they
were outside and they had no appeal, and when
the Mounted Police came they had to pull out,
because the fishing rights were hired to big canning concerns run by Japanese.
Mr. Reddy Does the Canadian government provide any subsidy for shipbuilding in this country?
Is there a bounty for building schooners for fishing?
Mr. Smallwood I do not think so. I will not
swear to it. That is a provincial matter.
Mr. Reddy In this country the government
provides $95 per ton for building schooners.
Mr. Smallwood Yes, any province of Canada
no doubt could do the same thing.
Mr. Smallwood I said I would not swear to it. If
the House so desires, I could get that information.
Mr. Bailey I think it would be a help if you
would get that information. I know there is a
bounty in Quebec on everything built.
Mr. Smallwood I wonder if the bounty to which
Mr. Crosbie refers is provincial or federal?
Mr. Crosbie It was a federal bounty in 1944. I
do not know if it has been changed since.
Mr. Newell I take it that copies of this Fisheries
Act will be available presently?
Mr. Smallwood It is in the bibliography and
they will be available.
Mr. Chairman Yes, that particular act would be
included and covered by the request already
made, and we are expecting it any day now.
Mr. Chairman Definitely. As I already pointed
out, its proper interpretation might not pemit
otherwise. It might very well be that a clause
might defy interpretation unless and until related
to a preceding clause.
Mr. Job I do not want to delay the House on this
point, but I was looking through the report and
with regard to the export of saltfish from Canada,
there is no information given on that subject. The
point I wanted to make was this. I do not think
Canada exports any fish to the Mediterranean
countries. We do. We have been enabled to do
that almost entirely by our connection with the
United Kingdom. The United Kingdom has supplied us with the sterling exchange, particularly
from Spain, and for some reason or other Canada
has not been participating in that market.
Mr. Job Very little. It is worthwhile looking into
the reason for that. It may be that if we joined up
with Canada, it might affect our relations with
those markets. Formerly Canada was a heavy
shipper to these markets, but they have not been
shipping in recent years.
Mr. Chairman Before we go any further, are
you making a list of the requisitions for information, Mr. Smallwood? I want to make
sure that
each and every request for information is complied with or given to the department
concerned.
They must, of course, first go to the Information
Committee.
Mr. Smallwood Yes. I understand what Mr. Job
wants is a list of the countries to which Canada
exports codfish. I suppose Mr. Job is referring to
salt codfish?
Mr. Job Yes, and more especially the Mediterranean....
Mr. Bailey We have been able to beat them,
either in better selling methods or better fish. I
know two or three markets which Canada held,
where we came in and ousted the Canadians. I
believe we did that in Central America with the
Gaspé fish very lately.
[Short recess]
Mr. Smallwood Sub-section (9): Canada will
take over "Geological, topographical, geodetic
and hydrographic surveys." In that connection I
ask you to turn to Volume 1, page 89:
Mines and Resources
The Mines and Geology Branch conducts
topographical and geological surveys and in
this connection makes use of aerial surveys
carried out by the RCAF. The purpose of
November 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 847
such surveys is to discover and develop the
natural resources of Canada such as minerals,
forests, agriculture, water power, etc. and to
stimulate and assist the development of
mineral resources. The Branch produces
geological maps. It also secures and maintains specimens indicative of the geology,
mineralogy, palaentology, ethnology, flora
and fauna of Canada. It investigates the character of deposits of minerals of economic
and
strategic interest with a view to their exploration and development. It investigates
methods of mining, quarrying, processing,
utilising and marketing mineral products. It
operates physical, metallurgical laboratories
with a view to improving the quality of
metallic products and it undertakes the study
of economic problems affecting the mining
industry. The Branch administers the Explosives Act.
The Surveys and Engineering Branch supervises the work of the Dominion Observatories,
the Geodetic Service of Canada, the
International Boundary Commission, the
Hydrographic and Map service, the Engineering and Construction Service and the
Dominion Water and Power Bureau. The
functions of these various divisions include
time and astronomical services; triangular
and precise levels; the determination and
maintenance of the international boundary;
surveys for the preparation of coastal and
navigation charts; legal surveys and the
preparation and printing of maps and charts;
engineering and construction works relative
to national parks, historic sites and Indian
reserves; the measurement of streams and the
investigation of national water and power
resources.
The Branch renders assistance to provinces under certain circumstances in connection
with the building of roads which are
considered to be of national importance.
Mr. Bailey I wonder if Mr. Smallwood would
also read no. 10 in the Grey Book in connection
with that.
Mr. Smallwood That refers to lighthouses, fog
alarms, etc. That comes directly under the marine
services division of the Department of Transport
and is a different subject altogether. We might
come to that after we pass this one.
Mr. Bailey After you hear what I have to say,
you will understand why I wanted to read the two
together. I think this, above anything else in this
country of ours, is long overdue, especially a
hydrographic survey. The others, I am not going
to touch on; they are outside my jurisdiction. In
fact, I know very little about them. If you notice,
when you pick up a chart of this country, it refers
back to Captain Cook. He is a long time dead. I
must say he did a wonderful job. But I think it is
time someone else did a job. It is long overdue.
There is many a mother and wife whose husband
did not come home, because nobody was interested in what was under the vessel's bottom.
Sometimes the only way to find a depth of water
is to have a wire dragging between two ships with
floats on them. This is long overdue and whether
we have responsible government, commission
government or confederation, the first job is to
get this survey of our coast and Labrador coasts.
The Labrador coast is in the worst condition of
any part of the world. It is a crying shame, especially in a maritime country....
Take the Funks —
nobody knows the fishing ground around the
Funks. I had hopes of bringing this up before, but
I could not work it in.
Mr. Smallwood I have a great deal of sympathy
for what Mr. Bailey says. As a matter of interest,
I took occasion when in Ottawa to go down to the
office where this work is done, and talked with
the men in charge — the men who would be in
charge of the mapping and charting of the coast
of Newfoundland and the coast of Labrador. As
professional men, they were looking forward
with interest to the charting of the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador. But let us
be quite accurate about this. The British Admiralty has
brought Captain Cook's charts up to date; we are
not as far back, in coastal charts. We are a little
more modem than that. But I agree they are
lacking, and need to be brought up to date.
Mr. Ballam I believe had our Commission
government made arrangements with the RCAF
— they had planes stationed in this country, and
did a lot of photography work in the training of
pilots — I cannot see why it could not have been
done. If it had been put before the British government, they would have been only
too glad. We
have not been able to reach anybody in authority
848 NATIONAL CONVENTION November 1947
to do the right thing....
Question: Would the services outlined in
paragraph 36 — also paragraph 37 — (mapping, survey work of all sorts, investigation
of mineral deposits, metallurgy, economic
problems, etc.) apply to Newfoundland, and
how rapidly would it be likely they would be
introduced?
Answer: The services described have
been carried on for many years and would
undoubtedly be extended to Newfoundland
under present federal policy, although not all
of them are, strictly speaking, federal responsibilities. For example, the federal
government is obligated by Statute to carry out
geological surveys in Prince Edward Island,
Manitoba and British Columbia. No such
obligation exists in respect of other Provinces.
Would Mr. Smallwood like to explain that?
Mr. Smallwood If you turn to page 23, it says,
"It is expected that all the above services could
be extended to Newfoundland promptly."
Mr. Smallwood Further on in the Grey Book
there is a clause where they undertake to do this
with extra speed and promptness to Newfoundland.
Mr. Ashbourne I would like to point out on
page 22 it says "The recharting of Newfoundland
coasts is one of the most urgent survey projects
required. Newfoundland's fishing industry badly
needs up-to-date hydrographic charts...." That
would be, I take it, the surveying of the Banks
and the other places around the coast which
would be most beneficial to our fishermen who,
it seems, will have to go further offshore in the
future to obtain more remunerative voyages,
probably when inshore codfishery proves a
failure, and the carrying out of this work is
obligated by the terms; that they would take over
these surveys is an important item in the terms.
Mr. Smallwood Sub-section (10). The Government of Canada would take over "Lighthouses, fog alarms,
buoys, beacons and other
public works and services in aid of navigation
and shipping." I would ask you to turn to Volume
1, page 94.
[2] You will notice these matters come
under two different departments of the Government of Canada; strictly marine works
come
under the marine services division of the Department of Transport, and others come
under the
Department of Public Works...
I said they come under two departments — it
is really three departments, the Department of
Public Works; the marine services of the Department of Transport; and the National
Harbours
Board looks after such harbours as are designated
to be National Harbours, From memory, I would
say there are 16 harbours which have been designated as National Harbours and one
harbour at
least, maybe two harbours in Newfoundland
would be designated as National Harbours were
we to become a province.
[Mr. Smallwood then read the section of the
Black Book dealing with the Marine Services
Branch]
All marine works are federal in function and
operation. Thus we have it here in section 10 —
"Lighthouses, fog alarms, buoys, beacons and
other public works and services in aid of navigation and shipping" — all marine works
are
federal in character. The federal government
pays the employees, and pays the costs and expenses of all these maine works. It would
make
your mouth water to hear the amounts spent, the
amounts voted year after year for marine works.
It is ladled in there. Last year I think they spent
in the three Maritime provinces $5-6 million.
That is the normal thing every year to keep up
public wharves, breakwaters, viaducts,
aqueducts, lighthouses, harbour improvements,
dredging. We, living in a maritime country, need
these things so badly.
Mr. Bailey Have you any data on breakwaters
in the provinces?
Mr. Smallwood I have not got it handy now —
I can give you the actual amount voted year by
year by the Parliament of Canada for these purposes.
Mr. Bailey Looking back, and looking at other
countries around the world, I think from 1900 to
1929 we could hold our head high with regard to
navigation aids, especially during the Monroe
government when Captain Winsor was Minister
of Marine and Fisheries. Take our country as it
November 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 849
was in those days; I do not think we had anything
to be ashamed of along the line of beacons and
buoys and lighthouses, considering what the
revenue was. Since the Commission of Government came into power, I know of only one
lighthouse put on our east coast. I have been out of
this country most of the time since Commission
government came into power. I hope whatever
government we get will remember its first duty is
to keep up what our people did in the past. I am
sure that those who were in responsible government days have to be proud of what they
did in
this respect.
Mr. Butt In the estimated expenditures, marine
works, 1947-1948 there is the amount of
$670,000.
Mr. Smallwood I am glad Mr. Butt mentioned
that. I do not remember offhand what this present
government has spent on lighthouses in the last
few years; but on marine works generally they
have spent immense amounts — breakwaters and
harbour improvements made in the last four or
five years, it is a striking amount. I cannot answer
for lighthouses. I do not know if any or many have
been built or improved. What they did spend,
they spent during the last two or three years.
Before the war they did not have it to spend. If
the amounts spent each year by the Government
of Canada in the Maritime provinces on these
things can be taken as an example, I think we
could figure on something over $1 million on
marine works to be spent in Newfoundland for a
good many years. We have today something like
300 public wharves. We have public launchways,
public slipways, I think we have between 150 and
200. Many of them have been swept away or gone
into a bad state of disrepair. There will have to be
an awful lot of money spent on marine works to
bring them up to a half-decent standard.
Mr. Bailey You mean we had them. I can point
to one in Hants' Harbour where the marks only
are left; you have to look for stumps. There was
an $80,000 wharf in Hearts' Content — where is
it? There is one in New Perlican and I dare you
to put a horse on it. They have spent a few dollars
in Winterton. The breakwaters in Bay de Verde
and Bonavista are memorials to the Commission
of Government. They have been sadly neglected.
Mr. Smallwood Sub-section (11). Canada will
take over "Marine hospitals, quarantine and the
care of ship-wrecked crews."
I have nothing to add to that. I do not remember anything in the Black Books. The
only thing
I would add is that we have one marine hospital
in Newfoundland. That would become a federal
hospital, paid for and operated by the federal
government; quarantine and care of shipwrecked
crews.
Mr. Bailey I do not think we should pass that
without giving credit. I have been hospitalised in
many countries; I have had occasion at times to
get medical attention for men, and I can pat the
authorities on the back, both past and present, for
the care given shipwrecked crews in this island.
I believe in the care of shipwrecked crews — we
had a case of it on Sacred Island
[1] — those men
will not forget they were shipwrecked in Newfoundland. I can tell our people, those
men who
had the misfortune to be hospitalised or
shipwrecked here; wherever I have been in this
world, that has been brought up, the general
hospitality and kindliness of the people of Newfoundland.
Mr. Smallwood Sub-section (12). Canada will
take over "The public radio broadcasting system"
— that is, the Broadcasting Corporation of Newfoundland. I do not know if there is
anything in
the Black Books. The Broadcasting Corporation
of Newfoundland would become part of the
Canadian Broadcasting Commission. Although it
would be owned and operated by the Canadian
Broadcasting Commission, it would remain —
we were assured of that — that although it would
be taken over and operated by the CBC, it would
remain in many ways what it is today; and so far
as being a Newfoundland station, it would remain
entirely what it is today. The main difference
would be that the employees would be federal,
paid by the CBC, and stations of the Corporation
would carry the Canada news roundup, Canadian
news broadcasts, national news and international
news. Any programmes originating in Newfoundland, interesting enough to carry on the
CBC throughout Canada, would be carried
throughout Canada. Then when politics came up,
general elections and so on, the speeches of the
leaders of the political parties would be broadcast
on our stations at the same time as on all stations
throughout Canada. Except for these things, our
station would go right on as though confederation
850 NATIONAL CONVENTION November 1947
had never come at all. There is no intention of
trying to Canadianise us. They are quite happy
for us to remain Newfoundlanders. We will have
our own programmes, our own local news, our
own Newfoundland broadcasting.
Mr. Job What about the assets of the Broadcasting Corporation? It is a flourishing concern
with
a cash surplus. It is a nice present for them if they
take it over.
Mr. Smallwood That is only chickenfeed,
$100,000, compared with the Newfoundland
Railway and the Newfoundland Hotel.
Mr. Fogwill Would privately owned broadcasting stations be issued licenses to continue?
Mr. Smallwood No doubt of that. It is done
throughout Canada. All existing radio stations
would go on as usual.
Mr. Hickman Might I ask if the delegation did
bring up the question of independently owned
stations such as VOCM, and do they know
whether they will be allowed to operate or not?
Mr. Smallwood It was not brought up in view
of the fact that throughout Canada there are
probably two privately owned stations for every
public station. There was no need to bring it up.
It is quite obvious that they have privately owned
stations. They have private stations in Nova
Scotia, in British Columbia — why not in Newfoundland? One thing they have not done
in
Canada, the government has not permitted
provincial governments to operate their own stations.
Mr. Chairman I do not want to get into the
realm of legal interpretation, but certainly in the
light of the words "the public radio broadcasting
system," it must of necessity exclude the others.
Mr. Hickman I was not referring to that. I notice
that no others were mentioned.
Mr. Hickman I am not going to accept Mr.
Smallwood's interpretation, what he thinks; there
may be some control of wattage in those stations;
I merely asked for information. I do not want an
answer, "It is perfectly obvious". It is not obvious
to me.
Mr. Smallwood I did not say it was obvious to
Mr. Hickman. What I said was, the reason the
delegation did not raise the question was that, to
them, it was obvious. I would suggest we give
notice of question; let us get the official answer
from the Government of Canada. Let us have a
question directed to the Government of Canada
on whether or not privately owned stations would
continue; whether licenses to them would be
issued; what is their policy with regard to power
for privately owned stations.
Mr. Bailey I wonder if the delegation made any
investigation as to whether Newfoundland, if and
when she went into confederation, could hold
control of the broadcasting station?
Mr. Smallwood Yes, we did. What we were up
against was the fact of a definite, categorical
policy of the Government of Canada not to allow
provincial governments to operate radio stations.
Members who have been following the modern
history of Canada will remember probably why
that is. Mr. Duplessis in Quebec wanted to start
a provincial government station, the federal
government stepped on it, would not allow it.
They could not allow one, if they did not allow
another. They adopted that categorical policy.
Two stations, yes, but no provincial-owned stations.
[Short recess]
Mr. Smallwood If no one has any comment to
make that Canada would take over the public
radio broadcasting system, I can pass on. Subsection (13). Canada would take over
"Other
public services similar in kind to those provided
at the union for the people of Canada generally."
That is just a blanket clause. They could not list
all the public services; they put in a blanket clause
to cover the rest. If there is no comment, I might
pass on to clause 6.
Canada will pay the salary of the
Lieutenant-Governor and the salaries, allowances and pensions of superior court
judges and of judges of district and county
courts, if and when established.
There is only one thing I have to say. Under
confederation there is only one governor in
Canada, the Governor-General. Each province
has a Lieutenant-Governor. He is appointed by
the Governor-General on the advice of his ministers, that is the cabinet of Canada.
His salary is
paid by the Government of Canada. His appointment runs from five to ten years. Some
of them
resign before that time; some are re-appointed,
and so on. They would pay the salaries, allowances and pensions of superior court
judges, and
that means, in our case, Supreme Court judges.
And they would pay the salaries, allowances and
November 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 851
pensions of judges of district and county courts.
Mr. Smallwood We have one Central District
Court; we have not a county court. If and when
they are established, the judges in them would be
paid by the Government of Canada. Now, the
constituting of the county courts is left to the
province. The province constitutes the county
courts; divides the county into as many districts
as it desires, and provides for the creation of a
county court, but it is the federal government
which appoints the judges and pays their salaries.
It is not much use for the provinces to create
county courts unless they know the federal
government will fill the courts with judges and
pay their salaries. I pointed out how many
magistrates we had in Newfoundland and suggested, jokingly, that we could have every
magistrate we now have in a magistrate's district;
we could then create a county court and leave it
to the federal government to provide magistrates
by appointing them as county court judges. There
was a laugh. They said, "You can not go the
whole hog." On the basis of other provinces, we
would be entitled to six or eight or ten county
court judges, therefore that many county courts.
Their salaries, allowances and pensions would be
paid by the Government of Canada, if and when
established.
Mr. Crosbie Are Grand Falls and Corner Brook
included in district courts?
Mr. Chairman No. We have only one district
court as such — the Central District Court in St.
John's. All other district courts are magistrates
courts. To illustrate what I mean, take Judge
Browne, he occupies a unique position in the
sense that when he sits on criminal matters, he
sits as a magistrate of the St. John's Magistrate's
Court. In any civil claims, in the case of debt or
liquidation, demanding up to $200, then he sits
as judge of the Central District Court. That does
not apply to any other magistrate. As opposed to
that, the county court system is a midway position
between the magistrate system and our Supreme
Court. For example, in the Magistrate's Court or
in the Central District Court of St. John's, for that
matter, if your claim exceeds $200, it automatically must go into the Supreme Court.
Were we
to have the county court system, the county court
would have jurisdiction in the case of debt and
liquidation up to $1,000. In the case of criminal
matters, they would be able to try certain offences, other than capital offences such
as murder,
treason, etc., by a system of speedy trial.
Mr. Smallwood There were three questions we
asked the Government of Canada when we were
up there. Volume 2, page 17.
[1]
Maintenance of Courts
Question: Does the federal contribution to
the cost of such courts end with the payment
of the judges' salaries, of if not, what other
contributions are made?
Answer: The federal government pays
salaries, travelling allowances and annuities
of the above mentioned judges.
Appointment of Judges
Question: Must judges invariably be
lawyers?
Answer: Under the BNA Act, sections 97
and 98, the judges of the courts of the original
provinces are selected from the respective
bars of the provinces. The Judges Act, 1946,
provides that: "No person is eligible to be
appointed a judge of a superior, circuit, or
county court in any province unless, in addition to other requirements prescribed
by law,
he is a barrister or advocate of at least ten
years' standing at the bar of any province."
Admiralty Courts
Question: There are at present six such
district judges in Admiralty. Would Newfoundland become entitled to have one?
Answer: Under the Admiralty Act, 1934,
the Admiralty districts are constituted in all
the provinces of Canada, except the three
Prairie provinces. From its geographical
position Newfoundland would no doubt be
constituted an Admiralty district.
Mr. Crosbie It is not clear to me who would pay
the salaries of judges in Corner Brook and Grand
Falls and other places in Newfoundland. In many
places, magistrates are not solicitors or barristers.
Would they be removed from their jobs and
replaced by barristers and solicitors?
Mr. Smallwood They would in such cases
where county courts were established.
Mr. Chairman You had better qualify that.
There are certain magistrates who are lawyers;
even then to become a county judge, you must
have ten years practice. The magistrate may be a
852 NATIONAL CONVENTION November 1947
legally trained man, but he would not be able to
comply with the other requirements — namely
10 years practice before the bar. Put it this way;
if he is not a lawyer or legally trained man, he is
out. Even if he is, unless he happens to have ten
years experience he cannot qualify for a county
or superior court appointment. Were any sections
which are now administered by magistrate courts
re-constituted into county courts, and the
magistrate could not comply with the two requirements, I assume they would be automatically
out and have to be replaced by some person
who could comply with the statutory requirements.
Mr. Smallwood I think what would likely happen is this: we now have courts of justice, these
courts are mainly magistrates courts around the
island. Some of them are occupied by magistrates
who happen to be lawyers. The tendency on the
part of the provincial governments is to have as
many county courts as possible, because the
provincial government would not have to pay
their salaries. They would try to push as many as
possible on to the federal government. What
would happen is, in certain districts where they
have lawyers as magistrates, they would be constituted county courts; or if no lawyer,
then the
magistrate would be shifted to a district which
would still be a magistrate's district and a lawyer
put in his place.
Mr. Chairman For all practical reasons, Grand
Falls, Corner Brook and Bell Island would undoubtedly follow the practice employed
in the
Maritimes. As I know it, and I have been a
member of that bar for 14 years, these would
become county courts.
Mr. Crosbie I am not satisfied. Who pays the
salaries of these other magistrates?
Mr. Smallwood The province pays the salaries
of all magistrates who are not federal judges or
magistrates. The federal government pays all
county court judges. Naturally they would try to
have as many federal judges as possible and as
few provincial judges as possible.
Mr. Chairman The answer to Mr. Crosbie's
question is that magistrates would be paid by the
provincial government.
Mr. Smallwood I wonder could we read the
next clause? I do not suggest we want to finish
the debate or begin the debate on it.
Mr. Crosbie I would suggest that we start that
tomorrow.
Mr. Chairman As Mr. Crosbie and Mr.
Smallwood point out, perhaps it would be just as
well, if suitable to members, to defer the reading
of the next clause until tomorrow.
[The committee rose and reported progress. The
remaining orders of the day were deferred]
Mr. Hickman I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask His Excellency the Governor to ascertain
from the Government of Canada whether in the
event of confederation the Clarenville vessels
would remain in the ownership of Newfoundland.
[The Convention adjourned]
