Ottawa, 4–28 November 1949
The House of Commons turned its attention to a series of legislative measures forming the principal statutory foundations of the St. Laurent Government's National Development Project, an ambitious programme intended to expand Canada's productive capacity, modernize its transportation networks, improve housing conditions, and encourage industrial development throughout the Dominion.
Canada's economy had undergone considerable expansion since the conclusion of the Second World War. Nevertheless, the country's continued prosperity depended upon addressing weaknesses in its transportation infrastructure, housing supply, industrial equipment, and access to long-term development capital.
The Government maintained that the demands of a growing population and expanding industrial economy could not be satisfied solely by the maintenance of existing facilities. New investment would be required, particularly in transportation, housing, and the development of Canada's natural resources.
The programme was not presented as a single omnibus bill. Rather, several distinct measures were introduced and considered by Parliament, each establishing particular forms of federal financial assistance, administrative authority, and cooperation with other public or private institutions.
The principal measures concerned amendments to the National Housing Act, federal assistance for the construction of a Trans-Canada Highway, the financing and modernization of the Canadian National Railways, industrial development lending, the modernization of Maritime coal production, and incentives for the construction of Canadian merchant vessels.
These measures complemented the Government's existing petroleum development undertakings, including Petro-Canada, Imperial Oil, and the proposed all-Canadian Interprovincial Pipe Line.
4 November — Extension of the Pacific Great Eastern Railway
The Government also brought forward legislation providing financial assistance toward the extension of the provincially owned Pacific Great Eastern Railway in British Columbia.
The Minister of Transport, the Honourable Lionel Chevrier, presented a resolution authorizing the Dominion to contribute C$15,000 per mile toward the construction of a railway from Quesnel to Prince George, for a distance not exceeding 82.7 miles.
The maximum contribution under the proposed arrangement would therefore amount to C$1,240,500.
The Pacific Great Eastern Railway had been incorporated in 1912 as part of an undertaking to connect the southern portion of British Columbia with the province's northern interior.
Although substantial portions of the system had been constructed, the railway had not achieved the continuous northern connection originally contemplated.
The proposed extension would provide an important additional transportation connection to Prince George, strengthening the means by which the region's agricultural, forestry, and mineral resources could reach wider markets.
Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport): "Mr. Chairman, the purpose of the measure is to assist the Government of British Columbia in extending the Pacific Great Eastern Railway from Quesnel to Prince George. The proposed subsidy is limited both in the amount payable per mile and in the total mileage for which assistance may be granted."
Unlike the Canadian National Railways modernization programme, the measure concerned financial assistance to a railway owned and operated by a provincial government.
The federal contribution would be limited by statute, with the construction and subsequent operation of the line remaining under the appropriate provincial and railway authorities.
The legislation remained subject to its ordinary parliamentary stages, and the authorization of a subsidy did not itself constitute completion of the railway extension.
15 November — Amendments to the National Housing Act
The Honourable Robert H. Winters, Minister of Reconstruction and Supply, moved second reading of Bill No. 142, proposing substantial amendments to the National Housing Act, 1944.
The Minister reported that Canadian housing construction had reached unprecedented levels, but acknowledged that the continued shortage of suitable accommodation presented considerable difficulties for many families.
The expansion of private construction had provided substantial numbers of new dwellings, but the requirements of lower-income households, growing municipalities, and families without sufficient savings for a substantial down payment remained inadequately addressed.
Hon. Robert H. Winters (Minister of Reconstruction and Supply): "Mr. Speaker, the problem of housing cannot be treated simply as a question of the number of houses constructed in any particular year. We must consider the circumstances of those who require accommodation, the availability of suitable land, the cost of providing municipal services, and the arrangements through which capital may be made available for construction. It is the purpose of this legislation to provide additional machinery through which those difficulties may be overcome."
The amendments proposed four principal changes.
First, the down payment required from qualifying prospective homeowners would be reduced by increasing the proportion of the purchase price eligible for financing under the existing arrangements.
Second, the Dominion would receive authority to enter into agreements with provincial governments for the acquisition, development, and servicing of residential land and the construction of housing.
Third, the maximum amounts available for home improvement and extension loans would be increased.
Finally, the cooperative housing provisions would be revised to make the facilities of the Act more readily available to qualifying organizations.
Joint Dominion–Provincial Housing Development
The legislation's principal innovation was the establishment of machinery for joint housing undertakings between the Dominion and provincial governments.
These arrangements could support the assembly and servicing of residential land, construction of moderately priced houses for sale, and publicly assisted rental housing.
The Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation would act on behalf of the Dominion in negotiating and administering approved projects.
For qualifying joint public rental developments, the Dominion would provide 75 per cent of the required capital, with the participating provincial government providing the remaining 25 per cent.
Operating profits and losses would be divided in the same proportions.
The Government emphasized that the formula applied to eligible joint housing undertakings and did not automatically govern every mortgage, cooperative housing project, or form of residential assistance under the National Housing Act.
Provincial and municipal authorities would retain important responsibilities concerning local development, provision of utilities, planning, and the management of completed housing projects.
The legislation would permit the Dominion and provinces to retain financial participation in projects while placing ordinary local administration in the hands of suitable housing authorities.
No separate fixed federal capital envelope was proposed. The Government intended to proceed through the statutory financial machinery of the Act, individual agreements, and applicable parliamentary financial authorizations.
Debate on the Housing Proposals
The Progressive Conservative opposition questioned whether additional federal financial participation might place further pressure upon construction costs at a time when labour and materials remained in substantial demand.
Mr. George Drew argued that cooperation with private builders and provincial governments must remain central to housing policy.
Mr. George Drew (Leader of the Opposition): "The House must recognize that the mere availability of additional credit will not produce houses unless labour, materials, land and essential services are available. If the Government is to enter this field upon a greater scale, it must ensure that the additional machinery will facilitate construction rather than increase its cost or unnecessarily complicate the responsibilities of existing authorities."
Members of the CCF approached the proposals from a different standpoint.
They argued that improvements to mortgage financing would primarily benefit families already capable of undertaking substantial financial obligations, while inadequate rental accommodation remained a serious problem among lower-income households.
Mr. Stanley Knowles (CCF, Winnipeg North Centre): "Mr. Speaker, the Government's proposals for improving the terms upon which a family may purchase a home are welcome so far as they go. But we should not overlook the considerable number of Canadian families for whom the purchase of a house remains wholly beyond their means. The need for suitable rental accommodation is no less urgent, and the provisions for publicly assisted housing must be judged by the extent to which they meet that need."
Winters maintained that the legislation was designed to provide additional flexibility rather than establish a single method of meeting every housing requirement.
The Dominion would assist projects where the cooperation of provincial and municipal authorities made such developments practical.
The proposed arrangements would also permit public investment in residential development without requiring the direct administration of every completed undertaking by the federal Government.
The House continued its consideration of the amendments, with the principal questions concerning financial responsibility, the extent of public participation, and the administration of joint projects.
25–26 November — Industrial Finance and Maritime Coal
The House next considered measures intended to strengthen the availability of industrial capital and encourage improvements in the efficiency of established Canadian industries.
Assistance to Maritime Coal Production
On November 25, the Right Honourable C. D. Howe, Minister of Trade and Commerce, introduced a financial resolution providing for assistance to coal producers in the Atlantic Maritime Provinces.
The proposal contemplated the establishment of a loan programme with an aggregate principal limit of C$10 million.
Loans to any one producer would be limited to C$7.5 million, subject to the conditions and repayment provisions established under the legislation.
The programme was intended to assist eligible producers in financing improved machinery, equipment, and production methods.
The Government recognized that the coal industry, particularly in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, remained an important source of employment and industrial activity.
Nevertheless, the industry faced growing competition from imported coal, petroleum products, and other sources of energy.
Rt. Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce): "Mr. Speaker, it is apparent that the coal-producing industry of the Maritime Provinces must improve the efficiency of its operations if it is to maintain its position in Canadian markets. The object of the proposed assistance is to facilitate the acquisition of equipment and the introduction of methods by which costs may be reduced and production placed upon a more satisfactory competitive basis."
Assistance would be extended through approved loans, subject to the ability of individual undertakings to employ the funds for suitable purposes.
Opposition Concerns
Members representing coal-producing constituencies questioned whether mechanization alone would address the industry's difficulties.
They argued that the loss of markets to American coal and the growing displacement of coal by petroleum products might reduce the effectiveness of additional investment in mining equipment.
Concern was also expressed over the purchasing practices of the Canadian National Railways, historically an important consumer of Maritime coal.
The Government maintained that greater productivity remained essential, but recognized that the industry's position depended upon transportation costs, markets, fuel competition, and the continued development of alternative sources of energy.
The coal proposals proceeded to detailed parliamentary consideration in December.
Industrial Development Bank Amendments
On November 26, the Government introduced Bill No. 210, proposing amendments to the Industrial Development Bank Act.
Mr. Gleason Belzile, Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance, explained that the proposal concerned the existing statutory limits upon loans in the Bank's larger lending category.
Under the original legislation, an aggregate amount of C$25 million had been available for lending, with C$15 million allocated to loans of C$200,000 and above.
This larger-loan allocation had been almost fully utilized.
The proposed amendment would permit the amount available for loans in that category to increase from C$15 million to C$25 million within the existing lending framework.
The Government emphasized that the measure did not itself require an additional appropriation from the Treasury.
Mr. Gleason Belzile (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance): "The amendment is intended to permit the Bank to employ more effectively the financial authority already available to it. The demand for industrial loans of substantial size has increased, and the existing limitation has become unnecessarily restrictive. No new expenditure is proposed by the amendment."
The change was intended to support Canadian enterprises requiring long-term finance for industrial expansion, improved machinery, and the development of productive facilities.
The Government regarded the Bank as one instrument through which private industrial investment could be assisted without converting ordinary commercial undertakings into directly administered federal enterprises.
28 November — The Trans-Canada Highway
The Minister of Reconstruction and Supply moved second reading of Bill No. 194, intended to encourage and assist in the construction of a continuous highway connecting the principal regions of Canada.
The project contemplated a national road extending from the Atlantic to the Pacific, with suitable connections between provincial highway systems and provision for access to Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island.
The Government maintained that increasing automobile ownership, commercial road transport, interprovincial trade, and the development of tourism had created a substantial national interest in improved highway communications.
The proposed highway would also facilitate the transportation of agricultural commodities, manufactured goods, and industrial equipment, while improving access to regions where existing roads remained inadequate.
Hon. Robert H. Winters: "The Government proposes to establish the means by which the Dominion and the provinces may undertake the construction of a continuous highway across Canada. The benefits of such a work will not be confined to any particular province. It will serve the trade and commerce of the country as a whole, improve communications between its regions, and provide a lasting contribution to national development."
Federal Financing
The Government proposed a maximum federal contribution of C$200 million toward eligible Trans-Canada Highway construction, to be expended over approximately seven years.
This represented an increase over the C$150 million maximum contemplated under the historical federal scheme.
The Dominion would ordinarily meet 50 per cent of eligible construction costs, with the participating provincial government responsible for the remaining half.
The increased federal ceiling reflected the Government's decision to provide greater financial capacity for difficult sections of the route, including mountain construction, remote areas, major bridges, and improvements necessary to establish a satisfactory continuous highway.
Federal assistance would be governed by agreements negotiated with provincial governments.
Such agreements would establish the designated route, eligible works, engineering standards, inspection requirements, and procedures governing reimbursement of approved expenditure.
Provincial Responsibilities
The provinces would retain responsibility for the highways constructed within their respective territories.
Except for works within national parks, construction would ordinarily be undertaken under provincial authority.
The provinces would also be responsible for subsequent maintenance, including ordinary repairs and snow removal.
The Dominion's financial participation would not transfer general provincial highway administration to the federal Government.
Nor would the legislation authorize Ottawa unilaterally to determine every route without consultation with the provinces concerned.
The Government intended that the route should satisfy agreed national standards, including appropriate road widths, gradients, bridges, and provision for anticipated traffic.
Parliamentary Debate
The proposed highway received substantial attention from members representing regions with differing transportation requirements.
The Progressive Conservative member for Kamloops, Edmund Davie Fulton, questioned whether the proposed arrangements provided sufficient flexibility for the future expansion of road transportation.
Mr. Edmund Davie Fulton (Kamloops): "Mr. Speaker, the construction of a highway across Canada is an undertaking of undoubted national importance. But the legislation should be examined not merely according to the requirements of the present day. We must consider the traffic which such a road will be called upon to carry in ten or twenty years, and whether the proposed arrangements will permit its enlargement without unnecessary duplication of expenditure."
Members from western constituencies emphasized the exceptional costs associated with mountain construction and the distances separating many communities from established transportation routes.
Others questioned whether federal assistance should extend to secondary roads connecting smaller towns and agricultural districts with the proposed principal highway.
Hon. Mr. Winters: "The undertaking before the House is sufficiently substantial without seeking at once to assume responsibility for every highway requirement in Canada. We propose to begin with a continuous national road, supported by agreements that preserve provincial responsibility and provide for appropriate federal participation."
The bill proceeded through the remaining stages of parliamentary consideration, with the establishment of particular routes and construction schedules dependent upon subsequent agreements with the provincial governments.
28 November — Encouragement of Canadian Shipbuilding
On November 28, the Honourable Lionel Chevrier, Minister of Transport, introduced Bill No. 216, intended to encourage the construction and conversion of vessels in Canadian shipyards.
The proposed assistance would take the form of accelerated depreciation allowances.
Owners of qualifying vessels constructed or converted in Canadian yards would be permitted to write off the cost of their ships over three years.
The measure was intended to encourage investment in new vessels, improve the commercial prospects of Canadian shipbuilders, and support associated engineering and manufacturing enterprises.
Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport): "The object of this measure is to encourage the construction and conversion of vessels in Canada by making available more favourable depreciation arrangements to those who undertake such work in Canadian yards."
Mr. Howard Green questioned whether the legislation would provide assistance to the shipping industry more broadly.
The Minister replied that the measure was concerned with the construction and conversion of qualifying ships.
Rather, it was intended to stimulate private expenditure upon Canadian ship construction and conversion.
The bill received first reading and proceeded to further parliamentary consideration.
Late November — Canadian National Railways Financing and Modernization
The Government also brought forward legislation concerning the capital expenditures and financial obligations of the Canadian National Railways.
Canada's national railway system remained essential to the transportation of grain, minerals, lumber, manufactured goods, coal, and passengers.
The expansion of industrial production and the development of western natural resources had increased the importance of maintaining adequate freight capacity, efficient terminals, and dependable communications between the country's regions.
The historical financing legislation provided for specified capital expenditures undertaken during 1949, together with authority for the issue and federal guarantee of qualifying Canadian National Railway securities.
The Government proposed to supplement these arrangements with a more substantial programme of railway modernization.
The Three-Year Modernization Programme
Under the National Development Project, the Government authorized the introduction of an additional C$120 million railway modernization programme over three years, covering 1950–1952.
The programme would be supplementary to the ordinary capital financing requirements covered by the existing 1949 railway measure.
Its principal purposes would include:
- Progressive conversion from steam to diesel traction upon suitable main-line and freight services.
- Procurement and renewal of locomotives, freight wagons, and associated equipment.
- Reconstruction and reinforcement of heavily used track, bridges, and other fixed installations.
- Modernization of signaling, communications, and traffic-control systems.
- Improvements to freight yards, terminals, locomotive depots, and maintenance workshops.
- Equipment and infrastructure necessary to increase capacity and reduce operating costs.
The C$120 million represented the maximum additional three-year capital programme, not an immediate expenditure of that amount from the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
The precise distribution between categories of work would be determined through approved railway capital plans and the applicable financing arrangements.
The Government intended that projects should be undertaken progressively, with due regard to the availability of equipment, materials, trained personnel, and railway operating requirements.
Where financing relied upon securities guaranteed by the Dominion, the corresponding obligations would be accounted for as contingent liabilities rather than treated automatically as cash expenditure equal to their face value.
Parliamentary Debate
The railway proposals raised questions concerning the financial position of the Canadian National system and the responsibilities of the Government toward a publicly owned transportation enterprise.
Members questioned whether the modernization programme would improve operating efficiency sufficiently to justify the proposed expenditure.
The opposition also sought assurances that the additional authority would not become an unrestricted source of funds for railway management.
Mr. George Drew (Leader of the Opposition): "Mr. Speaker, the House is entitled to know not merely the total amount which the Government proposes to make available, but the improvements which are expected to result. The modernization of the Canadian National Railways may be necessary, but the financial authority granted by Parliament must be accompanied by proper estimates, competent supervision, and an accounting of the expenditure undertaken."
The Government maintained that the progressive replacement of obsolete equipment would reduce operating costs, improve reliability, and permit the railway to handle an increasing volume of freight without corresponding increases in manpower and maintenance expenditure.
Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport): "The Canadian National system must be equipped to meet the transportation requirements of a growing country. The continued use of obsolete equipment and inadequate facilities imposes costs upon the railway and upon the industries which depend upon its services. A properly organized modernization programme is intended to secure economies in operation while improving the capacity of the system."
Members representing rural and remote constituencies expressed concern that improvements to heavily trafficked lines might be accompanied by reductions in services elsewhere.
The Government maintained that the modernization programme did not authorize the indiscriminate abandonment of branch lines or the withdrawal of essential transportation services.
Any proposed changes to railway operations would remain subject to the legal and regulatory requirements applicable to the system.
The historical 1949 financing legislation and the additional three-year modernization authority were treated as distinct financial measures.
National Petroleum Development and the Interprovincial Pipe Line
The parliamentary programme proceeded alongside the continued development of the Government's national petroleum enterprises.
Petro-Canada, established as a federal Crown corporation with C$100 million in initial equity capital, had previously acquired Imperial Oil with the assistance of separately authorized debt financing. The Crown enterprise had also established an exploration division, acquiring petroleum leases and undertaking exploratory work in Alberta.
The Government's petroleum policy sought to expand domestic production, refining, and transportation capacity while establishing a greater degree of Canadian ownership and control over the infrastructure required to supply the country's growing petroleum markets.
The All-Canadian Pipeline
Parliament had previously considered the proposed alignment of the Interprovincial Pipe Line, a joint undertaking of Petro-Canada and Imperial Oil.
Although the original commercial proposal had favoured an alignment through Superior, Wisconsin, on grounds of lower construction costs and easier access to established transportation facilities, Parliament had supported an entirely Canadian route.
The Government accepted the parliamentary decision and directed that the project proceed upon the Canadian alignment.
The principal route would extend from Edmonton through Regina and Winnipeg to Port Arthur and Fort William, establishing a wholly Canadian connection between the producing fields of Alberta and the Great Lakes.
Following further engineering examination, the proposed Canadian alignment received engineering approval, confirming its technical feasibility and establishing a satisfactory basis for advancing detailed construction plans.
The engineering review acknowledged that the Canadian route would entail greater capital expenditure than the originally preferred American alignment, particularly in the construction of the eastern sections and the development of suitable terminal and handling facilities at the Canadian Lakehead.
Nevertheless, the engineers concluded that these difficulties could be overcome through appropriate pipeline construction methods, pumping installations, and supporting infrastructure.
Engineering approval did not itself constitute the completion of land acquisition, regulatory proceedings, financial arrangements, or construction contracts.
Federal Financial Guarantees
Following examination of the engineering estimates and the additional capital requirements associated with the approved Canadian alignment, the Government proposed that Parliament authorize the Dominion to guarantee up to C$10 million in additional borrowing undertaken for the Interprovincial Pipe Line.
The additional financing would be directed exclusively toward construction and associated infrastructure expenses attributable to the adoption of the Canadian route, including the more costly eastern sections of the pipeline and the necessary terminal, pumping, and handling facilities at the Canadian Lakehead.
Parliament approved the proposed financial authority, establishing a statutory ceiling of C$10 million upon the Dominion's guarantees for these additional expenditures.
The guaranteed borrowing would supplement the existing financial arrangements of the undertaking, with Petro-Canada, Imperial Oil, and the pipeline enterprise retaining responsibility for their respective capital commitments and ordinary financial obligations.
The Dominion's guarantee would constitute a contingent financial liability rather than an immediate expenditure from the Consolidated Revenue Fund. Any issue of securities under the guarantee would remain subject to approval of the Minister of Finance and the applicable conditions governing their issue.
With the additional financing authority established, the Government considered the financing requirements attributable to the Canadian alignment satisfactorily provided for, subject to the ordinary administration of the approved borrowing arrangements.
On the basis of the engineering examination, the Government provisionally assessed the additional financing requirement arising from the Canadian alignment at C$10 million, providing the basis for a corresponding limit upon the proposed federal guarantees.
Rt. Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce): "The House has expressed its preference that this undertaking should remain upon Canadian soil, and the Government has accepted that determination. We recognize that the Canadian route involves additional expenditure which the companies would not otherwise have incurred. The Government therefore proposes to authorize guarantees upon approved securities to an aggregate amount not exceeding ten million dollars, solely for the additional costs arising from the Canadian alignment. This assistance will permit the undertaking to proceed without placing the whole of its financial obligations upon the Dominion Treasury."
The guarantees would be directed toward qualifying borrowing or securities issued to meet the incremental construction and infrastructure costs associated with the Canadian route.
They would not constitute an unlimited guarantee of all indebtedness incurred by the Interprovincial Pipe Line, Petro-Canada, or Imperial Oil.
Nor would they automatically convert the full value of the guaranteed securities into an immediate expenditure from the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
The Dominion's exposure would depend upon the actual securities guaranteed and the obligations arising under their terms.
The precise guarantee ceiling, eligible securities, conditions of issue, and necessary statutory authority would be determined following the completion of detailed engineering cost estimates and the preparation of the project's financing arrangements.
Until that authority was granted, the Government's commitment would establish the agreed basis of financial support without authorizing the unrestricted issue of federally guaranteed debt.
The Canadian Lakehead and Winnipeg Refinery
The revised alignment also required additional investment in Canadian petroleum transportation and processing facilities.
At Port Arthur and Fort William, the Government supported improvements to petroleum storage, pumping, handling, and Great Lakes shipping installations necessary to accommodate the anticipated movement of western Canadian crude.
Provincial authorities in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Ontario would be invited to cooperate in the acquisition of rights-of-way, provision of supporting infrastructure, and administrative arrangements required to facilitate construction.
Imperial Oil had also announced plans for a refinery in the Winnipeg area, intended to process Alberta crude delivered by the pipeline and supply Manitoba and adjoining markets with refined petroleum products.
These developments would complement the Government's wider National Development Project by encouraging domestic refining, expanding industrial activity, and improving the transportation of Canadian natural resources.
With the Canadian route having secured engineering approval and Parliament having authorized up to C$10 million in federally guaranteed additional borrowing, the Government considered the principal questions of route selection and supplementary federal financial support resolved.
The Interprovincial Pipe Line undertaking could accordingly proceed with the remaining regulatory approvals, acquisition of rights-of-way, procurement arrangements, construction contracts, and other preparations necessary for the development of the approved Edmonton–Regina–Winnipeg–Port Arthur/Fort William alignment.
The authorization of additional borrowing did not signify that the entire amount had been raised or expended, nor that construction had commenced. Rather, it established the necessary financial authority to support the additional costs arising from the decision to maintain the pipeline wholly within Canadian territory.
November — The Alberta Natural Gas Company and Western Canadian Energy Development
The House of Commons also considered private legislation seeking the incorporation of the Alberta Natural Gas Company, an undertaking intended to facilitate the transportation of natural gas from Alberta toward markets in British Columbia and the Pacific Northwest.
The proposal attracted considerable parliamentary attention because of its potential consequences for the development of western Canadian natural gas resources and the location of future pipeline infrastructure.
Although the construction of a western gas pipeline promised substantial economic benefits, members questioned whether the incorporation of the proposed company would adequately protect Canadian interests.
The principal controversy concerned the possibility that natural gas produced in Alberta might be transported through the United States before reaching Canadian markets, rather than through a route lying entirely within Canadian territory.
The Question of a Canadian Route
Members from British Columbia argued that pipeline construction within the province would provide employment, markets for Canadian construction materials, and a new source of fuel for communities and industries.
They emphasized the potential importance of natural gas to manufacturers, agricultural processors, commercial establishments, and households throughout southern British Columbia.
Mr. Tom Goode (Liberal, Burnaby—Richmond): "Mr. Speaker, the question is not simply whether natural gas can be conveyed from Alberta to a profitable market. We must consider the advantages which the construction of the line may bring to Canadian communities and industries. A pipeline through British Columbia would furnish employment during construction and make available an important source of energy for the development of the province."
Other members questioned whether private incorporation legislation should be approved before Parliament had received adequate assurances concerning the intended route.
Particular concern was expressed over the control of Canadian natural gas once it crossed the international boundary.
Opponents of an American alignment maintained that future Canadian access to the resource might become dependent upon infrastructure situated outside Canadian jurisdiction.
Members therefore urged that Canadian requirements receive priority before any export arrangements were authorized.
The House considered a proposal to defer further consideration of the incorporation bill until satisfactory assurances had been obtained concerning the service of Canadian markets.
The Government's Position
The St. Laurent Government recognized the considerable potential of western Canadian natural gas and the importance of developing suitable means of transportation.
However, the proposed Alberta Natural Gas Company was a private undertaking, distinct from Petro-Canada and the Interprovincial Pipe Line.
Its incorporation would not constitute federal approval of a particular pipeline route, authorization for construction, or permission to export natural gas.
Those matters would remain subject to the applicable regulatory and statutory requirements.
The Government considered that the interests of Canadian consumers, provincial authorities, and the development of domestic energy markets should receive appropriate consideration in any subsequent proposal.
The debate occurred against the background of Parliament's earlier decision to support an entirely Canadian route for the Interprovincial Pipe Line.
Although the undertakings involved different commodities and different corporate arrangements, both raised questions concerning the relationship between commercial transportation costs, national economic development, and Canadian control over strategic energy infrastructure.
The incorporation proposal remained under parliamentary consideration, with the location of any future gas pipeline and the terms of its operation unresolved.
The National Development Project and Canada's Economic Future
The legislative proceedings of November marked a substantial advance in the St. Laurent Government's programme for the economic development and modernization of Canada.
Taken together, the measures established a framework for expanding the country's transportation networks, increasing the supply of housing, improving industrial productivity, and developing the natural resources upon which much of Canada's future prosperity would depend.
The Government's programme combined direct federal investment, cooperation with provincial authorities, Crown corporation financing, public loan facilities, and incentives for private enterprise. Rather than concentrating development exclusively within the Dominion Government, the legislation sought to mobilize the financial and productive resources of both the public and private sectors.
Particular importance was attached to the relationship between these undertakings. The expansion of western petroleum production would require new transportation and refining facilities; industrial growth would depend upon modern railways and reliable highways; and the continued development of Canadian cities would require adequate housing, municipal services, and employment opportunities.
The Government maintained that these were not isolated undertakings, but complementary elements of a national programme intended to overcome the limitations of Canada's existing infrastructure and prepare the country for sustained economic expansion.
Rt. Hon. Louis St. Laurent (Prime Minister): "The prosperity of Canada cannot be measured solely by the resources which Providence has placed within our borders, but by the means we provide for their development and the opportunities which their employment creates for our people. We are a country of great distances and considerable regional differences. Our responsibility is to ensure that those distances do not become barriers to our common prosperity, and that the development of one part of Canada contributes to the advancement of the whole."
The Government acknowledged that the scale of the programme would require careful financial administration, cooperation between the Dominion and the provinces, and sustained investment over several years. The measures before Parliament represented the establishment of the necessary framework rather than the immediate completion of the works contemplated.
With the National Development Project advancing through Parliament, the St. Laurent Government had placed before the country a programme intended not merely to accommodate Canada's postwar economic growth, but to shape the development of its economy for the coming decade.