Document Information

Date: 1930-05-21
By: Canada (House of Commons)
Citation: Dominion of Canada, House of Commons, Official Report of  Debates House of Commons, 16th Parl, 4th Sess, 1930 at 1714-1716.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).

Click here to view the rest of the Confederation Debates.

NATURAL RESOURCES

AGREEMENT WITH ALBERTA

Charles Stewart moved the third reading of Bill No. 17, respecting the transfer of the natural resources of Alberta.

Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.

AGREEMENT WITH SASKATCHEWAN

Charles Stewart moved the third reading of Bill No. 58, respecting the transfer of the natural resources of Saskatchewan.

He said: I have just been asked to make a short explanation covering Saskatchewan in order that the information may be on Hansard. Some question arose as to the rights of the lessee on lake Manitou, and I propose reading what Colonel Biggar, who has been advising us in these matters, has been pleased to send me as reply:

As to water rights, I am informed that when the agreements were negotiated it was understood by all concerned that these passed to the province as completely as all other interests of the crown, and that is my present understanding. Water rights like all other rights, merely continue to be administered under Dominion legislation until other provision is made by the provincial legislature, and the minister undertakes that no water right is granted unless and until there is a very definite and binding undertaking that the rights of the public will be protected with respect to lake Manitou.

Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.

AGREEMENT WITH BRITISH COLUMBIA RESPECTING RAILWAY BELT AND PEACE RIVER BLOCK

Charles Stewart moved the third reading of Bill No. 41, respecting the transfer of the railway belt and Peace River block.

He said: Before this bill is read a third time, I think in fairness 10 members of the opposition I should give some information that I was to secure for them. I see the hon, member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens) is not in his seat, but I can put the information on Hansard with reference to the foreshore rights in the Fraser river. Upon inquiry I find that the harbour board of New Westminster made application for the foreshore rights from Douglas island to tidewater. That was refused, but foreshore rights were granted to them to two miles west of Annacis island and in addition the foreshore rights were granted on the Pitt river some twelve miles easterly from the junction with the Fraser

[Page 1715]

and ten miles in the Fraser river. The harbour commission of New Westminster apparently were able to convince the provincial authorities that this was necessary to protect them in connection with harbour purposes.

In answer to the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. Fraser) in regard to ordnance lands, the tract of 100,000 acres mentioned by him as being in the Chilcoten valley was exchanged for Point Grey property which was granted to the provincial government for university grounds and other purposes, and is still controlled by the Department of Defence. It has not yet been transferred to the Department of the Interior.

With reference to the boundaries in regard to which the commission is set up and provision is made in the agreement, the commission is simply to decide what the boundaries of the present areas of ordnance reserves will be. They are not definite nor well defined and the commission was set up for that purpose.

With reference ,to the other matter that we discussed, that is as to whether or not there could be exchanges, I am informed by our officers that that matter was not discussed in the negotiations with the officers of the provincial government, so that I was somewhat in error in making the statement that exchange could be made. The commission is set up simply for the purpose of defining the boundaries of ordnance lands already set aside.

John Fraser—Might I ask the minister a question in regard to foreshore rights? The paragraph in the agreement says that the foreshore rights are reserved to the federal government as for up as Kanaka creek. That is eight miles from Lillooet, or 150 miles up the Fraser river. That does not correspond with tl1e statement the minister made a moment ago.

Charles Stewart—I think my hon. friend must be in error, because according to the map I have in my hand there is a Kanaka creek about twelve miles up the Fraser river, and that is the one mentioned because I have gone into the matter thoroughly with the officers of the Department of Marine and Fisheries and they say that is required. The hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. McQuarrie) who at present is not in the house, is anxious, I understand, that we should introduce legislation confirming this agreement as be claims, so I am told, that it is very necessary for the protection of New Westminster harbour and any new development in connection with it. The creek mentioned by my hon. friend (Mr. Fraser) is at least 150 miles up the river, but that is not the one referred to. The latter is about twelve miles up.

John Fraser—The agreement is clear that the bed of the Fraser river and the foreshore of the Fraser river up to Kanaka creek are reserved to the federal government. That takes in a good deal more area than the minister has stated.

Charles Stewart—I have gone into the matter thoroughly with the officers who have negotiated the agreement, and this is a creek twelve miles or slightly more, up the Fraser river from Hs junction with the Pitt river.

John Fraser—Then I am to understand that the minister and I are not referring to the same Kanaka creek?

Charles Stewart—Yes.

John Fraser—The one to which the minister refers is twelve miles up the Fraser river?

Charles Stewart—Yes.

Edmond Ryckman—Mr. Speaker, before this bill receives third reading I desire again to emphasize the fact that it appears to be grotesque and absurd that the parliament of Canada should seek to give itself a jurisdiction which it has no power to do. I feel satisfied that as the implications of paragraph 16 of the agreement are so broad, there will certainly be occasions when this paragraph will be called in question. The fact that parliament is attempting to do what I submit it has no right to do, will be a matter of great concern to those who are directly involved, that is as between the Dominion of Canada, the province of British Columbia and those who may be charged as failing to observe regulations that may be imposed by the parliament of Canada. Therefore, the law officers of the crown ought to consider the situation very carefully and to avoid the possibility of trouble, likely to result in great injury to individuals, to the province of British Columbia and to the Dominion of Canada, safeguards should be provided in any validating act. I raise this objection because I feel satisfied, if nothing more is done, just as sure as morn succeeds the night, we are going to have trouble over this paragraph.

Lucien Cannon—I may say the point does offer certain difficulties. These difficulties were indicated to a certain extent by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) and also by my hon. friend who has just spoken. I may assure the house that as regards whatever legislation may be necessary to put into effect these new relations as between British Columbia and the Dominion,

[Page 1716]

every possible weight and consideration will be given to the suggestion offered by hon. gentlemen opposite.

Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.