Wednesday, April 12, 196!

Robert A. Grindlay (Second Prince)

Mr. Speaker, having disposed of the courtesies usually extended when one speaks on this particular Debate, I now intend to devote some time to the document which is the subject of the motion now before the House.

I would like, first of all, to refer to paragraph fifty, which states; “In August 1966, the strike by Canadian National Railway employees disrupted ferry service be- tween Port Borden and Cape Tormentine. The priority system of transportation was successfully set up at Wood Islands to handle traffic until my Government was able to negotiate with the crews to commence operations again. Consultations with all classes concerned are being held and will continue to be held until a satisfactory solut- ion to the problems relating to continuous operation of the ferries at Borden is reached”.

I gather from this particular paragraph that it purports to reassure the people of the province that everything is now under control insofar as the ferry service be- tween Borden and Tormentinc is concerned. I am not sure whether the people are re- assured by this paragraph — I doubt it very much. We are all well aware of the steps taken by the government to establish operation of the ferries, a step, which in my opinion, usurped or assumed the responsibility of the federal government, but I won- der if the Government, this Government. remembers that it could have taken, and should have taken more complete action in this respect. The matter was dealt with in an editorial in the Guardian of Friday, August 26, which states after a statement quot- ed ‘by Premier Campbell who said. “We have received full co-operation not only from the Office of the Prime Minister but also from the Minister of Transport in this mat- ter, and we must recognize the limited direct influence which the federal government is able to exert beyond the nation-wide appeal to the Prime Minister.”

Now, the editorial says, “We cannot go along with this statement at all,” and I think most of the people of the rovince cannot go along with this statement. The fact that our provincial authorities ve been left to plead their case for the continua- tion of the ferry service with the Railway Union at Borden, and to invoke drastic emergency measures surely is ample evidence that our interests have been disregarded by those in authority at Ottawa.

In 1950 one of his Liberal predecessors, Premier Jones, took a different view of the matter of a strike in moving a Resolution censoring the St. Laurent Government’s failure to maintain this service in operation. He, Premier Jones, noted that there was in the agreement with the Unions and the ferry crews a section providing that the Government Vessels Discipline Act should take precedence over the agreement should the necessity arise, and that this section should have been invoked. There was also a statutory provision for the Transport Department taking over the ferry operation in an emergency. The Legislature, this Legislature, went so far as to demand “damages for federal failure to act in this matter.”

Now on the same theme, and this is from the Maritime Truck Transport Review. “At the annual general meeting of the Maritime Motor Transport Association who were indignant over the blatant discrimination against highway freight at the ferry dock during the railway strike ground out this strongly worded resolution.”

“WHEREAS as a result of the railway strike in August 1966, highway commun- ication between New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island and between Nova Scotia and Newfoundland was completely broken, having serious effects on the economics of the rovinces involved and threatenin disaster p rtions had the situation continued. AN WHEREAS this situation had t e effect of b ock' two different sections of the Trans-Canada Highway between the provinces; AND W EREAS the Federal Govern- ment was pressed for a guarantee after the strike of 1950 that the situation would never occur a in, and some assurances were made by the Federal Government at that time. BE IT SOLVED that the Minister of Transport be informed of the serious effect of this serious situation on the economy of this region and the difficulties of oration, and economic loss to the motoring public and transport operators using t ese routes. That his Department make necessary arrangements for the operation of these ferries on an uninterrupted basis." There is a little more to it, but the reply from the Mimster of Transport, (it was acknowledged by the Special Assistant to the Min- ister), who wrote: “Due note has been taken of the views of your Association in this

connection and your representations have been drawn to the attention of the approp- riate officials.”

—149—