1941-06-13

[Stage Direction]
Fourth report of the special committee on the Pension Act and War Veterans' Allowance Act.-Mr. MacMillan.


[Stage Direction]
Canada's war effort
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) on Wednesday last expressed the hope that before parliament adjourned for the summer months I might find it possible to make a brief statement with respect to recent developments in the war situation and our own war effort. He expressed the view that such a statement might serve to strengthen the morale of the country, which as he rightly believes is apt to suffer when faced with severe reverses or seeming reverses such as those which have recently taken place in the middle east. I have no hesitation whatever in saying that a true perspective of the situation should go a long way toward strengthening the national morale.
With the consent of the house I should like to make the statement at once, as in all probability either to-day or to-morrow will be the last occasion on which there will be a favourable opportunity.
Whether it is better to fight and lose, or not to fight at all, is one of the oldest questions facing military strategists confronted with an enemy of superior strength. Reverses there are bound to be, and we must not lose heart when they come.
When we recall that up till a year ago Britain placed her main reliance on the French forces in Syria and north Africa and on the French fleet in the Mediterranean for the protection of the common allied interests in the whole Mediterranean basin, and then reflect that a year has passed since the ollapse of France and no vital British position has yet been lost, it should give us cause, not for satisfaction certainly, but at least for thankfulness.
In an attempt to capture the changing phases of a world-wide war, it is obvious that the picture, if relieved by sunshine, must also 14873-2481
be darkened by shadow. To-day there may be an encircling gloom-to-morrow there will be shafts of light.
I can but reiterate what I have previously said to this house and to the people of Canada. We shall only be helping the enemy and not ourselves if we are unduly elated by temporary success, or if we are unduly downcast by temporary failure.
No thoughtful man could ever have believed that this war would be over in a few months, or won by a short, sharp thrust. From the very beginning it was obvious that the volcanic forces let loose in the world were so mighty that a long, grim struggle was inevitable. It was bound to spread from nation to nation, from ocean to ocean, and from continent to continent.
The weak, the unprotected, and the perversely neutral were obliged to fall by the wayside. The final conflict was inevitably destined to be waged between the strong.
To-day, in what may be the bitterest chapter of the battle for freedom, state discipline fights self-discipline. The strongest men ever forged and hammered by a state meet on many fronts the strongest men ever tempered by the fires of liberty.
In this last chapter a few indubitable facts stand out in bold relief. The war will be won or lost not in Africa or in Asia or in the islands of the Pacific, but in the wide waters of the Atlantic, on the shores and in the skies of Britain. The Mediterranean is but an outskirt of the city of liberty. The battlements are in the Atlantic and the English channel. Freedom falls only if Britain falls.
Let me for a moment seek to balance our advantages and our disadvantages in the air, on the land and at sea.
In the air, the balance of machine power is gradually being adjusted. Increasing numbers of nazi bombers are being destroyed at night; British raids on German objectives have not only grown more effective, but no longer can the official silence of the usually overloquacious German propaganda ministry hide their results from the German people.
In his Reichstag speech on May 4, Hitler was forced to promise still better weapons next year. This statement was the first indication given to the German people that the war would not, as hitherto forecast by Hitler, be ended this year. Thus are the prophecies of the violent put to confusion by free men.
The War-Review

The stream of machines continues to flow. If any further evidence were needed of the growth of the British and allied air power, it is to be found in aggressive activity in the Atlantic ocean, in the North sea and in the Mediterranean. It is to be found too in the steady defensive activity that every day pursues its revenges against those who scatter indiscriminate murder and destruction upon British soil from the British air.
Everywhere in sky warfare a situation, not yet mastered, nevertheless improves from day to day.
On the sea the curve of loss has recently shown a decline. The shipping losses for May were considerably lower than they were for April. The attack of the Bismarck upon H.M.S. Hood was followed by relentless pursuit and swift retribution. The reality of British sea power remains. The catalogue of the heavy losses sustained by enemy shipping proves that, if regard is paid to the comparative available resources of tonnage, targets and striking power, the balance of effective destruction is not tilted as heavily as might appear upon the side of Germany and Italy.
Most heartening of all in the present situation is the attitude of the United States. The promises of President Roosevelt are not only being kept, they are being enlarged. The announcement by the president on April 29 that United States warships would be sent wherever the needs of hemispheric defence required their presence; the speeches of Mr. Stimson and Mr. Knox early in May; the passage by the congress of the bill authorizing the seizure of foreign vessels in United States waters; all these were encouraging signs of stiffening opinion. But the decisive point was reached by the president in his broadcast on May 27, when he made it plain that the United States would take whatever steps were necessary to ensure the delivery of American supplies to Britain.
Mr. Roosevelt did not minimize the seriousness of the battle of the Atlantic. His statement that British shipping losses far exceeded the present combined shipbuilding capacity of Britain and the United States marks a thoroughly realistic facing of the facts.
This continent is rapidly becoming not -only the arsenal of democracy, but the shipyard of the freedom of the seas. Canada has mobilized all possible resources of men, material and suitable location to build ships. American and Canadian construction have begun the race against destruction. Every ship added to the Canadian navy helps to relieve the tremendous burden so gallantly borne by the British navy. Every new

American warship, every new Canadian warship, helps the British navy to detect and to destroy. Every new merchant ship is a guarantee of men, machines, munitions and food.
In connection with land operations, there is nothing which can be added to the closing remarks of Mr. Churchill made in his speech on Wednesday, June 11. If we eliminate the occupation of the Channel islands by German forces, at this time of speaking, after nearly two years of war, no enemy soldier has a foot on British soil. As Mr. Churchill said:
If anybody had said in June last, we should to-day hold every yard of the territories for which Great Britain is responsible in the middle east, that we should have conquered the whole Italian empire, that Egypt, Palestine and Iraq would have been successfully defended -anyone who said that would have been thought a foolish visionary. Yet that is the position at the moment.
Those briefly are the salient, they are the outstanding facts about tangible things.
As far as Canada is concerned, our own war effort in men and materials has steadily gained in momentum, in volume and in power. We are adding every day to the material and strength of the allied cause. Every month sees more Canadian troops, more Canadian sailors and more Canadian airmen added to the number of the defenders of Britain.
For some time past we have had an army corps of two divisions in the British Isles. As the corps commander, General McNaughton, has pointed out, they are helping to garrison the one vital citadel, the retention of which decides the war. We have made known to all the world that our forces overseas are ready to go, and that we are equally ready to have them go wherever their services may count for most. We are dispatching to Britain two additional divisions, one a third infantry division, the other an armoured division, also a tank brigade and many reinforcements. All will have been despatched in the course of the present year. This is apart altogether from the forces we are retaining in Canada.
Ships of Canada's navy have, as all hon. members are aware, been engaged with British ships in the coastal waters of Britain. They are now taking an increasingly important part in the defence of the Atlantic coast and in the duties of convoy on the great passage way of the Atlantic so vital not only to the present of Britain but also to the future of Canada and of the United States of America.
Canadian airmen and Canadian squadrons, as all are aware, have from the beginning been taking their part in the battle of Britain. In the Royal Canadian Air Force we have to-day 55,000 men. The British common-

The War-Review
wealth air training plan this year will double the number of its enlistments. In Canada nearly one hundred training schools, manning depots and recruiting centres are already infull operation. From this source is flowing to Britain an ever-growing stream of pilots, observers and gunners. They have crossed to Britain in thousands and will continue to cross in ever-increasing numbers.
We have recently sent from Canada to Britain one thousand radio technicians whose help has been invaluable and will be invaluable in the cleansing of the midnight air. More are following on.
We are making machines for Britain's armed forces as well as for our own. Canadian motor transport vehicles, machine guns, aircraft, corvettes, mine-sweepers as well as shells, explosives and chemicals are being sent in growing volume across the Atlantic. We are sending and will continue to send to Britain all the goods which ships can be found to cariy, but we are not stopping there. We recognize the tremendous financial burden which the British peoples are bearing. That burden, as well, we are continuing to share in ever-increasing measure.
Without complaint our people are bearing the heaviest taxes in their history. In addition they are lending their savings to the government. I know that with loyal willingness they will lend and, if necessary, give, whatever is needed to strengthen and supplement the financial resources of the government of this country. The Canadian people are performing a magnificent task. They will not fail the cause to which we have pledged our all. They are producing, and will produce to the limits of their strength and genius, the material, tangible things^ without which victory cannot be won.
There remain, also, as our sure strength and shield, the intangible things of the human spirit. The will to live, and to endure every hardship that all may continue to enjoy the blessings of freedom is a part of Canadian character. We in Canada have a veritable passion for human brotherhood; a hatred of hate; an intolerance of intolerance. Ours is the unshaken and unshalceable purpose to reestablish upon the earth, now hideous with the blackened ruins of civilization, a freedom, wider and more deeply founded in social and international justice, than ever before in human history. All these intangible things are the very fibre and fabric of the national character alike of the British and Canadian peoples. Tried by many onslaughts, tested by many defeats, the inner fortresses of that character remain unbroken and unbreakable, impregnable, indomitable. Against their walls, the tides of tyranny and the waves of battle will beat in vain.


Hon. GROTE STIRLING (Yale):: On the day which the optimists think may be the last of this session before adjournment, and I sincerely trust they are right, the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has drawn together the threads of international affairs, the war story, and particularly that -part of it which Canada is playing, into one statement which will go out to the public of Canada and to a wider public than that. I trust that it will have the effect which I have no doubt the right hon. gentleman had in mind, namely, of strengthening, if strengthening be necessary, the morale of the people, and driving home once more to the intelligence of every individual that there is just one thing which will bring us through to victory, and that is the spending of ourselves individually in the whole effort.


Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):: I would endorse what the acting leader of the opposition (Mr. Stirling) has said, and, in doing so, convey to the Prime Minister appreciation of his act in having placed this statement before us. The statement, both in its comprehensiveness and in its literary style, if I may say so, is something which I am sure will be appreciated by those who read and study it, not only now but in future days. I believe it is essential to strengthen the morale of the people in every particular, and it has been shown-the Bismarck incident proved it-that when we have the equipment, the planes, the ships, the guns and so on, we shall have every assurance that the present menace will be overcome.
Mr. J. II. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge): We have listened with much satisfaction to the admirable statement the Prime Minister has made. I wish to assure him, in these closing days of the session, that the movement for which I stand in this house will be behind him in his effort to make Canada's part greater, more effective and more satisfactory than it has been in the past.



THE MINISTRY


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The leader of the opposition (Mr. Hanson) asked me to lay on the table the letter of resignation of the former Minister of National War Services, the present Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner). I now table the communication in question.
Daylight Saving



WAR EXPENDITURES


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I have been asked to move that the name of Mr. Hansell be substituted for that of Mr. Marshall on the special war expenditures committee.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Grote Stirling: May I ask the Prime Minister whether the government has given consideration to, and arrived at a conclusion on, the question of dominionwide daylight saving.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The government has given some consideration to the matter, but no member of it has studied it more closely than the Minister of Munitions and Supply. Perhaps my hon. friend will allow him to reply.


Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):: The introduction of daylight saving in a community has always been by action of the community itself. Some months ago the power controller, supported by the electricity board of the province of Quebec and the Ontario Hydro-Electric Power Commission, asked the government to act under the War Measures Act to extend daylight saving during the winter months to those communities which had already adopted it by their own action. That action was taken, with the result of saving some 180,000 primary horsepower which was made available for war industries. Since then the government has had communications from city councils and boards of trade asking that it take action to introduce daylight saving in their localities. We have consistently replied that the matter is one for local action, and while we believe that the introduction of daylight saving would be beneficial to the war effort, the government has maintained its position that the introduction of daylight saving is a matter for local action. There are many sections of Canada which have violently opposed the introduction of daylight saving. There would be no particular gain to the war effort in forcing daylight saving upon these communities-for the most part rural communities- and therefore up to the present the government has felt that any further introduction of daylight saving should be by local action.



DOMINION PUBLIC BUILDINGS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):: On the basis of a report appearing in the June 13th issue of the Toronto Globe and Mail concerning the purchase by the federal government of a brewery in Ottawa for $500,000 to beautify Ottawa, may I ask the government: (1) Has the Brading brewery been purchased? (2) Does the government actually feel that an expenditure of over half a million dollars to beautify Ottawa is justifiable in this critical war year? (3) Will this expenditure be submitted to the special committee on war expenditures for examination at an early day?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I have not had an opportunity to look at his question, but what the hon. member has reference to, I believe, is the expropriation by the government a considerable time ago of certain properties on Wellington street, in view of the improvements which the government itself intended to make in that particular area. As my hon. friend is aware, two of the largest government department buildings are on Wellington street and the plan of development has in view the extension of further buildings along that street. It was thought advisable, before all the property in the adjoining areas, and in that area itself, became enhanced in value in consequence of improvements being made by the government, that the government itself should acquire property for its use later on. The brewery referred to is in that particular area, and while there may be some who will be sorry it is going or gone, I imagine their number will not be great.



SUGGESTION THAT FLAGS BE FLOWN CONTINUOUSLY DURING SUMMER MONTHS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. W. GLADSTONE (Wellington South):: I should like to direct an inquiry to the Prime Minister with respect to the flying of the flag on dominion public buildings, especially on these parliament buildings in Ottawa. Tradition, I believe, has established, without any legislative requirement, that the flag shall be flown on these parlia-

Food and Drugs Act
ment buildings while parliament is in session and on dominion public holidays. It would seem that in war time, and especially during the months of July and August, when large numbers of United States tourists are visiting Ottawa, it might be appropriate to have the flag flying on these buildings. I wonder if the government would consider this matter and, so far as possible, have the flag flown on dominion buildings throughout Canada during the summer months.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I shall be glad to look
into the question raised by my hon. friend. I imagine, however, that there are many considerations of which account would have to be taken. One reason for not flying the flag on the parliament buildings at all times is that it may be a distinguishing mark with respect to the time at which parliament itself is in session, and also with respect to certain occasions of a national character. I am afraid that if the flag were flown the year round as a matter of course much of that significance would be lost. However, I shall be glad to look into the practice at Westminster and also to consider what I have already mentioned, the other facts which may bear on the matter. I see no reason why, in connection with government buildings throughout the country, effect might not be given to the suggestion of my hon. friend. That matter also will be carefully considered. I might say that I understand that such is the present practice.



MUNITIONS AND SUPPLY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. JEAN-FRANQOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata): May I bring to the attention of the Minister of Munitions and Supply the fact that several uncompleted corvettes are lying in Toronto harbour. This end of the war effort is being scandalously neglected. What does the government intend to do about it?
Clarence Decatur Howe: I think the ships in question
are mine-sweepers. They have been launched, and as soon as the electrical work and other fittings have been installed, they will be delivered to the government.


LABOUR CONDITIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. HUGHES CLEAVER (Halton):: Could the Minister of Labour advise how many strikes exist to-day in industries engaged in war work?


Hon. N. A. McLARTY (Minister of Labour):: My information is that the workers at the Canadian General Electric plant in Toronto have returned to work. That being so, I think I am safe in saying that there is no strike of any consequence to-day in any war industry.



POOD AND DRUGS ACT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. JEAN-FRANQOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata):	I hold in my hand a bottle which
bears a certain label and I should like to ask for some information from the Minister of Pensions and National Health. On this label appears the word "genuine" when it is not genuine; it bears the word "Hollands" when it is not Hollands; it bears the word "Geneva" when it is not gin; it bears the word "Rotterdam" when it is not Rotterdam; it also bears the words "John de Kuyper." Will the minister see to it that these labels are changed immediately, and any stocks of this product that may be in the stores seized at once?
Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Pensions and National Health):	Replying as
an amateur to a question asked by an expert, I may inform the hon. member for Temis-couata (Mr. Pouliot), with his inquiring mind, that all the regulations under the Food and Drugs Act with reference to the contentious question of gin have been complied with as the result of instructions issued on April 24 last.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. DOUGLAS G. ROSS (St. Paul's): I should like to ask the Minister of Finance if he will consider having the banking and commerce committee meet in the fall when we come together again, for the purpose of continuing our discussions on monetary matters and going into the principles of taxation?
3936	COMMONS
Government and Bank of Canada
Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):: -The hon. gentleman asked a similar question when my estimates were before the committee, or at some previous stage. I shall be glad to see that the government gives consideration to the desirability of the banking and commerce committee being called for this purpose. I should like to say a word about the banking and commerce committee and about the submission of monetary policies to that committee. I do this because the Premier of Alberta has issued a statement which perhaps makes it desirable for me to say something about the relationship between the government and the Bank of Canada.
As hon. members know, the report of the governor of the Bank of Canada was considered by the banking and commerce committee in the spring of 1939, with I think most beneficial results. On June 2 this year,
I made certain statements in this house with respect to the relationship between the government and the Bank of Canada, statements which were referred to by an hon. member on June 5. Whereupon I made certain other statements in relation to that matter. I note that the premier of Alberta has issued a statement which probably will be widely used to show that the government has no control over monetary policy. Therefore, I should like to make the matter clear before the house adjourns.
When I made my statement on June 2 we were discussing whether the internal administration or operations of the Bank of Canada should be subject to discussion in this house. At least that is what I had in mind, and I think a careful reading of what I said on that occasion will bear me out, although I will admit that it is open to another construction. I tried to make it clear that that is what I had in mind when I spoke on June 5.
As the committee knows, the Bank of Canada was created by parliament as an autonomous corporation with its stock owned wholly by the government, but with its own management and board of directors appointed by the government. It is an arm of the government, but not a department of government. The character of the act is such that responsibility for its operations is placed squarely on the shoulders of the governor and the board of directors. In this connection I wish to quote from Hansard of June 20, 1938, a statement made by the then minister of finance when proposing certain amendments to the Bank of Canada Act:
There is, of course, no intention nor any hope that it-
Meaning the change in the constitution of the bank.

[DOT]-will dispose of political discussion regarding the use which shall be made from time to time of this instrument of national control of monetary policy. I should say in this regard, however, that it is not the intention of the government by the introduction of this measure to make the Bank of Canada merely a department of government. If the central bank of a country is to serve the high purpose for which it is created, it must be manned by men who not only are expert in monetary policy, economic and financial matters, but also have a sufficient independence of judgment to be able at all times to talk on equal terms to the government of the day with respect to the matters which come under the jurisdiction of the bank in the ordinary course of business. It is not the intention that by this resolution the Bank of Canada should become in any way a political arm of government. That, indeed, would be fatal to the successful operation of the control of monetary policy and credit in this country.
The point which I would like to emphasize is that the responsibility with which the governor and board have been charged by parliament does not in any way relieve the government of responsibility for the monetary policy being pursued by the bank, nor in any way militate against public control of monetary policy. The monetary policy which the bank carries out from time to time must be the government's monetary policy, but the government must leave the carrying out of that policy, the choice of ways and means of executing it, to the management of the bank in whose judgment it has confidence.
If the government is satisfied with the policy which is being pursued, there is obviously no quarrel between it and the bank. Let us suppose, however, that the management of the bank and the government do not see eye to eye in the matter of monetary policy. Let us assume that after the usual careful consideration of the pros and cons, a serious difference of opinion remains. In such a case there can be no question whatever as to the outcome of the dispute. The government's views will prevail.
In view of the statutory responsibility placed on the governor and the board of directors, I do not believe that those of them who disagreed with the government on a fundamental issue could conscientiously carry out the government's policy. It would therefore be necessary for them to resign, and they would be replaced by others who were willing to accept responsibility for the type of policy which the government believed to be appropriate. It follow's that if a serious dispute ever occurs, it will be brought to the attention of the house and of the countiy.
The type of organization which parliament has created combines the essential factor of public control with the extremely desirable factor of managerial responsibility. I know

Supply-National Defence
of no better way of safeguarding the public interest. It is, of course, always open to parliament to question and reject any policy, including monetary policy, which is being followed by the government of the day.
I think it is desirable to have this on record. I regret that the matter should have been dealt with-I am speaking now for myself- by question and answer on another matter, as it was, and I think it was due to that that some misunderstanding arose on the part of certain hon. members of the house and apparently some outside the house.



PROPOSED COMMITTEE TO EXAMINE REPORT OF BANK OF CANADA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. G. HANSELL (Macleod):: I should have liked to place this question on the order paper, but it is too late now to do so. I would ask the Minister of Finance if before the next session of parliament the government will give consideration to the setting up of a standing committee to examine the report of the Bank of Canada, similar to the existing committee on railways which examines the reports of the Canadian National Railways.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Well, Mr. Speaker, there would be no objection to giving consideration to this request, but I should say that duty could be acceptably discharged by the banking and commerce committee.



WHEAT ACREAGE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. G. DIEFENBAKER (Lake Centre):: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner). I have a volume of correspondence which I have received in the last few days in reference to the question of summer-fallowing and the inability of farmers generally in western Canada to finance their summer-fallowing operations by reason of the fact that the oil companies are refusing to advance them credit. Would the minister advise whether the government is prepared to advance say 50 per cent of the cost of summer-fallowing to farmers in order to enable them to get the work done? Or as an alternative, will the government devise a scheme whereby the municipalities could guarantee a percentage of the cost of summer-fallowing and the government pay direct to the municipalities the amount guaranteed?


Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) :: I do not think the federal government has at any time taken part in the promotion of summer-fallowing activities in the western provinces. That has always been looked upon as a responsibility of the provincial governments in so far as it has been taken care of by governments. I do not think the provinces will expect the federal government to take on a load at the present time which has not been carried even in peace time.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Vien in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE

[Stage Direction]
182. Normal services. Cadet services, $171,500.
Mr. POULIOT:: Before this item is voted I should like to place on record copies of two letters I have sent to the Minister of National Defence, under date of May 15, 1941, and May 16, 1941. The second letter reads:
Ottawa, May 16, 1941
The Honourable J. L. Ralston, K.C.,
Minister of National Defence,
Ottawa.
My dear Minister,
Referring to your letter of May 11, there is something that I do not understand.
Eleven months ago, the Prime Minister pointed out to me that in doing voluntary recruiting for the defence of Canada, I might be making the greatest mistake possible with respect to the national interest.
Would there be no mistake possible with respect to the national interest in doing it for overseas service? In other words, how can I do, at your request and for another country, what I had been precluded to do by the Prime Minister for our native country?
Please find herewith attached supplementary memorandum in the form of a letter which completes this one.	.
Yours truly,
Jean-Fransois Pouliot.
The first letter reads:
Ottawa, May 15, 1941 Colonel the Honourable J. L. Ralston, K.C., Minister of National Defence,
Ottawa.
My dear Minister,
I have received your letter of May 11 and copy of a broadcast of your colleague, the Honourable C. G. Power, with regard to voluntary enlistment.
I take the liberty to refer you to a most important statement made in the house by the right honourable the Prime Minister, on June 19, 1940, Hansard, page 922. In the forenoon, at a general caucus of the Liberal party, I had offered to recruit in my constituency, within

Supply-National Defence

a week and for the defence of Canada, a regiment composed mostly of lumberjacks, farmhands and day labourers. I mentioned the fact that all those men would be in excellent physical condition and besides that, nearly all of them would have been familiar with the handling of a gun. I added that if every member did the same, we would have in a very short period of time an army of 245,000 fresh recruits of the best kind.
The remarks of the chief, which appear at page 922 of Hansard (last line of first column and first lines of the second one), honoured me by mentioning in the house what I had said at a caucus, but at the same time I was deeply disappointed as I happened to be the one he referred to on that occasion. Here is the text of his remarks:
"An lion, member on this side of the house made the statement publicly this morning that he felt he could go into his constituency and, by making it known to his constituents that this measure had to do with the protection of Canada and our own Canadian soil, bring forward in a very short time men from the forests, from the fields and from the factories, all prepared immediately to join the Canadian forces to resist any possible invasion, and that he would be prepared to guarantee that that could be done in constituency after constituency throughout the country, once it was understood that there was the necessity of defending our own Canadian shores. I pointed out to him that in doing that he might be making the greatest mistake possible with respect to the national interest; that, to win this war, we might wish to keep at work in the forests the men who are now working in the forests, to provide the timber which will be required for docks and wharves and required immediately; that the men who are working in the factories may be a thousand times more useful to the government of this country in giving their skilled labour to the manufacture of aircraft, munitions, or other weapons of war than they could possibly be in lining up and presenting themselves for military service; equally that on the farms, if we are to perform what will be expected of us, we shall need all the production that can be effectively and rapidly carried out on the farms of our country."
It was undoubtedly because my offer was turned down by the Prime Minister eleven months ago that no other member made a similar one until you did it yourself a few days ago.
After the chief had told me in very definite terms that "I might be making the greatest mistake^ possible with respect to the national interest" if I did some recruiting in my constituency, that very statement and the wide publicity given to it made it impossible for me as well as for any other member of parliament to do any recruiting in his constituency.
At that time the government had already announced their policy about conscription. In fact it was the day before that the Prime Minister had presented a resolution for mobilization of human and material resources in the present war. I wonder if it was precisely because of that new policy of conscription that members of^ parliament were prevented from doing recruiting on a voluntary basis, which would have shown that conscription was unnecessary to recruit as large an army as could be equipped and maintained for the defence of this country but, in spite of the rebuke that I received and which was evidently
fMr. Pouliot.l
inspired by the brass hats of the war departments because it was much stronger in the afternoon than in the morning, I did not remain inactive and I did my best to assist all those who expressed to me by writing or verbally their desire to enlist into the militia, the navy or the air force.
The policy of the war departments as put into effect by those who were in contact with the people was to give the least possible chance to those who were willing to enlist.
I cannot mention all eases, but I sent you copy of a correspondence of Antoine Lagace, of Riviere-du-Loup, who has done some military service and who has written to three commanders for enlisting into the home guard: he was turned down because he was not a veteran of the first great war.
Another man, in a similar case, could enlist only because his brother-in-law was a sergeant, and it was considered something like a government favour to be accepted in the army.
I insist on that; it was considered a government favour to be accepted in the army.
How many men wanted to enlist as truck drivers, and how many were accepted?
I have mentioned in the house the difficulties that our boys had with regard to medical examination. Many difficulties have arisen from the fact that those who were unfit were accepted and those who were really fit were declared unfit. Finally, since the establishment of conscription, some who desired to enlist had to travel at their own expenses from Riviere-du-Loup to Quebec city and if they were declared unfit by your medical staff, they had to pay their travelling expenses from their own pockets.
Whatever could have been the intention of the government in the application of the mobilization act, in my constituency, I had the impression that everything was done not to recruit the best army, but to justify the uncalled for policy of conscription.
Please find herewith enclosed copy of letter which I am sending to-day to your colleague, the Hon. Minister of National Defence for Air. It is from Jean-Joseph Lajoie, who has a brother in the air force and another one in the navy. He says that he is so anxious to enlist in the Royal Canadian Air Force that, although he knows English very little, he is ready to spend the money that he has to learn it. I presume that he will have no opportunity to get there, although I am sure that he would do very well because that career appeals to him. I also enclose another letter to the same effect which I received to-day from L. Paul Ouellet, of Riviere-du-Loup station. It speaks by itself.
That man has been taken in.
My first cousin, Yves Bertrand, had won medals as an athlete and a marksman. Squadron-leader Stewart could tell you the trouble I had to have him enlisted as a gunner and it is only thanks to Mr. Stewart's intervention that he could get in.
Now-, regarding the manufactures of munitions, you could be astounded in reading the letter from Donat Champagne, a settler of St. Elzear, in the back country of my constituency. I wonder if it would not be possible to secure work for .him although he is a mechanic of great experience.
By the way, three people in the employment office in Quebec have been arrested because

Supply-National Defence
they were selling jobs, and no one could get in unless he paid something to the people higher up. This explains why we have trouble. I mentioned the matter a long time ago to some people, but I never succeeded in getting anywhere until those people were arrested. I continue with the letter:
Sometimes, you may find that I am grouchy and of unpleasant disposition: there is always a reason for it and I will give some of them.
Before the war, I recommended more boys for the air services than any other member ever did. General Lafleehe could tell you about it, and he was satisfied with those boys amongst whom was a nephew of your colleague, Right Honourable Mr. Lapointe. But now, since the war started, it seems as if French-Canadians were unwelcome in the army, in the navy and in the air force, and the first thing to do would be to remove all barriers seen or unseen, and, in the latter ease, badly felt, which prevent French-speaking Canadians from enlisting when they are perfectly willing to do so.
In the first place, the medical examiners shall be competent and unbiased; they shall be thoroughly familiar with French language and easily accessible, which means that no one would have to pay travelling expenses to undergo medical examination which will establish definitely and to the satisfaction of the recruit whether he is fit or not.
In the second place, the French-speaking Canadians shall be under French-speaking officers and the men shall be in a position to expect and to receive legitimate promotions in due course. On this point, I will quote the case of Sergeant Major Leo Pinel who has been in the army for several years, had won all the cups and trophies of his regiment, and has been on guard at Buckingham Palace. Colonel DesRosiers could tell you about it, as I took up this case unsuccessfully with him.
I do not blame Colonel DesRosiers; he just placed my letter before general headquarters overseas. It continues:
That fellow is very popular in a certain part of my constituency. In fact, on the occasion of the opening of a new post office at Cabano, where his family lives, I paid a tribute to him as a sportsman and a soldier, adding that on account of his services it was expected that he would soon get the promotion he was entitled to in the army. At that point, there were prolonged cheers from the whole crowd. You will understand that if Pinel gets a well-deserved promotion it will have a very good effect for increasing voluntary enlistment where he is so favourably known.
What astonishes me is the considerable number of French-Canadians who have already enlisted in spite of so many obstacles to overcome.
It is bad for a man who is ready to enlist to have a door slammed in his face. He is not anxious to go back. The letter continues:
It is true that the members of parliament are more familiar with the feelings of the people because they are in daily contact with them, but if they convey to you suggestions that really originated from the people, what-14873-249*
ever it is, you pay no attention to it and you seem to prefer to listen to the so-called military experts that Hore-Belisha has expelled from the war office.
I wonder if you ever realized that the success of voluntary enlistment in this war is largely due not to any public speeches, but to the painstaking efforts of the members of parliament who are spending lots of time with their people trying to explain and make as acceptable as possible policies for which they have never been consulted.


Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Chairman, my hon. friend
sent me the letter to which he has referred, enclosing the memorandum-or a previous letter, I have forgotten which it was. As he understands, I could not go into a long and detailed correspondence in connection with the various matters indicated in the letter. But I did, as a matter of fact, make inquiries about.it.
His first letter has to do with a statement made by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons with regard to the relative benefits of recruiting, and of the calling up of men under the National Resources Mobilization Act. If hon. members will refer to the passage in question I am sure they will realize at once that the Prime Minister was endeavouring to indicate that under the National Resources Mobilization Act provision was made for the postponement of those in essential industries. That, I believe, was what was meant by the Prime Minister's statement, and I do not feel that it would be a justification for my hon. friend's feeling that he could not take part in a recruiting campaign and in asking men to enlist.
The other part is more important, so far as I am concerned. It has to do with the welcoming of French-Canadians to the Canadian Army. May I say to the hon. member for Temiscouata-and this is no idle statement, no platitude-that I do not think any matter of policy has received more intensive attention from me than has that same matter. And I can say to my hon. friend that I have tried day in and day out, avowedly

I have made no secret of it-to see to it that just as far as possible our friends in French Canada are represented in the army, and are represented in as high places as they could possibly fill.
As a matter of fact Brigadier Archambault was recommened for a brigade in the third division, since I have been Minister of National Defence. Brigadier Reynaud has been made deputy quartermaster general. Brigadier Leclere was given a brigade overseas. He has just been returned as being medically unfit. I may point out further that a number of staff appointments have been made.
Supply

National Defence

I must say to my hon. friend and to the house and country generally that instructions at National Defence headquarters are that every effort should be made to see that French-Canadians have fair representation in appointments. There is no reason for not doing so; that is part of the national effort. It is part of the effort for the unity of Canada. I make no apology for taking that stand, and I believe hon. members of the committee will concur with me in the stand I have taken.
There are difficulties of course, and my hon. friend has pointed them out. One difficulty is connected with the question of language. I take the position that there are two official languages in this country, and that a man is entitled to speak French and to say, "That is all I can speak," just as a man is entitled to speak English, and to say, "That is all I can speak." May I pay this tribute, to the French-Canadians, that there are far more French-Canadians than there are English who are bilingual-yes, far more.
The situation with regard to enlistments and appointments is this, that in connection with units other than infantry units a man who does not speak English finds difficulty. It is difficult for a man to hold a position of command or responsibility in those other units. In fact, it is difficult for a man in those units to carry on, unless he does understand English. The technical terms in connection with the artillery, signals, ordnance and army service corps is in English. It is therefore difficult to have all French-Canadian units in those particular services. But we are trying to meet the situation in two ways. We are having French-Canadian units as far as we can, and I want to pay my tribute to those units which I saw overseas representing the province of Quebec. They were fine units, wholly French-Canadian, and officered by French-Canadians. They have done a fine job, not only in the field, but through their second battalions, in recruiting reinforcements. Those as mostly infantry units.
We are also endeavouring to recruit French-Canadian artillery and other technical units. In that connection, in order that there may be coordination, because artillery units cannot be used alone but in conjunction with divisional formations, we have sought to have a sufficient number in the artillery units who are bilingual, so that they can understand the directions which are given. And we have a school now which is opening up to give special instruction. I think it is in the interest of the country that we should do this for the French-Canadian boys who do not understand English, particularly those in the technical units, so that they will understand

the phrases and commands which are used, the articles which are referred to, and the orders which have to be communicated between their own and English units. We are doing that. We are endeavouring to form French-Canadian units and we are watching to see that our French-Canadians get fair representation, just so far as their qualifications permit.
I am sure that my hon. friend would not suggest on behalf of French-Canadians or anybody else in this country, at this time, when we need men who are equipped and trained and efficient that we should take men simply because of language or race unless they are efficient and have the necessary training. We are endeavouring to provide that training. My hon. friend will find that the French-Canadians stand up well in the officers' schools to which they go.
I do not think I can say any more, except to assure my friend that this subject is very much in my heart and in the hearts of the officers at headquarters. I know that he has not the same confidence in or the same warm feelings towards some of the officers at headquarters that I have, but I assure him, nevertheless, that the matter he speaks of is not being lost sight of either here or overseas, as he would know if he could see the exchange of cables which has taken place with regard to various French-Canadian appointments.


Jean-François Pouliot: If I may ask one more
question, will it be possible for charitable organizations to get for the people in need in the poorer districts some of the used clothing from the Department of National Defence as was done before?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot make any general statement on that. I received a very special application last night, an application on behalf of sufferers in the recent forest fires in Quebec province, and I did authorize the use of some unused and some discarded clothing for that purpose, to the extent of helping something like six hundred persons. But answering my hon. friend's question, each case will have to depend on its own merits.


Mr. CHURCH:: I was not here yesterday
or on the last two occasions when the minister's estimates were before the committee and I wish to have about ten minutes this morning to offer to the government some constructive suggestions.
As to the point raised about home defence, there is no such thing as home defence in this country. The defence of this country, as I have pointed out before, is not going to be decided at Halifax or Vancouver or Saint

Supply-National Defence
John or Montreal. It is going to be decided in the primary theatre of war, in Britain and on the Mediterranean and on the Atlantic.
Canada up to the present has not in my opinion measured up to its responsibility as the senior dominion of this empire in the matter of home defence, as I interpret it. Home defence is not as important in Canada as in Great Britain, where the people are within range of enemy guns and are in danger of bombs falling on them every night.
On the question raised by the hon. member for York South (Mr. Cockeram) and replied to by the minister, there are certain amenities in British public life that I do' not find in Canada, and I believe that public questions should be discussed on certain principles as they are in England, where men are free to express divergent views. In the riding I represent I have held no public or other meetings and have discussed no politics whatsoever, only once a year to reelect officers. In my riding men and women's associations do nothing but war work.
At different times I have represented four or five ridings in the city of Toronto. I have been transferred around wherever there was a fight. But undoubtedly this is a different war from the last one, as the minister has said. In the old days a war might last only a matter of days. Now wars last for years and this one may last ten years in view of its widespread nature; it may break out again elsewhere. The war is different, too, because of the greater mechanization of the armed forces, the vast numbers of people involved and increased population. The hon. member for York South comes from the Toronto district. He is a soldier and belongs to a regiment I have not seen much of, but which the late Sir John Eaton and the late Colonel Boyd Magee many years ago came down with me to Ottawa to raise in the great war. Another was the 75th battalion. I was interested in a sort of city's own battalion.
I believe that a member of parliament should offer constructive criticism of the government, not of individuals in particular departments. The question that has arisen between the hon. member for York South and the Minister of National Defence arose in the British house in the days of Peel, Palmerston and the Crimean war, and this one. But in this war the principle was laid down both by Mr. Chamberlain when war broke out and by Mr. Churchill that a member of parliament can enter the British house wearing his uniform. It is the right and privilege of a soldier member of parliament to exercise the principles laid down by Burke in his address to the electors of Bristol, outlining the functions and duties of a member
of parliament, and stating that the exercise of his rights must not be interfered with. That relates to peace only, though. In war there must be of necessity some difference.
As I have said, in my constituency I have held no meetings since the war started except executive meetings for the election of officers once or twice a year. The hon. member for York South was within his privileges, as I see it, in making any criticism he saw fit to make in war time of the work of the department if he did it within the house. The minister in his reply, in effect, laid down the general principle followed now in the British house I believe. I notice that in the British, house in a week some forty-six questions were asked on the orders of the day on war and. defence, and they can ask supplementary questions there. We can here too according to-the evidence in 1929-30 by the committee which revised the rules. We are bound in the end by the British rules.
Turning to other matters I am glad that the minister has reduced soldiers' fares one-third; he did good work in that, I know. I hope that all charges for soldiers' fares will be eliminated next year. The hitch-hiking order should be rescinded, and I would like to see it done. The minister last year wrote a letter to me and to three or four other members of parliament about hitch-hiking and suggested that we had better appeal to the motor league. We did make an appeal, and I think the minister himself made a very strong appeal to motorists. That order ought to be rescinded, if I may respectfully suggest it. In England almost every car has a little sticker on the windshield, I am told, saying "Soldiers invited. Free rides." I was on the outskirts of Toronto at York Mills not long ago and one Sunday night I saw fifteen soldiers for Camp Borden trying to get a car ride, but everybody passed them by. On the 24th of May on my way to the Argonaut club secondary schools regatta, I passed two young soldiers in front of the exhibition grounds, and I saw the two still standing there on my way back an hour afterwards. I gave them a lift. The groom sat in the front seat. They belonged to the Irish regiment. I asked him where he came from, and he told me from such and such a street. "I am going to be married," he said, "at seven o'clock to-night by the chaplain." He said the soldier in the other seat is the best man; said he was a Scotsman and lived on Roncesvalles avenue,, which is in the riding of the hon. member for Parkdale, but he did not know him. I asked, him what school he went to. He said he was just out of Parkdale collegiate. I said I went there myself once. I asked the groom-to-be on what street he lived. He said that
Supply-National Defence

he lived on Pape avenue. I said, "Who is your member of parliament?" He said, "Tommy Church." He said to me, "Do you know him?" I said, "I never heard of him." Well, I took them to within a block or so of the place of the wedding. They asked me if it was right to go to the bride's home before the hour named with the best man. I said, no; sihe might change her mind. They askedi me to the wedding, but I did not go. But the point I wish to raise is the principle involved in this regulation.. I saw a thousand cars pass that baseball park in two hours on their way out to Sumnyside, on the road which, while I was chairman of the harbour commit sion, my board was responsible for constructing along twelve miles of waterfront. Those motorists are supposed not to help soldiers on. their way. They might do so, but did not.
I think that that hitch-hiking order has somewhat hurt recruiting, and I appeal to the minister to rescind it. I do not wish to offer the government anything but constructive suggestions, but criticism is a tonic and stirs governments to action, so long as it is founded on fact and is not actuated mainly by party bias or a desire to embarrass. The responsibility under our constitutional practice is on the government and minister. It is a heavy task at such a time as this. In my opinion the order is illegal, yet young fellows from Toronto who have enlisted in the service of their country are fined $5, which they can ill afford out of a week's pay. At Camp Borden you have a most able, popular and excellent officer. I am sorry to have to mention his camp in connection with this matter, because I do not wish a thing like hitch-hiking to interfere with a lifelong friendship for him. But I insist that the order is illegal, and I may mention that the provincial minister of highways, Hon. Mr. McQuesten, wrote to me that the Ontario government had never prosecuted a man under that order, and magistrates I have consulted tell me that they have never had a case like that before them. Why should a man getting only $1.30 a day be subjected to treatment of that kind? I appeal to the minister to reconsider this matter. He did good work in connection with the appeal for free fares; he approached the railways immediately and obtained some results. But the time has come when we should provide these men with free transportation, particularly when one remembers that 700,000 free civilian passes are issued every year.
Another matter should be mentioned at this time. The other day I travelled on the train with the chancellor of the university of Toronto on our way to the unveiling of the Macdonald memorial tablet. I do not often see the

chancellor, who is an old friend of mine, but I had occasion to observe some things which he did not seem to notice. At the rear of the morning train every morning recently, going to Kingston was one car which, when we stopped at Trenton, was soon filled by men of the air force. Indeed last Monday it was so packed with air force men and so overcrowded, there was no room for other soldiers who joined the same car at stations further on. I do not know why this overcrowding is necessary on the Canadian National Railways. Quite a number of cars used on Canadian National trains consist of old-fashioned carriages built at least thirty years ago. It is a shame that troops should be transported in that way all over Canada. They should have first-class accommodation. The minister wrote me and got some reform recently.
Then as to meals on the trains. The minister conferred with the management of both railways about a matter I raised as to the heavy cost of meals on trains, and secured some reduction in the cost of meals for soldiers. I am glad to see that, but in my opinion a corporation such as the Canadian National Railways which has spent vast sums on branch lines and entertainments, and which has received hundreds of millions of dollars from the public, should give further relief to the troops as to meals and trains and accommodation.
I believe the minister is making some inquiries about the records system. How does it come about that, in connection with the victory loan, announcements can be made every day in the newsapers of how many subscriptions by municipalities have been received, the amounts of individual subscription, and so on, when it is so difficult to get information about recruiting by municipalities? I know it is hard to do. I believe that there is need for a change in the records office system to the unit system. Last July the civic board of control allowed to General Alexander clerical civic help-three clerks to do this for Toronto for the army. I asked the Royal Canadian Air Force to do it for the manning pool. In June Deputy Minister Duncan said he could not do it, but in July again he wrote he would do it. Why cannot the records be segregated so as to show the figures with relation to every district, every municipality? These facts will have to be available when the war is over, if only to enable the authorities to deal with matters of old age pensions, relief, hospitalization and employment. I hope that something will be done in this connection, although I admit it will be a heavy task.

Supply-National Defence
Another matter which requires attention is the utilization of public property. I obtained a return with regard to what has been done by the various Canadian universities in Canada to supply the government with facilities. I will name just one university, the great university of Toronto, which did so much in the great war in arts and medicine and science and the noble contribution of graduates and splendid undergraduates, men who never came back. In that war the university of Toronto put all its buildings and other properties at the disposal of the Royal Flying Corps and army. The city did much the same; they turned over to the department, free of charge, all the exhibition grounds and splendid buildings which have a commercial value of $22,000,000. The school board lent free of charge all its buildings and other properties. I am not criticizing our great university in respect to the present war; far from it. They gave all that was asked, no doubt, but I notice that the government has rented various stores and properties near my own office and on our main streets. A building which is not fit for recruiting has been rented on Albert street. But little seems to have been done by institutions which enjoy exemption from taxation. The university of Toronto, the return shows, has contributed only a basement in the engineering building, and accommodation for a rifle range has been provided in a room at Hart house and a small house at 184 College street. But why should the government have to pay for practically all the accommodation it requires when there are exempt properties for education, schools and church property? The Ontario government has, in this respect, taken the lead among the provinces by making available to the department its properties at Guelph, St. Thomas,, and many other places, including new Ontario, and it is willing to give more. Yet the federal government has rented from the Quebec government a large property in Quebec for five years at a rental of $177,000, to be put to other uses no doubt later on.
A word with regard to the officers and the staff. The minister's predecessor, the lamented young gentleman who occupied that office at the outbreak of the war, wrote to members of parliament the second day after the war broke out asking us not to use any influence with the officials of the department to secure appointments for persons as commissioned officers and otherwise in the public service. I believe hon. members have respected that request. I know that I have, because I never got a man an appointment. I have been here since 1921, and I have yet to get any man an appointment any place in Ottawa; if I asked for it I know I would not get it, even to-day.
Reference was made last evening to Major General Harry Crerar. I have known his whole family for a great many years. I have not seen him since before this war began. It was a splendid appointment. He is a brother-in-law of the late Sir Adam Beck. His youngest brother, Malcolm, was killed in action when be was 19 years of age while serving with General Allenby. He had only been out of the Royal Military College about six months. The general and his other brother served in France in the great war. His mother, the late Mrs. P. D. Crerar and his sister, Lady Beck, were the finest patriotic workers in Canada. I am not here to defend him; he needs no defence. I believe he was recommended as the minister said by General McNaughton. However, there are one or two other brigadiers who I know Should not have been appointed. One of them, I was told by a fellow member here, claimed he had eight senators supporting him. Whether that is so or not I do not know, as the minister has said he is sure there is no political consideration given in such promotions although many others claim they can get no promotion.
One or two other things I wish to mention. The first is that of the soldiers' bonus. If by means of an act of parliament, or by rules of construction relating to it, we are to give a new bonus to certain officials in the Canadian National Railways, or to some of their officials who enlist for civilian and military work and still hold their positions and are not going to the war, something should be done in the matter of soldiers' free transportation. If anybody is to get a cost of living bonus the soldiers should get it; the men receiving the $1.30 a day should have some consideration as is the case of the civil service.
So far as home defence is concerned, I have already raised this question; I say that we have no home defence in municipalities, but local militia. They can have all the blackouts they like; they have some soldiers as home guard-they have already got it started as well as the air raid precautions I referred to here in 1938-39. My views on this matter were expressed as soon as the war broke out, and again in May, June and July of last year. I thought we should fallow the example of Finland, and train every man, woman and child to handle a rifle. I interviewed the present minister on the home guard matter. That is the proper course for a sparsely populated country like Canada. There is no use in letting the people think they are protected with black-outs, trying to persuade the people of Canada, in every municipality, that they have home defence when they have nothing of the kind, suggesting that we are
Supply-National Defence

armed for an emergency in all places, when in some towns and small places we have not so much as a pinwheel, a firecracker or a skyrocket for home defence. The hon. member for Temiscouata, when speaking the other day on the needs of his own constituency for defence remarked that you cannot blow your nose in this house without saying that it is for the war effort: everything is "for the war effort".
We are assured that the British government consents and agrees to everything which this government has done. That is the reply given to everything mentioned. I do not know whether they consented to the hon. member here blowing his nose and agreed that that too is part of the war effort. But everything, it is said, is consented to by the British government; they asked for it, and it is all right; and this we are expected to believe, without any document supporting it, because somebody says so.
In my opinion people should be told the truth and the grave danger we are in. So far as the municipalities are concerned, there is no such thing as home defence. I discussed last July the question of air raid precautions with the minister and the deputy minister as to adopting the Finland way. I did so three months before the matter was taken up by the provincial authorities in Ontario. I suggest that we should follow the example of Finland and have every man, woman and child taught to handle a rifle. Miniature ranges should be established all over Canada as the first step in local defence, and air raid precautions also are necessary.
We have an information department which is known here as the publicity bureau. That is the only bit of humour I have heard during the session apart from one or two other examples. A publicity bureau giving only propaganda information.
I was speaking a little while ago about the amenities of British public life. As we all know, pacifists like Morrison, Alexander, MacDonald and others one could mention were promoted to the cabinet. The First Lord of the Admiralty, Mr. Alexander, reduced the navy from 72 to 50 capital ships, would not build destroyers, and Britain was no longer a first class power. Mr. Morrison, head of the London County Council would not allow certain facilities or buildings to be used by the air force three years ago, and Mr. MacDonald a pacifist, who helped with the Irish bases, was league-minded. Our information bureau now has at its head a gentleman who was a pacifist and isolationist, who introduced into the house on March 31, 1939, a bill which I talked out, because it had for its purpose the declaration that when war

came we would be neutral and parliament would decide. I objected to our small militia votes.
Who is to blame for the absolutely defenceless position of the country when war broke out? The answer is that all parties were responsible, because, almost everyone in the house seemed to be saturated with the Geneva fad, the Geneva nonsense, with the result that we reduced our army, our air force and our navy to practically nothing- so much so that Hitler thought that some of the dominions would not come to the support of the motherland but would remain neutral.
As regards the question of theatres of war, it is my opinion that the primary theatre, Great Britain, should be looked after. Canada has only 80,000 troops in England. We should have a large army over there so that when Britain has achieved the mastery of the air they might help Britain take the offensive, with the aid of the fleet.
Coming to the question of cadet services, I may say that at one time I was the only member of parliament who stood up for this highly essential institution when every attempt was made to abolish it in the years from 1932 to 1937. In fact, it was abolished by the school board of Toronto. But if it had not been for the cadet services, away back in the time of the Northwest rebellion and the south African war as well as in the last great war and this present struggle, I do not know where the militia would have been in Toronto. The cadet services are a valuable auxiliary, and always the backbone of the militia.
As regards the medical services, the minister stated that 14,000 men had been discharged since the war started. In the pension committee I think the figure given was 1,800 in one month. The minister of pensions has done good work in pensions, as he did previously when at the head of the army, and I trust these men will be generously dealt with.
The only question I should like to discuss for a moment now in conclusion is one that was raised by the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Bruce). I have myself discussed it on four or five different occasions. I say now that we could have done better, even under a voluntary system, and could have had a volunteer army of 750,000, if recruiting had been encouraged, instead of on again, off again, on again. The present minister is not altogether to blame, because he took over the department when recruiting had fallen down and enthusiasm had been somewhat spent. The fact is that nothing w'as done to encourage young men who were eager to enlist at the right time and tried to get

Supply-National Defence
in. I remember seeing outside the armouries in Toronto at 9 a.m., men who stood there between the hours of six and nine in the morning on January 6, 1940, when it was eight below zero, a line-up of men who quite obviously were anxious to get into the army; but these men were not even allowed to go into the armouries so as to get out of the cold. Here are the newspaper pictures of it. There were young fellows from Mimico and Aurora and other districts who were wearing sweaters at the time, and many of these young fellows had to get a meal at the Scott institute. There has been a considerable improvement, but I suggest that if the minister cannot get recruits he should adopt some other method. He should study the situation critically between now and the time parliament reassembles and be prepared to make a report that will satisfy the people as to whether it is necessary to take other methods. We compel our citizens to be educated in order to be able to take their places in civil life, and I do not see why one of the first essentials of education for responsible citizenship should not be training to fit men to defend their homes and their country. If we compel every worker to insure himself against the chances of unemployment in industrial life, while working with the vast mechanization of to-day, and the discoveries in arts and science and other matters, why not also equally to insure oneself and one's fellows against this present German disaster, which means not only loss of wages but of the very life worth living for free men. The only European countries which did not have compulsory service were little Luxemburg and Vatican city.
Australia and New Zealand have had compulsory training and service for home defence for many years-true for home defence mostly, as they are so close to Japan.
Conscription is the only system that is just to all; the pity of it is that in the last war it was mixed up with politics and never had a chance. If we had run the voluntary system properly it would not be necessary. As I said in 1937 and 1938, the most exposed provinces are the maritimes, Quebec and British Columbia. Are we going to wait until the enemy appears on our own soil, as it did in the small countries of Europe, with its vast mechanization, and brutality and savagery, before we get a proper army, navy and air force and raise a million men?
With regard to recruiting, we could have had 750,000 men under the voluntary system if we had gone about it properly. Compulsory national service is the most democratic system that could possibly be devised. Under such a system none can complain. All are
treated alike; all are required to render the same sort of service, to submit to the same system of discipline. Nothing increases so much the spirit of loyalty and patriotism as service. To make every citizen feel that he, individually, is part of the defensive force of the country would make him justly proud; the physical and mental training and discipline and practical instruction which is part of the education of a soldier to-day, would make him a more valuable citizen in every way, and the time spent in his military service would be returned to him many-fold in increase of efficiency and ability for sustained and disciplined effort in all his subsequent career.
National service is fair in principle, avoids discrimination and the practice of substitution or securing an exemption by payment of a stipulated amount. It makes a better man, a self-respecting man-in all, a better citizen. We can only become really strong and invincible when every man in the broad expanse of our land. can be taught cheerfully to recognize his obligation of service and to take pride and satisfaction in the knowledge that he is a qualified defender of our common liberties and one of the guardians of this glorious land.
By the New York State constitution, all ablebodied male citizens between the ages of eighteen and forty-five, who are residents, of the state, constitute the militia. There is' no more danger of our nation becoming militaristic through preparedness than there was that the students of colleges would become ruffians or prize-fighters when the colleges made attendance in the gymnasium compulsory. There is more danger of militarism from unpreparedness than from the maintenance of a sufficient army and navy. Can anyone doubt that any great defeat suffered by this country in war would change this country to a militaristic nation, because the man of the sword would become the national hero, since through him our national rights could most potently be restored?
The late Mr. Hamilton Merritt in his book on national service, is responsible for the last fifteen lines which I have quoted with reference to the state of New York.
I have just a few more words to say. I have received a letter from a lady who has a son in Singapore. He has been with the navy and has been anxious to come home on leave. He has six months' leave, but the foreign exchange control board will not give him any Canadian funds to come home, and his father and mother are ill. I do not like to be sending the minister letters all the time. If all members send him letters it would mean. 245 multiplied. Also a traveller on the train from Montreal met a boy the other day whose mother had died. He had no funds with which to get home; he had had a hard
Supply-National Defence

time getting enough together to get him to Toronto and it will cost him three weeks [DOT] pay. I hope the minister will be able to arrange for a fund of some kind to take care of cases like this. I apologize for detaining the committee, but I represent a military district and I get a great many complaints. They do not all belong to my riding, but for some reason or other they write to me. I should be glad if a lot of them would write to somebody else, because I do not want to take up the time of the house and of our overworked officials.
We do not know where we are going to be until we come back here. Everything is as usual in Canada and every member of parliament should see that it is not as usual. You cannot go into any amusement place without seeing it. I had a complaint this morning from a man whose son was killed in the present war off England. He served with the 1st battalion in the last war and he complains that people are asking him to enlist. The boy's mother has received some kind of cross from the government which she appreciates very much, but the father has been stopped, even by soldiers, and asked to enlist. I think such men should be given some sort of button to wear.


Mr. BRUCE:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to commend the very encouraging statement made this morning by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) and express the hope that it will have a splendid effect upon the morale of our people. I also hope that the spirit as well as the words of that statement will be carried out. If the facts were given to this house, as they are in the British House of Commons, I am sure that we would all agree with what the hon. member for Edmonton East (Mrs. Casselman) is reported to have said a few days ago. I quote:
I see no value in criticizing until fully informed upon a subject, and then being prepared to offer suggestions for improvement.
May I digress for a moment to congratulate the hon. member for Edmonton East upon her recent success at the polls and to voice the opinion that by her grace and culture she will prove a valuable addition to this house. My only regret is that the whip did not see fit to place her opposite these benches.
Although the Minister for National Defence (Mr. Ralston) placed the blame for the lack of essential equipment for the troops in Canada upon the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe)-


James Layton Ralston: I must interrupt my hon. friend. I have placed no such blame. My hon. friend is used to making that sort of insinuation and I ask him to withdraw that statement. He will not find it anywhere.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: That was my interpretation.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend has no right to say that. I ask him to point to a single sentence upon which that interpretation could be placed. My hon. friend is too prone to do this sort of thing.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: May I just finish my statement?


James Layton Ralston: I am interrupting to object to my hon. friend stating that I placed the blame for lack of equipment upon the Minister of Munitions and Supply. That is absolutely untrue. There is nothing in the records to justify that or from which my hon. friend could make an interpretation of the kind.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: I shall leave that to members of the house.


The CHAIRMAN:: A point of order has
been raised in connection with statements made by the hon. member for Parkdale reflecting upon something that has been done by the Minister of National Defence. The Minister of National Defence raises a point of order and has made a statement with respect to his own declarations and with respect to his own actions. Under the rules of the house an hon. member must accept a statement made by another hon. member with respect to what he said or did not say. Therefore, I request the hon. member for Parkdale to withdraw the remark from which such inference could be drawn.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: I abide by your ruling, and I am glad to withdraw the conclusion which I thought I was justified in arriving at from the remarks made last evening by the Minister of National Defence.
The Minister of National Defence will then have to assume responsibility himself for the deplorable situation disclosed by the hon. member for York South (Mr. Cockeram). As he pointed out, there has been widespread dissatisfaction with the functioning of the defence department, which I believe is partly due to the confusion engendered by the constant changing of plans for training. That is not only my own view; it is held by others. I should like to quote as evidence an article written by Mr. Williamson, a veteran of the last war and now secretary of the Canadian

Supply-National Defence
corps. This is entitled "We can't run two armies" and was published in Saturday Night of Ma}' 10. It reads:
There should be only one army and it should be an extremely active army. Canada is not defensible with any force that we could raise. If Britain falls, we fall. An army for home defence may contribute to that fall. It will sap the strength of the overseas army. It will take men, money and equipment. It will add complication to an already muddled situation. The thirty-day and four-month schemes were bad enough in all conscience, but to immobilize thousands of our young men for duration is madness. It would unnecessarily impede our industrial output; it would be unfair to the voluntary army overseas, and it would add nothing to the safety of the country.
The utter failure of the reserve army, as a source of reinforcements, must now be plain to all. It is no longer to be considered as a reserve. It is to be moved to the sea-boards as an army for Canada's defence, a duty it could never perform. Its failure is so abject that already it is proposed that units of the third and fourth divisions are to be broken up for reinforcements. This did not happen in the great war until four divisions had gone through the hells of Passchendaele and the Somme. With the announcement of the latest scheme, it is admitted that it never was in fact' an effective reserve. The minister now says that the organized units were, in great part, composed of men unfit for service or of those who, for personal reasons, could not go overseas. It may be nothing more than stupidity that has brought us to this pass, but the government is not keeping faith with the men who have volunteered. It has gambled, and to-day is gambling with the existence of the empire and of Canada at stake. There must be one army and one type of enlistment from this point on. Battalions of veterans and lower category men can undertake such duties as are necessary in Canada.
I received a clipping the other day from the Winnipeg Tribune of May 28 containing a letter in favour of conscription. I shall not read the letter, but I should like to refer to the editor's footnote which is as follows:
Recruiting figures show that the number of active service force volunteers, per thousand of population, is higher for French-Canadians than for English-speaking Canadians.
No one would be more pleased than I if that were true, but so far as I am aware no reply has been given by the minister to the questions which have been asked in connection with recruiting in the various provinces, unless it was his speech of May 12 last, when he said:
The thirty-day plan for compulsory training was accepted by every province including Quebec. The four-month compulsory training plan was accepted by every province. I may say that young men in the province of Quebec have come to the camps in larger surplus numbers perhaps than in any other province.
I submit that this statement does not justify the interpretation placed upon these words by the editor, and I would ask the minister to
clarify the situation by giving the figures previously asked for, as well as the figures to date, of active service force volunteers per thousand of population, of French-Canadians and of English-speaking Canadians respectively, so that there may be no cause for misunderstanding. I think it would be very helpful if the minister also would give a break-down of the recruiting figures for the various military districts in Canada up to date, showing first the number enlisted for active service overseas, and second those enlisted for home defence. In this connection I should like to ask the minister if any of the men previously discharged from the army for the reason that they were not regarded as likely to become efficient soldiers are being reenlisted. I am informed that this is so.
Heretofore we have been lulled into a sense of false security by the statements made in this house that more men were not needed. Can anyone doubt to-day that men were urgently needed, when one recalls with chagrin what happened in Libya, in Greece and in Crete, where British armies suffered a severe defeat because of lack of man power? Still more men will be needed if we are to play our part as lojrally as have the other dominions of this empire.
The Minister of National Defence is modestly asking for 32,000 men. Has he any expectation that this will meet even our immediate needs? I venture to say that if Canada is to play its part proportionately to the other dominions we will need to raise at least 300,000 men, Instead of four divisions we should now have twice that number. A Canadian Press dispatch from Hamilton, New York, dated June 9, containing a report of the speech made by the minister to the graduates of Colgate university, at which time he received an honorary degree-on which I wish to congratulate him-contains this statement:
When war began, we had 10,500 men on active service in the three fighting services, and to-day in those services we have a quarter of a million men enlisted to serve wherever duty may require them, together with a reserve army of 175,000, subject to call for the defence of Canada.
This makes a total of 425,000. Since this figure very greatly exceeds the figures given to this house so far by the minister in regard to those on active service who have enlisted for duty anywhere, will the minister say whether or not he was correctly reported?


James Layton Ralston: I can say now to my hon. friend that I am correctly reported. That statement has been made frequently.
Supply-National Defence


Herbert Alexander Bruce: I understand that we have had a third Canadian division at Debert for about a year. I should like to ask the minister if they have received sufficient training to be ready for active service, to face the enemy on equal terms. If not, is there any reason why they should not receive that training in Canada? If these troops can be trained in Canada, and I see no reason why they should not be trained here, then to me it would seem almost a criminal imposition upon the hospitality of an overcrowded, harassed England, to ask them to provide food and space to enable these troops to complete their training after they arrive in that country.
As a veteran of the last war I feel it incumbent upon me to express disagreement with the attitude of the minister towards members of the reserve army who are also members of this house, in respect to their right of criticism either inside or outside this house, in connection with the preparedness of the armed forces. I do not propose to enter into a discussion of military law, upon which the king's regulations and orders are based, but I should like to quote from a speech made by Mr. Churchill in the British House of Commons on November 21, 1940:
I entirely agree with what has been said about the desirability of members of parliament serving not only in the military services but in all other forms of warfare and discharging their parliamentary duties at the same time or in alternation. No doubt difficulties arise, but I think they are well covered, and that the good sense of the house and of hon. members will enable these dual and occasionally conflicting functions to be discharged.
During the last war, as well as this war, there have been notable instances of such criticism in the British House of Commons. For instance, Admiral Keyes spoke in criticism of the Norwegian fiasco, and during the last war Admiral Beresford also criticized the government. If this can go on in England under the stress of war surely it would have been better if the Minister of National Defence had not insisted on too legal an interpretation of the words rather than the spirit of the king's regulations and order.


James Layton Ralston: Mr. Churchill was talking about speeches in parliament. I have raised no objection to speeches in parliament.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: I think I am right in assuming that the minister did object formally in the house.


James Layton Ralston: Well, if my hon. friend has another assumption or impression or interpretation I am saying that I did not.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: Of course I am bound to accept the minister's statement. I would

suggest to him that criticism is often the truest form of loyalty. Prime Minister Churchill evidently thought so, for in his statement in the British house a few days ago he said:
No one, however ministerially minded, could possibly complain of the tone, temper and matter of this debate. The kind of criticism we have had to-day-some of it very searching -is the kind that the government not only accepts but welcomes.
May I express the hope that the ministerial benches will profit by this statement by Mr. Churchill.


James Layton Ralston: I adopt that statement of Mr. Churchill's in November.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: I am very glad to hear the minister make that statement.


James Layton Ralston: That is exactly what I was suggesting, that there would be conflicts from time to time and that I thought they could be reconciled; and that is what Mr. Churchill has said.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: I had not intended during this session to reply to the minister's totally unjustifiable attack upon me on May 12 lost, but since the subject has been again opened I feel called upon to make some comment.
It was a little over a month ago that I recommended selective compulsory enlistment as the only fair and efficient way to meet the complex needs of Canada. As I stated then, I now repeat, I spoke then and now speak only for myself. The minister characterized my remarks as a blow at our national unity and, whether I intended it or not, an attempt to undermine it. I entirely dissent from that view. In my belief there is nothing that would better promote national unity than the idea that every citizen in Canada, irrespective of his racial origin, is playing an equal part in this great struggle.
The other day the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) stated that equality of sacrifice, according to ability to pay, has been the basis for taxation. I ask that equality of sacrifice, according to the ability to serve, should also be the basis for enlistment. I believe that one large section of our population, the FrenclnCanadians of Quebec, are as much concerned about the preservation of their freedom and the survival of the British empire as are any other sections in Canada. To suggest otherwise is an insult to their loyalty.
I should now like to quote from a French-Canadian newspaper to show the changed attitude in that province in respect of Canada's participation in war outside of Canada. I

Supply-National Defence
hold in my hand an editorial from Le Soleil of Quebec, June 4, 1941, and, I quote in part, as follows:
It could not be otherwise, because we are the most genuine and the truest Canadians. We have said that among us, as in all the other provinces, there will always be a sufficient number of volunteers to defend our country- even if to defend Canada it is necessary to meet the enemy on another ground to prevent them from coming here. No intelligent and bona fide Canadian doubts this. On the other hand, everything shows that Canada is menaced. The theatre of war is enlarging. Who would refuse to admit that it is better to prevent Canada from becoming a battle field? That it is better to spare our women and children the unfortunate lot of the women and children of Europe? That it is better to meet the enemy where they are and halt them in their march toward America?
I am afraid, however, that the question has been approached rather from the point of view of political expediency than in any other way. I may say quite frankly that at the present time I am not concerned about the fortunes of any political party, but I am concerned about the survival of Canada as an integral part of the British empire. If we lost this war HitleT would very soon get rid of all political parties, as well as our democratic way of life. Nearly a year ago the United States, although not at war, called up 1,000,000 men for compulsory selective draft. I believe the word "draft" is a better word than the one which I did not use in my former speech, but which was used by the minister himself- "conscription".
Surely after nearly twenty-two months of war, and with the disasters which have happened in Europe staring us in the face, we should now be eager to throw aside all political considerations, and to face stern realities. We should be ready to adopt the speediest and fairest means of securing man power to meet immediate and future needs, both in the field and in the factories.


James Layton Ralston: That means conscription of labour, as well, does it? That is the way I would understand it. I am asking my hon. friend if that is what he does mean.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: I believe a system of selective draft for all, whether in the army or otherwise, is the better way. It was accepted in the United States without protest, and it did not cause disunity, because the president was wise enough to call into his cabinet two outstanding Republicans, Mr. Stimson and Mr. Knox.
A few evenings ago we listened to an almost frantic appeal from Lord Beaverbrook for more tanks, more ships, more aeroplanes and more men. He said that life was in the balance, and made an urgent appeal for more help from Canada. The Hon. Ronald Cross,
on his way to Australia, expressed himself in similar terms. These men I submit are in a most advantageous position to know what the real needs of the present situation are overseas.
When in his speech on May 12 the minister referred to me as one who spoke glibly and without thought, he made an incorrect statement. When I advocated a change in the system I spoke only after the most mature consideration. I would point out to him that it is the realist who is serving Canada and the empire best at this time. I would also give him the same reply I gave to the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) on June 5, 1940, when I spoke in the house regarding Canada's ability to make tanks. The Minister of Munitions and Supply said as reported at page 309 of Hansard 1940-and I took it that he was referring to me, and to something I had said on May 28, 1940-
So when a man stands up and makes reckless statements about two firms in Hamilton that can build tanks-
And so on. I replied as follows:
I wish to tell the minister that I am not in the habit of making reckless statements.
And I say to the minister of defence that I am not in the habit of speaking glibly in the house.
My whole training and habit of life have been to observe scientific accuracy, and I resent the minister's accusation.
The Minister of Labour in England, Hon. Ernest Bevin, speaking on June 6 in the British House of Commons, said that the next three months will be the most vital in our history-a forecast which may be only too accurate.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at three o'clock.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: Mr. Chairman, when the committee took recess I was about to speak of a matter to which I referred in a resolution which I put on the order paper on June 3 last, and which reads as follows:
Whereas criticism has been made regarding the lack of any recognized comprehensive training plan to which training can be adjusted, as distinguished from our military plans of operation,
Therefore be it resolved that, in the opinion of this house, a planning committee should be set up to devise a training plan in keeping with the tremendous changes that have taken place in military science since the beginning of this war.
I would not venture personally to suggest a training plan but I am going to give a brief synopsis of a training plan proposed by a
Supply-National Defence

competent artillery officer who served in the last war and who has been connected with artiltery organizations ever since. He says:
Officers of vision and imagination should be chosen to constitute a military planning committee for the purpose of devising a master training plan.
Might Canada not be used as the training ground for the main hitting force (or shock troops) which will be used for victory? The Canadian corps was used as shock troops in many historic battles in the last war. These "shock troops" are highly specialized men whose job it is to break the resistance of the enemy and pave the way for the movement of the larger formations.
The "shock troops" are armoured divisions working in close cooperation with aircraft specially trained for this work. The larger formations already organized to resist invasion in the British isles, added to their normal dense population and the difficulty created by German air raiders, will add enormously to the task of training specialized "shock troops" needed in modern offensive.
The same ideal conditions found in Canada, which have enabled us to make a great success of the commonwealth air training plan, exist for the specialized training of armoured divisions.
It is believed by competent military authorities that ultimate victory depends upon the organization of a larger number of extremely mobile armoured fighting units, manned by a relatively small number of highly trained men. It is almost impossible to give adequate training for this purpose in Great Britain. No country in the world is more admirably suited for this purpose than is Canada. If this is to be our role, then Canada should specialize in the training and coordination of land and air forces suitable for attack.
Referring further to the training plan he says:
It may be necessary to create a distinct air army for the armoured fighting forces.
Germany did not delay her training until she had all necessary equipment, guns, et cetera. She used improvised equipment.
One thing that will probably attract recruits more than anything else is the knowledge that their time will not be wasted and that from the very day they enlisted their abilities will be directed into useful channels. In the opinion of many competent officers, nothing is deterring recruiting more at the present time than the fact that our young men know how ineffective the training of our land forces really is. Such methods, i.e., the use of improvised equipment, were used by Germany for years and it would be futile to deny the effectiveness of the methods they adopted for training for land forces. The urgency for such a national training plan has been stressed on many occasions by representative military groups dnd the urgency becomes more apparent every day as we sit by and read of continued German victories.
I think the best answer I can give to the minister's charge that I was attempting to drive a wedge of disunity into Canada's war

effort and that my suggestion was ill-timed and unnecessary will be to quote from a letter of Major-General Elmsley, D.S.O., C.M.G., appearing in the Globe and Mail about a week ago. General Elmsley was chief of staff at military headquarters here and is one of Canada's most distinguished soldiers. He spent thirty-three years as a professional soldier, of which seven were spent in war, which should surely equip him to speak with knowledge and authority; and I think his opinion should command the respect of all. The letter to which I refer will be found in the Globe and Mail of June 7. I quote it only in part. General Elmsley says:
Conscription honestly administered without political interference ensures equality of sacrifice, and equality of sacrifice in a democracy ensures unity. What, then, is this question of disunity that is referred to so often by politicians but never openly discussed in actual words?
We of Ontario and other provinces feel that Quebec has been represented by the existing government as irrevocably opposed, en masse, to conscription. This I cannot believe, for two reasons.
1.	As a Roman Catholic I am of the same religion as the majority of the people of Quebec, and our church maintains that we should take up arms in support of our government in a just war, and there is admittedly no question about the justness of this war. No Roman Catholic either of Quebec or of any other province can therefore refuse his armed support to his government on religious grounds.
2.	As a soldier by profession of thirty-three years' service and of this seven years spent in war, may I state that I have served under French-Canadians as my superior officers, with French-Canadians as my equals and under me, and they have proved repeatedly in peace and in war that they are a gallant and honourable people. . . .


Mr. LAPOINTE (Quebec East):: The hon. member should say that to Doctor Shields.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: He will probably be able to
read that.
Colonel Ralston has stated publicly that there is no need for conscription. Others have said with equal emphasis that we have come to the end of our resources of man power on a voluntary basis of enlistment. Only the results of the present appeal for an additional 32,000 men on a voluntary basis will give an indication of the correctness of these claims. It is certain, however, that heavy fighting and heavy casualties are bound to occur in the near future, and the question will arise shortly whether our war effort overseas is to be restricted by the use of volunteers only, or whether the whole of our man power is to be utilized under conscription.
History has shown that conscription enforced unexpectedly in a panic or emergency-and an emergency may arise in a matter of weeks or months-is a criminal disservice, as it creates bitterness and distrust among fighting men who have enlisted on a voluntary basis and those who have enlisted on a compulsory basis, and

Supply-National Defence
furthermore disrupts our war industries by introducing grave disputes between the employers of labour and the requirements of our fighting services.
Conscription should be discussed now, and if deemed advisable adopted forthwith.
He concludes by saying:
We cannot serve two masters in this war, that is, the cause of our king, Great Britain and our sister dominions on the one hand, and our local political interests on the other. These interests are obviously not identical and will, therefore, come into conflict to the detriment of our fighting activities.
In view of what the minister said this morning, I should like to call attention to the rebuke which he administered to the hon. member for Hastings-Peterborough when he spoke in this house on March 11, as reported in Hansard at page 1416. I wonder what has caused the minister to change his views since 1917, when he was serving in France in his majesty's forces, as to the freedom allowed officers. The minister did not hesitate at that time to take part in a political campaign in Canada, although he was not a candidate. According to the Halifax Chronicle of December 14, 1917, he sent the following cable to A. K. Maclean, the candidate of union government for Halifax:
France, Dec. 12, 1917.
I strongly favour the immediate operation of the Military Service Act, and hope Nova Scotia will heavily support candidates pledged to that policy.
Ralston.
I should like to ask the minister if he considers the situation to-day less critical than it was in December, 1917. At that time we had the support of Russia, the powerful fleets of Japan, and Italy, unbeaten France with its superb army, and the help as an ally of the great United States of America, in addition to receiving supplies from many neutral countries all of which are now under the heel of Hitler; while to-day, Great Britain fights alone.


James Layton Ralston: Let me at once refer to two or three points which my hon. friend has brought up.
Regarding the training of the army, with all due deference to him I prefer to accept the advice of the officers who know conditions overseas, who have been overseas, who have been in close touch, not only with General McNaughton, but with the staff overseas of the war office, from the chief of the Imperial General Staff down, and who therefore have some idea of the requirements of training in this country.
Let me say further that while I respect General Elmsley's views as a military man,
the opinion he expresses with regard to conscription is expressed not in his capacity as a military man but in his capacity as a citizen of this country, just the same as anybody else. So I do not think that all the build-up which my hon. friend has given to General Elmsley in connection with his military record has anything much to do with the soundness or otherwise of his expression of opinion as a civilian upon this particular question.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: It shows his experience.


James Layton Ralston: It shows his experience as a military man, but my hon. friend is quoting his opinion on a matter quite apart from his military experience.
Let me now come to the matter dealt with by my hon. friend in the last three minutes of his speech, in which he observed that in 1917 I favoured the national service act of that time. My hon. friend asks, what is the difference between now and then? Let me tell him. At that time we were in the third year of the great war; in fact it had been going on for nearly three years and a quarter. So far, the present war has lasted for about twenty months, and in all three services we have had probably seven hundred casualties. Up to December of 1917 Canadian casualties were numbered in the tens of thousands. Already the fifth division had had to be broken up in order to furnish reinforcements. When that telegram was sent, I, as an officer of a battalion, had had the experience of receiving men from dismantled battalions from all over Canada-units which had had to be broken up in order to provide reinforcements to replace casualties. At that time the battle of Passachendaele had just been fought and the Canadian corps had been decimated. The casualties in my own battalion in the two days we were engaged numbered between four and five hundred, of which 138 were killed. That was the condition in December, 1917. What is the condition in Canada to-day? It is that we have enlisted less men at this time than we had at the corresponding stage of the last war, that we have had comparatively few casualties, that the army has not been in action, although it is holding a strategic position in England at the suggestion and request of the British government. I say to my hon. friend that, at that time, recruiting campaign after recruiting campaign had been put on in Canada, from one end to the other. I myself in the spring of 1916, a year a half after war was declared, was engaged in an intensive volunteer recruiting campaign, and after that time, battalion after battalion after battalion was raised in this country under the volunteer system.
Supply-National Defence

So that the condition then and the condition now cannot be compared. We are at this time, as I pointed out the other day, engaged in the first intensive campaign for recruits since this war began-the very first. And I ask my hon. friend again in all seriousness as a citizen of Canada: Why raise this question of conscription at this time? He knows that in 1917 it split Canada from top to bottom.
We had at that time no such united position as we have in Canada to-day. As I said the other day, in October, one m'onth after war was declared, the province of Quebec had an election on the issue as to whether they would participate in this war. What did they do? They voted overwhelmingly to stand with Canada in the war-to stand with Canada, who was standing by the side of Britain. That was followed by compulsory training, known as the thirty-day training scheme. That plan was advised by the chief of the general staff, and put into effect. I venture to say it did a great deal to bring the young men of Canada-not simply the young men of Quebec- to a realization that there was a national duty to perform. Eighty thousand men were trained at that time. That was followed by the four months training plan, whereby the men took not only basic training, but advanced training as well. That was put into effect. Both those plans were accepted all over the Dominion of Canada, without exception anywhere. Then the plan was announced which stated that those who had their four months' training would be drafted-to use my hon. friend's expression-for service in Canada. That, too, was accepted all across Canada.
Having regard to that situation, and to the unity which undoubtedly prevails, I really feel my hon. friend is not doing a service to Canada at this time when he advocates conscription. Probably this afternoon the premier of Quebec will be doing what? He will be asking the young men of Quebec to volunteer to enlist in connection with this recruiting campaign. That is an example of unity. I ask my hon. friend why he wishes to introduce this discordant note at a time when we are engaged in raising recruits. The effect of it is-and my hon. friend must be able to see this-that it provides a young man who may doubt whether he needs to enlist with a reason for delaying to do so. It hinders the war effort, as I said the. other day; and it hinders the campaign which is going on across Canada at the present time.
It will be noticed that my hon. friend is not advocating anything of this kind in regard to money. I have no doubt that he is serving on some kind of committee. He is no doubt asking Canadians to subscribe their money to our war loan. But my hon. friend

suggests that we pass a law right now before we have really tried the volunteer system, fold our arms, and request these young men to come in.
Some suggestion has been made about compulsory service in other dominions. I made a mistake myself the other day, and I wish to correct it. In New Zealand there is provision for compulsory service but in the other dominions, Australia and south Africa there is no such law. Enlistments are voluntary.
I say to my hon. friend I had the feeling that at this time he might-and those who think as he does-help in every way possible in connection with this campaign to get men. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that this campaign will do a great deal in the Dominion of Canada to encourage future enlistment. I must agree with those who say that we have not put to the young men of Canada, perhaps as we should, the need for men. I agree that we did not take all the men that were offered. Why? Because-I can say this now, as I said it the other day-because conditions were such, in connection with shipping, that we could not send overseas the men we intended to. We were having to shift plans from time to time. There was a necessity for accommodation. There was a necessity for armament. It was considered that recruiting could be allowed to take its normal course according to our needs. We began recruiting again in February, I think it was. The number recruited did not come up to the quota, which meant that next month you had to add to that month the deficiency of the month before, and so on with the next month. That is one of the reasons for the call for recruits now in this first intensive recruiting campaign that has been put on.
But that was not the only reason by any means. Another was that establishments, particularly in connection with the technical units, were increased, and men who had been expected to be used for reinforcements were used instead to fill up those increased establishments.
Another reason was, and is, that we took the men out of the technical units from the fourth division to form the armoured division. We did not plan to build the fourth division up until some time later, but we decided in view of the situation to accelerate that, and we are now asking for something like 8,000 men for the fourth division.
Then there were discharges on medical grounds which were greater than we expected. When I found there was doubt as to the phj'sical capacity of some men, and I have in mind particularly certain units, to stand the strain, as I wanted to see that we sent

Supply-National Defence
over to Great Britain an army that could stand up with any of them, I insisted that there be a further medical examination. That examination was made, a large number of men were discharged, and that adds of course to the number we are requiring and asking for to-day.
We are making a special call for 32,000 recruits, and there will be the quotas from month to month to make up wastage. But I believe that if we educate the people of Canada now in connection with this recruiting campaign as to the need for men from this time on, and if we have them realize that there is a situation which demands their support, we shall get it and the impetus given by this campaign will assist us with the further quotas needed.
That is the position. My hon. friend and I differ in connection with it but I deprecate again my hon. friend bringing this question up before we have even really tried out the voluntary system in Canada.
With regard to the other matters to which my hon. friend has referred, I do not think there is very much point in my going over them in detail at this late stage of the session. He has dealt extensively with training. I have already received a letter and a memorandum from the author of the memorandum which my hon. friend read to the committee to-day, and I have had that memorandum examined, sentence by sentence, by the training officers of the department. I have had it examined, not in a spirit of defence or in a spirit of excuse, but to see what there was in it that was good and that we could make use of, to stack up the suggestions made therein against actual performance, against what is being done to-day, and to adopt any remedial measures when such seemed to be indicated. Certain suggestions I think in the light of the experience of the training officers, particularly the experience we have had overseas, would not prove to be sound. But in so far as the-memorandum makes constructive suggestions which can be used, I assure my hon. friend they will be used.
I do not propose to follow my hon. friend in connection with the other matters he mentioned. Let me just say this:	The man
who is speaking to you to-day has a fairly heavy task. I need all the help and all the support I can possibly get. I believe that in the interests of Canada at this time the thing to do is to drive on with this recruiting campaign and have young men realize that young men are needed and ask them to come in, and I propose to do that. I believe I would not be a good Canadian if I did not do that. That is my position, and I ask my
hon. friend and all others to put their shoulders to the wheel in connection with this campaign, and instead of suggesting alternative methods in the middle of the recruiting campaign, to endeavour to assist in every way possible to impress on young men that they are required and the attractions of service for Canada in her hour of need.
May I say just a word to the hon. member for Broadview. He brought up quite a few questions, and I am not going to deal with them in detail. I only say to him, as I have had to say to him before, that the suggestions which he has made will be considered. I have given a good deal of thought to some of the subjects to which he has referred, and he knows I have had a good deal of correspondence with him. I do want to say one word, and it is because the man is not here to answer for himself. The hon. member introduced-perhaps through inadvertence- but I would not want it to remain on the record as it is-the suggestion that General Crerar was selected on the suggestion of- I understood him to say-"a late senator". I do not know to whom he refers. I have no idea who he is talking about. All I want to say is that no suggestion of any kind or description came from any senator or any member of the House of Commons or, for that matter, anyone on this side of the water with regard to the selection of General Crerar. The selection was made, as I said last night, and I give my word to the house for this, solely on the recommendation of General McNaughton after I had a personal conversation with him and after he had considered the matter fully.
I am not going to take up the time of the committee any longer. I only say that I feel from the bottom of my heart that we are trying to do a job in the Department of National Defence. I have said time and time again, and I repeat, that we are not content or satisfied. I can only pledge to the house that I will give my best in order to see the job through.


John George Diefenbaker: As I listened to the concluding words of the Minister of National Defence with reference to those who would at this time raise one part of Canada against another, I thought the time has come when we must forget this question of racial descent in this country and be Canadians first and foremost. I have felt for years that one of the things that may break down the fabric of this country is the fact that every ten years men who are and whose ancestors have been Canadians for generations have to register in the census their racial descent. That is one thing that perpetuates in this
Supply-National Defence

country the type of citizenship that we do not want. I have no French blood in my veins, but I believe that those who do come from that part of Canada are as anxious and as willing to serve as those from any other part of this dominion and to assert the contrary is to do a great disservice to Canada and its unity of purpose.


Mr. McDONALD (Pontiac):: Why all this talk about it? Why always cite Quebec?


John George Diefenbaker: Mention was made of that by the minister.


James Layton Ralston: I beg my hon. friend's
pardon; the mention was first made by the hon. member for Parkdale.


John George Diefenbaker: I was replying to
the observations of the minister. The minister admits to-day something that we have said over and over again on this side of the house, that so far as this government is concerned there has been no concerted policy of recruiting. It has been spasmodic, and lackadaisical. He says-and I realize the load of responsibility he carries; have some appreciation of what it must be-that up to the present time we have not tried to get recruits in a large way. The result speaks for itself.


Mr. McNIVEN:: He gave the reasons.


John George Diefenbaker: In my opinion it
is due to the failure to have recruiting speeches and bands, but the consequence to-day is that this country is in a deadening torpor of complacency.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: Hon. members can say what they wish. The reason why the minister says it is necessary for speeches on the part of members of parliament and others including the premier of Quebec is that the people have to be aroused now. Only a few days ago the minister made the statement in a speech that he delivered before the Rotary club in Toronto: "I think our most dangerous enemy on this side of the Atlantic is the idea that there is lots of time."
Too late, too late, has been the history of many countries in Europe to-day. We to-day have our Jena, our Austerlitz, we shall have our Waterloo if we realize before it is too late that something has to be done now to encourage recruiting, and to assure an ample production of the instruments of war, tanks aeroplanes and munitions.
The minister criticized the hon. member for Parkdale for some reference he made to there having been a failure in production. This is what the minister himself said-


James Layton Ralston: I beg my hon. friend's
pardon; the only reference I made to the hon. member for Parkdale was in regard to his reference to a late senator. I mean the hon. member for Broadview.


John George Diefenbaker: The statement that the minister made as I understood it was this, that there had been no criticism of the Minister of Munitions and Supply in any statement that he made last night. The words of the minister were these:
He knows that our present commitments are for an army tank brigade, for a third division and for an armoured division. Those are the commitments we made for this year, and our endeavour naturally is to see to it that these units are supplied with equipment just as rapidly as possible. I cannot get equipment for these units any faster than Canadian industry turns it out.
Now after almost two years of war the minister of one department states in answer to the allegation made by the hon. member for York South, "What you say is true; there is not the equipment there should be; we have not been able to equip because industry has not produced." I ask the minister this: what about the National Resources Mobilization Act passed last June? It gave powers to this government asked by the Prime Minister as an emergency measure. It gave the government power to take over industries that were falling short. Why have the powers granted under this act not been utilized in order to ensure the required production? Yet we have been told repeatedly by the Minister of Munitions and Supply that all is well, that everything is in order, that tanks are being produced. Did the tank that was produced the other day have a Canadian engine or transmission? Then there is the question of aeroplane production, on which we have not had a report since March. We have had no report, nor have the people of Canada had a report, as to the present situation with regard to the production of aircraft. All we have had are general statements that all is well; and the psychological effect of the government continuously painting a picture of self-satisfaction in connection with Canada's war effort and the progress of the war has in the past engendered and will continue to engender apathy.
Why is there not the enlistment there should be? Look at the province of Saskatchewan, where we have a very fine record. Sometimes aspersions are levelled against those of racial descent other than British, but consider the record of the Ukrainian people and the contribution they have made and are making to our armed forces. If there is a failure to secure recruits it may be for one

Supply-National Defence
of three reasons. The first is that so far as the various departments of this government are concerned there is no coordination. I am not going into any detail in that connection except to say that one of the strongest objections to recruiting has been the fact that the men in Canada did not receive fair treatment in the matter of transportation while on leave. The minister now has seen fit to remove that objection in large measure. Why was it not removed months ago? Six months ago the minister said it could not and would not be done.


James Layton Ralston: Oh, no. If my hon. friend will permit me, what I said exactly was that free transportation could not be given. I stated that I would consult with the railways to see if there could be a reduction of fares; I did that, and that reduction has been made.
Mr. DIEFENBAIvER: Yes, Mr. Chairman, that was the last statement, after hon. members had brought up the matter time and again from June, 1940, on. It was postponed and put off. To-day that criticism has borne fruit. Why? Simply because of the fact that public opinion has been aroused and has demanded that something be done. One of the salient criticisms that I direct against this government to-day-and I say this in all kindliness-is that in many things it will not move until public opinion forces it to move.
Let me go back to the situation in Saskatchewan and western Canada generally. I have mentioned the wonderful record of the Ukrainian people and what I have said applies to Canadians of other racial descents in my province. One of the things most seriously hampering recruiting is the attitude that was taken by this government in an order in council passed on September 25, 1940, with regard to the Doukhobors. These people are antagonistic to any participation in warfare. Everyone, of course, respects religious scruples. The Doukhobors came to Canada, their rights being contained in an order in council dated December 6, 1898, which included the following paragraph with regard to military service:
The minister recommends that under the power vested in your excellency in council by the above provision, the Doukhobors, settling permanently in Canada, be exempted unconditionally, from service in the militia, upon the production in each case of a certificate of membership from the proper authorities of their community.
That was the exemption; that was the pledge upon which they settled in Canada. What happened in September, 1940? This government set up a higher type of citizenship for the Doukhobors in Saskatchewan and
British Columbia than is enjoyed by any British citizen in this dominion when it passed an order in council extending the order in council of 1898 to-
-the descendants of such immigrants who have continued without interruption to be members of the aforesaid sect or denomination . . .
The other day I was speaking to a Ukrainian who has two sons overseas with the forces of this country. He pointed out the situation in reference to the Doukhobors and said, "Nobody objects to their not having to fight in the armed forces of this country, but what did they do?" They refused to take their medical examinations when they were called up; they just did not turn up. Did the government punish any of them? And when the question of exemption was brought up they were ordered to appear before the military tribunal set up in the province of Saskatchewan, or at least they were ordered to appear along with all the others.


James Layton Ralston: Not a military tribunal.


John George Diefenbaker: The tribunal headed by Hon. Mr. Justice Embury.


James Layton Ralston: Not a military tribunal.


John George Diefenbaker: Then what do you call it?


James Layton Ralston: The tribunal under the Department of National War Services.


John George Diefenbaker: That is it. Did they turn up when everybody else did? No. The Doukhobors said, "We will stay at home," and at home they stayed, and as yet they have not been proceeded against. This is what they said, according to the statement I have here: "We refuse to serve in any capacity. We will not leave our farms. We will refuse to appear for medical examination." The toleration of that sort of thing does not encourage recruiting. Why should these people, entitled as they are to exemption, be able to flaunt the laws of this country?
I have in my hands a copy of a letter written by the Doukhobors to the Prime Minister on June 24, 1940, which was attached to a return brought down the other day. In this letter the Doukhobors tell the Prime Minister what they are going to do in reference to the matter of military service. There is one paragraph in this letter which may afford an explanation for the unusually tender treatment being accorded these people, under which they are allowed to break the law at their own convenience.
You would no doubt recall that while on your election campaign the delegation of Named Doukhobors, consisting of Nilcoto Popoff, Alex
Supply-National Defence

Cheveldave and others of Blaine Lake, Saskatchewan, have approached you at Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, on or about 29th day of February, regarding this same subject, and were assured by you that while there were no conscription of compulsory service required at that time, the issuance of such exemption certificates was unnecessary. And you have further assured them that the government would grant such exemption certificates to be issued in case the conscription or compulsory service would be necessary.
It was following this letter that the order in council was passed extending the order in council of 1898 to the descendants of those who entered this country at that time. The passing of the order in council has had a detrimental effect on recruiting in the province of Saskatchewan.
Let me give two other reasons. The first I pointed out the other day, and I am asking the minister to take it up with the Minister of Agriculture with a view to having it altered. In Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta the Prairie Farm Assistance Act is in effect, under which the farmer must contribute one per cent of the value of his crop. Yet, Mr. Chairman, if any farmer who has contributed his proportion, as required by law, which assures him against failure in his crop, proceeds to enlist in the army of this country, between May 1 and November 1, he loses his bonus. Surely there is no justification for that. It is penalizing the man who enters Canada's army. We are asking for recruits across the country, in the agricultural districts as elsewhere. How can we ask for recruits if we say to a man who is prepared to leave his farm after sowing his crop, that if he enlists we will take away from him the right to share in the bonus provided by the government of Canada.
Surely that is inexcusable. It is an inexcusable detriment so far as recruiting in the agricultural districts is concerned.
I now pass on to the next matter.


Mr. CRERAR:: What does my hon. friend mean by the -word "bonus"? He has said that the men will lose the bonus. What does he mean by that?


Mr. ROWE:: The hon. member should
understand that.


John George Diefenbaker: I thought the minister would have understood what I meant when I referred to a bonus under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act, to be paid when there has been a failure in crops. The bonus is then payable, as the minister knows.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: My hon. friend is using the term in the wrong sense.


John George Diefenbaker: Oh, I do not think I have to be informed by the minister as to just what the right sense is,-no, no! I am
TMr. Diefenbaker.]
using it in this sense: if a man enlists in the army, in answer to the call sent out by the Minister of National Defence, and if there is a failure in the crop area in which that man lives, every other person in that area is entitled to a bonus. I say that the man who enlists should be entitled to a bonus as well.
Quite a few farmers came back after the last war and took up land under the provisions of the Soldier Settlement Act. They have been farming ever since. They are in no better financial position than the general run of farmers, but from year to year they have continued to farm their land. Those men are re-enlisting in this war. What is happening to-day ? They leave behind them their dependents, their wives and children. Would hon. members not think that the department in charge of the administration of the Soldier Settlement Act would refrain from badgering those dependents at times such as these?
Let me explain. On March 19, 1941, this government passed an order in council providing as follows:
Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary contained in any of the regulations providing for payment of dependents' or marriage allowances in respect of dependents of members of the Canadian armed forces, that in all cases where the dependents of an enlisted person continue to occupy the farm for which such person is indebted to the director of soldier settlement and in respect of which the contract terms are not otherwise satisfactorily provided for, there may be deducted from the dependents' or marriage allowance amounts sufficient to provide for payment of taxes-
And so on. What an invitation to enlist! Those people go overseas, and this is the way they are treated. I have letters here-one from a man who left his wife and two children on the land. He is advised by the department-I should say that she is advised-that $15 a month is to be deducted from her allowance in order to pay taxes against land owned by the government of Canada. A portion of the letter she received from the department of dependents' allowances reads:
It is felt that in your own interests and those of your husband this financial provision is essential in order that the debt against your home and farm will not amount to proportions beyond the capacity of the farm to carry.
In effect the department informs her: "Your husband is in the army. You are not going to get the dependents' allowance that others get. You are not to get it, because your husband owes money to the soldier settlement board. We are going to deduct from the allowances made to you."


James Layton Ralston: As taxes.


John George Diefenbaker: Yes. Here is the
explanation-so that the land will not be lost.

Supply-Nation'al Defence


Mr. MAYBANK:: Is the hon. member
referring to municipal taxes which must be paid?


John George Diefenbaker: Yes, municipal
taxes. From year to year the soldier settlement board before the war continued to keep up the taxes, and did not permit the amount to grow larger and larger; but as soon as the purchaser enlisted in the service of his country his dependents were deprived to the extent of $15 a month of their statutory allowances. I would ask the minister to consider this matter. I have several letters along similar lines, one from a woman whose husband is overseas, and whose older son is overseas. All she has at home with her is a sixteen-year-old boy to assist her in her farming operations.


James Lorimer Ilsley: In respect of a city dweller
is not the dependents' allowance to cover such charges as rent, as well as charges for living expenses of the dependents? That is to say, is it not expected that out of the dependents' allowance the dependents of a soldier will make some provision for the renting of premises in which they live? Is it not just as fair in a case where there is no rent that at least the taxes should be paid out of the dependents' allowance?


John George Diefenbaker: Well, that is a legalistic justification of a situation which, I am pointing out, in its practical application is doing harm to recruiting. For years the soldier settlement board has allowed these men to remain on the land. Why now, in an hour of national peril, take it out on their dependents? Legal justification may be found, but after all I suggest to the minister that we are trying to encourage reoruiting and that such treatment on the part of any department of the government can have only an adverse result in the recruiting campaign in which Canada is now engaged.
We on this side of the house are not trying to create difficulties for the government. We are pointing out these things with a view to having them remedied. Hon. gentlemen may have read Ambassador Bullitt's speech the other day in which he said that 5,000 tanks and aeroplanes would have spelled the difference between victory and defeat for France. Just a few more men-


Ernest Lapointe: They had the men.


John George Diefenbaker: They had men dispersed in various parts of the world and men who were lulled into a false sense of security behind what they thought was an impregna-able line, the Maginot line, just as some
people in Canada think we have an impregnable line for the defence of Canada, in the Atlantic ocean, and apathy was the result.
I place this matter before the committee, Mr. Chairman, with a view to having this injustice remedied, so that we shall be able to secure that enthusiasm which is necessary if we are to overcome the apathy of the last few months engendered as a result of the failure, as I see it, on the part of those in authority to make the people of Canada realize the need and the danger and awfulness of the prospect that faces us unless Canada acts now.


Mr. GREEN:: Mr. Chairman, some time later in the day, or perhaps some time tomorrow, the Canadian parliament will adjourn, and apparently the intention is that it may not meet again for a period of approximately five months. During that time anything may happen in this world. Those five months will be the most critical five months in the history of civilization, and as a member of this parliament representing a great riding on the Pacific coast I feel that it is my duty to bring to the attention of the house before we adjourn certain suggestions and criticisms in connection with our war effort.
May I say at the outset that I listened this morning with great interest to the statement of the Prime Minister. I was very much concerned about certain portions of that statement and about the attitude of the leader of Canada, because it seemed to me that he was satisfied with Canada's war effort. I wish most heartily that I could convince myself that he is right, because it would be a great relief to me. But I cannot do so, and I do not believe that the Canadian people are satisfied that Canada is doing everything that can be done. They ask for nothing less. They insist on having that much. There is uneasiness, there is misgiving across this nation to-day, and may I point out some of the things which I think are wrong in connection with our war effort, some of the things which need to be remedied and need to be remedied without further delay.
In the first place we have too few men in Great Britain, too few men in the battle line. There are two battle lines in this war, one in Great Britain and one in the Mediterranean. Our battle line is in Great Britain, and I do not quarrel with such disposition of our troops, for Great Britain is probably the best place they could serve. Canada's battle line is in Great Britain, as every member of this house well knows, and the time of battle is in this year 1941, not in 1942 or 1943, or five years hence. The hour of Canada's battle comes this year. Yet what do we find?
Supply-National Defence

We find that there are brave Canadians in Great Britain, two infantry divisions and corps troops as well as the men serving in the navy and the air force. We find at home here in Canada, thousands of miles from our battle line, two more infantry divisions, and an armoured division and a tank brigade, made up of equally brave men, men who have been recruited, most of them, for over a year; some of them have been on active service for nearly two years-men who are without exception keen to do one thing and one thing only, and that is to get to Great Britain to fight.
It is clear-I do not think this can be contradicted-that these men can receive their final training and their full equipment only after they arrive in Great Britain. They cannot get these things here in Canada. It is equally clear that if they were sent to Great Britain it would be a spur to recruiting in Canada. Nothing would make it easier to get recruits in Canada. It is clear also that sending them to Great Britain would improve the morale of the troops themselves, and it is obvious that Great Britain needs every fighting man she can get. Our motherland has had to call up men in their late thirties. We find this statement made in April by a leading British general; I quote from the Vancouver Sun of April 15, from a Canadian Press dispatch:
London, April 15.-Lieutenant-General Sir Wilfrid Lindsell, in charge of administration, home forces, indicated to-day that the war office is ready to equip the Canadian tank brigade when it comes to England to join the Canadian corps.
"The more divisions of Canadians to arrive here the better," General Lindsell declared.


James Layton Ralston: The more divisions we can send the better, and my hon. friend knows as well as anybody why they are not going faster.


Howard Charles Green: No, that is one thing your hon. friend does not know. I cannot understand why portions at least of these divisions have not been sent over to England long before this.


James Layton Ralston: If my hon. friend will think twice he can imagine the reason. He knows the demands on shipping around the cape in the last three months.


Howard Charles Green: I sometimes wonder whether the wish, whether the desire to get fighting men to England from Canada is as strong as some people would have us believe.


James Layton Ralston: It is as strong as I could wish.


Howard Charles Green: In January of this year the Minister of National Defence announced to Canada that Canada's commitment for this

year would be a third division, an armoured division, and a tank brigade, and he said again yesterday that that was Canada's commitment for the year. I could not understand the way in which he used that word "commitment." Surely the position is such that if Canada's commitment for this year is too small, it may be too small for all time. We may be wiped out in this country. Things have happened since last January. Let us review our commitment in the light of events which have taken place since then. The year is almost half over, and yet none of these troops have gone to Great Britain. I say to the government that they should be sent over just as quickly as possible and that the fourth division should also be sent to Great Britain instead of being kept in Canada on what might be called home guard duties.
The second point that I wish to place before the minister is this. I believe that the fighting departments, the navy, the army and the air force, are not adapting themselves to modern warfare as quickly as they should. One has the feeling that the Department of National Defence has become departmentalized into three channels-navy, army and air channels. Things have been happening recently in Europe, particularly in Greece and in Crete, and I suggest that we should set up in our defence department a small war council to direct the whole military effort of Canada, having in mind all arms of the service.
For example, why should we not raise air divisions in Canada such as the Germans used with such success in Crete? I understand that they are smaller in personnel than the ordinary infantry division. Why should we not train such troops in Canada? Let us build up air divisions which could be used in the forefront of the battle when the time comes to take the offensive. The men could be trained here in Canada much more easily than in Great Britain, where they would be subject to attack by enemy bomber and fighter planes. No arm of the service would be so likely to attract recruits as air divisions, and such divisions would be invaluable not only overseas but during the time of their training here for the defence of Canada should it be necessary to defend Canadian territory.
I suggest also that full scope is not being given to Canadian initiative. One of the greatest assets of the Canadian man and the Canadian woman is his and her initiative, and I suggest that that quality should be used to the full at this time; let us make more use of the initiative of those in civilian life, of our citizen soldiers, and of course of Canadians in the permanent force. Let us not in all these

Supply-National Dejence
matters slavishly follow Great Britain. Conditions are different over there. Moreover, as we found out in the last war, the British do not always fight in the most efficient way. Brave as they are, they make mistakes, just as others do.	[DOT]
In the third place, I suggest that the ministry are not facing the facts about manpower. I do not wish to say anything which will hurt the minister's recruiting campaign-


James Layton Ralston: It is not mine. It is the campaign of Canada.


Howard Charles Green: Well, the recruiting campaign of Canada. As the minister knows already, I have offered to help him in any way I can. But there is this fact to consider. This is not the only recruiting campaign which will be carried on. It will be necessary continuously to raise recruits, and are we to take it that the minister will object indefinitely, or until the end of the war, to anything that may be said which might be considered as affecting adversely his recruiting campaigns? I am sure he does not mean that. I believe he wishes to be fair, and that he would not wish seriously to question the right of any member of the opposition to point out defects in present recruiting methods.
Speaking on this subject, the minister told us on June 5, as reported in Hansard, page 3534:
I have every reason to believe that, with the acceleration which has taken place in the campaign, and with the assurances we have received, the campaign will be a complete success.
Now that, Mr. Chairman, is soothing the Canadian people; I do not think it is putting the facts squarely before them. It is a mistake for the minister to make statements of that kind. May I cite a statement made by Major-General Alexander, officer commanding the Pacific command, as reported in the Vancouver papers on May 31. It is a call for volunteers, and begins as follows:
An urgent call for volunteers for the Canadian active army was issued to-day by Major-General R. O. Alexander, general officer commanding-in-chief, Pacific command.
In his statement General Alexander used these words:
A special recruiting campaign is now being carried on from coast to coast. The result of this campaign in this district, to date, has been far below the actual and urgent need.
That statement was confirmed on June 7, six days ago, in an editorial in the Vancouver Sun which, as the minister knows, is a strong supporter of the government-


Thomas Vien: Order, please. I have allowed the hon. gentleman a great deal of
latitude, but certainly it would be against all the recognized rules of debate in the house to continue much longer any more than the briefest references to statements in the press. I do not want to restrict discussion at this hour of the session, and the minister yesterday agreed that the discussion should be wide open. On the other hand, to read articles at too great a length is against the rules of debate.


Howard Charles Green: I wish merely to read three short paragraphs from this editorial, because it shows the position with regard to recruiting on the Pacific coast. It says:
Recruiting has fallen down in this province. There is no use blinking the fact. We have got to face it, and see what must be done about it. The army wants 32,000 men from all Canada, 3,100 of them from British Columbia. Mr. Ralston told the House of Commons this week they had about one-quarter the needed number.
When Mr. Ralston says this is "satisfactory" we wonder where he gets his complacency. The drive has been on since May 11, and is scheduled to finish at the end of June.
In British Columbia they have still to get 2,445 men between now and the end of the month. In four days of this month they added only 91 men.
I suggest to the minister that he would be more likely to get recruits if he placed that position squarely before the Canadian people. Do not let them believe that this recruiting campaign is going well if it is not.
There are reasons why the campaign is not going well, and I believe they should be pondered by the government, particularly in view of the fact that further recruits will be called for from time to time.
One unfavourable circumstance, of course, is the failure to use the enthusiasm of young Canadians which manifested itself so clearly when the war broke out. This is ancient history, and I do not intend to say anything with regard thereto except this, that it has engendered in the minds of many of these young men the attitude, "Oh, they would not take me when I was willing to go, now they can come and get me." One encounters that feeling time and time again in talking to these young men. There is no lack of courage among them. I think we must be most careful not to accuse them of lack of courage, no matter from what part of Canada they come or from what race they spring.
Another point which is worrying them is the inequality of sacrifice. Here is a young man in a job; he is willing to enlist; he enlists; another young man comes and takes over his job. There is that possibility always present in the minds of these men. An
39G0
Supply-National Defence

employer who operates big logging camps on the Queen Charlotte islands, writing me a few days ago, pointed out this fact. He said:
Take for instance, our own operation on the Queen Charlotte islands; eighty-five per cent of our crew is now composed of foreigners; most of them are not naturalized. These men are taking the places of young Canadians who are to a great extent being used as home guards.
That is the position which the minister has to face.
Then, let the government not forget that it took over the direction of the young man power of Canada when it brought in compulsory training. Now the tendency of these young men is to wait for a lead. They wait for the government to say what is to be done next. Our whole way of living has changed since the last war. We are subject to government direction in many, many more ways than we were at that time. That is another reason why these young men are waiting,-waiting to be directed into whatever channel they are required to go, waiting for action by the government. I am convinced that the government must face the possibility, and face it now, that it will have to decide who is to serve, and how. That applies not only to the men but to the women. Eventually we shall have to put every man and woman in this country in his or her proper place in this war effort, and the government has to accept the responsibility for making the decisions with regard to who goes where.
Another reason why these young men have not been enlisting is the treatment given to men already in the forces. I hate to say this, but I must, because I believe it is true and is important. It may be that the cause has been the great rush of events; there have been so many things to do. But in this war, far more even than in the last, Canada must go to any length to see that the men of her fighting forces are properly treated. Only in that way can she get volunteers in adequate numbers in this war.
Take for example the question of dependents' allowances. I find in Saturday Night of May 31, 1941, a full-page advertisement calling for recruits:
Step up and step out in a uniform!
Down below are these words:
You are needed now for active service.
Rates of pay in the ranks.
The rates of pay are set out, and then we read this:
Dependent allowances in cash: $35 to wife, $12 each per month for 2 children-only 3 dependents per soldier.
[Mr. Green.1
That decision was made at the beginning of the war because Canada did not want men with-more than two children to enlist. Men who had more than two children did enlist, but they have never been able to get allowances for more than the two. Now we are calling for any Canadian and every Canadian to enlist, and yet men with three or four children can get only an allowance for two. That is an unfair situation, it is one which will hamper recruiting, and it should be remedied without further delay.
A week or two ago there was an argument in this house about pensions. In the last war any man who enlisted was covered by what was known as the insurance principle of pensions, or the "incurred on" principle. In other words, if he incurred disability on service, even here in Canada, he got a pension. In this war that has been greatly modified. It was wiped out for a year, from some date in May last year until a few weeks ago, in so far as the men serving in Canada were concerned. However, within the last two weeks some change has been made, as was announced in the house. But we did not go the full length, we did not make that insurance principle applicable to the men who are going to England to do the fighting for us. Things like that hamper recruiting.
Again, vi'e have not to-day provision in Canada for reconditioning the men who are discharged from the forces. A man comes back with a stomach ulcer and is discharged. If he is in need of active remedial treatment he can get treatment in a pension hospital for the period of a year. But as between the man who can qualify and the man who is put out of the army but is yet not really fit to go to work, there is a large gap. Canada should set up some sort of reconditioning depots or convalescent camps, so that these men can be nursed back to health. In many cases they could be put back into the forces, not perhaps to go overseas, but to relieve other men who are fit to go overseas.
Further, we have not yet decided whether the privileges of land settlement will be extended to the men of the present forces, or whether they will be able to get soldier insurance. Those two matters should be considered right away and, in my opinion, put into operation. They would provide just that much more attraction to the men we wish to enlist.
Finally, members of this government may not like this, but I believe it is true-the general attitude of this Canadian government is wrong, because it is moved as the result of its fears. An outstanding example of that is what it has done recently with regard to

Supply-National Dejence
wheat for Japan. Time and again this government moves because it is afraid of something, or more afraid of something else. That is an attitude which is entirely out of line with the courage of the Canadian people. They are calling at this time for fighting leadership, and to fighting leadership they are entitled. Right Hon. Winston Churchill said a day or two ago in London, at a gathering of dominion and allied representatives:
But here also, duly authorized by the parliament and democracy of Britain, are gathered the servants of the ancient British monarchy and accredited representatives of the British dominions beyond the seas, of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, of the empire of India, of Burma, and of our colonies in every quarter of the globe. They have drawn their swords in this cause. They will never let them fall till life is gone or victory is won.
Till life is gone or victory is won. That is wnat the Canadian people face to-day. I plead with the government to announce as our war aim the smashing of Germany. Let it be as simple as that-that we are out to smash Germany-and let this government give bold and tough leadership. If it will do that, the Canadian people will rush to follow.


Mr. TURGEON:: I had not intended to say anything in this debate, particularly since we have reached the last stage of this part of the session, and especially since we are discussing estimates; but as I listened to the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Green) I began to realize some of the reasons why there is not a better response to the efforts that are being made for recruiting than we have been having in the last little while.
I am decidedly of the opinion that the hearts of the people of Canada have not yet been properly touched with what this war means to us. Every now and then I ask myself why that is, and I am afraid I have found the answer during the last ten or fifteen minutes.
Let us go back and see what has taken place during the time that we, the elected representatives of the people of Canada, have been sitting in this House of Commons. There is a recruiting campaign going on, and very much depends upon the success or failure of that campaign. I am certainly hoping it will be a success. I believe that hon. members who have been speaking also share that hope. But what is going to be the result if it is a failure? How long has this house been in session? What have we been doing that is of importance to the war effort during the many months that we have been sitting in this chamber? The hon. member for Vancouver South said that he had told the Minister of National Defence that he was willing to do 14873-250
everything he could to help to make the campaign for recruits a success. Of course, he is willing to help; he is anxious to do what every hon. member in this house wishes to do, and has probably made an effort to help the Minister of National Defence. He read extracts from newspapers to indicate that if the campaign is going to succeed it must succeed during the month of June. Why was not some effort made to permit the members of the house to get away, at an earlier date, from this portion of our parliamentary duties so that we could assist the Minister of National Defence in making the campaign a success? I challenge any member of the house to look over the records during the last six or eight weeks and find more than ten per cent of what has taken place to have been of benefit to the war effort of Canada.
I know that when I say that, if it should be reported, I am perhaps helping to bring down the level of this institution of parliament in public opinion. But what I say is true. As I listened to the hon. member, he told us of some of the causes of the lack of response on the part of the young men of Canada to the appeal to engage themselves by voluntary effort in this war, which is a war of Canada's, just as much as it is a war of the people of the British isles or of any other part of the world. But did he appeal to the young men of Canada to put aside the sense of injustice to which he made reference and to enlist anyway because of the gravity of the situation?


Howard Charles Green: I am talking to the old men of Canada to-day, I am afraid.


James Gray Turgeon: Very well. But what the hon. member has said to-day is, after all, only a repetition of what has been said in this house practically since the beginning of the war. The hon. gentleman read extracts from newspapers. These same newspapers time after time have devoted all their energy to creating disaffection in the young men of Canada toward those who are in the armed forces and those who have not yet enlisted. Unfortunately that is what a good many of us have been doing in this House of Commons. Effort after effort has been made to destroy the confidence of the people, old men and young men, women and children of Canada, in the government that is charged with the responsibility of carrying on this war. To-day, some people not being satisfied with trying to destroy confidence in the ministers themselves, there appears to be taking place an effort to destroy confidence even in the military men who are at the head of the armed forces of Canada. I ask you, Mr. Chairman, and through you every hon. member wherever he may sit, can we induce young

Supply-National Defence

men. to enlist on a voluntary basis by continually trying to destroy confidence in the men who are going to lead them, by continually referring to the injustices that without question have been heaped upon the men who suffered from the last war? We must do more than call the attention of the men and women of Canada to things that some of us think to be unjust. In addition to that, we must show them that in spite of anything that may have the appearance of injustice and, in fact, be unjust, it is their duty first of all to assist Canada when this, their country, is in distress, and second, we should show them on every possible occasion that if they do not assist Canada to-day, then Canada will not be able to assist in saving the world from the fate that is threatening it at this moment.
Another cause for the lack of response is, I understand, this. We have heard expressions in this house, and echoes of these expressions in the country at large, and it has struck me that unfortunately many men, leading men who have set ideas are thinking more of the particular idea that they have in mind than of making a serious effort to help in the winning of the war. For instance, there are very many who are strongly in favour of conscription, in opposition to the voluntary system. I am taking no exception whatever to those who wish for conscription, and when I make the general statement which I am about to make I do not say that it includes every person who is in favour of conscription. But I ask hon. members, is there not a tendency on the part of those men and women of Canada who want conscription to place all their energies behind a campaign to bring about conscription rather than to place those energies behind a campaign to make the war effort of Canada stronger and better and more successful than it is to-day? The same thing is true of those whose main idea centres round questions of social progress and reform. Is there not a tendency on their part, or on the part of many of them, to place all their energies behind a campaign to bring about more and more rapid social progress rather than to direct their energies towards accelerating the speed of Canada's war effort?
Turn back to what I said about the records of this house. I have wondered why we were not released long ago to go out and help the ministry of defence in getting recruits. I said that if hon. members would look back over the last six weeks, they would not find more than 10 per cent of the record of the doings from day to day of this house devoted entirely to the effort to win the war. What is more, I venture to say it would be

found that nearly 50 per cent of the debates in this house consist of repetitions, restatements, of what has already been said by some other hon. member, repetition of question after question, each question dealing with something that has already been answered. We who represent the people of Canada would have been doing far more service to Canada, to Great Britain, to the British empire and to all who are allied with us if we had been out in the country, each where he thinks he can do the most good, making, first, an appeal for recruits and, second, trying to convince the people of what every one of us believes to be true, namely, that whatever injustices have been allowed to germinate and grow in the past are soon going to be uprooted. We; who sit here, no matter on which side of the house we sit, know that as a result of this war and the efforts being made in connection with it, there is going to be a greater measure of social progress in the next few years than there has been during a century in any country of the world. We know that; why can we not each one go to the country and convince the people who listen to us of what is taking place, that they should not lose hope of a greater measure of justice than was given to the men who enlisted and fought for us in the last war. Let us try to make them see, notwithstanding some of the disaffections which naturally are theirs to-day, that the only way to reach that state of social progress .is to make certain that Canada and those associated with Canada win this war, and that the only way in which Canada can win the war is to have her people more deeply touched with the necessity of winning it than they are to-day.
I rose to speak not for the purpose of chastising but rather for the purpose of suggesting that from now on we should stop trying to destroy confidence in our leaders both civil and military, stop trying to destroy confidence in the determination of the people of Canada, and set ourselves to restore that confidence and try to impress upon them the necessity of realizing that although mistakes may have been made they should join the colours and do everything they can to have Canada carry on a greater and more stupendous war effort even than she has been doing in the past.
With that hope I take my seat. I trust we shall not be here much longer, and I sincerely hope that when we return in the summer or the fall we shall devote ourselves with all our capacity and ability and energy to trying to create, always to create, a greater war effort and not to destroying confidence in our military and civil leaders.

Supply-National Defence


Mr. QUELCH:: correspondence between the Bank of England and the Bank of Canada be tabled, but our request has been refused. Members of this house are entitled to know just what kind of policy has been urged upon this country by the Bank of England. I say that the governor of the Bank of England has proved himself to be a traitor, and I believe that all association with this bank, so far as Canada is concerned, should be cut off.
I do not consider that Germany's successes have been achieved on the field of battle alone. I think Germany's successes have been very largely due to acts of treachery committed by people in high places in various allied countries. We know that happened in Norway; we know it happened in France. I am suggesting that it has happened and is happening in England, and I am wondering to what extent it is happening in Canada to-day. There are many things in this country that people cannot understand. As the hon. member for Battle River stated the other day, there are brakes on our war effort. We think those brakes should be removed, and should have beeD removed a long time ago. We all know that from September, 1939, to May, 1940, we slumbered. Apparently we felt that we were safe so long as the Maginot line remained, but after May, 1940, we suddenly realized that it was necessary to wake up. But it is impossible for a country to wake up immediately and develop at once a fighting force ready to go overseas. Now we are told that *one reason why we cannot expand our production at a greater rate is the lack of skilled labour. The other day I made the statement that we should do the same with labour as we have done in connection with the army. We do not refuse to take men into the army on the ground that they are not skilled, although the soldier of to-day has become a highly skilled man. We take men into the army and train them, and I maintain that we should do exactly the same so far as industry is concerned. We should take unskilled people and give them the necessary training to enable them to take their places in industry. The other day the hon. member for Essex East asked if I was aware of the fact that we were training or had trained in the neighbourhood of fifty thousand men, but those men were not trained to the point that when they finished their training they were able to go into industry. What we lack to-day is a link between the schools and industry; in other words, we need schools to give advanced training. In the United States they have schools that provide such training, but so far as I know, there is only one such school in Canada, namely, in British Columbia.

The other day we were discussing this question in the pensions committee, and it was admitted that in the west there is a very long list of people waiting for training. Many people are trying to get into those schools in the west, but there is no room for them. So far as the east is concerned, they seem to be actually short of applicants. I suggested that we might well move some of the people from the west to the schools of the east, but I was told that it would be an expensive business. Then I suggested that we might put more schools into operation in the west in order to give these people the training they want, but I was told that then we would be training more men than industry could absorb. Yet in this chamber we had been told by the Minister of Munitions and Supply that we had a shortage of skilled labour. One of those statements cannot be true. If industry cannot expand because we have not skilled labour, then we want more skilled labour. If we want more skilled labour, then we should equip more schools in the west to train those men. Yet we are told that there is no use in having more schools, because we would be putting men into the labour market who could not find jobs. Those are questions which people are asking. A situation like that will do more harm to our war effort than will any other situation of which I could conceive. For this government to say that they are doing everything in their power to expand the war effort, while there are thousands of people throughout Canada looking for jobs, just does not make sense.
I did not intend taking the time of the committee further, because I know it is the desire to close down either to-night or tomorrow. For this reason I shall not speak at greater length. I suggest to the minister, however, that if we do not do anything else at this time to expand industry, we should at least put into operation advanced training schools which will take up that slack between the state of a man's training after he comes out of the training schools, and the state of training required by industry-one of skilled labour.


Mr. ADAMSON:: As one of those who have been in some way entrusted with a certain degree of responsibility for the success of the recruiting drive, I believe it my duty to mention certain conditions which I have observed and believe to be general in that part of Canada in which I live. These are circumstances of which I have learned while in contact with troops and officers from all parts of Canada.
There can be no doubt that those who are charged with the recruiting effort to-day are

Supply-National Defence
doing everything humanly possible to get recruits. In the metropolitan area of the city of Toronto, alone, we have fifty recruiting stations. The officers entrusted with this grave task have worked zealously day and night. So far as possible we have enlisted the services of patriotic civilians. The work has never flagged. I disagree, however, with the minister's statement with regard to national service. I am not advocating anything; it is not my duty to advocate. But I believe, and I believe this in absolute sincerity, that a national service act would not disrupt the country, but rather would unite it.
I believe the Canadian people are looking anxiously for some such act, some such move. That is my opinion. I have seen, and talked with officers and men in the army, with civilians, with youngsters coming out of school, and I believe they would welcome it. If this government finds it necessary to enact such a measure, I make this pledge, that so long as I am in the public life of this dominion I shall never use the discomfiture of the government, if they have to bring in national service, for political purposes: Had this been done ever since the last war there would have been no talk of racial disunity in Canada to-day. That is all I have to say with regard to compulsory national service.
I know the recruiting figures; I see them every day. I am naturally not allowed to mention them in this house, but I can say that we need men and that the need is imperative. It has not been impressed on the country how badly we do need men, and that we need the best men we can possibly get for the army. The man in the army to-day, particularly in the armoured formations, has to be a better mechanic, a better signaller, a better craftsman, a better tradesman than the man in the factory. We want the best in the army. The man in the army must be prepared to do all the things that a man in industry must do. He must be prepared to do them in the most frightful discomfort and he must be prepared to do them twice as fast and in shocking working conditions. I do not believe that we have stressed the vital need for the best we have in Canada for the army to-day.
The army is the highest of the professions in Canada at the present time. I notice that there is a certain bitterness about the war effort, a bitterness which is growing. The Globe and Mail of Toronto had an editorial this morning which would repay everyone's reading. It says that civilian morale is bad. There can be no question about the justification of that editorial. Civilian morale is bad all across Canada because we have not had from the beginning that candour, that downright leadership which we must expect. It
should be a great thing to be a Canadian. People are now going round as if it were a disgrace, but it is a great thing to be a Canadian. We are a great country. Let us see to it that our effort is put out in this war and that the name of Canada will remain gallantly at the masthead.
With regard to national service, I should like to quote from an article by General Wavell. I will be brief, but I think there is a message in it for us. He said:
The soldier is apt^ to disregard or underrate the statesman's difficulties. I remember one of our present politicians giving an apt illustration of this tendency. He instanced a soldier's impatience at the slowness of the statesman to implement some political measure which was agreed to be essential, say compulsory service. If you agree it has to be done, why not do it at once? says the soldier. The politician might retort thus: When you come to a river line defended by the enemy, which you must cross to reach your objective, do you assault it forthwith? Of course not, the soldier will reply; it is essential to reconnoitre, to group the artillery, to construct bridges, to draw the enemy's attention away from the point of crossing, and so on. Just so, says the politician, so must I prepare public opinion, anticipate objections, draw up a measure which will be fair to all classes, arrange for the medical examination of men liable, decide on exemptions, and so forth.
That article has a great message for us in Canada to-day.
With regard to man-power, had we been able to have a division in Libya it is altogether probable that to-day we would still occupy Libya. We have recently been told by Mr. Churchill that the army of the Nile consisted of a mere two divisions, so that we can see how desperate the need is for man-power and machines. These are matters that must be brought home to the Canadian people. We are all in this war, every single one of us. Another division in the near east might have entirely averted the threat to Suez. I do not believe for an instant that Suez will fall, but I believe we must have more men for the near east, and I believe the Canadian troops are the most mechanically minded in the British empire. I see in the headlines of the papers to-night that Vichy reports that Canadian troops are already in Syria. May I ask the minister whether there is any truth in that statement. Is he prepared to make a statement, or is it a matter on which he cannot speak?
That is all I wanted to say, but I wish to impress upon the committee that what we must do, all of us, is to go out and get our pride back, for it is a great thing to be a Canadian. We are a great country, and we are not going to get our pride back by stopping criticism. We are not going to do it by innuendo. Talk about racial differences, as if we were a split country, must
Supply-National Defence

stop. We must be a united country, and I believe we are. I believe we are capable of going ahead, and it is up to the government to give the lead. The country is with the government, but it is demanding action. I am absolutely convinced that no matter what measures may be brought down, the government will find no difficulty from the Canadian people. But they will find grave and serious difficulty, even peril, if things continue as they are and Canadians continue to believe that the government is not prosecuting this war with an all-out 100 per cent total effort.


Mr. GILLIS:: I was tempted to rise because of a statement made across the floor. It was said that some of our difficulties at this time were due to the fact that men were trying to stress and to press for social reforms that were not called for. Another hon. gentleman to my right makes the statement that Canada, when she moved for the compulsory training of the youth of the country, indicated that she had taken a step in the direction of conscription. I do not agree with these statements. Most of the discussion this afternoon I would construe as an attempt to force the government on the question of conscription. For the past two months, listening to the different ministers reporting to the house on the activities of their respective departments, I have become convinced that it is not man-power of which Canada is short and that there is absolutely no necessity at this time to talk about the conscription of manpower.
We have in Canada to-day under arms and in training camps many more men than we are capable of equipping. I would also call the attention of the hon. gentleman who suggests that military training is now compulsory in Canada, to the fact that when we passed the mobilization act we gave the government power to mobilize the whole financial and industrial resources of the country; and if there is need at this time for conscription of anything, it is conscription of the resources of the country to manufacture the necessary arms to equip the men who are in our camps already. In my part of the dominion I do not think there is any difficulty in securing recruits, because a large percentage of the men who are employed in the coal mines at all events, are only too anxious to get into the army; for leaving the coal mine to go to war is a vacation to them. I think the recruiting officers will find that that is the situation there.
We can make speeches in the house until further orders, but all the oratory in the world is not going to cure the situation. We must do something about the causes that

affect the war situation generally. In addressing myself to the Minister of National Defence I am not going to deal with production and other matters which have nothing to do with his department, but I should like to bring to his attention one or two things which I believe have an adverse effect on the morale of our army particularly, and on the men who are going into training at the present time. Complaint after complaint is made that men who have enlisted for military training and are paid $1.30 a day go into the training camps and are put to work on national defence construction projects, in the erection of huts and so forth in the camp, replacing the ordinary labour which should be employed on such work. The result is that the men who have enlisted for military training find themselves doing carpenter's work or plumber's work or some other form of labour which should be done by men outside the army who are dependent for their livelihood on these particular lines of work.
I would call the minister's attention to a brief which was prepared by local union 1588 in Sydney, of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America. The local union has a membership of five or six hundred, and in this brief they complain specifically of the erection of huts by enlisted men. That is not good for the army itself. The man in uniform does not want that kind of work; it is not good for recruiting, because those who would join up for military training see the men in the camps engaged in that kind of work, and it is not good for labour to have men in uniform doing the work at a lower wage than is paid outside for such labour. This brief speaks very strongly against soldiers being used on any national defence project where there is a labour supply available, as there is in Sydney. It gives many instances where work of this kind has been done by men in uniform, and if the minister has not a copy of the brief I think he should familiarize himself with its contents. As I say, this sort of thing is bad both for the potential soldier and for the soldier himself, and if it is being carried on right across Canada in community after community, we can all appreciate what the effect will be.
Some hon. gentleman has made the suggestion here that the services of each and every individual who belongs to any of the services at this time should be fully utilized on the basis of his experience, that he should be placed in a position where he can make his maximum contribution. I agree heartily with that statement.
I would call specifically to the minister's attention the case of a young man who came over here from the United States, as many

Supply-National Dejence
are doing at the present time, in order to enlist. He left a good job in his own country, being sufficiently interested in the principles for which Canada has engaged in this war. He is a newspaper correspondent who has been all over the world, knows the international situation thoroughly, and was prepared to make a contribution in his own field. It is some ten months since he came to Ottawa and offered his services. He was advised at that time that the way in which he could make his best contribution would be to get into the army. He enlisted as a private soldier and has been at the depot since then in that capacity.
He started in to make a valuable contribution to the army. I believe that if there are any people in Canada whose morale must be built up, it is the young men who have enlisted in Canada's forces. In a great many instances Canada has not been very good to them in the past, and there is no doubt that most of them are coming into the army in a bad frame of mind. This young man undertook the responsibility of issuing a magazine. He published biographical sketches of the Minister of National Defence and the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services, and carried on a line of education-I would not call it propaganda- for the benefit of the troops from camp to camp. What cooperation did he receive? From the beginning he had to turn out that magazine from his own pay of $39 a month. He continued that work until last month, by which time he had gone so far in the red that he had to discontinue it. He got no financial assistance from anybody; he rented a typewriter at his own expense, bought his own stencils, and did all the work himself. He has tried every way he can to get into the field wherein he has specialized. I should have thought that a United States newspaper correspondent with contacts all over his own country and with credentials from some of the most influential people there could have been fully utilized in offsetting the influences of Lindbergh and the isolationist groups in the United States. But that was not done, and this young man to-day is in a frame of mind that he wants to be discharged. If the minister is not aware of the case of which I have spoken, I shall be glad to give him the information privately. I do not care to broadcast these things. I have talked on several occasions to this young man and am convinced that he is all he appears to be. I have confirmed my opinion by reference to the mounted police, who inform me that there is no suspicion of his bona fides, and that his credentials are in order. I do not know why, at this time, when a man of this
type volunteers his services, we cannot undertake to place him and those like him where they can make their maximum contribution in influencing United States opinion on behalf of our cause.
Our recruiting campaign, I understand, is somewhat slack in this city. A young man of this type, whose services have not been utilized, and whose treatment may become more widely known, will not have a very good influence on recruiting.
Talking will not cure the conditions to which I have referred. Something must be done. I believe that the Minister of National Defence must accept in the present emergency more responsibility with respect to direction. The government will have to cut through the line of red tape which has been the system for the last twenty or thirty years. It would take one six weeks to put an order through from the Jackson building and to have it finally O.-K-ed and ratified, and that is not good enough to-day. The minister himself must make an investigation-and he is capable of doing so-into what is necessary at this time for the promotion of the best interests of the country in the administration of the department, instead of having the system of pigeon-holes, putting a thing into one pigeonhole after another, as in the past. He should issue orders directly and have them carried out. He must cut through the maze of red tape which I know exists, has always existed and will always exist until someone is big enough to accept responsibility and will stand up and recognize the emergency, brushing away everything that is irrelevant.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: I resent the remarks of the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. Turgeon) and those of the hon. member for Brantford City (Mr. Macdonald), delivered the other day. Both these gentlemen said the same thing-that we on this side of the house were endeavouring to undermine the confidence of the people of Canada in this government. I do not think either of these gentlemen should have made that statement. They are not right in saying it. Certainly the last thing we have in mind is undermining the confidence of the Canadian people in the government. We have already, on many occasions, offered our cooperation with the government, and they are getting it to-day for the sake of Canada's war effort.
There are many apparently minor matters, however, that mean a great deal to the enthusiasm of the people for a greater effort in connection with the war. For example, I would call the attention of the committee to something that has had a bad effect. Yesterday, a man who has been an outstanding personality in Canada, an eminent Prime
Supply-National Defence

Minister of the country-I refer to the Right Hon. R. B. Bennett as he was then-had a very high honour bestowed upon him by His Majesty the King, and it seems to me it was rather small of us not to show some public recognition of that fact on the floor of the house. With other members of the House of Commons, I cabled my congratulations, but I do think that this honour, conferred upon a great Canadian, should have been recognized from the floor of the house. I have received several telegrams from different people who are very much upset over the manner in which that honour was recognized.
Let me assure the government that we are not criticizing without reason. I have listened to a good deal of criticism to-day, and I think it is good for the government that there should be such criticism. To go back to the earlier days of the war, had it not been for the prodding we gave the government, a good many things that have been corrected would have been left untouched. I know it has happened. Let me call the attention of the committee to the words of Mr. Menzies. He said that the people of Australia had said to him: "You go ahead; you lead this country." I say that to the government: "You lead this country, but lead it, and if you go too slow we will prod you." There is no reason, however, why we should be subject to abuse for doing the prodding in a constructive way in an endeavour to secure a better war effort and to have certain things that are not right remedied. I will go further and say, in the words of Mr. Menzies, "If jmu go too fast we shall be delighted, because we did not expect it of you." That is the attitude which I feel should be taken. In my opinion, I repeat, some recognition should have been given the honour conferred upon Mr. Bennett. I do not see any difference between a man receiving a degree from a university, honoris causa, and receiving an honour from the king for meritorious work. The only difference is that the fatter comes from a higher and greater power than a university. It is unfortunate that the honour to Mr. Bennett was not betteT recognized, because what has happened has had a disturbing effect upon a good many people.


Howard Charles Green: I asked the minister yesterday for the figures of the men discharged from the forces from the beginning of the war. Has he them to-day?


James Layton Ralston: All discharges to the 31st of May were 32,461, all ranks, including 473 discharged overseas. The number of those returned from overseas and discharged is 1,658. The break-down is, medically unfit, 60 per cent -these are rough percentages-under age,

irregular enlistment, 6 per cent; not likely to become efficient, or misconduct, 24 per cent; the note says that the larger number of these took place in the early days of the war. The recent regulations have reduced the number discharged for these causes. The percentage of those transferred to other services is 3 per cent; those discharged for miscellaneous reasons, including compassionate grounds, to resume civil occupation, et cetera, 7 per cent.


Howard Charles Green: At what rate are they being discharged each month?


James Layton Ralston: Up to May the number was 1.912.


Howard Charles Green: Per month?


James Layton Ralston: Monthly average for five months.


Mr. COCKERAM:: What is being done
in the department with regard to women's organizations? The department should take some definite stand and give some assistance to these organizations, which are being developed across Canada, They are useful to the country, and I think we should know something of what they are doing.


James Layton Ralston: That is something with regard to which I expected the former Minister of National War Services would have made a statement, but owing to the change in portfolio this has been left to his successor. The whole matter of the organization, or of interest in the organization, of women is a much larger subject than simply affects the department of defence. So far as the defence departments are concerned, in order to be ready for whatever plan may be worked out, we are making a survey of all the positions in which women can be utilized, and are receiving reports from all districts, camps and headquarters as well. One of the branches at headquarters now is the D.A.G.(M)-deputy adjutant general (mobilization). That officer is working with the Department of National War Services, particularly in connection with those activities.
Whatever general work is done with regard to the coordination of women's activities in governmental services will be done by the Department of National War Services, and the defence departments will get their requirements from the Department of National War Services. It is anticipated that each defence service will have its own branch in which women who can be employed will be engaged.


Alan Cockeram: What is the function of the reserve army? As the minister knows, within the last few rveeks their training strength has been cut dowm by at least 50 per

Supply-National Defence
cent, and I believe that those men who joined the reserve army last year did so on the understanding that they would assist their country. But to-day their morale is being definitely destroyed. The minister owes it to the men in the reserve army to tell them what their task is, what is expected of them, and not, merely for the purpose of saving a few dollars, to cut everything from under them at every opportunity.
The commanding officer of my reserve unit has resigned because he was quite dissatisfied with the role that the reserve army has been called upon to play at this time.


James Layton Ralston: As my hon. friend knows, the role of the reserve army has been definitely laid down in instructions from headquarters. One of its primary functions is to provide reinforcements to the active service force, wherever it is a counterpart to a unit in that force. Second, it must be in such a position as to be ready for mobilization should the necessity arise. Third, it must provide aid to the civil power such as has been the function of the reserve army for many years. These are the three outstanding and primary roles.
My hon. friend speaks of camps. He knows the situation in that regard. We have a great many troops; he knows what our plans are *with regard to the movement of troops, and the difficulties in connection with accommodation are considerable. A decision was arrived at with regard to the reserve army, that a certain proportion of its strength should go to camp. The role of the reserve army is well set out. and in a great number of instances reserve units have done remarkably well in the furnishing of reinforcements.
It has been a matter of some disappointment to me in certain instances that the reserve units have not done more. It is said that many men in the reserve army enlisted to do something for their country who did not find it possible to enlist for active service, and at the same time, on top of that, with respect to some units, I have received applications from time to time that units be mobilized. Obviously, one cannot mobilize a unit with any considerable prospect of success if there are not many men in the unit who are prepared to enlist for active service. I do not find fault, but I mention that as one of the difficulties which presented themselves to the department in connection with this very anxious question of reserve units. All of them are eager to serve in some capacity, and many of the communities where they are localized are particularly desirous of being represented in the active service force. But there are difficulties owing to the fact that men who have enlisted with the idea of doing the best they could to 14S73-251
serve their country, in such a capacity as a reserve unit might afford in Canada, have been precluded from taking a more active part for various reasons, business, medical or family.


Mr. McCANN:: I wish briefly to bring to the attention of the minister and the government the question of medical services in connection with our armed forces. Let me say at the outset that I am not critical of the personnel which goes to make up those particular forces. It is true that there are many square pegs in round holes in this branch of the force, as perhaps has been said of some other branches. By that I mean that it has been necessary to give special training to certain men in the army medical corps where men could have been found who had had that training in their professional and civilian life. I would say to the minister that the medical profession are not convinced that, having in view efficiency and economy, we have the best set-up at the present time. We have three forces: one for the air, one for the navy and one for the land. It is the general opinion that we have more duplication than is necessary. For instance, in the city of Halifax we have hospitals for the men of the navy, the men of the air force and the men of the army. That is an unnecessary duplication of both buildings and personnel and certainly must cost considerably more money. After all, when men in any of these forces become casualties or become ill, when they reach a hospital they are all in the same category. When you have to set up three distinct arms of medical men, you can well imagine that what appears in the papers is true, that there is a shortage of doctors.


James Layton Ralston: Not if they were all busy.


James Joseph McCann: But they are duplicating work. I am going to suggest how there will not be that shortage if use is made of those who are already in the service. Let me first suggest that instead of spending a good deal of public money for military hospitals, we first make use of the civilian facilities which are already built and equipped and available. That has been done to some extent but not to the extent to which it should be done.
Then, looking further ahead to conditions in the post-war period, if the money were spent on additions to civilian institutions, those could be used to advantage in the after-war period. That is preferable to erecting temporary buildings which will be done away with when the war is over. We could also make use of the staff of these civilian institutions instead of having the military medical staff look after the treatment of men in hospital.
REVISED EDITION*
Supply-National Defence

I am also led to believe that there is great duplication in the purchasing of supplies. Old regulations that are in some of the army books are carried out. I have been told by pharmaceutical houses that they receive requisitions for drugs, instruments and other things that are entirely out of date and are not being used in this country.
I bring these suggestions to the ministry not with a view of being critical of the administration. As I say, I have no criticism of the personnel of the army medical corps of the different forces. But I do believe that they could be used to better advantage and that the duplication of services is unnecessary. So far as erecting new hospitals is concerned, that should not be done until such time as civilian institutions are in full use, and when it becomes necessary to build, it should be done as an addition to already existing civilian institutions which are established, and which can be made use of in the post-war period.


James Layton Ralston: As to duplication of
medical services, as my hon. friend knows, the medical service for the air force was separated from that for the army some six or eight or ten months ago after a pretty thorough examination by a medical man who came out from England. I think the ground was that the air force requires special examination on account of the higher medical specifications which are required, and that it was to the advantage of the service that there be separation. My hon. friend will know far better than I the soundness of that view.
The question of the use of civilian hospital facilities has been before us within the last four weeks, and we have found it impossible to lay down any absolute rule that in every case civilian facilities should be used. But we have a rule, and it is being adhered to, that whenever civilian facilities offer themselves the case will be considered on its merits. There is going to be no rigid rule that the army must have a separate hospital no matter what the possibilities are in the particular community where the facilities are needed.
With regard to duplication in purchasing of supplies, I had not heard of that before. My hon. friend also suggested that supplies are being purchased that are outmoded-


James Joseph McCann: And duplication of both
supplies and equipment.


James Layton Ralston: Of course my hon. friend knows that supplies are always bought through the Department of Munitions and Supply. But I will make a note of my hon. friend's point.


Mr. JAQUES:: I do not know whether the recruiting campaign is entirely to the minister's satisfaction or not. I am not going to argue one way or the other, but it does seem to me that amidst the glamour and excitement of the victoiy loan campaign the mere recruit must feel like the forgotten man. After all, the problem that faces the common man in Canada at the present time is not so simple as it is in England. In England the people do not have to be told that they must fight or die, kill or be killed. The problem here for the majority of people, not perhaps for members of parliament, but for the masses of the people throughout the country, is not so simple as that. Nor is it made simpler by those who keep on reminding us of the inevitable unemployment, poverty and bankruptcy that must follow victory in this war. Those who are responsible for the recruiting campaign could do no more useful work than to make it clear to the Canadian people that the government will no more tolerate losing the peace than they will tolerate losing the war.


Howard Charles Green: There was an announcement in the press a couple of weeks ago that the number of men called for compulsory training for June had been reduced to about 2,700 men. It was our understanding before Easter that there would be some 5,000 men called up every month. Apparently that number has now been reduced. Will the minister explain why that is, and tell us how many there will be in the future?


James Layton Ralston: There is accommodation
for about 40,000 altogether; that is, about
10,000	a month. The basic centres are combined; the active and the reserve recruits are combined in the basic training centres. The more active enlistments there are, the fewer recruits will be necessary. That has been made plain right along; forty thousand is what we are turning out every four months. The more active recruits there are the fewer will have to be called up under the compulsory' training plan.


Howard Charles Green: How many is it expected
there will be during the rest of the summer?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot tell. It depends on the number of active recruits who are enlisted. Does my hon. friend understand that?


Howard Charles Green: Is the minister yet in a
position to make any statement with regard to the escape of the twenty-five or twenty-six German prisoners from the prison camp in northern Ontario?


James Layton Ralston: As my hon. friend knows, a court of inquiry was held under Mr. Justice Embury. The finding of that court was filed

Supply-National Defence
with the department, and the matter is now in the hands of the adjutant general. As a matter of fact, further proceedings are now pending in connection with the matter. I am not in a position to make any statement in regard to it until those proceedings are concluded.


Major James William Coldwell: I have not yet asked a question in connection with this department, but there is one thing I should like to know. A short time ago I received a complaint with regard to the central mechanization depot in the city of London. I understand that this is practically an ordinary civilian set-up, except for the fact that it is under the Department of National Defence.


James Layton Ralston: That is a pretty important exception.


Major James William Coldwell: At least the employees
there were on a civilian basis; I will put it that way. Unionization of the men was going on; organization was being carried out, and a conciliation board was applied for. In the midst of the discussion the men were notified by a conciliation officer, I believe named Mr. Chapel-


Norman Alexander McLarty: There is no such conciliation officer in my department.


Major James William Coldwell: My information as to the name may not be correct, but the men were notified that the government was about to place this depot definitely under the Department of National Defence, and that in these circumstances a collective bargaining agreement could not be negotiated. I should like to know whether the facts were as I have stated them, and whether this depot comes under the Department of National Defence or under the Department of Labour. Both departments seem to be involved in the situation. Could the minister tell me anything about the matter, as far as his department is concerned?


James Layton Ralston: So far as my department is concerned the central mechanization depot at London is under the master general of the ordnance, and is a Department of National Defence organization. The depot was established for the purpose of receiving, storing and issuing mechanically propelled vehicles. It also performs the same function for the spare parts and accessories required to maintain and equip such vehicles. Its purpose includes the performance of any work which may be required upon vehicles between receipt from contractors and issue to military formations, such as the addition of special equipment not included in the main vehicle contract. It will also serve as a central repair depot. There is capacity for storing 14873-251}
3,300 vehicles under cover, and these storage facilities permit the following advantageous practices: (a) the flow of production by the automotive industry may be kept relatively even and therefore at the maximum of efficiency; (b) the full establishment of vehicles for a military formation may be purchased, but any quantity not required during the period prior to active service may be held in reserve; (c) a reserve for unknown emergencies may be held.


Major James William Coldwell: Who are employed at this plant? Are they civilian employees?


James Layton Ralston: I think they are ordnance men. I am advised that the depot is in process of 'being turned completely into an ordnance organization.


Major James William Coldwell: That is just the point. Up to the present time, according to my information, a large number of civilians have been employed in this work, and it was not until the men became dissatisfied with the rates of pay, which are very considerably lower than those in automobile plants such as General Motors and others, and began to organize, that action was taken to place the men directly under the control of the master general of 'the ordnance, or to militarize the plant. Many of these men, of course, will lose their jobs because of this action, which it is felt was taken to prevent the organization of the men in this plant. That is rather a serious statement for the men involved to make, but it came to me through one of the legitimate trade unions, if I may use that term, and the union officials were very disturbed and wondered if this was going to be a precedent to prevent the organization of men in government plants of this description.


James Layton Ralston: I can only say to my hon. friend that it may have been concurrent with, or synchronized with, or at the same time as, what my hon. friend mentions, but as I understand it the master general of the ordnance intended this to be a military establishment. I will tell my hon. friend the reason for that, as it was given to me. That wa3 the intention in order to give these men training in handling and repairing these vehicles. As the country knows, one of our most difficult jobs is the training of tradesmen and familiarizing them with these vehicles. This was one of the preliminary steps taken to provide, in effect, a trade school where repairs could be made and familiarity acquired with the various vehicles being used. I cannot tell my hon. friend more 'than that.


Major James William Coldwell: So that it was intended, some time before this, that this depot would be militarized?
Supply-National Defence


James Layton Ralston: That is my understanding. This matter was not discussed with me at all, but if I had had anything to do with it there would have been no question about it, and I believe the master general of the ordnance had this fully in mind from the very beginning.


Clarence Gillis: Under present regulations, as pointed out by the hon. member for Lake Centre, a man joining the army to-day who has more than two children is obliged to leave a certain number of his children without a subsistence allowance. Is there any intention on the part of the government to change the regulations in this regard? I know men in the unit of which the minister is honorary colonel who have left six children at home, which means that the wife, with an allowance for two children, is required to care for four in addition without provision being made for their maintenance. Is there any intention to change that regulation?


James Layton Ralston: All these matters are
constantly under consideration, but I cannot give my hon. friend any assurance that there is any intention of changing the regulation. I may say that I have made a note of no less than ten different reasons which have been given in this chamber this afternoon as to why men should not enlist. All these matters are being given attention. I can assure hon. members that the recruiting committee. which is in charge of this campaign, have had most of these matters in mind. Notwithstanding all these reasons, however, some of which may be sound and some unsound, I do ask hon. members, though they have given expression to these views here, to do as an old medical officer of mine often suggested: "Don't tell me the difficulties; tell me how to get over them." I ask my hon. friends to do the same thing in connection with this recruiting campaign, because I do not think many of these difficulties are really serious as long as a man is imbued with the spirit mentioned a while ago, the desire to serve his country. I do not wish any hon. member to understand for a moment, however, that because I have not replied to all these matters they have not been considered and are not being kept in mind. Naturally I want to do all I can, and the department wants to do all it can, to make recruiting and army life as attractive as possible under the circumstances, and having regard to the needs and duties which have to be performed.
To supplement my answer to the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar. perhaps I did not emphasize as I should the fact that the
[Mr Coldwell.]
mechanization depot is a place where vehicles actually owned by the army are kept, and from which they are issued.


Major James William Coldwell: I did not know very much about the depot; I just had the complaint. There is one other point to which I think the minister should give his attention, namely, the position of mothers whose sons have enlisted, such sons or mothers having been on relief before the boys joined. The ruling was-I do not know whether it is still in effect-that because the boy was not a wage-earner and in support of his mother before joining up, the mother was not eligible for any allowance. I do not know whether that has been changed, but if it has not, I believe the minister should give it his attention.


James Layton Ralston: I believe the ruling was
changed about nine months ago.


Alan Cockeram: I believe I can say
from experience that it is a mistake for the government to accept in the army men who have big families. Consideration should be given to seeing that they are not recruited in the future.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
185.	Normal services. Battlefields memorials, $14,680.
Major James William Coldwell: Where are those memorials? Are we able to get access to memorials in France, or is there some agreement under which they are looked after?


James Layton Ralston: I understand these
memorials are in occupied France and Belgium. The question may be as to whether payment can be made. However it was thought desirable to make provision for such things.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
186.	Normal services. Book of Remembrance, $8,500.
Major James William Coldwell: Is the Book of Remembrance finished yet? I believe it was to be completed this year.


James Layton Ralston: When I was in the
department before, I made some predictions about that .matter. It is calculated that the photostating of completed pages can be forwarded during the current year so that the whole of the decorated pages can be sent to the Dominion archives for binding not later than December 31, 1941. All materials for binding are on hand.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Public TForfcs
187.	Civil pensions-Robert Allen, $269.52.
Alan Cockeram: Who are these people?


James Layton Ralston: These are ex-employees or their dependents who have been getting these pensions for many years. They were injured or killed while on duty. The department makes these grants year after year.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Are they civilian
employees?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
257. Departmental administration, $188,030.
Major James William Coldwell: I should like to know what the agreement is between the dominion government and the Bell Telephone company, through the Department of Public Works, with regard to service to government telephones. I ask the question for several reasons, one of which is that the Bell Telephone company is of course a very powerful organization, charging, in comparison with what we pay in western Canada to provincial telephone companies, a very high rate on short-distance calls. At times there is a difficulty in having calls put through quickly from this building to Toronto and Montreal. I have heard complaints in that regard. Upon making inquiry I have been told the reason is that although the company is making very high profits for the United States parent company, as well as for itself, it has not the necessary trunk lines to give that service to which at least the government of Canada and these buildings ought to be entitled. What is the contract with the Bell Telephone company? What are the rates, and cannot some pressure be brought to bear upon this company, whose profits since the beginning of the war have shown an increase, to give at least this city and this building better telephone connection in return for the very high rates everyone has to pay?


Hon. P. J. A. CARDIN (Minister of Public Works):: There is a special item in the estimates providing for the use of telephones, but possibly I could answer the hon. member now. The telephone service throughout the government offices in Ottawa is supplied under an agreement entered into in 1937. According to section 4 of the agreement the telephone company is to provide and maintain all telephone apparatus, equipment and facilities required to furnish the service, and the crown must pay the company for such equipment and telephone service at the company's standard rate3.
The charges borne by the crown may be divided in this way: Telephone service, which includes rentals of telephone instruments, and mileage, and private branch exchange equipment, including automatic switch devices, switchboards, and so on. The total amounts paid by the crown in the last three fiscal years for telephone service are as follows: 1938-39, $92,000; 1939-40. 5102,000, and 1940-41, $144,-
000.	This increase is due to the larger number of telephones installed as a result of the war. For example, in 1939-40 the increase due to the war was $8,000, and in 1940-41 the increase amounted to 550,000. The total number of telephones installed for war purposes since September, 1939, had amounted, in March, 1941, to 1,650. But we are paying standard rates for the service given to the government.


Major James William Coldwell: That is, the government receives no discount?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No.


Major James William Coldwell: On account of the larger number of telephones?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No.


Major James William Coldwell: Are the rates fixed by the board of transport commissioners?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Major James William Coldwell: And we have no way of getting a reduction?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. HAZEN:: Mr. Chairman, there is a
matter I wish to bring to the attention of the minister. A building was recently erected at the Lancaster military hospital, at West Saint John, New Brunswick, to be used, I understand, as an isolation hospital or a hospital for contagious diseases. The specifications for the building required the hinges or butts as they are called in the trade, on the inside doors to be of solid bronze. I am informed that these bronze hinges cost about. $6 a pair and that they serve no better purpose and cannot be distinguished from steel chromium-plated hinges, which cost about $1.10 a pair. I should like to know why bronze hinges were used when they cost so much more than the steel chromium-plated hinges. It seems to me that this is a waste
Supply-Public Works

of money and that there is inefficiency on the part of the department in specifying hinges of this kind. I would also point out to the minister that it affords an opportunity for a contractor, if he wants to be unscrupulous, to use steel chromium-plated hinges instead of the bronze hinges called for, because it is impossible to distinguish one from the other.
I would also point out that the specifications provided for steel knobs with cylinder lock on the outside door. This form of knob will rust on exposure to the weather. The specifications should have provided for bronze knobs, which will stand exposure to the weather. I do not know if the minister is in a position to give an explanation now', but it is a matter which I think should be investigated.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I thank my hon. friend for bringing the matter to my attention. I am reminded by the officer here that this building is being erected for the Department of Pensions and National Health and that the specifications had to agree with their requirements. I am not in a position to explain why such a fitting was specified or to give the reason justifying such a requirement, if in reality this fitting was called for by the specifications. In the main I am free to say that I agree with the observations of my hon. friend, but of course there may be some reason which cannot be given at the moment. I will undertake to look into the matter and inform my hon. friend.


Mr. COLD WELL:: I wish to ask the minister a question about the stationary engineers employed by the Department of Public Works in Ottawa. It has been brought to my attention that a number of the stationary engineers employed by the public works department in this city are not receiving the one day rest in seven. If that is so, it is a matter of long standing. I would point out that the Lord's Day Act compels the citizens of Canada to observe a weekly day of rest, and if the situation is as I am told it is, the public works department ought not to be breaking one of Canada's own statutes.
The late Doctor Hyndman, former member for Carleton county, asked some questions with regard to this matter and they were answered on June 1, 1938, as reported at page 3433 of Hansard. The answer shows clearly that at that time a large number of the stationary engineer employees worked for long periods without a single day of rest. For example, in 1937-38, J. D. Stratton, worked from November 1 to February 20 without a day of rest, and again from March 16 to April 30. E. Nunn worked from November 19 to December 19 without a day of rest, and again from from December 28 to January 29. F. Deavy
(Mr. Hanen.1
worked from November 1 to January 16 and from February 1 to April 10 without a day of rest. H. R. Clarke worked from November 1 to January 12 without a day of rest, and then after one day's rest he worked from January 14 to February 7 without a day of rest and again from February 25 to March 9. R. G. Whalen worked from October 15 to November 21 and from November 23 to December 17, or over two months, with only one day's rest in between those two periods, and again from December 19 to January 2, and from February 8 to February 25, without a day of rest. C. Graham worked from November 1 to January 10 without a break, again from January 23 to March 14, and again from March 25 to April 10 without a break. All this was in 1937-38, and I am told that the situation is now very similar to what it was then. If the facts are as I have stated them, this is a flagrant breach of our own statute. How on earth can we expect private companies and organizations and individuals to obey the law when we ourselves break it? These men are entitled to at least one day of rest in seven, and surely the government of Canada, as a model employer, ought to be setting the example to private employers. I bring this situation to the minister's attention.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I cannot recall the situation as it existed at the time that report was brought down, but my information is that at present all these employees are enjoying one day of rest in the week. Of course it happens that they have to replace each other, but when one of these employees has to work on a Sunday he gets a day off during the week.


Thomas Miller Bell: Is the minister sure of that?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That is the information
which comes to me.


Major James William Coldwell: The correspondence I have here would not bear that out.


Mr. KINLEY:: The information that came from the hon. member was all on the winter season. It may be that in the summer time the duties are very light.


Major James William Coldwell: The information I have does not seem to bear that out. I should be glad if the minister or the officials with him would make further inquiry.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I will.


Major James William Coldwell: Before the dinner recess I was speaking about the Bell Telephone company. Would the minister table that agreement.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: With pleasure.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Public Works
261.	Chief architect's branch. Telephone service at Ottawa, $97,000.
Mr. MacNICOL:: May I ask a question
about items 261 and 262 together?


Thomas Vien: Is it the wish of the committee to take items 261 and 262 together?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.
262.	Telephone service other than at Ottawa,


John Ritchie MacNicol: I notice that the amount voted under item 261, "telephone service at Ottawa," is $97,000, whereas apparently for all the rest of Canada the cost of the telephone service is only $8,000. What makes the cost so excessively high at Ottawa?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The difference between the telephone service at Ottawa and the outside service is that here we have a governmental service for all the public buildings. We have exchanges for all the services in Ottawa. In the other cities we use the ordinary telephone services without any special switchboard such as we have in Ottawa.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Are there more telephones under government control in Ottawa than there are under government control in Toronto, Montreal, and all the great cities of Canada, put together?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Oh, a very large number.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Far more than all the
rest of Canada?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Far more.


John Ritchie MacNicol: We are using too many telephones in Ottawa.
Items 261 and 262 agreed to.
267. Chief architect's branch. Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings. Saskatchewan. Dominion public buildings- improvements and repairs, $35,000.


Major James William Coldwell: May we have a breakdown of this expenditure, please?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is not possible to give a break-down of this item. The wording of the item is in general terms, because we cannot ascertain long in advance what will be the requirements for each building in a province.


Major James William Coldwell: There is no large extension of any public building?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This covers maintenance only.


Major James William Coldwell: Just the maintenance?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Just maintenance and
operation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
268. Chief architect's branch. Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings, Alberta. Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs, $35,000.
John Horne Blackmore: Could the minister explain one matter which arrests my attention? I notice that the appropriation under item 263 for the maritime provinces generally, is the same this year as it was last, and the same is true of Quebec, but Ontario's appropriation is reduced, and the appropriation of each of the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, is also reduced. I am curious to know how the minister has been successful in effecting economies on buildings in the three prairie provinces but has not been so successful in the case of Quebec and the maritimes?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The reduction in this item, as in some others, is due to the fact that we do not expect to have to do as many repairs or as much maintenance work as we had to do in the past year; and, according to the very severe direction which is being given to us by the Minister of Finance, we have to reduce items as much as we can and limit ourselves to the most necessary repairs. There is no prejudice.


John Horne Blackmore: I grant fully the
Validity of what the minister says, but it seems to me that his general principle should apply to Quebec and the maritime provinces with the same force as it does to the prairie provinces.


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: There are more buildings to maintain in Quebec and the maritime provinces.


John Horne Blackmore: There would not be any more in Quebec, I would think, than in Ontario. I notice that there is a reduction of $25,000 in Ontario, but none in Quebec and the maritime provinces. It just arouses my curiosity; that is all.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I assure my hon. friend that there is no prejudice in so far as I or the departmental officers are concerned in the matter of the treatment of Alberta in comparison with other provinces. We did not spend last year all the money which had been provided for the maintenance of public buildings in Alberta, a-nd accordingly we thought that this year, particularly in view of the policy of economy, there was no use in providing for a larger amount than would be required. Of the vote of $40,000 provided last year for Alberta we expended only $18,000 on repairs of public buildings in that province.


John Horne Blackmore: I assume, then, I would be justified in forming the conclusion that we in Alberta must have learned how to take particularly good care of our buildings? Mr. CARDIN: Probably.
Supply-Public Works


Clarence Gillis: The policy of the department now is that no new buildings shall be erected. Some time ago the town of Dominion, Nova Scotia, petitioned the Department of Public Works, pointing out that the building used for postal services there is totally inadequate and a disgrace to the Post Office Department. Is it the intention of the department to make any repairs or put that building in some kind of decent shape, in view of the fact that a new building cannot be erected at this time?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: If it is a publicly-owned building, we are providing under the general vote for repairs that may be necessary. If it is not a publicly-owned building, if it is rented, we do not make the repairs ourselves; they are supposed to be made by the proprietor of the building.


Clarence Gillis: It is a rented building.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: But we make representations to the proprietor and probably induce him to make the necessary repairs, or we suggest that a change be made. Is it a post office?


Clarence Gillis: Yes.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We are governed to a large extent by the representations which are made to us by the Post Office Department. My information is that the Post Office Department pay the rent for the building which they occupy. I will undertake to make the necessary representations. I will make a note of what the hon. gentleman has said.


Clarence Gillis: I have a copy of representations made by the town council of Dominion to the department with regard to the erection of a suitable building in the town. The reply was that no new undertakings were to be made at this time. From the description I have of the building, it is a distinct reflection on the Post Office Department. I brought the matter up when the Postmaster General's estimates were before the committee, and he referred me to the Department of Public Works. In the light of the correspondence, will the department consider putting the building into decent shape or providing a building that is suitable?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The Postmaster General, I presume, was thinking of a new building. If the building is rented, the rent is paid by the Post Office Department. I will, however, look into the matter.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Will the minister put on Hansard the value of the public buildings owned by the dominion in the various

provinces? We cannot tell very well what is necessary unless we know the values of these properties. I do not want the answer now.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
271. Chief architect's branch. Dominion quarantine stations-maintenance and repairs, $17,000.
Mr.	COLDWELL: Where are these
stations? .
Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: In Halifax; Sydney; Tra-cadie; Quebec-Savard Park; William Head, and Bentinck island in British Columbia.


Major James William Coldwell: I was wondering what the accommodation was like at Halifax, where there was some difficulty this winter with certain diseases brought in by sailors. Perhaps that comes under the Department of Pensions and National Health, and I was wondering why there was not an amount included for the extension of that work if the accommodation was insufficient at any of these ports.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: So far as the Department of Pensions and National Health is concerned, I took up the question immediately after my hon. friend made his speech in the house, and I was assured that with regard to both accommodation at the quarantine stations and hospital beds there was ample provision in Halifax. The lack of accommodation was in connection with the social care of men and not in hospitalization or in quarantine.


Major James William Coldwell: I am glad to hear that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
273. Chief architect's branch. Flags for dominion buildings, $2,500.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Is any other flag than the union jack flown on any public buildings?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
279. Chief engineer's branch. Dredging. Maritime provinces, $349,700.
Douglas King Hazen: Where was dredging done
last year in the maritime provinces; what was the cost in the different places, and what quantity of material was removed?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I regret that I am not able to give the places where dredging was done. There were three dredges in Prince Edward Island, two in New Brunswick and six in Nova Scotia, doing minor work which it was not thought advisable to give under contract. It was decided to have it executed by the

Supply-Public Works
equipment of the department. The details are not before me, but I can give them to my hon. friend, probably to-morrow.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
280. Chief engineer's branch. Dredging.- Ontario and Quebec, $259,300.
John Ritchie MacNicol: On page 170 of the estimates there is a detail of the increase of $59,300 in this item. Where are the extra works being erected?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I cannot give the reason for the increase, but I can give certain figures which may explain the situation. The big items are: Cobourg, $20,000; Oshawa, $20,000; Port Hope, $11,000, in round figures; Toronto, eastern channel, $15,000; Whitby, $9,000. These are the big items; the others are small items of a few hundred dollars.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
282. Chief engineer's branch. Dredging. British Columbia, $190,000.
John Horne Blackmore: How is it that we
find economies effected in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, but they are singularly lacking in the case of Ontario and Quebec?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The only explanation I can give is that the location is responsible. There are many more places in Ontario and Quebec where dredging is necessary than in Alberta or Saskatchewan or even in British Columbia, although in British Columbia there are large areas that have to be dredged, and dredging is going on continually.


John Horne Blackmore: It would seem to me that in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba there would be about the same number of areas to dredge this year as last, and I do not see how labour would be any cheaper. Therefore it is difficult to see how these economies have been effected. Of course I should not like to have the minister go to the trouble of giving a complete break-down of the figure, but it seems unusual.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The amount being voted this year for the three prairie provinces is practically the same as last; there is a decrease of only $24.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
287. Chief engineer's branch. Maintenance and operation of graving docks, locks and dams, etc. Locks and dams, $49,174.
Douglas King Hazen: Where is the St. Andrews lock and dam located?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is on the Red river in Manitoba?


Douglas King Hazen: What about the locks on the Rideau canal in Ottawa? Does the minister's department maintain them?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That comes under the
Department of Transport.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
288. Chief engineer's branch. Maintenance and operation oi graving dock, lock and dams, etc. Snag boats, $41,600.
Mr. NICHOLSON:: I do not find any item here for Churchill. In view of the large expenditure the government has made there, would the minister make some statement-


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That is under the Department of Transport.


Douglas King Hazen: Where do these snag boats operate?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Both of them in the Fraser river in British Columbia.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
SIS. Telegraph branch-reconstruction, repairs and improvements, British Columbia-Vancouver island district, $9,000.
Major James William Coldwell: Before we leave these telegraph branch items, may we have some idea what these telegraph and telephone services are, just generally?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: These telephone and telegraph services are established and maintained to promote communication with the remote districts which privately-owned organizations do not serve. It is a public service which is of great importance for the people living in the remote sections. It is operated at a loss, but I think the service is worth it. The private companies will not go there; that is the important point.


Major James William Coldwell: I asked the question in order to bring out that information. It is another of those cases where the private companies cannot make a profit, and accordingly they do not go in. If our people understood that the government carries on many services which are not profitable, we might have a little less criticism of the ordinary normal expenditures of the country.


Douglas King Hazen: What income is derived by the government from the operation of these services?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I regret that that information is not tabulated. I would have to take each one separately. We have for each section a statement showing the revenue and expenditure. I think I could give my hon. friend the total to-morrow morning.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
39/8
Supply-Public Works
[Stage Direction]
S13. General. National gallery of Canada, $43,720.
Thomas Miller Bell: The amount is I see, almost entirely taken up by salaries. When the country decides to purchase pictures, if it ever does, out of what account would that come?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It comes out of this vote.


Thomas Miller Bell: Do we ever buy any pictures for the national gallery?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We have not done so for a long time.


Major James William Coldwell: It seems to me that even in war time we should keep up our expenditures for some educational and cultural objects. We should be encouraging in every possible way the promotion of Canadian national culture. We have a number of artists who are doing fine work in develpping a particular kind of Canadian art. I should like to see something included in our estimates that would enable the national gallery to purchase some of the best of the pictures that are painted each year, even if only a relatively small amount is devoted to this purpose.
We should do much more than we are doing now to encourage Canadian art and literature; I believe the country is really doing very little indeed in that direction. I am not suggesting that anything should be included at the present time, but I hope the question of inserting an item in the estimates on some future occasion will receive consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
315. General. To supplement, on approval of treasury board except where less than $200 is required, any of the appropriations of the Department of Public Works, $100,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: May I ask if the palace of justice, the supreme court building, has been completed?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is practically completed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
515. Special. Chief architect's branch. Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings. To close out contracts-further amount required, $370,000.
Major James William Coldwell: These items are going through so quickly it is impossible to follow them; as a matter of fact in my copy of the supplementary estimates the numbers are not very clear, and therefore I could not follow them in any event. I presume these are all right, but I imagine I shall have to rely on the judgment of other hon. members.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am now in a position to comply with the request made a short time ago, and table herewith a copy of the agreement between the Bell Telephone Company of Canada and His Majesty the King.


Major James William Coldwell: Thank you.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
363. Administration of the Transport Act. Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada -administration, maintenance and operation, $280,760.
Howard Charles Green: Will the minister tell the committee whether there have been any agreed charges under the Transport Act which was put through two or three years ago; that is, where an agreement is made for a reduction in rates. I think in each case any such agreement has to be approved by the board of transport commissioners.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps I can answer that question, since I was very much concerned with the question of agreed charges. There have been some ten agreements put through, I think none within the last year.


Mr. WRIGHT:: I should like to repeat
a question I brought forward the other day in connection with another department, when I was told to wait until the estimates of the Department of Transport came up. The question had to do with freight rates to Fort Churchill. In the northeastern part of my province, on the Canadian National line from Prince Albert to Hudson Bay junction, the freight rate on wheat to Fort Churchill is something like three cents a hundred less than the rate to Port Arthur and Fort William. All the grain that goes to Churchill is shipped over that line, but the farmers do not obtain the benefit of that freight rate. They pay the freight rate to Fort William, and the difference is credited to the wheat board. In Alberta, where most of the grain at the present time is shipped to Port Arthur and Fort William, they are given the benefit of the Vancouver freight rate, and I am just wondering why the people on the line from Prince Albert to Hudson Bay junction are not given the same consideration.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am afraid the question raised by the hon. gentleman is rather involved, and I am not quite sure that I am the one to answer it. I will undertake, however, to look into the matter and to discuss it with the other departments that might be concerned and also with the board of transport commissioners. At the moment I am not in a position to give a proper answer to this question.

Supply-Transport-Marine Service


Percy Ellis Wright: Would the minister send me that information when he obtains it?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
376.	Canals service. Canals service administration, $37,810.
Thomas Vien: It will be observed that items 364 to 375 inclusive have been left for the time being. They will come up later, when we consider air services.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
377.	Canals service. Canals-operation and maintenance, $2,213,669.
Alan Cockeram: Will the minister break down this item, please?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This item can be subdivided as follows: permanent staff, $1,065,000; temporary assistance, $728,000, or a total, for staff of $1,794,000.	Allowance-this means
board for employees on dredges and tugs- travelling expenses and so forth-


Alan Cockeram: I have that information; thank you.


Thomas Miller Bell: How are these employees appointed? Is this just casual labour or are they permanent employees appointed by the minister, or by the civil service commission?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: By the civil service
commission.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
385. Marine service. Construction, maintenance and supervision of aids to navigation, including salaries and allowances to lightkeepers, $1,802,560.
Mr. POTTIER:: I should like to bring to the attention of the minister a serious situation which has arisen as a result of the employment of men on lightships. For some twenty or thirty years these men were considered temporary employees, and until some two or three years ago no provision was made for their superannuation. Some of the men who were retired in 1933 and 1934 are now receiving old age pensions. They served faithfully on these ships, and I should like the minister to give some consideration to their case. In my constituency there is Captain Larkin, who served for thirty-five years on the lurcher lightship and who is now in such circumstances that he requires and should receive some assistance. I am asking the minister to give this matter his attention.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that in the last few years it has come under superannuation.


Vincent-Joseph Pottier: In the last three years.


Clarence Gillis: I have in mind the salary of a harbourmaster at Glace Bay, Nova Scotia. Considerable correspondence has passed between the minister and myself with reference to this matter. I understand the regulations state that in the smaller harbours the harbourmaster must depend for his wages upon fees paid by boats entering and leaving the harbour. This man is in quite a busy harbour, where perhaps 400 or 500 boats go in and out. The department requested that he make his returns for the year 1940, and he has forwarded me a copy of a statement showing cash receipts at that harbour in 1940. The statement shows receipts of exactly fifty cents. It would seem, therefore, that he is not too well paid.
I have spoken about the matter because the man in question has been known to the fishermen around there for many years. He is one of the best qualified men in his line of work who could be secured in Canada, and is a valuable official for the department. He does a lot of work at that point. The minister has informed me through correspondence that the act will have to be changed to permit the payment of a salary or any other remuneration to this man. Is there any regulation under which he could be compensated? If he leaves his present job I am sure he will never be replaced at the same salary. He is carrying on a very necessary work among the fishermen. He must have food; he is very well qualified and sticks to his job religiously because he realizes the value of his services to the fishermen in that harbour.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am afraid that at present there is no means of coming to the rescue, if I may use that word, of this gentleman. We have no means of compensating him for the services he is performing. When there is no return for the government we cannot pay the officer who is supposed to be looking after the harbour. However, the man is not forced to occupy that position; he is free to do any other job of which he is capable in that locality. He is not what might be described a regular employee of the government, and therefore he is not prevented from doing other work. Unfortunately at the present time nothing can be done to remedy the situation. There are several other cases similar to the one described, because we have a number of harbours in Canada where the revenues are not great enough to pay harbourmasters. In fact we have some difficulty in some places in finding persons who are ready to act as harbourmasters, because the revenue is so small. I regret I cannot do anything in this instance.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
3980	COMMONS
Supply-Transport-Railway Service
399. Railway service. Repairs and expenses in connection with the operation and maintenance of official railway cars under the jurisdiction of the department, $41,120.
Mr. POIRIER:: Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to try the patience of the committee, but while we are on the railway estimates I desire to inform the house that on March 28 last I handed to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Cardin) a brief on the subject of the Baie des Chaleurs railway. In substance, this brief stated:
Work has been begun on the establishment of a naval base and an air base at Gaspe. Now that the battle of the Atlantic is under way and that German submarines and cruisers are only some three hundred miles from our eastern coasts, this project is of incommensurable importance. It is quite possible that the enemy may enter the gulf of St. Lawrence and attack the Gaspe coast, which lies open and defenceless. Thus the urgent need of pushing forward the organization of these two defence bases.
In order to establish communication with these bases, to move the requisite supplies, material and troops, it is a matter of imperative necessity and immediate urgency to improve the Baie des Chaleurs railway. This line, some two hundred miles in length, is the property of the Canadian National Railways. At present, it cannot carry heavy locomotives and freight cars cannot be loaded to full capacity on account of the poor condition of the line. The road-bed needs to be ballasted throughout its entire length and light rails replaced by heavy ones over a length of 45 miles. This would ensure a twofold result- the normal defence of the Gaspe peninsula and the whole country in wartime, and normal railway facilities in time of peace.
May I point out further that while industrial activity, employment and prosperity are the rule in most sections of the country at present, the Gaspe peninsula remains in a state of unemployment and comparative poverty. Doubtless it would be difficult to establish war industries in that section of the country. But that could be made up for by improving the railway line. The result would be (a) to provide work for the unemployed; (b) to strengthen our national defence; (c) to anticipate postwar needs, and (d) to give justice to this section of the country which has never enjoyed its share in the Canadian confederation and has always been looked upon as a poor relation.
This is not the first time that the house lias heard of the Gaspe railroad. My predecessor, Hon. Charles Marcil, frequently pointed out the poor condition of the line
t'Mr. Cardin.]
and the state of inferiority in which the Gaspe people found themselves as a result.
Many of the older members will recall the fine personality of Hon. Charles Marcil. An intimate friend and counsellor of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, he represented Bonaventure during thirty-seven years without interruption and without suffering defeat at the polls. A most eloquent speaker, he often held the house spellbound. He was rightly called golden-tongued. He had the honour of accompanying Sir Wilfrid Laurier from one end of the country to the other during the campaigns of 1904, 1908 and 1911.
As I said, Mr. Chairman, my predecessor, Mr. Marcil frequently called the house's attention to the Gaspe railroad. I shall quote from a speech he delivered from this floor on the 21st of June, 1923, as the words he uttered then are applicable to the present situation:
The two counties of Gaspe and Bonaventure are inhabited by 60,000 people, and we could easily have three times that population if we had a proper railway service. These two constituencies cover 10,000 square miles of the most fertile territory in the province of Quebec, with a double advantage of being situated by the sea, having thousands of miles of timber and pulpwood, mineral resources, fertile soil, and splendid fisheries producing some of the finest fish of the North American continent. Our rivers are visited yearly by the cream of American and Canadian society. Nevertheless the district has remained in a quiescent state. During the decade from 1911 to 1921, the population increased by only 500. Why? Because the industries in both Gaspe and Bonaventure, one after another moved away across the Baie des Chaleurs to the Intercolonial where they could get service over which they could send their produce. At Nouvelle, to begin with, the Province of Quebec Lumber Association transferred all its lumber over to Dalhousie, and it is operating on the main line of the Intercolonial. The same thing happened at Bonaventure and New Richmond where the mills of the McLean Lumber Corporation were transferred to Bathurst, and to-day we witness the spectacle of this lumber being cut in these two counties and being transported in booms across the Baie des Chaleurs, a distance ranging from 25 to 50 miles, to be sawn and placed on board cars to be exported to the Canadian and American markets at great disadvantage and loss. The result of this is that the young people are leaving these two counties daily, and settling, unfortunately a large number of them, in the United States. We are losing our population, and this because we have not an efficient railway service which would develop the resources of these constituencies as they should be developed.
Hon. Mr. Marcil's speeches always ended with a request to the government of the day to have the Baie des Chaleurs railroad made part of the Canadian National Railways.
Finally in 1928, thanks to the personal intervention of the Minister of Justice (Mr. JUNE 13, 1941	3981
Supply-Transport-Hudson Bay Railway
Lapointe), the Baie des Chaleurs road was taken over by the Liberal government and incorporated into the national system.
I wish here to convey to the Minister of Justice the gratitude of the Gaspe people for this act of justice. In spite of the minister's well-known modesty, we have been definitely apprised of the fact that he is responsible for the success met by Hon. Mr. Marcil in attaining the object of his oft-repeated requests. The Minister of Justice has earned the admiration and gratefulness of the people of Gaspe for having thrown all the weight of his influence on the side of their section of the country.
As a consequence, Mr. Chairman, the Baie des Chaleurs railway has been operated by the Canadian National railways for almost thirteen years. Many complaints have been attended to; we enjoy freight rates that are considerably lower than formerly; the right of way is better kept and the service much more convenient than under the old management.
However, I must say, as suggested in the brief from which I quoted that we are still a long way from perfection. The Canadian National boasts of having expended $1,300,000 in the last twelve years in improvements of all sorts. Well, Mr. Chairman, this line was in such a bad way, that even the expenditure of this seemingly large sum of money still leaves it in a deplorable state.
Two hundred miles of that line require ballasting. In many places it follows the shore so closely that protection walls had to be built to check the eroding effect of the sea. Many of those works are in such a bad shape that people are fearful, and not without cause, when travelling over these precipices.


Mr. HANSON (Skeena):: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, the hon. gentleman is reading and reading so fast that I cannot follow him.


Joseph Alphée Poirier: I would say, Mr. Chairman, as the hon. member for Parkdale said a few weeks ago, that I am referring to my notes.


Olof Hanson: But he is reading them too fast for me to follow him.


Thomas Vien: The hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Hanson) requests the hon. member to read more slowly, in order that he may follow.


Joseph Alphée Poirier: Furthermore, and I presume to call the Minister of Transport's attention to this fact, all through the spring period the trains had to reduce their speed to ten or twenty miles an hour on account of the poor condition of the right of way. At least forty-five miles of this line is built with light steel weighing only fifty-six pounds a yard. As everyone knows, modem locomotives cannot use rails of such light weight and consequently, the equipment running on this line remains inadequate.
I hope the Minister of Transport, whom I have made conversant with this condition, will consider the matter in conjunction with the board of railway commissioners and decide to undertake, with the shortest possible delay, the improvements requested.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The hon. member may rest assured that I will send his request to the management of the Canadian National railways with the greatest pleasure and give it all possible support.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
1/00. Railway service. Hudson bay railway- construction and improvements-capital, $14,000.
J/01. Hudson Bay railway-To provide for the difference between expenditures for operations and maintenance, and revenue accruing from operation during the year ending March 31, 1942, not exceeding, $350,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: When the hon. member
for Qu'Appelle left for home the other night, he asked me if I was going to say anything about the Hudson Bay railway, and I said I would on my own behalf and also on his behalf. It shows his interest in the Hudson Bay railway. Here is an item of $350,000 to cover a deficit in the operating expenses of the Hudson Bay railway. I realize that this year little if anything can be done to eliminate the deficit because, as the Minister of Trade and Commerce said, it is not possible at the present time to convoy wheat shipments from Churchill across the ocean, but a year or two ago that would not be an excuse. The Hudson Bay railway is to my mind a very good road when it is being operated. There is no vote here for a deficit on capital account, but if there were and it were added to the $350,000, we should have a considerable sum. I wish to say for the Hudson Bay railway that it is a well built road, with fine rails, and smooth to ride over. The trains of the Canadian National which run up there in the summer to take tourists into that country are good trains and well operated.
3982	COMMONS
Supply-Transport-Hudson Bay Railway
During the last year or two, no grain, so far as I can ascertain, has been carried over the road; but, as the Minister of Trade and Commerce said the other day, for over a year
2,600,000	bushels of wheat have been stored at Churchill. To-day, however, the road is carrying no freight that is worth while between the Pas and Churchill.
Has the department control over the protection and guarding of the bridges from the Pas to Churchill? There are three large and magnificent bridges. The second at Mani-tou and the third at Kettle Rapids, both on the Nelson river, are two of the finest bridges I have ever seen. I am aware that the Minister of Munitions and Supply knows all about them because he has been over them many times. If these two bridges are not guarded they should be, because if they were destroyed it would stop traffic over the whole road to Churchill. The same remark applies to the bridge at the Pas, which is the first. It is a six-span bridge over the Saskatchewan river, about 1,000 feet long.
If the elevator at Churchill belongs to the government, it also should have protection, but so far as I can see there is little protection there. It is a magnificent elevator, built by the Minister of Munitions and Supply, and it is a credit to him. In addition to these bridges which should be protected, there are four roundhouses at the Pas, Wabowden, Gillam and Churchill. The road has equipment enough to cariy a thousand times the freight that is going over it to-day. I talked to one of the main men on the road, and he told me that if they had ten million bushels passing over the road yearly it would pay the operating costs and there would be no deficit.
May I say to the Minister of Transport that when the time comes again that wheat can be shipped by Churchill, if he is the minister, I hope an effort will be made to ship at least 10,000,000 bushels. That is not very much out of a crop of three or four hundred million bushels, but it would be sufficient to take the cost of operating the road oS the backs of the Canadian people. I do not see why western members, particularly those from Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta, do not take this matter up. I realize that there is not much hope for this year, because the Minister of Trade and Commerce has told us that there cannot be any convoys out of Churchill. In the past, however, the western members should have fought for fair play for the Hudson Bay railway.


Major James William Coldwell: I think they did.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I never heard of anyone fighting for it.
[Mr. MacNicolJ


Major James William Coldwell: The hon. member for Mackenzie did.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Perhaps I should not be so all-inclusive. It may be that some of them did. At any rate, I hope that when the time comes again, some of them will, and that the minister will be sympathetic, because it cost the Canadian people about $50,000,000 to build the road and it is costing them about $400,000 this year to pay the deficit on the operating costs.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I should like to go on record as supporting what the hon. member for Davenport has said. Those of us from the western provinces are tremendously interested in the success of this route. Hon. members will recall that I raised the question two or three times last year, and the present Minister of Munitions and Supply explained at that time that the position was that ships would not be available without convoy protection being supplied, and that that was not practicable. I understand that is still the situation. I suggest that other hon. members should do as the hon. member for Davenport has done, namely, take a trip to Churchill at some time during the recess and learn something of the possibilities of that country. They might consider engaging the hon. member for Davenport as special publicity agent. We appreciate very much the publicity he has given to this channel of transport.


Alan Cockeram: Mr. Chairman, you rushed by item 390 so fast that I did not get a chance to speak on it.


Thomas Vien: I understand that some other hon. members wish to speak on items 400 and 401. If the hon. member wishes to revert to item 390, I shall call it again, with the consent of the committee.


John Horne Blackmore: I have not been able to get a clear understanding why it is that grain cannot be shipped out of Hudson bay.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is because we cannot get any ships to call at that port.


John Horne Blackmore: Why cannot we get ships?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: W ell, shipping involves convoys, and I understand that there are difficulties in view of which the authorities in London do not wish to send ships to Churchill during the war.


John Horne Blackmore: I am not satisfied, by any means.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We cannot control the
situation.

Supply-Transport-Hudson Bay Railway


John Horne Blackmore: I should like to ask one or two more questions. The information I have up to the present time justifies me in the belief that for some reason or another, which simply will not hold water-


An hon. MEMBER:: The Hudson bay?
Mr. BLACKMOREthe Churchill route is not being used. It is stated that the authorities cannot supply convoys for ships out of Hudson bay. First, I should like to know why convoys are necessary until the ships get out of Hudson bay entirely. Surely there are not enemy submarines in Hudson bay; why should there be convoys until ships reach the open sea. If there is a sufficient number of ships, why cannot escorts accompany them from the entrance to the Hudson bay just as they accompany them from the St. Lawrence?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The responsibility does not rest with the Department of Transport. It is not for me to decide. I have no authority to impose my will on the proprietors of the ships, or on the companies, and if no escort is supplied for ships navigating in the bay I cannot force companies to send over their ships without convoys. I have no idea what the Canadian government could do to improve the situation in that regard. If there were any possibility of improving it we would be ready and anxious to relieve the condition, instead of paying a deficit such as we are providing for this year.


John Horne Blackmore: I am to understand, then, that the matter of using that valuable harbour, that railway, and that magnificent elevator does not lie in the hands of the Canadian government? Is that right?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No; that is not it. But we cannot force proprietors of ships to send their boats to Hudson bay against their will. We have provided a railway, elevators and aids to navigation, and it is not our fault if shipowners do not wish to take advantage of these facilities at the present time. To a certain extent the reason which they give is a good one; they do not desire to navigate their ships during the war without convoys.


John Horne Blackmore: Is the minister in a position to tell us how many years there has been a deficit on that railway? Was there a deficit in 1936?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


William Earl Rowe: There has been a deficit ever since it was built.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The deficits were:
Year
1935-	36
1936-	37
1937-	38
1938-	39
1939-	40
Amount


William Earl Rowe: It is getting worse all the time.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Last year we provided for
8350.000,	plus $68,000 in the further supple-mentaries.


John Horne Blackmore: Am I to conclude
then, that British companies had an objection to sending their ships into Hudson bay in 1936?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No.


John Horne Blackmore: Why was there a deficit then? Manifestly the line was not being used in 1936, and if the reason given for the present deficit is that we cannot get convoys, what was the reason for the deficit in 1936?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Movements'of wheat, by
years, have been as follow:
Wheat shipped
Year	bus.
1935-	36
1936-	37
1937-	38
1938-	39
1939-	40
1940-	41
2,351.633
2,683,415
Nil
3,201,167
2,101,089
120,315
The revenue from the wheat movement in 1940-41 was $8,587.33.


Major James William Coldwell: At the moment, of
course, the difficulty is really a matter of convoy. Ships have to be assembled somewhere in large numbers in order that warships may escort them across the sea, and some other ports in Canada are suffering in consequence of that assembly. I would join with those who have spoken in suggesting that the Hudson bay route is feasible. It is several hundred miles shorter than the route now used.


John Ritchie MacNicol: It is much more than that. From Churchill to Liverpool the distance is very little more than from New York to Liverpool.


Major James William Coldwell: It is several hundred miles shorter.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Over a thousand.


Major James William Coldwell: It is several hundred
miles shorter than the routes now used, and undoubtedly the route has never been given a fair trial. I do not know exactly what the minister in charge of marine matters could tell us about aids to navigation which have been placed there, or whether the Minister of Public Works is responsible for the placing of aids to navigation or for the provision of them. These departments get so mixed up sometimes that it is difficult to sort them out. When the war is over, I am sure there will be pressure from western Canada to give the route a fairer trial than it has had up to the present time. The British are very conservative. Shipowners and naval men usually like to do what they have been used
3984	COMMONS
Supply-Transport-Hudson Bay Railway
to doing, and if the war is prolonged and becomes intensified there is still a possibility that this route may be of immense value to Canada and Great Britain. It is short; it is well north, and it would save a perilous passage for ships along the Atlantic coast. I do not profess to know much about shipping or naval affairs; but if the war is prolonged, the conservatism of the authorities may be broken down, and this route may yet be a valuable outlet for supplies to Great Britain. I am glad to know that the road and the facilities are being maintained, and even if we are spending a great deal of money this year and taking a serious deficit, I believe it is worth while keeping everything in good shape, because the time may come in this war when we shall find that route a useful one.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I should like to say a word or two on this question because, as it happens, the port of Churchill is in my constituency. The fact of the matter is that Churchill has suffered in the last five or six years from conditions beyond the control of any government. In 1937-38 no grain was shipped there. Why? Because in that year Saskatchewan did not produce enough wheat to meet its own requirements. From the date of the opening of the port there has been a steady increase in business until adverse conditions arose.
What the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar suggested a moment ago was correct. There was a conservatism in shipping circles regarding the practicability of the Hudson bay route, but from the first or second year of its use as a port the insurance rates on cargoes of grain and on hulls were reduced, not to the point they 'would ultimately reach but considerably.
The hon. member for Lethbridge offers criticism because the port has not been used in the last two years. Well, shipping in Great Britain since the outbreak of war has been under the direction of the minister of shipping, and they will not send ships to Churchill on account of the risk involved. The ship would come out through the Hudson bay strait, but submarines are operating not very far off the coast of Greenland, a very short distance indeed from the outlet of the strait, and consequently cargo vessels are exposed to the risk of sinking by submarines unless accompanied by convoy. Therefore this route is not practicable at the moment.
I am as much interested as any hon. member in seeing the port developed. I have been one of its consistent advocates from the earliest date, and I am as much convinced as the member for Rosetown-Biggar that the day will come, not perhaps in the next few years but some time, when the route

will be one of the great trade routes of the world. There are no doubt practical difficulties to-day against it, but not from lack of sympathy on the part of the Minister of Transport or of the government. The people in the district fully recognize the difficulties. When the war is over, however, and we return to peaceful conditions and safety at sea, the port will come into its own and will be used.
It is worth while mentioning that there is less than one hundred miles difference in distance as between that port and the port of Montreal in relation to Liverpool, and consequently all that area which lies in the northwestern and central part of Saskatchewan is many hundreds of miles closer to Liverpool by that route than by Montreal or Vancouver. Churchill is not the only port that has suffered from war conditions. Let the hon. member inquire as to the amount of wheat that has gone out of Vancouver in the last eighteen months, and he will find it' has been practically stationary so far as shipments to Great Britain are concerned.
These are conditions that arise out of the war and they are beyond the control of the Minister of Transport. They are beyond the control of the government, and they will not be remedied until the war is over; but I have every confidence in the future of the port when the war is over and we return to peaceful conditions.


William Earl Rowe: What steps if any have been taken to make sure that bridges at different points on the railway are protected? Our chief concern should be about the possible necessity before the war is over, of resorting to greater use of the road.


An hon. MEMBER:: Keep a pack of wolves round every bridge.


William Earl Rowe: There are many wolves round bridges in this country, and we are fortunate that some of them have not been blowing up some of our bridges at vital points of transportation across Canada. We should be thankful that we have not been disturbed by acts of sabotage and other destructive efforts of enemy aliens in this country. Even in that outlying district and even if the bridges are not in great use, the government should see that they are guarded.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Guards have been appointed to look after these bridges. They are protected in the same way as all the works of the Canadian National Railways.


Mr. ROWTE:: They are on duty?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.

Supply-Transport-Travel Bureau Service


Major James William Coldwell: What has happened to the bridge across the Nelson river at Port Nelson? Is it still there? It is a beautiful bridge standing alone.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: All the works that have been erected at Port Nelson have been abandoned since Churchill was chosen.


Major James William Coldwell: Has anything been done to reclaim for war purposes the steel in that bridge? There is a huge amount.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: My information is that the steel has not yet been reclaimed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
S90. Marine service-Administration of pilotage- $194,600.
Alan Cockeram: There is an increase of $65,000 in this item. The details show "recoverable loan to pilots, $65,000". What is that?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This is to make a loan to the pilotage authority in Halifax to build a pilot boat to replace one which was lost. That money is to be reimbursed to the government. It is an advance such as we make to all the pilot authorities to build the boats they require, and the money is reimbursed to the government afterwards.


Alan Cockeram: Have the government a mortgage on the boat?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
i05. Canadian travel bureau service-To assist in promoting tourist business in Canada, $500,000.
Howard Charles Green: Would the minister explain the situation with regard to tourist travel this year? Last year tourist travel was nothing like it was hoped it would be.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is very difficult to outline completely the situation. We all know it is difficult on account of the war to move from one country to the other, and there is no doubt an agitation is being made in the United States against people coming to visit Canada.


Howard Charles Green: Is that so this year too?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes, and according to the information given to me the campaign against Canada has been intensified. Recently the director of the tourist bureau made a visit to the United States and spent three or four weeks there visiting all the important centres, and when he came back he reported that the situation was very bad; that the propaganda against Canada was very extensive and was having a great effect.


Howard Charles Green: What steps are being taken to counteract it?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It was with great satisfaction that he learned that the invitation issued by the Prime Minister explaining the situation had a very good effect upon the United States public. The director made a proposal to have a certain number of our public men deliver addresses explaining the situation, to dispel the misapprehension which exists in the United States. He recommended in particular that the Minister of Justice be asked to broadcast from Washington, and said he undoubtedly would be given the advantage of the broadcasting stations in the United States capital. It was suggested also that members of parliament and all those who have an opportunity of going to the United States take advantage of their visit to explain that it is not so difficult to visit Canada and that the embarrassments spoken of so much by the propagandists are not true. There is a possibility of combating in the .United States press this bad influence against our tourist traffic, but it is quite a job.


Howard Charles Green: Are we doing any broadcasting from Canadian stations to clear up that situation? Take, for example, the stations near the boundary; why do we not have regular broadcasts from them?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That is done. I have had control of that branch of the Department of Transport for only a short time, and now it is going to be handed over to the new Minister of National War Services.


Howard Charles Green: But there must not be any delay, because the summer is advancing, and it will be too late.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am sure there will not be any delay.


Major James William Coldwell: The minister suggested that members of parliament if they go across the line do a little work; I wonder whether for that purpose they can get enough foreign exchange to get there and back again.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
J/12. Marine service-river St. Lawrence ship channel-To provide for extension and improvement of control weirs-capital, $155,000.
Alan Cockeram: May we have a breakdown of this item?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is for repairs to be made to a certain number of weirs or submerged dams built in the St. Law'rence river for the purpose of raising the level of the water in and below the port of Montreal. They are built between islands at the opening of lake
39S6

Supply-Transport-Marine Service
St. Peter, about fifty miles below Montreal. The amount required is for the repair and maintenance of these submerged dams.


Alan Cockeram: That is what I understand. but I wanted a break-down.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
413. Marine service. To provide for the completion of a combination ice-breaker and service vessel-capital (revote), $80,000.
Douglas King Hazen: Where is that vessel being built, and who is building it?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The vessel is being built in Lauzon, Quebec. This is the ice-breaker known as the Ernest Lapointe, and this amount represents the last payment on the purchase price. There is also an amount for repairing the hull following the spring season, but that is covered by a supplementary item.


Douglas King Hazen: Who built the vessel?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It was built by the Davie Shipbuilding and Repairing company, after tenders were called.


Major James William Coldwell: When was it placed in
service?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This spring.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Government owned enterprises.
415.	Non-active accounts. National Harbours Board. Advances to national harbours board, subject to the provisions of section 29 of the National Harbours Board Act, to meet expenditures during the calendar year 1941 or any or all of the following accounts:
(a)	Retirement of maturing debentures- Saint John, $2,000; Quebec, $400,000. Total, $402,000.
(b)	Reconstruction and capital expenditures -Saint John, $3,000.
Generally

unforeseen, $200,000.
Major James William Coldwell: What is the reason for this increase?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This is to retire maturing debentures amounting to $400,000 at the port of Quebec and $2,000 for Saint John. There is also provision for the expenditure of $3,000 at the harbour at Saint John, and the $200,000 is for unforeseen expenditures in the harbours generally.


Douglas King Hazen: How much of the $200,000
voted last year was spent?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that the
expenditure was somewhat over $100,000.


Douglas King Hazen: Where was that money
spent?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It was used for the purchase of floating equipment for Halifax and Saint John, and also for timber handling equipment in the port of Montreal.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canadian National (West Indies)- Steamships, Limited.
416.	Advances to Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships, Limited, repayable on demand with interest at a rate to be fixed by the governor in council upon such terms and conditions as the governor in council may determine and to be applied in payment of capital expenditures in connection with vessels under the company's control during the year ending December 31, 1941, $20,000.
John Horne Blackmore: I am wondering how long this custom has been followed of granting an advance to Canadian National Steamships Limited of $20,000, or $21,000, which was the amount voted last year. How long has this custom prevailed?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I happen to be familiar with that matter. This item is required by the Canadian National act. They are not permitted to spend money for capital account unless it is voted by parliament. As a matter of fact, this year, as I remember the statements made in the committee, the net earnings of the Canadian National Steamships Limited were substantial, amounting to about $400,000. In spite of that fact, however, any capital expenditure either by the railway or the steamship company must be voted by parliament.


John Horne Blackmore: I gather from the item that this money is advanced to the company with the understanding that it may be repaid by and by. Have any of these advances ever been repaid by the Canadian National Steamships?


Clarence Decatur Howe: This is a capital vote, the
money being spent to improve the property; it is a permanent capital investment. As a matter of fact, at the present time the Canadian National Steamships are returning money to the government out of earnings.


John Horne Blackmore: They are ahead on
revenues, then?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


John Horne Blackmore: Under what item is
that shown, or where could we find a statement of that amount?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It will be found in the report of the Canadian National Steamships, which was dealt with by the committee on government-owned railways and shipping. Under the Canadian National-Canadian Pacific Act passed in 1932, it is necessary for the railway

Supply-Transport-Railway Service
and the steamship company to come to parliament and get a vote for capital expenditures, regardless of the amount of their earnings. That is, even though they may have a large surplus of revenue, that surplus cannot be spent on capital account unless it is voted by parliament.


Thomas Miller Bell: How many ships have
we on the West Indies route now, and are they passenger or cargo boats?


Clarence Decatur Howe: At one time we had six
passenger and six cargo boats, but I think a number of the cargo boats have been put on the north Atlantic run to help out the situation there, and I believe one or two of the passenger boats have been transferred to the British government for use as hospital ships. I cannot give the exact number.


Major James William Coldwell: The service is practically out of commission, then?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Canadian National Railway Company
Appropriation not required for 1941-42 (decrease), $15,000,000.
Mr. HARRIS (Danforth):: There is no
number attached to this reduction of $15,000,000 for the Canadian National Railways; nevertheless I think I should ask one or two questions in order to clarify the general picture. First, it is a matter of congratulation that in the conduct of this railway we are $15,000,000 better off for the coming year, which, of course, is due almost entirely to the war.
Under the report and the recommendations brought down by the committee on railways and shipping, after suggestions from the directors of the Canadian National Railways, the system of bookkeeping employed makes it mandatory that a depreciation charge be set up. This amounts to the sum of $11,000,000. My question is:	Will the $15,000,000 reduction and another $11,000,000 depreciation be the total amount for the coming year, or is the new bookkeeping set-up which is now authorized and mandatory and brings our methods of bookkeeping into line with the systems employed by class I railways in the United States

under the supervision of the interstate commerce commission-designed to make the amount $15,000,000 plus $11,000,000 depreciation?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No; because we had depreciation last year also.


Joseph Henry Harris: Yes; but it was not set out in the books last year. It was estimated, but it did not go into the bookkeeping system.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Practically the same amount went in as a retirement allowance.


Joseph Henry Harris: I want a clear answer to. my question. Will the $11,000,000 appear in the present bookkeeping system as a charge against the operations of the Canadian National Railways?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Joseph Henry Harris: Then I shall make this observation. I say to the administration that if that $11,000,000 is on the record as a depreciation charge, then with that amount, which is almost $1,000,000 a month in the year, there should not be nearly the requirement for temporary loans throughout the twelve months to take care of the deficits which occur from month to month.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Prince Edward Island Car Ferry and Terminals.
417.	Amount required to provide for the payment during the fiscal year 1941-42 to the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the national company) upon applications approved by the Minister of Transport, made from time to time by the national company, to the Minister of Finance and to be applied by the national company in payment of the deficit (certified by the auditors of the national company) in the operation of the Prince Edward Island car ferry and terminals arising in the calendar year 1941, $400,000.
Alan Cockeram: Why is there an increase here?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This is only an estimate
of what the deficit will be this year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
364. Air service. Air service administration, $11,435.
Clarence Gillis: Piloting a bill through the
house on March 20, the Minister of Munitions and Supply, who is in charge of this item, made a statement with reference to the extension of passenger and air mail service into Sydney, Nova Scotia. He stated at that time that it was the intention of the department to extend these services and to cure the situation which exists there at present. Has the minister any further information relative to the extension of the service?


Clarence Decatur Howe: A radio beam to connect the
airways is now under construction. The tower

Supply-Transport-Air Service
at Sydney is being constructed. Within the next six weeks or two months the beam should be installed, and at that time it is hoped we shall be able to extend the service to Sydney.


Mr. JACKMAN:: Is this an account of
Trans-Canada Air Lines, or is it a government expenditure?	.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is a government expenditure. It has not anything to do with Trans-Canada Air Lines. It is for government supervision of aviation generally throughout Canada.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: What is the set-up in the minister's department? Is there a staff including one or two senior men to look after air transportation, as well as those men connected with Trans-Canada Air Lines?


Clarence Decatur Howe: All aviation is in the Department of Munitions and Supply. This particular vote covers the supervisory staff, including the director of civil aviation and his staff.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: Who is the director of civil aviation?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. J. A. Wilson.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
866. Air service. Civil aviation division. Airways and airports-Construction and improvements, including lighting and radio facilities-Capital, $1,231,400.
Mr. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: When a road is being constructed from a city to an airport, and it happens to pass through private property, what arrangements are made for compensating the owner for the lands taken from him?


Clarence Decatur Howe: If the road is built by the federal government-and this is seldom done, because it is not our practice to build roads to airports-an attempt is made to purchase
the road by private agreement. If that attempt is not successful, expropriation proceedings are taken, and the price is settled by the exchequer court.


Charles Edward Johnston: The road I have in mind is the one which runs from South Hill Ogden, a suburb of Calgary, to Shepard. I believe it is a dominion operation.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Probably in connection with a military airport, is it not?


Charles Edward Johnston: Yes, at Shepard.


Clarence Decatur Howe: An attempt would first be made to purchase the land from the owner.


Charles Edward Johnston: How would the department arrive at a valuation? Would it be the average price for the district, or would this be done by adjusters?


Clarence Decatur Howe: We have been using the real estate division of the Canadian National Railways. Those men have had wide experience in purchasing land, under similar conditions. Mr. Clark, of the Canadian National Railways, is in charge of purchasing for the Department of Munitions and Supply. His local representative would endeavour to reach what would be considered an equitable price. If that failed, the matter would be settled by court action.


Charles Edward Johnston: I hope the minister's department would not pay the same price as was paid by the Canadian Pacific Railway for a supply depot in East Calgary. The price they paid was about $500 an acre. A farmer would do all right if he could get that much. If a road happened to run through summer-fallow, or through land bearing crops, would there be compensation for the summer-fallow or the crops?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes; if the land is under crop, we pay compensation.


William Earl Rowe: Has the minister given consideration to assistance to municipalities for roads through townships?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No.


William Earl Rowe: From one airfield to another?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Highways are a responsibility, first, of the province and, then, of the municipalities. The federal government is not responsible for roads.


William Earl Rowe: I mean roads from airfield
to airfield.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Under the air training plan,
where it has been necessary for operational purposes, we have sometimes built roads to the airport.


William Earl Rowe: The department should give
more consideration to the maintenance of higher class roads to the airfields used for training purposes. I am not going to delay the passing of the item by going into details, but I would mention the roads from the airfields in Simcoe coimty between Beeton and Camp Borden and between Camp Borden and Edenvale. The aviators and airmen in training have to endure considerable hardship from the dust and rough roads in that district, and the department should give more consideration to maintaining these roads in better shape by assisting the municipalities.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Transport-Radio
365. Air service. Civil aviation division- Control of civil aviation, including the administration of the Aeronautics Act and regulations issued thereunder, $245,400.
Ralph Maybank: Mr. Chairman, I desired to ask a question on item 365, but it passed before I had an opportunity. I had also a question to ask on item 366. Perhaps it would be convenient if I asked that one now and then asked my question on item 365.


Thomas Vien: All right.


Ralph Maybank: My question on item 366 relates to the airport on the outskirts of Winnipeg, sometimes referred to as the Winnipeg airport, and as to the road leading to it. I know the minister has had some dealings with respect to that road. It is in pretty bad shape. There is one road leading out there in a westerly direction and another leading in from the south. Are any negotiations going on to have the road to the airport fixed up? It is not strictly a federal matter, but the authorities there have been seeking some help here and I should like to know how the matter stands.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The matter lies between the
city of Winnipeg and the municipality of St. James, and we sincerely hope that between them they will improve this road. We realize, of course, that it is of interest to the airport, but once again this is not a federal matter, and the federal government has no funds to devote to that purpose.


Alan Cockeram: Item 366 deals with
airways and airports, construction and improvements, including lighting and radio facilities, $1,231,400, and the next item is also for airways and airports, operation and maintenance, including lighting, radio and meteorological services, $1,729,585. How long will this expenditure continue?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The programme is pretty
well finished, and we expect that expenditure will decrease rapidly after this. We have been bringing the airway system up to standard, and this will probably be the last year in which the item will exceed a million dollars.


Douglas King Hazen: Were any airports constructed this year, or is it planned to construct any airports this year under item 366? The item uses the word "construction."


Clarence Decatur Howe: No. There will be certain minor improvements to airports but no new airports will be constructed so far as we know.


Ralph Maybank: To revert to item 365, can the minister give us any information with reference to the development of an air route in the northern part of the country? A newspaper in Winnipeg recently referred to the Canadian Pacific Railway commencing to operate, under some other name, I believe, an air route that took in Prince Albert, Edmonton and a couple of other cities. It seems there is a movement to establish another line across the country. Can the minister indicate just how far that matter is advanced and what the plans of the government are with respect to it?


Clarence Decatur Howe: A few northern routes have been purchased by a new owner, but there is no indication of any plan to connect these routes with an east and west service. As a matter of fact, the Trans-Canada act protects the government service against any competitive service, and if any attempt were made to establish a service between towns served by Trans-Canada, such a service would not receive the approval of the board of transport commissioners.


Ralph Maybank: It would not require very much, as I understand the matter, to connect between towns already served by companies under Canadian Pacific Railway control. What I have been wondering about is this. Here we have an organization spending a considerable amount of money, and if they should at some future time endeavour to connect these towns by air service-and it is only a matter of seven or eight hundred miles-would we not be in rather a difficult position? They would be able to point back and say that they had been spending money in preparation for just that sort of thing and that we had not adequately warned them but had allowed them to start in with a service which would become a competitor with Trans-Canada. Are all such organizations warned that we shall not tolerate a competing system of that sort?


Clarence Decatur Howe: There is no indication of any attempt or desire on the part of that organization to operate an east to west service.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
375. Air service. Radio division. Issue of radio receiving licences-(transport department only), $156,406.
Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Chairman, I have waited for this item to come up, and I regret that at this late stage of the session I shall have to say something about the broadcasting corporation. I would have dealt with the matter earlier, but the opportunity did not arise. I was also awaiting some further information which I obtained only a short lime ago.
On two occasions last autumn, on November 12, as reported at page 64 of Hansard and on December 3, at page 622 of Hansard I drew
Supply-Transport-Radio

attention to the conditions in the broadcasting corporation and asked for the appointment of a parliamentary committee to inquire into them. I referred then to serious charges against the corporation, the management, and the board of governors by a member of the board who had resigned and by high officials of the corporation who also had resigned, apparently for somewhat similar reasons. I put before the government and the house accusations of an anti-democratic bias on the part of certain Canadian Broadcasting Corporation officials made in Le, Jour, a French weekly published in Montreal, and finally I protested against the treatment of employees of the corporation for their attempt to organize an association. Out of this I suggested that a parliamentary committee would be justified. The minister at the time refused an inquiry. He ignored the statements made by members of this house and left the impression that there was no ground for the statements and no reason for concern, that everything was all right. Yet what has happened since? By order in council the whole constitution of the corporation has been changed, and the general manager has in fact, if not in name, been demoted. The future of the corporation is, in my opinion, being jeopardized by a division of control and responsibility. Certain financial practices have been the subject of comment by the auditor general's department, and a general overhauling of the constitution and of the corporation has apparently been taking place. Why has all this been necessary if everything was well last autumn?
I intend to deal in greater detail with these matters a little later. For the moment X wish to say quite emphatically that this action with regard to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the changes which have been made in it, are, in my opinion, a neglect of the rights of parliament and parliamentary control. If it was considered necessary to make such far-reaching changes in the management and the constitution of the corporation, there should have been a preliminary inquiry by parliament into the reasons which made these changes necessary. Personally, I think this committee should be seriously concerned with what has happened to the broadcasting corporation.
First, it is a public utility, owned by the people of Canada, and, as is necessary in all such cases, it is essential that this house be eternally vigilant. There are private interests in the picture which would like to displace it and undertake the work themselves. The present development in the corporation gives rise to very grave concern to many of us who have believed for a number of years in publicly owned radio. We have
fMr. Coldwell.l
every reason to wonder whether the presence of certain business interests on the board is responsible for some of the things which have happened.
When the present general manager, Major Murray, was appointed, the appointment was generally approved on account of his long association with the British Broadcasting Corporation and with publicly owned radio. Whatever may have been the importance of radio in peace time, during the war it becomes of primary significance from the point of view of the country's war effort. We cannot fail to realize the use which the totalitarian powers have made of radio as a system of propaganda for their cause. Yet I venture to say that our own radio propaganda has been ineffective, and the criticism is made- and I repeat it-that it has also been too partisan. According to a return tabled in this house last month, to the date of the tabling of the return seventy-six speeches over the national network had been made since the war began by representatives of the government. To my knowledge only one speech, that of the leader of the opposition, had been made by any member of parliament representing other than the' government's party. I am not protesting, because I believe the members of the government should be given every facility to address the people of Canada in war time; but it is also wise, it seems to me, to prevent any idea that the government has a monopoly of radio broadcasting. Since that return was tabled, three broadcasts, which were described when the speakers were introduced as "experimental broadcasts", have been made, by the leader of the opposition, the leader of the social credit group, and myself.
I wish now to deal with some of the disclosures which were made in the parliamentary return tabled on May 16 in answer to certain questions which I had addressed to the minister.
According to that return, the by-laws of the corporation have been amended lately in such a way as to alter fundamentally the whole structure of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation constitution, and to alter it for the worse. In effect, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation will now have three managers-the general manager, the assistant general manager, and the executive committee of the board. This is contrary to the clear recommendations of the 1936 parliamentary committee, and contrary also to the clear intention of the act. The report of the committee stated, at page 784, as recommendation No. 1:
1.	It has been amply demonstrated that a commission of three cannot be moulded into a unit that can formulate and execute policy

Supply-Transport-Radio
successfully. Evidence adduced before this committee has made it apparent that under the existing organization there has been a lack of coordination in dealing with some major questions.
It goes on to say:
1(a). After carefully reviewing the administration of radio broadcasting, we have reached the conclusion that the recommendation of the 1934 committee, namely "that in the opinion of your committee radio broadcasting can best be conducted by a general manager", is justified in all respects, and your committee hereby endorses and repeats that recommendation.
The act provides, in section 6:
There shall be a general manager who shall be chief executive of the corporation.
This policy of unified management and control was carefully embodied in a former by-law of the corporation, in which the general manager is made the chief executive officer, subject only to the direction of the board of governors. The assistant manager is made responsible to him, as is every other department, and he alone is given the power of employment, dismissal, and remuneration of employees, with the exception of anyone receiving more than $4,000 a year.
All this was done as a result of the 1936 parliamentary committee report and was fully approved by the 1938 and 1939 parliamentary committees. The following quotation from the 1938 committee report is relevant:
Your committee believes that the constitution of the corporation ensuring a proper division between policy and management and a degree of flexibility and independence essential to the medium of broadcasting, together with ultimate parliamentary control, is well suited to the purpose for which it was created.
Furthermore, this point was emphasized above all others in the report of Mr. J. C. Thompson, which was tabled in this house some time ago. The whole plan of administration which he recommends throughout his report, and which he illustrates in appendix F attached to that report, hinges upon his opinion that efficient management requires "unified control of operations throughout Canada."
In short, four parliamentary committees, four statements by the heads of the corporation, and this latest survey by Mr. Thompson, all agree that to divide the management, to divide control and responsibility in an organization like the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, is to court disaster. In fact, as the 1936 report stated, it was precisely such divided authority which caused the difficulty under the former broadcasting commission and which brought about the changes that were recommended in that year. Yet the board of governors, and the government by the passage of order in council P.C. 2845, have seen fit to
ignore all this evidence, and the recommendations of these committees and the act itself, and to reintroduce precisely the very arrangements which experience had proven to be disastrous.
Who is in charge of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation now? According to the return, the following is the confusing and confused situation. The general manager is in charge of certain departments. The assistant general manager is in charge of certain other departments. The former has the right of employing staff for certain of the departments, while the latter-


John Ritchie MacNicol: Does he employ staff
directly or through the civil service commission?


Major James William Coldwell: Directly. The latter
appoints those in other departments. Major Murray has to be responsible "for the carrying out of the provisions of the Canadian Broadcasting Act, 1936, and of the by-laws and regulations made thereunder," while Doctor Frigon is to be responsible "for the internal management of the affairs of the corporation." To add to this confusion, neither of these gentlemen is to be responsible to the other, but both are to be subject to management and control by the executive committee, which apparently is to have the final say.
Note that another thing which wrecked the old radio commission was that, in fields of policy and management, there was no clearly defined line of separation; and that, of course, is something which is essential to the organization of any efficient body such as the broadcasting corporation.
The radio act sought to achieve this essential condition by putting management in the hands of the manager and leaving policy to the board. But the new by-laws upset all this. Members of the board who form the executive committee are given the final managerial authority -men who were not appointed for that purpose, nor with those particular qualifications for that particular function in mind. Can anyone in this house think of a more inefficient and a worse form of divided management?
Why was all this considered necessary? The minister last autumn certainly implied, and gave the house the impression by his silence, that he was satisfied with the corporation's management. Indeed, the board of governors went further. They passed a resolution which was published in the press on November 27, 1940, proclaiming "their full and complete confidence in the general manager." Yet, I submit, a clearer case of none too gentle demotion cannot be found. One cannot escape
Supply-Transport-Radio

the conclusion that the board, with the approval of the government, P.C. 2485, is prepared to do irreparable damage to the publicly owned radio system in order to cover up its own or the board's incompetence of management.
I say that such action ought not to be tolerated by this parliament. It should not have been tolerated by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), who took such a keen interest in the establishment of the publicly owned corporation.
I am also disturbed by the implications contained in the answers to my questions regarding the expense accounts. The reply to my question whether expense allowances had been exceeded was, no. But the answer to my question, whether the minister's attention had been directed by the auditor general to expense accounts having been overdrawn was, yes. Furthermore, the return shows that the general manager had incurred additional expenses amounting to almost $6,000, without any apparent authorization.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Did he give any details
of how he spent that large sum of money?


Major James William Coldwell: I do not know. Since
then, the auditor general's letter of February 25 has been tabled; in this house. What are the answers to the two pertinent questions which are posed in the concluding paragraph of the auditor general's letter? Indeed, what is all this about? The matter may not, in fact, be serious, but the government must know that there are rumours floating round this city, and suspicions of this sort can and will discredit the corporation unless they are allayed. My purpose is to end these rumours and suspicions and to restore confidence in the nationally owned broadcasting system.
I now come to a question to which this committee should demand a very clear answer: To whom is the corporation responsible, and what is its status? Ever since its formation in 1936, the government and the minister have maintained that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was an independent body similar in status to the Canadian National Railways. On this ground, information regarding the internal management of the corporation was refused in this house on several occasions. For this reason, too, there were parliamentary committees in 1938 and 1939 to inquire into the affairs of the corporation. To the latter, Mr. L. W. Brockington, chairman of the board of governors, made an exhaustive statement

on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, during which he had the following to say on the point of the corporation's status:
I make this submission as our view of our own position. We are not .part of the government of Canada. We are not civil servants, nor part of the civil service. . . . We are trustees for the payers of licences. In other words, we are trustees for that class in the community which can be described as licensed listeners. They include people who speak the French language and people who speak the English language; they include Liberals, Conservatives, Social Crediters, members of the C.C.F. party and members indeed of many other organizations, both those which are in esse and in posse. Our listeners represent the east and the west, the rich and the poor, and for them we are trustees.
Later in his presentation, Mr. Brockington gives the reasons why the 1936 parliamentary committee recommended that the corporation be set up, as it was, as a separate corporation under a radio act. He said that this was necessary in the case of broadcasting, and I quote again:
(a)	because, from all points of view, it is in fact in the nature of a business;
(b)	because the character of broadcasting requires the utmost flexibility of administration;
(c)	because the national broadcasting authority must be removed from the direct control of the government of the day and be nonpartisan and independent.
Many references could be given to statements by the Prime Minister, and by the Minister of Munitions and Supply while he was Minister of Transport, stressing that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was an autonomous corporation. I shall give one or two. In a letter written on behalf of the Prime Minister on November 21, 1939, to the Ontario secretary of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, the following paragraph occurs:
Mr. King wishes me to point out that the relationship between the government and the corporation had not been altered by the existence of a state of war, except that the censorship regulations apply to broadcasting as to other forms of publicity. The board of governors of the corporation have retained full control of broadcasting, and of the arrangement of programmes, in accordance with the responsibility imposed upon them by parliament.
Then the Minister of Munitions and Supply made the following statement in this house on January 20, 1939, as reported at page 192 of Hansard:
I might remind hon. gentlemen that the Canadian broadcasting corporation is an autonomous body, set up by this parliament under the broadcasting act of 1936, which superseded the broadcasting act of 1932 sponsored by hon. gentlemen opposite. In drafting that act and in its course through a committee

Supply-Transport-Radio
of the house every effort was made to divorce the corporation from political interference, or, in fact, any direction from the government of the day.
A little later, on February 15, 1939, he emphasized the point in answer to a question. On page 949 of Hansard he is reported as saying:
This question refers to a matter of the internal management of an autonomous corporation. Inasmuch as a committee of this house has been appointed to investigate all matters affecting the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, I think we should take the same position as is taken in connection with the Canadian National Railways and decline to answer a question of this type.
Finally I am informed that in three eases which have come before the courts the question of the status of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was an issue, and the courts, including the courts of appeal of Ontario and Quebec, held that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was a distinct and separate corporation which was properly suable although not taxable. In short, it has always been considered settled, both in parliament and throughout the country, that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was a separate corporation and not a government department. Yet, when a short time ago, its employees sought to form a union and to bargain collectively with the corporation, it becomes a sort of government department, and the union is informed that the corporation has no right to enter into an agreement with them.
Surely the Prime Minister, and perhaps the Minister of Munitions and Supply, who has been exceedingly busy, have not fully realized what has been happening. If they do realize it, and allow this condition to continue, they and the entire government are guilty of seriously damaging proper democratic and parliamentary control of a public utility which is of great importance to this country for the successful prosecution of the war and the maintenance of national unity.
I think I have said enough to substantiate my former statements that conditions in the broadcasting corporation are serious. I suggest that the recent actions of the government and the board show clearly that they have been aware of the seriousness of the situation.
Why then was a parliamentary committee not appointed when there was a request for it in the house and in many sections of the press? What interests, if any, were at work to advise against such an inquiry? Mr. Bannerman, president of the Canadian association of broadcasters, is reported in a weekly called News, dated May 8, 1941, to have stated that
although his association had not made any deliberate lobby, they had advised the government against an inquiry. Why was it the concern or the right of private broadcasters to advise the government against a parliamentary inquiry into one of parliament's own creatures and institutions? Why was it the business of these people, who opposed throughout the idea of a publicly-owned radio at the beginning, and probably still do, to advise against allowing parliament to exercise its right?
In March I asked the minister some questions regarding the granting of certain channels to certain private stations. I asked whether this implied a change in Canadian Broadcasting Corporation policy. The minister gave what I thought at the time was a vague answer. According to an article in the May issue of the Canadian Forum, three days *after the minister's reply-*
Representatives of the leading private broadcasting interests appeared before the board of governors to demand the right to increase their power to the limits allowed under the Havana agreement.
Is one to conclude that private interests are daring to interfere because they feel that they can get concessions out of this situation? I am told that on Monday of this week the governors of the broadcasting corporation met and that they were under pressure or had some application before them to allow increases in power for the high-power wavelengths now used temporarily by private broadcasters. There is no reason in the world why that should be done or even considered. These high-power wave-lengths under the Havana agreement were meant for our nationally owned system, and we have had that assurance from ministers in the house. Those wave-lengths need not be occupied for five years from April 1; that is to say, until March 31, 1946. During those five years the country has an opportunity of utilizing those channels, and if we do not utilize them, then the country can decide afterwards what it will do with them.
It is not too late to correct some of the mistakes that have been made. I appeal to the government to agree to the appointment of a parliamentary committee as soon as we meet in the autumn, so that such a committee may go into the whole situation and study the changes that have been made and understand the influences, if any, that are at work. The excuse that a committee is unnecessary in war time surely cannot be accepted. On the contrary, it is because we are at war and because radio is so powerful a factor in modem war, that it is the duty of this parliament and

Supply-Transport-Radio

of the government to ensure that the broadcasting system is functioning as effectively as possible in the best interests of the country. If it is suggested that members of this house are too busy to inquire into radio, it is doubly certain that members of the government have been and are far too much occupied to give adequate attention to this matter. Perhaps this is the reason for the ill-advised, ill-considered and unfortunate steps that have just been taken.
A parliamentary committee should inquire into this whole situation. It should hear the members of the board, the officials of the corporation, Mr. Plaunt, the former member of the board who resigned on account of conditions which have now been shown to have been there, and to justify his resignation, Mr. J. C. Thompson, Mr. Buchanan and Mr. Pickering, all of whom I named last November as having recently resigned from the corporation on grounds which should have been investigated by a parliamentary committee. If the inquiry shows that certain people were on the board or among the administrators who should have been removed, then let us do the courageous thing, instead of tolerating something which may cause serious harm to a public institution of great importance, just in order to hide some weaknesses in the set-up which ought to be rectified.
I was going to say something about the channels that were allotted, and the national coverage that might be given by the further use of some of those channels, but I do not propose to go into those matters to-night; I do not wish to detain the committee at any greater length. But as I did in November last, so to-night I appeal to the government to provide for a thorough investigation into all that surrounds the broadcasting corporation. When I find men on the governing board who are so tremendously interested in a competing form of public entertainment, such as the film industry-in the person of Mr. Nathan-son-I am not satisfied that this is a good thing. I think we should see to it that nothing is done which would undermine this great public institution. When the original act to set up a publicly-owned radio corporation was before the house, Right Hon. R. B. Bennett said that the air at least should not be alienated, that the time had come when we regretted having alienated some others of our great public utilities. I have been interested in this publicly-owned radio ever since radio came into prominence, because I have believed it to be one of the greatest means of education, and by the same token one of the most dangerous weapons of propaganda, that it would .be possible to find. When public confidence in a corporation of

this kind begins to be undermined, the educational value of the organization ceases, and we are in danger of losing it as the effective instrument it ought to be for the education, entertainment and good of the people of Canada.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Chairman, it is not my purpose at this stage of the session to make any extended remarks in reply to the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar. It seems to me, however, that the hon. gentleman is exceedingly inconsistent in his argument, in that in one breath he argues that this corporation is a department of the government, and, in the next, that it is an independent corporation.


Major James William Coldwell: May I suggest that this is exactly what the minister has been doing, and I was trying to find out exactly what it was.


Clarence Decatur Howe: This is my interpretation. This is a corporation set up by an act of parliament. The members of the corporation are the governors. The powers of the board of governors are the powers granted to them by an act of parliament, and the management of the corporation is vested in that board. Neither the minister in charge of the department nor any parliamentary committee has authority to manage the corporation. A parliamentary committee can recommend to the government any change in the broadcasting act. The government can appoint the governors of the corporation. The minister in charge of the department is the channel of communication between the board of governors and parliament and between the board of governors and the governor in council; but the management of the broadcasting corporation has been vested by this parliament in the board of governors. During the time I was in charge of the department, after the last broadcasting act was passed by this house, I was the channel of communication between the board of governors and this parliament and between the board and the government of Canada; but I was always careful to respect the position that it was the board of governors who were operating the corporation.
As to the position of the employees of the broadcasting corporation, that is entirely a legal matter; and in legal matters we of the government rely upon the Department of Justice, as we are bound to do. The question of whether the employees of the corporation are in the position of being employees of an independent corporation, or whether they are, in fact, employees of an emanation of the crown, is a legal question, depending entirely upon the position in which they were placed by the act of this parliament establishing the corporation. The Department of Justice has

Supply-Transport-Radio
considered the matter and has handed down a ruling that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is an emanation of the crown, and that the employees are in fact employees of the crown. As I say, that is a legal decision, and I do not think it is for me or for any other member of parliament to argue with the Department of Justice as to the correctness of that decision.
My hon. friend stated that changes have been made which have destroyed the position of the corporation. Those changes were very minor indeed. One change was that a new officer has been appointed, in the person of a comptroller. As companies grow and staff matters become more complex, it is quite customary to appoint a comptroller; that is, a man especially entrusted with the internal audit of expenditures and the control of staff. The changes in the by-laws had to do with the appointment of the comptroller, and the duties of that office were added to those of the assistant general manager. At the same time the control was strengthened somewhat to some extent by the appointment of an executive committee which could meet more frequently than the board as a whole, and which was given additional responsibilities particularly in connection with the financial control of the corporation.
I might point out that during the last year the corporation has been under some stress and strain due to the fact that a number of its senior officers have had to spend long periods of time in the British isles helping out the corporation during a difficult period there. As a result, the other senior officers of the corporation were called upon to double up in their duties, and a certain laxity of financial control was called to my attention by the auditor general. I reported the communication of the auditor general, who is also the auditor of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, to the board of directors, and asked them to take prompt steps. The steps taken were those which the board of directors thought necessary to overcome the lack of financial control which had been apparent, as a result of the auditor general's report.
The situation referred to by the auditor general was a very small matter in dollars and cents, and, when called to the attention of the board, was immediately corrected. Obviously, however, it was the duty of the board to take steps to see that the controls were tightened so that a similar situation could not arise again. I make no apologies for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation or its management. I believe it is a stronger institution to-day than it has been in any time in its history. I believe it is giving better satisfaction to the
14873-252}
public to-day than it has done at any time previously. At least, the complaints which used to come to my desk in great volume are coming now only in an attenuated stream. In handing over the duties to another minister, I can only wish that his relations with the corporation itself will be as happy as mine have been, to this day.


Mr. FULFORD:: I wish to complain about a coverage-perhaps I should say a lack of coverage-by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation of the locality in which I live, and; the county of Leeds, which I have the honour to represent in this house. I have reference particularly to the town of Brockville.
During the day we get excellent coverage from CBO, but just as soon as night falls, the set starts to whine and the first thing you know pandemonium is loose. We have station CFRC at Kingston, only fifty miles away, but we cannot get it either day or night. When one writes corporation headquarters the reply is, "Why, you are listening to the wrong stations. Neither CBO nor CFRC are your stations. You should listen to station CBL Toronto"-over 200 miles away.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And you could not get it.


George Taylor Fulford: No, we cannot get it.
Then, we have station CBM Montreal, which, is audible, during the day and inaudible at night. We have CBF in Montreal, but since ours is an English-speaking community, we find that station CBF does us very little good. The one station we can get is CBA, Sackville, New Brunswick, if you please, and then only if atmospheric conditions are perfect.
It is a hardship to have to pay $2.50 for a radio licence and then have to depend! entirely upon United States broadcasting stations. Surely that is not fair to those people who pay licence fees, and I do not believe it is the principle upon which the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was built, namely, that of nationalizing our radio system.
I wish to take this opportunity of complimenting the commission upon the improvement in their programmes because, when we can hear them, we notice a decided improvement. The corporation has taken the best programmes from United States stations, and is bringing in excellent programmes from Great Britain. But of what earthly use are those programmes to us if, when we sit down before our radios, we hear nothing but squawks and squeaks and a few words in Spanish?
I admit that the reallocation of stations has made some difference. Formerly we used to get two stations on the same wave-length; now we get three or four. I must point out that this is a most aggravating, and, I
Supply-Transport

R adio

believe, an unnecessary condition which obtains in the particular part of eastern Canada in which I reside. 1 believe it is a condition which might be easily overcome, either by. stepping up the power of CBO at Ottawa, thereby giving eastern Ontario complete cover-age_and this is the logical point from which to give that coverage-or by building a directional station somewhere which would give coverage from Belleville to the Quebec border.
As matters now stand, I can only restate that I do not think it is fair to those who are asked to pay radio licence fees, nor do I think the present condition reflects due credit upon the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for the improvement it has made in its programmes. I would urge the minister to give this matter his serious consideration.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: It is now within a few minutes of eleven o'clock, and if we are to sit beyond that time-and I believe it is the wish of the committee to do so-we shall need the consent of the committee.


John Ritchie MacNicol: If we cannot finish,
there is no use in sitting beyond eleven o'clock to-night.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: We would require the
consent of the committee to do so. If it is necessary, I would move that the committee remain in session, by unanimous consent, until *we make further progress.


Thomas Miller Bell: I shall not agree to that.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Do I understand that the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar does not wish to sit beyond eleven o'clock?


Thomas Miller Bell: I did not say that. I said that I would not agree to any motion permitting us to sit indefinitely. There are 144 items in the estimates still to be considered.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And they are important ones, too.


Major James William Coldwell: Yes; they are important. We cannot possibly finish to-night, and I think, after sitting night after night and day after day, as we have been doing, from eleven o'clock in the morning until twelve o'clock at night, if we cannot finish we might just as well quit right now. Certainly I would not be prepared to agree to an open motion such as that which the minister has just suggested.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I take the same stand. A good many of the items which have gone through to-night have gone through in a farcical manner; there is no doubt about that. The present government is no worse than previous governments have been in

this regard. But I am going to protest next session with regard to the way in which estimates have been going through at this and other sessions-both when we were in power, and under the present government. Governments leave estimates to the last minute, and then they are taken quickly-many of them involving millions of dollars. We voted $3,000,000 to-night in one second's time- just while the chairman said "carried". That is not fair to Canada or to the House of Commons.
All spring we sat neither Wednesday nor Friday evening. I suggest that we might have had meetings on both those evenings, and attend to some of these matters in the regular way. If we could finish to-night I would not be opposed to sitting, but there are some important items on which I wish to speak. All this cannot be done in an hour, and in that event, what is the use of sitting any further to-night?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: There are two suggestions which can be made. First, should we continue until midnight, as we have done on previous evenings this week, and then if it appears unlikely that we can finish to-night, could we sit to-morrow?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Certainly.


Grote Stirling: That is more sensible.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: We can continue only by unanimous consent of the committee.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Let us sit to-morrow.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I would suggest that tve continue until midnight and resume sitting to-morrow morning at eleven o'clock. If there is no objection, perhaps that proposal could be carried?


Thomas Vien: Mr. Crerar moves,
seconded by Mr. Cardin that the house shall sit-


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I do not think a motion in committee can be accepted. It can be implied that there is consent of the committee to carry on. Then, when Mr. Speaker is in the chair, there should be a formal resolution moved.


Major James William Coldwell: We shall need authority to sit to-morrow morning.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: It is the wish of the committee now to carry on until twelve o'clock, and that may be done by unanimous consent. Then, when the committee reports progress at twelve o'clock, and when Mr. Speaker is in the chair, the motion must be moved that we meet to-mor-

Supply-Transport-Radio
row morning, such motion being made with unanimous consent of the house, not the committee.


Thomas Vien: Shall item 375 carry?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: No. The minister
referred to the auditor general's letter dated February 25 as dealing with minor matters.
Here is question 10 which was asked by the the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar and answered on May 16:
Were either or both of these officials entitled to a stipulated expense allowance last year, in addition to salary; if so, how much for each allowance?
The answer to that was:
Allowance of $4,800 to general manager, $2,000 to assistant general manager. Allowances to cover expenses at base of operations.
My hon. friend's twelfth question was:
Were both or either exceeded? If so, by how much?
The answer to that was:
No. In addition to regular allowance general manager received $5,697.90 to cover expenses incurred while absent from base of operations. For similar expenditures the assistant general manager got $24.60.
These amounts, of course, were in addition to the salary of S13,600 paid to the general manager and $12,000 paid to the assistant general manager.
Here is the letter of the auditor general to the minister, dated February 25:
Dear Mr. Howe:
The broadcasting act places at the command of the broadcasting corporation certain moneys and, within the terms of the act, the corporation decides on the purposes to which these moneys are to be put.
Section 19 gives to you, as minister, powers with respect to the accounting system, reports, et cetera, and the following section names this office as auditor of the corporation.
Certain points have been brought to my notice, and being in doubt as to the authority to whose notice I should bring them, I address this letter to you.
The act provides that the general manager is to be appointed by the governor in council. This was done and the salary named by order in council. On examining the records of the corporation, it is observed that an allowance at the date of $4,800 "at the base of operations", was authorized by the board, "pending an adjustment in the general manager's salary, as requested by the board." In view of the language used, the question arises as to the administrative power to give such a direction, if the true interpretation to be given to the act is that payments to the general manager are within the sole discretion of the governor in council.
Associated with this is a second point which arises out of the fact that last spring the Minister of Finance gave to the House of Commons an explanation of the interpretation to be given by the income tax authorities to
living allowances paid to various men on war work for the crown. The corporation has left to the general manager the question of deciding what officers may be paid per diem allowances and the amounts which may be claimed, in lieu of actual details, when away from their official stations on official business. The accounts show that $20 is the amount claimed by the general manager, but this has apparently been selected by himself as being commensurate with his disbursements. The sum involved is not of concern, but it seems to me probable that the decision in such a matter is associated with the powers of the governor in council, or is one which rests on the board.
After you have had an opportunity to peruse the attached memorandum-which was prepared on my instructions to illustrate the problem- might I be informed:
(a)	If you are satisfied that the corporation acted within its powers in granting the $4,800 annual allowance to the general manager? and
(b)	If the establishing of a per diem travel allowance to the general manager is a subject of concern to the governor in council?
Yours faithfully,
Watson Sellar,
Auditor General.
I think the committee is entitled to a full statement as to the answers which the minister made to the auditor general. If an allowance of $4,800 has been provided, why this additional amount of $5,697.90 "to cover expenses incurred while absent from base of operations?"


Clarence Decatur Howe: The legal position is this. Under the broadcasting act the salaries of the general manager and assistant general manager are fixed by order in council. Early in the history of the broadcasting corporation the board of governors in its judgment granted an allowance to the general manager. I protested at the time, taking the view that the granting of special compensation to the general manager was a function of the governor in council. However, the question was referred to the justice department, and the justice department determined that the board of governors had the right to fix an expense allowance for the manager and the assistant general manager. The right was established several years ago. I replied to the auditor general that the matter of an allowance was one for the board of governors to determine; that it was a matter of internal management, but that the situation called to my attention was a matter of concern to the government and that we had referred his letter to the board of governors and asked them to examine the situation and to take appropriate action.
The action taken by the board of governors is a matter of internal management that is not discussed in this House of Commons. It can be looked into by a parliamentary committee at an appropriate time, but it is not a matter that I can discuss here because I had
Supply-Transport-Radio

no part in the action taken. It was taken by the board of governors in the course of their duties.
I might point out, however, that we have had demands for parliamentary committees on three or four occasions, and we have a demand now. We have had three parliamentary committees on radio since the broadcasting act was passed, and to the best of my knowledge and belief those three parliamentary *committees have not changed the broadcasting act in one iota from the act as it passed in 1936. I have the greatest confidence in the world that if another parliamentary committee on radio were held in 1941 or in 1942, the results would be exactly the same as from the three preceding parliamentary committees.


Thomas Miller Bell: I do not think it would be a question of changing the act. That is not the point at issue.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is the only way by which the conduct of the broadcasting corporation can be affected.


Major James William Coldwell: As a matter of fact, I think the board of governors has, during the past week or so, departed from the original intention of the parliamentary committee and of the act itself. I was not arguing particularly about the labour situation. I introduced that only incidentally. I have the third and final report of the committee containing the recommendations, dated May 26, 1936. Let me just make this one sentence stand out. I quote from the report:
That in the opinion of your committee radio broadcasting could best be conducted by a general manager.
That was a reiteration of the recommendation of the parliamentary committee of 1934.


Clarence Decatur Howe: But the general manager is in sole charge of broadcasting to-day.


Major James William Coldwell: No; he is not.


Clarence Decatur Howe: What does he not do about broadcasting?


Major James William Coldwell: I have here the new by-laws of the corporation, adopted April 29, 1941, and I find this:
(3) Subject to the control of the board of governors the executive committee shall have power-
Not the general manager:
(a)	to manage the affairs of the corporation, to control its finances and to supervise its operations, in accordance with the general policies laid down by the board of governors;
(b)	to define the functions, duties and responsibilities of the officers and employees of the corporation and to direct them in the performance of their duties.


Clarence Decatur Howe: One cannot imagine the board of governors not having the powers my hon.

friend suggests. The board of governors are delegating their powers to a smaller number of themselves.


Major James William Coldwell: I would say to the minister that they delegate to this executive committee the powers that ought to lie in the general manager, because surely it is the function of the general manager to direct the officers and employees of the corporation.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Major James William Coldwell: Here we are told that
it is the function of the executive committee. What I am objecting to is that we have gone back to exactly the same position in which the old commission found itself before the Radio Act. If we look into the new bylaws we find the other divided authority:
8. (1) (a) The general manager of the corporation shall be its chief executive officer, and, subject to the direction of the board of governors or of the executive committee, he shall have charge of programmes, of policies, and relations of the corporation with the press and the public and be responsible for the carrying out of the provisions of the Canadian Broadcasting Act, 1936, and of the by-laws and regulations made thereunder.
(b)	The general manager shall have authority to appoint the officers and other employees of the corporation other than-
Authority over other employees is taken away from him.
-the technical, commercial or business staff, but such appointments and the salary rates of these appointees shall be subject to the approval of the executive committee.
In other words, power which lay with the general manager now rests with the executive committee.
The by-laws state:
He may at any time suspend for cause any such officer or employee.
(c)	He may delegate any of his powers to the assistant general manager, or to any officer or employee of the corporation.
Then we come to the assistant general manager.
8. "(2) (a) The assistant general manager, subject to the direction of the board of governors, or the executive committee-
Note this.
*-shall have charge of the technical and commercial operations of the corporation;
No longer is there a general manager managing the corporation. The assistant general manager is removed from his control entirely; he is to be subject to the direction of the board of governors, or the executive committee, and he

-shall have charge of the technical and commercial operations of the corporation; he shall be responsible for the internal management of the affairs of the corporation, and shall fulfil-
What?

Supply-Transport-Air Service
-'the duties which may at any time be delegated to him by the board of governors or by the executive committee and shall exercise the powers of the general manager in his absence.
In other words, the assistant general manager is taken out from under the control of the manager, although the recommendation of the parliamentary committee of 1936 was that "in the opinion of your committee radio broadcasting can best be conducted by a general manager." That conclusion was a reiteration of the recommendations of 1934 and was incorporated in the statute. Then:
(b) The assistant general manager shall have authority to appoint the technical, commercial and business staff of the corporation, but such appointments and the salary rates of such appointees shall be subject to the approval of the executive committee-
Not of the general manager, ever, but of the executive committee.
He may at any time suspend for cause any such officer or employee.
On the other point, we have the position of comptroller which the minister mentioned, and which I think is an excellent move in the right direction. The comptroller shall report direct to the board of governors or to the executive committee. That is quite proper; no one can have any objection to that. In the event of there being no comptroller of finance, or in his absence, the powers shall be exercised by the general manager or the assistant general manager or any officer designated by the board of governors and the executive committee. The financial control, I quite agree, is where it ought to be. But I submit that the purpose at the time of the passing of the broadcasting act, the recommendation of the parliamentary committee in 1934, reiterated in 1934, endorsed in 1938 and 1939, was for a unified management of the corporation, and to-day we have the assistant general manager taken from under the control of the manager, and the executive committee assuming managerial powers which ought not to lie in the committee. That is my contention, not that I was talking about the legal status of the corporation in order to deal with labour disputes, although in that respect, may I add, we cannot have it both ways. If it is a government corporation, an emanation of the crown, then of course this house cannot deal with labour disputes between the corporation and its employees, nor can we ask for and receive reports in this house regarding the corporation. If, on the other hand, it is a corporation like the Canadian National Railways, which I believe it to be, then we have the right to ask for all particulars in the house, and the employees have the right, like the Canadian National Railway employees, to
organize a union and negotiate for conditions with the corporation. But that was not the point I was making.
The point was that there has been a distinct change in the whole set-up of the corporation in the last month or so. To-day we have the executive committee becoming the manager, the general manager demoted, and the assistant manager, with certain duties, reporting not to the general manager but direct to the executive committee. The whole basis of the corporation, as we have known it, has been destroyed.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I do not wish to prolong the discussion. I understood that the Prime Minister said that this organization had been transferred to the Department of National War Services. Is that correct?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I should like to take the opportunity of commending the government for this wise move. I believe that that is where the organization should belong. I do not believe that the Minister of Munitions and Supply, who is burdened in many directions, should be burdened with this. I urge upon the newly elected Minister of National War Services that he give careful consideration, to the recommendation made this evening by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, namely, to set up a committee to look into this whole question at the next session of parliament.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
52k- Air service. Civil aviation division. Airways and airports-Construction and improvements, including lighting and radio facilities-capital-further amount required, $238,500.
John Ritchie MacNicol: May I ask the acting
leader of the house, where do the estimates come in for national defence for air?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: There are none. They are all covered by the war appropriation vote carried earlier in the session.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Does the same apply to national defence for naval services?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
100. Annuities act, $255,742.
Thomas Miller Bell: This relates to the new act under which annuities are bought and paid?


Norman Alexander McLarty: Yes.
4000	COMMONS
Supply-Labour-Industrial Disputes


Thomas Miller Bell: Has there been an
increase of recent years in the business in annuities? In some places campaigns have been put on to sell more of the government annuities.


Norman Alexander McLarty: Speaking from recollection, although I shall endeavour to obtain the figures, I believe that in 193SM0 it was about $21,000,000, and in 1940-41 it was about $19,000,000. My recollection is that there is a decrease of about $2,000,000.


Major James William Coldwell: Would that be due to the increase in the rate? At one time our annuities had a favourable rate compared with those of insurance companies. But the insurance companies made representations, and I do not know whether it was on account of their representations or as a result of some inquiry, but the rate was rai'sed, I believe by 15 per cent. Has there been a drop in the annuities since then?


Norman Alexander McLarty: No. There has been no drop in the rate. The rate has been 4 per cent, and that is what it has been for, I believe, four or five years.


Major James William Coldwell: Yes, but I meant the 15 per cent increase in the rate which brought it up to 4 per cent?


Norman Alexander McLarty: Yes; I think that is right if the hon. member refers to the cost rate.


Douglas King Hazen: Who are the agents to whom commissions are paid? I mean, are they private individuals?


Norman Alexander McLarty: Oh, yes, they are private individuals.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
10J,. Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. $40,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: The hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis), speaking last night on estimates pertaining to labour, took occasion to say something about manufacturers and their unfair treatment of their employees. There are undoubtedly some manufacturers who in the past have not perhaps treated their employees as they should have done, but the statement of the hon. member was all-embracing and included everybody. That is not the situation. There are many earnest and sincere manufacturers and businessmen who do treat their employees as employees should be treated, in a spirit of brotherly love, which enjoins a man to follow the Golden Rule and do unto others as he would have others do unto him. I myself was a member of a trade union some thirty-five years ago, and in those days I was fairly well posted on trade unionism. I have not 
been a member for a long time because I graduated from the plant to the executive section of the business, and in my experience I have had both sides of plant life. My experience in plant life has been that managers who treat their men as they should be treated get much more out of them than do those managers who fail to treat their employees properly. A live manager who wishes to obtain the greatest output does, as he should, treat his men properly, just as he would like to be treated, or as he felt he should be treated when he himself was an employee.
I have found, in the course of many dealings with labour leaders, that they too are anxious to avoid strikes. A real representative of labour, a first-class union man, tries at all times to maintain harmony between men and employers, and at the same time he does his best to get fair play for the men. I have found labour leaders, times without number, doing everything they could to avoid calling out their men. Such leaders should be complimented upon their sincerity. Now is the time, if ever there was such a time, when harmony should be encouraged in every possible way; for to-day all should be united, both men and employers, in a common desire to produce the utmost in order to win the war. That is our main objective. Therefore the department, under this vote for the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act, should try, and perhaps it is trying, to bring about harmony.
The minister has had a good deal of experience because he has had much to do in his time with adjusting disputes between men and employers. For years I have known of his activities in such matters, and he should be qualified so to direct his department as to avoid to the last limit any dispute between employers and their men, in view of the necessity of producing for war purposes. I have a high regard for my hon. friends to the left. They are doing their best as they see it to represent labour, but I am and I have been a practical labour man-not lately perhaps, because it is some years since I laboured, although in former years I did labour, and I laboured hard in plants. I know, therefore, what labour conditions should be and what labour men should do. As I say, I was one myself. The labour unions have done a great deal and they deserve credit. I have seen much improvement in plant life through the earnest intentions of labour leaders- honest leaders-working for the betterment of the conditions of their men. On the other hand, I know many employers who have diligently endeavoured to improve the conditions of their working men. It was that way in the plant with which I was associated.

Supply-Labour-Industrial Disputes
Where you have harmony between employers and men, there is much more production. A strike is at all times not only contrary to the welfare of the men themselves but injurious to the plant as well. Therefore every earnest man, be he employer or agent of a union, tries to avoid strikes. Part of the trouble in Toronto at the moment is due to the fact that the government itself now controls certain plants there and, doing as the government should do, it gives good wages and the best working conditions. This has had an effect on a large number of employees in plants owned by private individuals. Whether the plants of private individuals are able to live up to the standards set by the government I do not know, but some of the strikes which have recently occurred in Toronto have come about because the private plants felt unable to maintain standards set by government. Every effort should be made to avoid strikes.
Since the war broke out, many of the plants-not so many lately-have operated three shifts a day. Many have reduced the number to two shifts of ten hours each, and they say that they are getting good results, but other plants still operate three shifts. One man told me last Saturday that a certain plant operates three shifts a day of eight hours each, but the shifts alternate. Using an arbitrary figure, I presume one shift would start at midnight and work until eight in the morning, another from eight until four in the afternoon, and a third from four until midnight, and they vary from hour to hour, so that often one of the shifts will work all night. Those men who have been working all night think there should be a distinction in the wages received as between those working at night and those working in the daytime. There is something in that. There should be some adjustment in favour of those who work at night, and those who work in the daytime would get the benefit of the adjustment when it was their turn to work at night. That is one cause of complaint.
Then I am informed that there is considerable child labour. I know that is supposed to be under the control of the province. In Newr York state they recently adopted a child labour law called the Nunan-Moffat law, which prohibits child labour, and where a plant uses child labour they prohibit the transport of the material produced in that plant over the roads or the transportation services of the state. I see a lot of very young-looking people going to work here; they look less than sixteen to me.
In conclusion, I would just say that we all look to the minister to use the conciliation methods in every possible way between employers and men in order to keep the plants M873-253
going, and see to it that fair play prevails all round, fair play for the company and fair play for the men, because men cannot do a good day's work if they are dissatisfied, and furthermore they are liable to be injured while thinking about their conditions. Therefore every effort should be made to have men happy at their work.


Clarence Gillis: I understand the hon. member for Davenport is an employer of labour.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I was also an employee, but held a responsible position for many years.


Clarence Gillis: I was going to say that it is too bad there are not more employers who have the same attitude of mind as the hon. member with respect to the questions he has just been discussing.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I should have said I was an executive official.


Clarence Gillis: I wish to bring something to the attention of the Minister of Labour. I refer specifically to the Hamilton plant where at the present time the government is in the position of employer. I do so on account of the fact that the Minister of Labour a few days ago, in answer to a question as to the number of strikes in Canada at the present time, answered that there were none of which he knew.


Norman Alexander McLarty: In war industries. That was this morning.


Clarence Gillis: I have received from the
steel workers organizing committee a copy of a resolution which was sent to the Prime Minister, and I presume the Minister of Labour is familiar with the subject matter of it. If conditions in that plant are as set out, then I think the Minister of Labour under his conciliation machinery should take immediate steps to iron out that situation.
I find myself in this position, being a member of a union and this house closing within a few days. I go back to a district where there is considerable unrest, and, as pointed out by the hon. member for Davenport, men who are interested in the legitimate unions do at all times use whatever influence they have in the unions to avoid strikes and live up to collective agreements and so forth. That has always been and will in the future be my attitude. While the house is in session, I believe the great majority of the men who have grievances that might culminate in stoppage of work will be marking time, thinking that this house will enact some legislation which will give them a way out of their difficulties other than a strike or stoppage of

1002	COMMONS
Supply-Labour-Industrial Disputes
work. But with the attitude that the government apparently have been taking with respect to the implementation of order in council 7440, which is the basis to-day for the settlement of all disputes in labour, if we leave with the decisions that have been rendered and the interpretations that have been placed on that order in council standing as they are without doing something to clarify them, I am afraid that after this house adjourns we may run into an epidemic of trouble. That is why I rise at this time.
I think the minister would be well advised if he studied the subject matter of the resolution to which I have referred, and if the controller in the Hamilton plant at the present time is taking the attitude said to be taken in respect of conciliation, recognition of the union and the extension of his power there to probe the matters that apparently are bothering the men employed in that plant, it w'ould be basis upon which other difficulties across the country might be settled. If the government as employer set the example for the other plants in the country with respect to that order in council and its powers as related to labour disputes, in my opinion that would be doing something to avoid the troubles that I see in the future unless something like that is done.
Another board which, I believe, has reported recently to the minister, is that set up for the purpose of examining into the situation of the railway employees with respect to bonus and so forth, representing, I think, some eighteen different organizations in the railway running trades. I understand that is a split decision; that there is a majority and minority report. The minister is now in this position: if I understand order in council 7440 correctly, if a conciliation board render a decision and have erred in their judgment, the Minister of Labour has the power to review that position, and if it is not in accordance with his interpretation of the order in council, or if the intention of the order has not been carried out, he can reinstruct that board and see that a proper decision is given.
If that were done, I think much of the trouble we have been running into would be avoided. I see most of the men who sit on these boards. I read and interpret that order in council as I think it was intended to be interpreted and see no difficulty with respect to its administration. There is much latitude given; the language is very clear, and I think anyone who misunderstands it does so deliberately, working in the interest of someone else. In the final analysis, however, the Minister of Labour has the right to interpret it.

In connection with that railway matter no decision has yet been made public. I should like the Minister of Labour to give an interpretation now of how he thinks order in council 7440 should apply to that case, and to state what he is prepared to do with respect to eliminating the difficulty that exists in that Hamilton plant at the present time.


Norman Alexander McLarty: In connection with the Hamilton plant, as the hon. member is aware a board has been set up there. The board is reconvening on Monday. I am given to understand that there are certain things to be ironed out in that plant. I do not wish to anticipate what the board will do. It would not be fair to them, but I believe that when they meet on Monday, a genuine effort will be made to iron out the difficulties.
In connection with the railway matter, that report was received last night. I have not yet had an opportunity to review it; but, as the hon. member correctly points out, the right of review is specifically provided, and I can assure him that the report will be reviewed very carefully.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
109. Special-to provide for commitments under relief settlement agreements with the provinces, $75,000.
Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Hon. members will
notice that there is a drastic reduction in this item, from $500,000 to $75,000. It was announced some time ago that the contributions made by the dominion government to the provinces would cease some months ago.
As outlined in the annual report, some years ago the federal government, in cooperation with the provinces and municipalities, entered into a resettlement plan under which settlers in a number of provinces were reestablished on the land. According to the report, in 1939 activities were carried on in New Brunswick, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. A great many people from the drought area were reestablished in my constituency under this act and similar arrangements. Last year I brought before the house some of the conditions that prevailed in the districts where these new settlers were living. Some hon. members came to the conclusion that I was referring to all the farmers of Saskatchewan as living under those conditions, which, of course, was not my contention at all. I was confining my remarks to the conditions that prevailed in those areas in which the people were being reestablished under these government schemes.
I think this government has followed a mistaken policy in discontinuing assistance towards this important work at this time. The other

Supply-Labour-Relief Commitments
night I raised the question when the agriculture estimates were before the committee, and the Minister of Agriculture said that he was sure the spirit of Saskatchewan was such that if a family was without flour some neighbour would come to the rescue. That is the spirit of Saskatchewan, of course; I think people in their poverty are more generous than people who are well to do. I have heard many remarkable stories of the extreme generosity of those who themselves have been in dire want. But the situation is that there are whole blocks of communities in which from 90 to 100 per cent of the people have been dependent upon government assistance for their supplies of food month by month. I am sure hon. members of this committee would have difficulty in grasping the meagreness of those supplies. I placed on the record previously some of the allowances that were made, and I am not going to repeat my statement to-night, but the conditions I described a year ago still prevail. Two or three weeks ago I was in my constituency for a few hours, and I saw two men who were leaving their wives and children because the government had notified them that no further relief would be given after May 31. These men were going to join the army, but I wish to tell this committee that they were not in the proper frame of mind to make their best contribution.
As I pointed out to the Minister of Agriculture, there are some things I think this country can do. We should be able to see that every home in Canada has all the flour that is necessary; and in a province like Saskatchewan, where they have had very little money spent in the development of war industries; where conditions are such that I think it will be extremely difficult for the provincial government to discharge its responsibilities to those people who are being reestablished, surely ways and means can be found to see that everyone has enough to eat. In the second place, I think the Minister of Labour should see that if these people are not going to be reestablished they should be given a chance to find some other employment. This government has been a party to taking these people from their homes in the southern part of the province-


Norman Alexander McLarty: No.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I understood that at the outset-


Norman Alexander McLarty: No; this act never applied to Saskatchewan.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: But, as I understand it, this department has been guaranteeing a part of the money necessary to provide food for the people who were being reestablished. Is that not correct?


Norman Alexander McLarty: Yes; up to this year we have been supplying, direct relief.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The food the people
require in order to live is an important factor in that reestablishment. I do not kn,ow how those people are going to be able to survive because, as I have said, I do not see how the province of Saskatchewan can fulfil its responsibilities to them. If this government is not going to carry out the terms of the contract under which those people have been reestablished, then it is our duty to see that they are given a chance in industry. I know of some people being reestablished who were machinists and mechanics in the cities. They went north a few years ago to avoid going on relief or to get off relief, as they thought at that time. Some of them have been appealing to me to make contacts so that they may get back into industry in order to render some useful contribution in the present crisis. Some time ago the hon. member for Davenport told me that he never knew it to be so difficult to find employment for people in his riding; and there is not an hon. member who has offered me any encouragement to have people from my constituency come to Ontario or Quebec, or any other eastern province, in the hope that they may find employment. The Minister of Labour should do one of two things. He should either set up the necessary machinery to enable those people to find employment in those parts of Canada where industries are being operated, or continue to see that they have the wherewithal to obtain sufficient food in the meantime.


Norman Alexander McLarty: This relief settlement
project never did apply to Saskatchewan. It applied to Quebec, Manitoba and Alberta.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: This report mentions
Saskatchewan.


Norman Alexander McLarty: It should not, because the project has never applied there. The provision under the act is that one-third of the cost is paid by the dominion, one-third by the province and one-third by the municipality. What the hon. member suggests is that we should revert to the system of providing direct relief in Saskatchewan. That matter has been debated in this house; and the difficulty is that if an exception is made for Saskatchewan, it would have to be made for other provinces as well. I believe Saskatchewan has received fairly generous loans in this connection from the dominion treasury, and I suggest that rather than establish any precedent by reinstating the system of direct relief in that
4004	COMMONS
Supply-Labour-Relief Commitments
province, if the necessity exists and they cannot finance it themselves it would be more appropriate to do it by Way of loan than by reopening the direct relief legislation.


Mr. HOMUTH:: I do not know that the
hon. member who preceded the minister really referred to the reopening of direct relief. The more we see of this whole industrial and unemployment situation, the more we begin to realize how we have fallen down in connection with our national registration. Industries throughout Ontario are calling for mechanics to-day; and not only for mechanics but for labourers as well. I know a great many men who registered as having been machinists. I know men who were expert machinists at the time of the last war and who to-day are driving bread-wagons or doing other jobs not connected with war industry. We have men on the farms of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta who were formerly mechanics, but who to-day are in the position described by the hon. member for Mackenzie, of requiring relief.
The whole system of national registration has fallen down, because we have not taken advantage of it. If one talks to one minister of the government and says, something about industry, his reply is that this is the responsibility of some other minister. Minister after Minister will say, "This is not my responsibility; the Minister of Munitions and Supply will answer that." Another minister will say, "This is not my responsibility; the Minister of National Defence will answer that." There is not the coordination of effort in our war effort which we ought to have. The result is that if we had used national registration in the way we ought to have used it, we would have been in a position to choose the men who on their national registration cards said they could do this or that job. We could have moved them to those jobs.
Members of the government will reply that that is conscription of labour. I say that it is not conscription of labour. It is an allotment of labour to the jobs those people can do. The great difficulty has been lack of coordination among various departments of government, a failure to see to it that those who are on relief are moved to those sections of the country in which they could do something in our war effort, and earn an honest living without having to accept relief. In that way there would be coordination of our whole effort among the various departments, and we would be getting somewhere.
To-day some industries are being bogged down on account of the recruiting campaign. Industries are saying to departments of government, "Here are men we cannot spare;

here are men who are most important to our war effort." But because the government are anxious to see that the enlistment quota is filled before ninety days have expired, they are paying no attention to the necessity of retaining certain men in industry. On the other hand, there are a great many men in other parts of Canada who could be put into those industries, but to whom the government is paying no attention. My objection is that this lack of coordination among various departments of government is doing a great deal of harm to our whole war effort, and is making it necessary for members from various constituencies in western Canada to make appeals for the relief of their people.


Major James William Coldwell: The point of view of the government in respect of these matters is wrong. I have always been opposed to a system of direct relief. I believe that in 1931, when this procedure began, a most profound mistake was made. While the cost of public works may be greater, still the morale of the people is maintained by a public works programme. I certainly believe that if we have to face the situation again, we should never go in for a system of direct relief.
In the past few days in the House of Commons we have been speaking about recruiting and morale. I am of opinion that we are not going to maintain the morale of our people if we allow conditions to remain as they now exist in some parts of Saskatchewan, and in some of our larger cities. I read in the Montreal Gazette this morning that in that city there are 6,000 heads of families unemployed. If that condition continues, surely it offers no hope for the post-war period. As a matter of fact, it gives people the idea, "Well, we are going back to the same old conditions again, when this is all over."
At noon to-day I had the privilege of having lunch with a minister from a sister dominion, namely, New Zealand. He was describing the enthusiasm there was in that country. They have conscription for overseas service in New Zealand. But the main point is that they are not going to return to the kind of conditions to which our young men may have to return. Already they have organized wealth and industry, and they have compelled wealth to lend its money without interest to the state. They have given to the aged pensions at sixty, amounting to 30 shillings a week, or about $30 a month at the normal rate of exchange. They have free health services, hospitalization and maternity services.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Is that a contributory system?

Supply-Labour-Relief Commitments


Major James William Coldwell: Yes, a contributory
basis. Those factors maintain the morale of the people. Here to-night we are discussing unemployment relief. Of course, if we were manufacturing the commodities so badly needed overseas, we should have no unemployment in this country. But the fact is that we have unemployment; we have relief right at our doorsteps. I have said a number of times, and I shall say it to-night for the last time during this session, that if we wish to have the high morale we need in order to win the present conflict, we must plan for something better than the bread-line. We must see to it that during this war the people are fed and clothed and given an opportunity to work. I wish to impress that fact as forcibly as I can upon the minister and the government at this time.


John Horne Blackmore: One more thing we
must do: We must open our eyes and recognize the fact that when there are unemployed in Canada there are unemployed in Canada. We have not a shortage of labour. It is astounding to me that members of the administration and members of parliament generally will persist that we are short of men in Canada. Yet when we read the newspapers we find there are
6,000	unemployed in Montreal. How on earth people can possibly square the two situations, I do not know. We have enough labour and enough .unused resources to produce plenty of all the commodities Canada can produce for all her people, and still give to great Britain a great deal more than we are giving her. But we simply must reorganize our way of doing things so that we may bring together the labour, and the natural and financial resources of our country in order to achieve the desired end.
Item stands.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Ernest Lapointe: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Crerar):
That on Saturday, June 14, 1941, the house shall meet at eleven o'clock, and the order of business and procedure shall be the same as on Friday.
In making this motion, I desire to thank the committee for its cooperation to-night, and to offer also my thanks for anticipated cooperation to-morrow. I believe it is the general desire that the session be adjourned to-morrow. I do not speak for myself or for members of the government, because we live
in Ottawa, and it would not make much difference to us even if we sat next week. But it is the desire of hon. members generally, many of whom have already left, and others who have made arrangements to leave, that we should expedite business to-morrow in order to reach that end.
I wish to point out, however, that some time must be left for the hon. gentlemen of the other house in order that they-


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The other place.


Ernest Lapointe: Yes, the other place, so that they can consider the supply bill, and also some time for the representative of the crowm to tell us when to come back to Ottawa.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Might I ask the right hon. gentleman who is leading the house whether, in view of the fact that government orders will come before questions to-morrow, the house might not first be given the answers to the few questions that remain on the order paper?


Ernest Lapointe: With
pleasure.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
On motion of Mr. Lapointe (Quebec East), the house adjourned at 12.05 a.m. until Saturday, June 14, at 11 a.m.
Saturday, June 14, 1941.