1942-05-11

THE MINISTRY


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: I regret to inform the house of the resignation to-day of the Hon. Mr. Cardin as a minister of the crown. The cir-
cumstances of Mr. Cardin's resignation and of its acceptance by His Excellency the Governor General will appear from the following correspondence.
On Saturday afternoon, Mr. Cardin personally handed to me the following communication: Office of the Minister of Public Works Ottawa, May 9, 1942. My dear Prime Minister,
As a result of the decision arrived at during the meeting of council yesterday, where I once more expressed my point of view and my reasons for not agreeing with the new policy of the government, I respectfully tender my resignation as Minister of Public Works and Minister of Transport.
I feel that there is no necessity for repeating here the arguments which, I sincerely believe, justify my action. Suffice it to say at present that, as far as Canada is concerned, since the question of the plebiscite was first discussed and since the vote has been taken, nothing has been said nor anything established to indicate that the war situation has rendered necessary, just a few days after the vote, the introduction of a measure containing the principle of compulsory military service for overseas.
The presentation at this time, of an amendment to abrogate clause 3 of the National Mobilization Act is not, in my judgment, in accordance with the attitude taken and the views expressed in the speeches and declarations made soliciting an affirmative vote on the plebiscite.
I desire to express, my dear Prime Minister, my deep appreciation of your personal consideration, goodwill and friendship.
Most sincerely yours,
P. J. Arthur Cardin
The Right Honourable W. L. Mackenzie King, Prime Minister,
Ottawa.
To Mr. Cardin's letter I made the following reply:
Office of the Prime Minister
Ottawa, May 11, 1942.
My dear Cardin,
In your letter of the 9th instant, which you so kindly handed to me personally, you state that you are tendering your resignation on the ground that you are unable to agree with the new policy of the government. You also give certain arguments which you feel justify your action.
Had the government adopted a new policy, a policy with which you ivere unable to agree, I could take no exception to your tendering your resignation. Indeed, it would be the only right and proper course for you to take. There has, however, been no change of policy. No new policy has been adopted.
The decision of the cabinet to seek from parliament an amendment to the National Resources Mobilization Act, deleting clause 3 of the act, does not denote any change in government policy. The sole purpose of the proposed amendment is to obtain for the government the freedom of decision and action with respect to the method of raising men for

The Ministry-Hon. P. J. A. Cardin
military service overseas which, in the recent plebiscite, the government itself requested, and which, by a very large majority, the people of Canada have said they desire the government to possess.
The statutory restriction contained in section 3 is the one remaining restriction on the government's freedom of decision and action in all aspects of Canada's war effort. The section was included in the National Resources Mobilization Act at the time the bill was before parliament because of a commitment arising out of promises and pledges from which the government and members of parliament have been released by the results of the recent plebiscite.
As you are aware, the government might have proceeded in this matter by order in council under the War Measures Act. Having regard, however, to its responsibility to parliament, the government has felt that such action as is necessary to bring existing legislation into conformity with the will of the people expressed in the vote on the plebiscite should be taken, not by order in council under the War Measures Act, but by act of parliament. In thus proceeding, the government is, before any amendment to the National Resources Mobilization Act is made, providing members of parliament with the fullest opportunity of considering the effect of every aspect of the amendment.
You will recall that, in my broadcasts, I stressed the fact that, despite the magnificence of Canada's war effort, the quite unfounded impression was being fostered in our own country and among other nations that, because of a restriction upon the powers of the government, Canada's effort was not, and could never be an all-out effort.
I gave the strongest reasons why this false impression, and the injustice being done Canada in the eyes of our own people and in the eyes of the world, should be ended as speedily as possible. In those reasons and in the fact that already it is desirable to extend the scope of service under the National Resources Mobilization Act to other parts of this continent and adjacent islands, you will find, I believe, wherein the war situation has rendered necessary the introduction, without delay, of the proposed amendment to the National Resources Mobilization Act.
In view of the grounds on which you have tendered your resignation, I cannot but feel that you have given to the decision of the government a significance it was never intended to have. I therefore feel that before taking any action on your letter, I should place before you, anew, the situation as I see it. You may feel that, in the light of what I have said, you would care to reconsider the request of your letter. I shall gladly await any further consideration you may wish to give the matter.
With kindest personal regards,
Yours very sincerely,
W. L. Mackenzie King The Honourable P. J. A. Cardin, M.P.,
Minister of Public Works,
Ottawa.
The letter I have just read was delivered to Mr. Cardin this morning. Shortly thereafter I received from Mr. Cardin the following reply:
Office of the Minister of Public Works
Ottawa, May 11, 1942.
My dear Prime Minister:
Your communication of this morning with reference to my resignation reached me but a short time ago, and is one more indication of your kindness to me and of your friendship, which I greatly appreciate and thank you for most sincerely.
On perusing the letter, I find, however, that it merely presents anew the arguments, interpretations and viewpoints put forward during the discussion which preceded the decision arrived at in council, on Friday last.
I regret, therefore, my inability to change the views conveyed to you in the letter which I personally handed you on Saturday afternoon.
With the expression of my warmest personal regards, I am, my dear Prime Minister,
Yours very sincerely,
P. J. Arthur Cardin
The Right Honourable W. L. Mackenzie King, Prime Minister,
Ottawa.
On receiving Mr. Cardin's letter I sent to him the following reply:
Office of the Prime Minister,
Canada
Ottawa, May 11, 1942.
My dear Cardin:
It is with great regret that I have learned of your decision not to withdraw the tender of your resignation. In the circumstances, I have had no alternative but to inform the governor general of the correspondence which has passed between us, and to advise his excellency to accept your resignation. I have now to let you know that your resignation, as a minister of the crown, has been accepted by his excellency.
Since the passing of Lapointe and Dandurand, you have been, in years of association, my oldest colleague in the cabinet. We have been together in parliament for many years. For thirteen of these years we have shared the responsibilities of office. Over all these years, our political and personal associations have been so close and so friendly that the severance of the relationship which your retirement from the government involves, means, I can assure you, not less to myself than I know it does to you.
I thank you for the words of appreciation and personal friendship conveyed in your letteT. They are most warmly reciprocated by myself. I wish to thank you in equal measure for your unfailing loyalty and constant and helpful cooperation in the work of the administration, during the years we have shared its tasks together.

The Plebiscite

May I express the hope that release from the responsibilities and anxieties of office which are so very great at this most critical of all times, may serve further to restore your health and strength from the impairment it suffered some months ago, from which, fortunately, you have steadily recovered.
With renewed expressions of my warmest personal regards and with my best wishes,
Believe me, my dear Cardin,
Yours very sincerely,
W. L. Mackenzie King The Honourable P. J. A. Cardin, M.P.,
Minister of Public Works,
Ottawa.


Hon. R. B. HANSON (Leader of the Opposition):: Before the Prime Minister takes up the next item, will he table the correspondence; and when will he announce the next resignation?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I regret to have to take exception to my hon. friend's last remark; I think when he reads it in Hansard and reflects upon it no one will regret it more than himself. I shall be pleased to table copies of the correspondence.



THE PLEBISCITE


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The results of the plebiscite on April 27 are now all but complete. Although final official returns are not yet available, the most reliable figures indicate that on the question asked there were over 2,926,856 persons who voted in the affirmative, and over 1,618,730 persons who voted in the negative; in other words 64 per cent of the voters answered in the affirmative and 36 per cent in the negative.
The total number of votes cast on the plebiscite is an impressive demonstration of the importance which the electors of Canada attach to giving to the government a free hand at a time of war.
The question on which the people of Canada were asked to express an opinion was:
Are you in favour of releasing the government from any obligation arising out of any past commitments restricting the methods of raising men for military service?
By their vote, the people have decisively expressed the view that the government should be released from any such obligation. In other words, there no longer remains any issue which the government or members of parliament, because of past promises or pledges are restricted from considering, dis-
cussing and deciding on its merits, in the light of what is best for Canada and for Canada's war effort.
The question in the plebiscite was of equal concern to all citizens of Canada. The result is a national expression of view on a national issue. It should be so viewed in all its aspects. In all of the provinces, and for that matter, in every constituency, affirmative and negative votes were cast. The vote was taken in a democratic fashion. It will be recognized throughout the country that, in a democracy, the will of the majority should prevail.
The vote in the plebiscite shows that the people generally recognize that the war has taken a course which was altogether unforeseen; that conditions wholly unexpected may yet arise, and that, in consequence, there should be no restriction upon the freedom of the government apart from its constitutional responsibility to parliament.
In the plebiscite, the electors were not called upon to vote for or against the government. The result, therefore, is not to be construed as a vote for any political party. In fact, the plebiscite was selected by the government precisely because it afforded the best known means of obtaining an expression of the views of the people on a specific question, regardless of political parties, or party considerations.
As, in'some quarters, an effort has been made since the plebiscite to interpret the result as a mandate for conscription for overseas service, it is necessary for me to repeat that, in the plebiscite, conscription was not the issue. The government did not ask the people to say whether or not conscription for overseas service should be adopted. That was not the issue before the people. With respect to the issue of conscription, the result can only rightly be construed as leaving to the government and to parliament entire freedom to deal with that question on its merits.



MOBILIZATION ACT


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 80, to amend the National Resources Mobilization Act, 1940.
Richard Burpee Hanson: Mr. Speaker, before the Prime Minister proceeds I would ask that you have the Clerk Assistant read the bill in the manner provided for under standing order 42.

Mobilization Act Amendment
(The bill was read by the Acting Clerk Assistant as follows):
An Act to amend the National Resources Mobilization Act, 1940.
His Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:-
1.	This Act may be cited as the National Resources Mobilization Aot Amendment Act, 1942.
2.	Section two of the National Resources Mobilization Act, 1940, chapter thirteen of the statutes of 1940, is amended by striking out in the first line thereof the words "Subject to the provisions of section three hereof."
3.	Section three of the said act is repealed and sections four, five and six are renumbered three, four and five respectively.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker,
the purpose of the amendment is to give to the government, by the deletion of section 3 of the National Resources Mobilization Act, the same freedom of decision and action with respect to the method of raising men for military services overseas which, in the recent plebiscite the government requested, and) which the people of Canada have said they desire the government to possess.
Section 3 ^contains the one remaining restriction on the'government's freedom of decision and action in all aspects of Canada's war effort.
This section was included in the National Resources Mobilization Act, at the time the bill was passed, because of a commitment arising out of promises and pledges from which the government and members of parliament have now been released.
In presenting the issue of the plebiscite to parliament and to the people, I repeatedly stressed the importance of removing any restriction, or even the appearance of any restriction, on the powers of the government to effect a total effort for total war. I pointed out that Canada's war effort was being placed in a false light because of the existence of what appears to be a restriction upon an all-out effort. If the amendment is adopted, Canada's war effort will appear thereafter in its true light; an effort in no way hampered by any moral or legal restrictions. By their vote in the plebiscite, the people have expressed their readiness to have the sole remaining restriction upon the government's freedom and decision of action removed.
The removal of section 3 of the National Resources Mobilization Act is, in other words, the logical consequence of the vote on the plebiscite. Since the people have indicated that they do not desire any restriction on the freedom of action of the government, there is
44561-145}
the strongest of reasons why parliament should be asked to remove any shadow of restriction which remains.
In the plebiscite, the people were asked to give full powers to the government, not to meet a then immediate situation, but to provide against a future emergency. The National Resources Mobilization Act is only enabling legislation. The extent of the use of such power as is conferred upon the government by its provisions is and has, from the outset, been a matter of government policy, to be decided in the light of all relevant circumstances. This will remain true of the unrestricted powers which the amendment, if enacted, would afford.
The government might have proceeded in this matter by order in council under the War Measures Act. Having regard, however, to its responsibility to parliament, the government has felt that such action as is necessary to bring existing legislation into conformity with the will of the people expressed in the vote on the plebiscite should be taken, not by order in council under the War Measures Act, but by act of parliament. In thus proceeding, the government is providing members of parliament, before any amendment to the National Resources Mobilization Act is made, with the fullest opportunity of considering the effect of every aspect of the amendment.


Mr. HOMUTH:: Then the government
takes full responsibility?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Is it the pleasure of the
house to adopt the motion?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Mr. POULIOT:: On division.


Mr. LACOMBE:: On division.
Motion agreed to on division and bill read the first time.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 69, to change the name of the Saskatchewan Life Insurance Company to Fidelity Life Assurance	Company.-Mr. McNiven (Regina City).
Bill No. 70, for the relief of William Milroy Davidson.-Mr. Bercovitch.
Bill No. 71, for the relief of Audrey Meredith Mann Harrison.-Mr. Bercovitch.
Bill No. 72, for the relief of Frangois Henri Drack.-Mr. Bercovitch.
Bill No. 73, for the relief of Gladys Irene Dale Weston.-Mr. Hazen.
Questions
[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 74, for the relief of Ruth Ufland Fishman.-Mr. Mellraith.
Bill No. 75, for the relief of Norma Brown Stevenson.-Mr. Claxton.
Bill No. 76, for the relief of Mary Cummings Bullock.-Mr. Whitman.
Bill No. 77, for the relief of Elizabeth Gertrude De Serre Gould.-Mr. Bercovitch.
Bill No. 78, for the relief of John Clifford Stanley Darbyson.-Mr. Bercovitch.
Bill No. 79, for the relief of Celia Reynolds Schellenberg.-Mr. Mellraith.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk).

Mr. HANSELL:: 1.	On what dates were the amounts paid to the seven persons or companies who received cheques amounting to $5,000 or over for wheat acreage reduction bonus?
2.	How many applications were made for wheat acreage reduction bonus?
3.	How many applications were paid up to March 31?
4.	How many remained at that date, to be paid in each of the provinces?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	Marie Wilson, final payment, October 4, 1941. Canada Permanent Mortgage Company, interim payment, December 29, 1941; final payment, February 27, 1942. G. H. Wesley, interim payment, November 15, 1941. Noble Farms Limited, interim payment, December 29, 1941; final payment, April 14, 1942. J. T. Heninger, interim payment, November 18, 1941; final payment, February 17, 1942. N. Neufeld, interim payment, November 15, 1941; final payment, March 8, 1942. W. ICynock, final payment, October 25, 1941.
2.	186,893 claims.
3.	151,763 fully paid claims, 29,330 partly paid claims.
4.	Alberta-8,008 claims; Saskatchewan-16,911 claims; Manitoba-4,411 claims.


DR. RICHARD REDLER
Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	Is Dr. Richard Redler, formerly commissioner of police in Austria, employed by the dominion government?
2.	If so, in what capacity?
3.	What allowances are paid to him for (a) salary, (b) expenses?
MR. THORSON:
1.	Yes.
2.	Examiner, Postal Censorship, Post Office Department.
3.	(a) 81,560 per annum plus cost of living bonus, (b) None.


FOOD PRODUCTION-CREDITS TO FARMERS
Mr. MARSHALL:: 1.	Have any arrangements been made by the dominion government for farmers to obtain, quickly and adequately, credits from banks and other financial institutions, at a low rate of interest so that they can play their part in the essential task of food production in this country ?
2.	If so, what general arrangements have been made?
3.	If not, why not?


Mr. ILSLEA :: No special arrangements have been made and no information is available to indicate that credit-worthy farmers cannot obtain adequate credits at reasonable interest rates in order to enable them to play their part in the essential task of food production in this country. The chartered banks are believed to be fully cognizant of the important part agriculture is playing in Canada's war effort and to be granting short-term loans to farmers regularly in the usual course of their business. Long-term and mortgage credit is available through the facilities of the Canadian farm loan board.


GERMAN REPARATIONS-FIRST WORLD WAR
Mr. HANSELL:: 1.	Were moneys paid to Canada as a result of reparations imposed upon Germany after world war No. 1 put to the account of consolidated revenue fund?
2.	If so, how much was paid into this fund from that source?
3.	How much of this money, if any, was paid to Canadian prisoners of war in Germany?


Mr. McLARTY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	$26,672,216.06.
3.	Total amount of money paid to military prisoners of war for claims allowed, $273,952.47.


EXPORTS TO SWITZERLAND
Mr. MARSHALL:: 1.	Have any goods been exported to Switzerland since the outbreak of the present war?
2.	If so, what is the nature and value of such goods exported for each year commencing with 1939?
Mr. MacIvINNON (Edmonton West): In keeping with our established policy, during the war, it is not possible to give the details of exports by countries. (Ninety-five per cent of the exports to Switzerland have been Red Cross supplies, particularly for prisoners of war in enemy territory).


EXPORTS OP LOGS
Mr. REID:: 1.	Are exportations of fir, cedar, balsam, hemlock and spruce logs still permitted?

Questions
2.	If so, what have been the respective exportations of these during 1941 and up to the end of April, 1942, and to what countries?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1.	Fir logs-exports at present being curtailed.
Cedar logs-no restriction on exports.
Balsam logs and hemlock logs-under export control but export permits being granted freely from crown grant lands. British Columbia provincial laws prohibit export of all logs from provincial leased and licensed timber except under special dispensation.
Sitka spruce logs-exports not permitted from British Columbia.
Other spruce logs-under export control but export permits being granted freely from crown grant lands. British Columbia provincial laws prohibit export of logs from provincial leased and licensed timber except under special dispensation. Export of spruce pulpwood logs from Alberta east is permitted to those United States mills which have been regular purchasers of pulpwood from Canada. Such United States firms are permitted to purchase up to the amounts of their average annual purchases for the past seven years providing that sufficient quantity is produced to allow for this as well as for the normal requirements of Canadian manufacturers.
2.	In keeping with our established policy, during the war, it is not possible to give the details of exports by countries.
The total exports of logs as specified, during the calendar year 1941, and period January 1 to March 31, 1942, were as follows:
	Calendar	Jan. 1 to
	year	March 31,
	1941	1942
	M ft.	M ft.
Logs, cedar	23,274	5,160Logs, Douglas fir..	86,195	622Logs, hemlock	148,801	30,165Logs, spruce	10,537	124Logs, balsam	not classified	
1942 VICTORY LOAN


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: 1.	What is the total amount subscribed in the 1942 victory loan?
2.	What were the expenses in connection with the floating of the loan, including advertising, commissions and other expenses?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	Cash subscriptions, $845,360,300; conversions subscriptions, $152,143,000; total, $997,503,300.
2.	Estimated expenditure actually incurred and paid to April 30, 1942, $4,907,965.28. Certain other expenditures have been incurred but have not been paid to date. Complete figures will not be available for some time.


RELEASES FROM INTERNMENT
Mr. CASTLEDEN:: How many persons have been released from internment camps in Canada during each month since April 1, 1941?


Mr. McLARTY:: The number of persons released from internment camps, Canada, during each month since April 1, 1941, is as
follows:
April, 1941	 34
May	  12
June	 26
July	 37
August	 37
September	 20
October	 29
November	 15
December	 37
January, 1942	 32
February	 12
March	 63
April	 9
Total	 363


ENLISTMENT OF INDIANS IN SASKATCHEWAN
Mr. PERLEY:: How many Indians have enlisted in his majesty's forces from each reserve in the province of Saskatchewan?


Mr. CRERAR:: (Reserves grouped by Indian Agencies.)
Duck Lake Agency
One Arrow's reserve	 4
James Smith's reserve	 5
Beardy's reserve	 16
John Smith's reserve	 8
Moose Woods reserve	 1
-	34
Battleford Agency
Little Pine reserve	 4
Poundmaker reserve	 2
Meadow Lake reserve	 4
Mosquito reserve	 5
Red Pheasant reserve	 4
Sweetgrass reserve	 2
Thunderchild reserve	 7
-	28
Carlton Agency
Sturgeon Lake reserve	 2
Little Red River reserve	 5
Wahpaton reserve	 1
Mistawasis reserve	 19
Muskeg Lake reserve	 21
Atakakup (Sandy Lake) reserve_____	8
- 56
Crooked Lake Agency
White Bear reserve	 6
Kahkewistahaw reserve	 6
Cowesses reserve	 16
Ochapowace reserve	 5
2286
Questions

File Hills Agency
Peepeekesis reserve	 25
Okanese reserve	 10
Starblanket reserve	 2
Little Black Bear reserve	 1
-	38
Pelly Agency
Keeseekoose reserve	 5
Key reserve	 6
Valley River reserve	 1
Cote reserve	 24
-	36
Onion Lake Agency
Onion Lake reserve	 2
-	2
Touchwood Agency
Gordon reserve	 12
Poorman reserve	 5
Day Star reserve	 1
Fishing Lake reserve	 3
Nut Lake reserve	 1
- 22
Qu'Appelle Agency
Muscowpetung reserve	 4
Piapot reserve	 6
Pasqua reserve	 3
Carry-the-Kettle reserve	 6
Standing Buffalo reserve	 3
- 22
Total	 271
The above information has been obtained from Indian agents and is as complete and up-to-date as can be reported by the Department of Mines and Resources. Some Indians live off reserves or are located some distance from the agencies and for these reasons the agents may not become aware of Indian enlistments for some time after they take place.


ROBERT SIMPSON COMPANY-EMPLOYEES IN GOVERNMENT SERVICE
Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	How many persons, whose last employment or position was with the Robert Simpson Company, Limited, of Toronto, have been appointed to government boards or have been or are employed by boards or departments under the jurisdiction of the dominion government?
2.	How many such persons are at present in the employ of the government, and, (a) what are their names, (b) what is the salary and/or other remuneration paid to each?


Norman Alexander McLarty: I have discussed this
question with the hon. member for Vancouver East, and I understand that he is willing to have the question dropped in order that it may be reworded. In its present form to produce the information asked1 for would entail a tremendous volume of work.


Mr. MacINNIS:: I understand that the
question is rather difficult to answer in its present form, and I am willing that it be dropped for redrafting.
Question dropped.


*SOLDIERS' DEPENDENTS HOSPITALIZATION
Mr. MARSHALL:: 1.	Is there a separate board apart from the present dependents' allowance board, which deals exclusively with the hospitalization of dependents of men in the fighting forces?
2.	If so, when was the said board set up?
3.	What are the names of the personnel, their general qualifications and their salaries?
4.	How many applications, by provinces, have been received by this board for consideration since the outbreak of war and what disposition was made of each?


Mr. RALSTON:: I should like to answer this question verbally. There is no board which deals exclusively with the hospitalization of dependents of men in the fighting forces. There is a board which includes a portion of that work under its special authority, that is, the dependents' board of trustees which was referred to by me on page 1932 of Hansard. This board was appointed by order in council P.C. 18 of January 2, 1942, and one of its powers is to pay supplementary grants or give special assistance to relieve misfortune and meet domestic emergencies, including serious illness of a member of the family.


NEWSBOYS AS AGENTS FOR SALE OF WAR SAVINGS STAMPS
Mr. AYLESWORTH:: 1.	Has the attention of the Minister of Finance been directed to the practice in the United States of having newsboys act as agents for the sale of defence stamps?
2.	If so, has any consideration been given to the institution of a similar practice in Canada?
3.	What decision has been reached?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes.
3.	This matter is receiving consideration.


CHARLOTTETOWN-MAGDALEN ISLANDS AIR SERVICE
Mr. ROY:: 1.	How many trips has the Maritime Central Airways made between Charlottetown and the Magdalen islands during the winter of 1941-42?
2.	What is the distance covered on the round trip between Charlottetown and the Magdalen islands?

Questions as Orders for Returns
3.	What was the total weight of mails carried by the above named company to the Magdalen islands during the past season?


Mr. MULOCK:: 1.	Nineteen round trips were flown with mails between Charlottetown and the Magdalen islands during the winter of 1941-42.
2.	212 miles.
3.	21,802 pounds.


ORDERS IN COUNCIL
Mr. JEAN:: 1.	How many orders in council have been adopted since September 1, 1939?
2.	What is, in alphabetical order, the subject matter of such orders in council?
3.	When orders in council affect provincial law's, are they submitted, before adoption, to an advisory committee versed in the laws of each respective province in order to coordinate them with existing provincial legislation?
4.	If so, who are the members of such committee?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Dropped.


PLEBISCITE-SOLDIERS' VOTE
Mr. BRUCE:: Would the government give a breakdown of the soldiers' vote by separate provinces?
Mr. MeLARTY: In view of the procedure laid down in the Canadian service voter plebiscite regulations, it is not possible at this stage to classify by provinces the votes counted under such regulations.


SIROIS COMMISSION
Mr. CARDIFF:: 1.	Is it the responsibility of any governmental agency to keep up to date the statistical computations of dominion and provincial public finance compiled by the Sirois commission?
2.	If so, what agency?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: The continuation of the compilations on public finance made for the report of the Rowell-Sirois commission is being carried on in the finance statistics branch of the dominion bureau of statistics.


BRITISH COAL SHORTAGE-DRAFT OF NOVA SCOTIA AND ONTARIO MINERS
Herbert Alexander Bruce: Is a battalion or draft of miners from the coal fields of Nova Scotia, as well as from the mines in northern Ontario, being formed and despatched overseas to assist in the coal fields of Britain?


Mr. MITCHELL:: No information.


TRANSPORT OF FEED FROM HEAD OF LAKES TO EAST
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	What has it cost the government to date to transport feed grains and other feed from the head of the lakes to eastern Canada?
2.	What companies and persons have been paid for doing this work, and how much has each received?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	The amount of money paid as freight assistance on the movement of grain originating in western Canada, and upon feeds produced from such grains, is as follows:
Up to and including May 8, 1942-$3,-781,264.70.
2.	The grain and feeds have been transported through the regular channels of trade, wholesale, retail, cooperative organizations and individuals, and it is not considered practicable to furnish details regarding all companies, organizations and individuals involved in the movement of feed grains for which assistance has been given. The adminr istrative work in this connection has been under the direction of the Department of Agriculture and the staff involved is paid in the regular way through the treasury office.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. DESMOND:: 1.	How many lawyers have been appointed to positions under the wartime prices and trade board since October 1, 1941?
2.	What is the name of each such appointee?
3.	Where did each such appointee engage in practice prior to his appointment?
4.	What length of experience at the bar had each such appointee?
5.	What salary and/or allowance is paid to each such appointee?
6.	What are the duties in which each such appointee is engaged?
7.	By what authority was each such person appointed ?
8.	In how many cases was it certified pursuant to order in council P.C. 4759 that the appointment of a particular person was in the public interest?
9.	Are any of these persons carrying on a private practice in addition to their duties with the wartime prices and trade board?
10.	If so, what are the names of such persons?


SIR EDWARD PEACOCK
Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	Did Sir Edward Peacock come to Canada on or about June 25, 1941?
2.	If so, did the hon. Minister of Finance meet him?
3.	If not, was he met by other members of the cabinet?
22SS

Questions as Orders for Returns
4.	If so, by whom and in what capacity?
5.	On that date, was there an acting Minister of Finance?
6.	If so, who was he, and for how long did
he so act?


TERMINAL GRAIN ELEVATORS
Mr. ROSS (Souris) :: 1.	How many terminal grain elevators are there in Canada?
2.	Where are they located and by whom are they owned? What are their respective storage capacities?
3.	By whom are they operated?


James Angus MacKinnon: Return tabled.


MILITARY TRAINING-FARMERS AND AGRICULTURAL EMPLOYEES
Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	During the present seeding season does the government propose to take the necessary steps to stop the calling up of farmers, farmers' sons and agricultural employees for obligatory military training?
2.	Has the government given, or does it intend to give to divisional registrars the necessary instructions to that end?
3.	If so, what arrangements has the government made for this purpose and what instructions will it give, or has it given to the registrars ?
4.	Has the government advised, or will it advise regimental commanding officers who find farmers are imperatively required in their districts, to bring before the appropriate commissions immediately all requests for delay submitted by the farmers referred to?
5.	If so, what are the views or instructions that the government has given, or proposes to give, to regimental commanding officers?


MANUFACTURE AND USES OF ALCOHOL
Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	How much cane or beet sugar, crude or refined, was used in Canada in each of the calendar years 1939, 1940 and 1941, in the manufacture of alcohol?
2.	How much cane or beet sugar molasses, crude or refined, was used in the same years for this purpose?
3.	What was the total quantity of alcohol manufactured from sugar and molasses in Canada in the above years?
4.	What was the quantity of such alcohol used in each of the above years in Canada in the manufacturing of war materials?
5.	What was the quantity of alcohol used in each of the above years for the manufacture of, (a) wines, (b) beers, (e) liquors?
6.	What was the quantity of such alcohol used for other commercial purposes?
7.	What was the total quantity of alcohol used in Canada for all purposes in each of the calendar years 1939, 1940 and 1941?
[Mr. Pou'.iot.)


MILITARY SERVICE-RECRUITING IN ONTARIO AND QUEBEC
Mr. BRUCE:: 1.	What is the population of the eastern part of the province of Ontario, which is included in military district No. 4, Montreal?
2.	In computing returns of recruiting in the province of Quebec, are the recruits from this part of Ontario included?
3.	How many recruits have been secured from the provinces of Ontario and Quebec respectively, for, (a) active service anywhere; (b) service in Canada only?


JAPANESE IN CANADA
Mr. HANSELL:: 1.	How many Japanese immigrants entered Canada during each year from 1930 to 1941, inclusive?
2.	What was the Japanese population in Canada as at the census of 1931 and the census of 1941?
3.	How many Japanese became naturalized during the years from 1930 to 1941, inclusive?


CANADIAN FORCES-FINANCIAL SUPERINTENDENTS
Mr. MARSHALL:: 1.	What are the names, ages, addresses and qualifications of the financial superintendents who have been appointed in each branch of the three fighting services?
2.	Are these persons members of his majesty's forces, or civilians?



HEALTH INSURANCE COMMITTEE

Mr. DESMOND:: .
1.	Has a committee been established to study the question of health insurance and to formulate a health insurance plan?
2.	If so, who are the members of such committee ?
3.	What are the terms of reference to such committee?


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: Return tabled.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. BERTR  AND@Terrebonne: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, agreements and other documents exchanged between the government, the federal departments and any person or persons, with respect to the construction of the military training camp at St. Jerome, Quebec. Also a copy of all invoices and paysheets in connection with this construction.


James Layton Ralston: I understand that with the consent of the hon. member this motion is to be dropped.
Motion dropped.

Motions for Papers



BRITISH WHEAT PURCHASES, 1939-42

Mr. FAIR:: For a return showing the price paid by the British cereals import board or any department of the British government for wheat purchased from the Canadian wheat board during thie crop years 1939-40, 1940-41 and 1941-42 to date.


James Angus MacKinnon: Mr. Speaker, on several occasions in this house and elsewhere I have been asked this question and I have explained that we would be glad to give this information if we were allowed to do so. We have sold wheat to the British ministry of food on various occasions and one .of the terms and conditions of those sales has been that the price be not revealed. I am sorry that it is impossible for me to give further information in connection with this request and I would suggest that the motion be dropped.


Mr. COLDWELL:: Can the minister tell us why the British cereals board does not wish this information to be given to the people who owned this wheat in Canada?


James Angus MacKinnon: If I told that I might just as well give the whole answer; that is tied up with the request that the information be not made public.


Robert Fair: As the mover of the motion I want to lodge a complaint against this information being withheld from the farmers who produced the wheat. Like the Minister of Trade and Commerce I have been asked for this information on several occasions and have had to say I am informed that to give it would not be in the public interest. If this information were of any benefit to Hitler or the Japanese I would certainly not ask for it, but I cannot see any reason in the world why it should be withheld. We are told what we are getting for our beef and our pork and all that kind of thing, but information on wheat is withheld. I do not believe it is democratic to have this information withheld.


Ernest Edward Perley: I wonder if the minister
will permit one question dealing with this matter? In the report of the 1940-41 crop there is a statement on page 2 with respect to sales made in the month of May, totalling 120 million bushels odd. Then in the monthly statement issued later you give the price at which wheat was offered, showing each month of the year, and for that month the price was over 90 cents. In one report the sales made are given, and then in the monthly statement the prices paid; why then can this information not be made available?


James Angus MacKinnon: I cannot help it if the hon. member for
Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley) wishes to draw conclusions from information published by the department in connection with the handling of the wheat crop. I cannot add anything to what I have already said. We have been asked by the British government not to reveal this price, and unless the house wishes me to go back to the British government and ask them to reconsider their stand, I think the question will have to be dropped.


Ernest Edward Perley: The price quoted in the
monthly statement is correct, is it not?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: It does not refer to the
same thing at all.


Richard Burpee Hanson: May I
request the minister to-go back to the British government and ask them if they will release the prices paid to Canada for the wheat during the years covered? If they definitely refuse to do that, I do not think we can pursue the matter any further. That has never been done so far as I know.


James Angus MacKinnon: I
have stated definitely in this house that I personally requested the British government to consider giving this information. I told them that this house and particularly the wheat producers of western Canada were anxious to get the figures and asked- if they would not reconsider their decision and allow me to give the information. They came back with the request that the information be kept secret in accordance with the terms for the purchase of wheat by that government.
Motion dropped.	[DOT]



AIRCRAFT AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES-MORALE BUILDING CAMPAIGN

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: For a copy of all letters, memoranda, or other documents addressed by the director-general of aircraft production, or any official of the aircraft production branch, and directed to any official of an aircraft industry or company engaged in whole or in part in the production of aircraft or parts thereof, with reference to the appointment of E. G. Hirst of Toronto to undertake a morale building campaign in the aircraft and allied industries; and in particular with reference to the manner in which his out-of-pocket expenses for travelling, organizing and office assistance are to be paid.


Mr. MICHAUD:: Because of the unavoidable absence of the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) I would ask that this motion stand until his return.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That cannot be the real reason. This is not an unimportant matter afid the questions asked are quite clear. The other day when the minister

Motions for Papers
was here he asked to have it stand. It may take some time to bring down the information but I should like to see this motion passed and then we can get the return later. Unless there is some real reason why it cannot be passed to-day, I ask that the motion be put.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: There is no special
reason for asking for delay, but the minister of munitions is not here and I do not know whether there is anything objectionable in the motion. However, if the house wishes to pass the motion, it must be with the reservation that anything of a confidential nature will not be brought down.


Georges Parent: Carried, with the reservation made by the minister.
CON SCRIPT! VE POWERS OF GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL UNDER WAR MEASURES ACT


Mr. CARDIFF:: For a copy of all opinions rendered by the Department of Justice with reference to the power of the governor in council under the War Measures Act to conscript men for service in any theatre of war.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I have been advised by the departments of government concerned to say that they do not object to the production of the opinions mentioned in this motion, but it will be done without prejudice to the general rule which is stated in Bourinot, at page 250, as follows:
As a rule the opinions of the law officers of the crown are held to be "private communications" when given for the guidance of ministers, and may be properly refused by the government.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The question is largely academic now.
Mr. ST. LAURENT:	With that reservation, for the convenience of hon. members I table the return at once.



MUNITIONS AND SUPPLY-POOL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY CONTRACTS

['Order. This is a question that should properly be placed on the order paper.']
George Hugh Castleden: For a return showing-1. What contracts have been let by the Department of Munitions and Supply to the Pool Construction Company, Limited, Regina, Saskatchewan, since September, 1939, and the dates of such contracts.
2.	In which cases there was a call for public tenders.
3.	The amount of tender in each case.
4.	The total amount paid by the government to this company.



Mr. NICHOLSON:: For a return showing the plans, specifications and contracts in connection with the building of houses in Hull, Quebec, by Wartime Housing Limited.


COMMITTEE ON RECONSTRUCTION
Lewis Elston Cardiff: For a copy of the basic memorandum which constitutes the agenda of the committee on reconstruction referred to by the Minister of Pensions and National Health, at page 26 of the evidence of the select committee of the house on reconstruction and reestablishment.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Has this memorandum been delivered to members of the committee? I think it has been, and I think it should be distributed to all hon. members.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I am informed by the chairman that that has been done, and the return will be tabled to-morrow.


THE MINISTRY
[Stage Direction]
REPRESENTATION OF THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC__

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Liguori Lacombe: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister? Is the government still considering the opportunity to give proper representation in the cabinet to the province of Quebec? I should like to direct a second question to the Prime Minister:	Are any changes contemplated in
the cabinet to replace Hon. Mr. Cardin?
Right Hon, W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister): I may say to the hon. member that the leader of the opposition (Mr. Hanson) has already been taken to task for a similar question, and I think he will find that the public will take him to task for asking that particular question at this time.


RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he can tell us when it is anticipated that the projected exchange of diplomatic representatives between Canada and the U.SB.R. will be effected? The Prime Minister announced some weeks ago that such an exchange would take place.
Right Hon, W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister): My hon. friend will appreciate that there are many matters to be considered in connection with the selection of a minister for a position of the kind, and that correspondence between the governments takes considerable time. I can only

Privilege-Mr. Kinley
say that the matter has been, receiving consideration and we hope to be able to announce an appointment as soon as possible.


SYNTHETIC RUBBER
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. G. SLAGHT (Parry Sound):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture in which the Minister of Munitions and Supply will also be interested, arising out of a dispatch carried in the New York Times of Saturday in which the following statements occur:
Secretary of Agriculture Wickard, appearing before a Senate agriculture subcommittee, urged a partial extension in the government programme of making synthetic rubber from grain alcohol produced from surplus wheat and corn. He stated that 80 million bushels of grain would make about 200 million gallons of alcohol-


Georges Parent: Order. This is a question that should properly be placed on the order paper.



PRIVILEGE-MR. KINLEY SALVAGE-OPERATIONS OP LUNENBURG COUNTY FISHERMEN-LARD

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. J. KINLEY:: (Queens-Lunenburg): Mr. Speaker, the Ottawa Citizen of this morning contains an article headed "Salvage On The Sea Front," with a quotation from the Halifax Herald. Reference is made in the article to a letter written by my friend and constituent, the Hon. Gordon Romkey, Speaker of the Nova Scotia House of Assembly. Mr. Romkey cites the fact that fishermen off the coast of Nova Scotia have brought into port a considerable quantity of lard salvaged from the sea.


Georges Parent: Is the hon. member speaking on a question of privilege?


John James Kinley: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Romkey's letter has been given prominence both in the local press and throughout Canada.


Mr. THORSON:: I might ask the hon. member a question.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


John James Kinley: I am speaking on a question of privilege. This matter was brought before the house last Friday.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


John James Kinley: It relates to something which occurred in my constituency. This
morning I had a telegram from Mr. Romkey which is as follows:-


Georges Parent: Will the hon. member state his question of privilege?


John James Kinley: The question of privilege is this. I made a statement in the house last Friday that I was advised that the matter would come under the receiver of wrecks. May I explain that I have a telegram from Mr. Romkey to-day saying:
Receiver of wreck could not handle it. Holding since April twenty second with no buyers Stanbury provincial organizer had offer from Lever Bros St. Stephen Saturday. Packing to-day in four hundred pound casks for shipment.


An hon. MEMBER:: That is not a question of .privilege.
Mr, KINLEY: Mr. Speaker, I am told that lard is used as an insulator for certain perishable products going overseas.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: It is used for grease, too.


Georges Parent: What the hon. member has just stated is not a question of privilege.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: If I may go back to the question of this lard: on Friday the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) asked me concerning the disposal of ten thousand pounds of lard salvaged from the sea by Lunenburg fishermen, and I told him that I would make inquiry with regard to the matter. The information which I have is that, through Mr. H. N. M. Stanbury, provincial salvage organizer for Nova Scotia, inquiry was made with the result that Lever Brothers, Limited, St. Stephen, New Brunswick, made an offer for the lard which was accepted as satisfactory by those responsible for salvaging it from the sea.
It may be of interest to members of the house to know that three weeks ago, 90,000 pounds of lard were salvaged from the sea, in the eastern passage, and satisfactory arrangements were made for its disposal.
It would appear that in the case of the
10,000	pounds of lard salvaged by Lunenburg fishermen, all possible avenues of disposal were not explored before publicity was given to the matter.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Angus MacInnis: Some little time ago the United Fishermen's Union of Vancouver wrote to the Department

War Appropriation-Naval Services
of Fisheries with regard to the setting up of a joint production board. I am in receipt of a telegram with regard to this matter, and I should like to know from the minister whether the department has given the subject any consideration. I am sorry I did not get this wire in time to hand it to him.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: In reply to the hon. member I may say that the department has given and still is giving consideration to this matter.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Friday, May 8, consideration in committee of a resolution to provide sums not exceeding $2,000,000,000 for the year ending March 31, 1943, for granting to his majesty aid for national defence and security-Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Bradette in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ANGUS L. MACDONALD (Minister of National Defence for Naval Services): I should like to table two documents containing information asked for on Friday last in this committee: first, a statement showing the rates of pay and allowances for officers and men in the Royal Canadian Naval Service; second, a statement showing the syllabus of training followed in the training of officers on the east and west coasts.
Richard Burpee Hanson: Has the minister been able to get any information with respect to the case of the Claire Lilley?


Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):: The Claire Lilley is a merchant ship, not a ship of war. She ran aground at the entrance of Halifax harbour some weeks ago. The whole matter is being investigated, as my hon. friend pointed out, by a commission of which Mr. Justice Archibald is the chairman. As I have said, she is not a naval vessel, and we have nothing to do with her except that, after she ran ashore, the naval craft in the harbour and naval officers and men put out a rescue boat and did actually rescue some of the crew with the assistance of the coast guard.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The minister has had, I suppose, the report of the commission?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: No.
I do not think it is completed.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Perhaps this question is premature, but I wished to ascertain whether there was a lack of cooperation between the naval authorities and the harbour commission authority. I believe that was involved in the inquiry.
fMr. Maclnnis.]


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I think the hon. gentleman had better wait until
the report comes in.


Mr. STIRLING:: When the committee was examining the details of the estimates of the minister's department there was a question I wanted to ask with regard to armaments. To what extent are the armaments, including the munitions, used in the Royal Canadian Navy, of Canadian production? Do we supply all our armament requirements ourselves, or do we still have to go outside for some?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Speaking of munitions?


Grote Stirling: No-armaments in the wide sense of the term; all the weapons as well as the munitions.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I should say, roughly, that the greater part of the armament is manufactured or produced in this country. Some of it is not, the reason being that the demand is hardly great enough to warrant the setting up of a special plant. I can tell my hon. friend at a later date what some of these things are.


Jean-François Pouliot: I have in my hand a telephone directory of the Department of National Defence, Naval Service and Army. There are about forty-four pages of names, the total number being between twelve and thirteen hundred. Of course this directory must be in the hands of everyone who has a telephone in both departments, and therefore it must be easily available to those who are inside. I have two questions to ask of the minister. First, of that total number of approximately twelve or thirteen hundred, how many are bilingual? Second, out of that total number how many officials, both civil and military, of both departments have been living in this country for the last five years? I should like the minister to tell us also the total number of people who have a telephone to-day.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: This book I understand contains the names of army and air force personnel as well as naval personnel. The number of navy personnel will be considerably smaller than the number in either of the other two services.
As to how many are bilingual and how many have lived here at least five years, these are questions that I shall have to spend a little time upon before attempting to answer. I shall get the answers for my hon. friend.


Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: Would the minister explain the nature of the naval developments which I understand have been taking place on Grand lake, Nova Scotia, and

War Appropriation-Naval Services
why a fresh water lake, the largest in Nova Scotia it is true, is being used? Also can the minister give any further particulars as to the naval college which was definitely announced on Thursday or Friday as being established in British Columbia? Why was this college removed from Nova Scotia, and what naval instruction is it proposed to carry on in Nova Scotia? It is with some regret that the people of Nova Scotia see the naval college which was located for a considerable time in that province being removed. It is one of the unfortunate developments that a great deal of the war activities operating in Nova Scotia are only temporary and will cease at the termination of the war. Very little is being developed there which will have a survival value. The naval college was one of the departmental activities that is not only necessary at the present time but should continue after the war as a permanent institution.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The Grand Lake development is a matter which has not yet been decided on affirmatively. There may be no development there. If there were it would be in the nature of a school for the training of men in signalling, which could be carried on quite conveniently at Grand Lake.
As to the naval college, the decision has been made to re-establish it at or near Esquimalt, British Columbia. It is true the college was established in Halifax at the beginning. It was destroyed in the great explosion, set up again for a time at Kingston as part of the Royal Military College, and finally at Esquimalt until it was closed in 1923. After very careful thought the decision was reached that, all in all, Esquimalt offered unusual opportunities. The property there, one square mile in area, was acquired at a very reasonable rate; it contains a very fine building already, and it was felt that on account of the favourable western climate the college would be better established there where year-round training in boat work can be had.


Percy Chapman Black: I appreciate
the minister's explanation. The intention appears to be definite to reestablish this naval college on the Pacific coast. Nova Scotia, however, does not willingly relinquish its claim to the location of this college. By the removal of the college the prestige of the province as the centre of naval activities and naval developments is diminished. The people of the province feel that they have certaip rights in the matter, and the opinion is definitely held there, and I believe it is shared in other parts of Canada, that Nova Scotia is the proper location in that it is in
closer contact with the mother country and with the development of naval service in Great Britain in conjunction with what is or may be done in that regard in Canada. It is believed that the Atlantic coast is a more appropriate location for the college so that it might operate in conjunction with the British naval authorities. It was unfortunate that the old college was destroyed in the explosion, but the province should not suffer on that account. I do not question the attractiveness of the location on the Pacific coast, but speaking for Nova Scotia I do not yield the claims of that province to location and reestablishment of the college on the Atlantic coast. As I say, it is unfortunate that so much of the development in Nova Scotia that has arisen out of the war, such as transportation by water and by rail, and work in the coal mines, and other activities, will cease on the termination of hostilities, which we hope will not be long delayed. We feel that a permanent asset or institution such as the naval college should not lightly be taken away from Nova Scotia.
Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City); All I can say to my hon. friend is that I hope there will be laid next week in Nova Scotia the keels of two destroyers, the first time that the building of ships of war of that size have ever been undertaken in this country. If there is to be a navy at all in Canada after the war, as I hope there always will be, destroyers will form a necessary part of it, and the natural and proper place to build them, at least a very suitable place, I think, is in Nova Scotia. The building of destroyers is from the point of view of the province a much more desirable thing than the establishment of a college. After all the college will contain no more than 100 students at any one time, fifty a year coming in. It is about the same as if fifty more students were added to the enrolment of Dalhousie or Acadia, or any of the maritime universities. ' I do not think that is to be compared to the prospect of a permanent destroyer-building programme in Nova Scotia.


John James Kinley: Is there not considerable
naval training going on at Halifax with King's college as a base, and are there not also many young Canadians who have been instructed as officers in the Canadian navy there?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes, there is training going on at King's, and there has been training for officers going on at other points since the beginning of the war. That is a shorter course, covering four months. We are speaking now of the college, which has a two-year course.

War Appropriation-Naval Services


Mr. GREEN:: Would the minister explain the requirements for entry to this new naval college, and also the age standards that have been set? We have had some complaints to the effect that the age limit is so low that young lads in some of the provinces cannot matriculate in time to qualify for the college, and it is felt that the result may be that boys from these provinces never will get into the college.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I do not think there is anything in that. There has been some complaint from British Columbia that the age limit is not satisfactory to them, but it is impossible to get exact equality of educational training in all the provinces. It is impossible to find students reaching the same point in their educational progress at exactly the same time. I think the superintendent of education in British Columbia made some complaint, but he was interviewed by the naval director of education and it was explained to him that we did not believe that any bright boy in British Columbia would be handicapped as a result of the age limit. Taking July 1, 1942, as the vital date, the requirement is that a boy must be over sixteen and not more than seventeen years and eight months as of that date, and he must have what is commonly called junior matriculation in order to enter. That is the general standard of admission. For the first year, that is for this year, we are making an exception, however. Boys can enter for one year only, taking a one-year course, who are beyond those age limits. They may enter even if they are up to the age of nineteen, I think, or perhaps it is eighteen years and eight months. In the paymaster branch they may enter up to twenty. But the standard age for entry will be over sixteen and under seventeen years and eight months. That has been arrived at after consultation with the departments of education of the nine provinces, and it is felt to be a reasonably fair and proper age limit to set.


Howard Charles Green: Would it not be possible to make some special allowance in a case where the provincial educational regulations make it impossible for a boy to be that far ahead at that age? They are very strict in British Columbia in not allowing a youngster, no matter how bright he may be, to skip grades; and the result may be that it will be almost impossible for a young chap from that province to get into the naval college.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Well, I do not know. Are there many bright boys-

I am only talking of bright boys; we are not interested in the dullards, because there would be no reason for their going there-


Howard Charles Green: I hope the minister does not mean to suggest that there are no bright boys in British Columbia.


Percy Chapman Black: That is another reason why the college should be located in Nova Scotia; they are all bright there.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Will there be any bright boy in British Columbia who will not have received his junior matriculation by the age of seventeen years and eight months? I should think nearly all these boys would be that far on. I am given to understand that the number of those who might be hampered or prevented from entering the college as a result of the age limit would be very small.


Howard Charles Green: I am told that under our school regulations it is almost impossible for a boy to be that far along at that age. I would ask the minister to look into the situation again and, if he finds it impossible for a boy from British Columbia to get into the college under the present regulations, some special allowance should be made, because it is not the fault of the boy.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: My hon. friend may rest assured that we will do right by British Columbia.


Mr. HAZEN:: I believe the regulations concerning the Royal Military college provide that a certain number of students shall be allotted to each province. Are there any such regulations in respect to the new naval college?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes, there is provision to the effect that we shall try to divide the number of students among the provinces, in proportion to the number of applications coming from the provinces.


Mr. MAYHEW:: High school students in British Columbia are required to take a four-year course. That does result in some of them getting through a little later; but the correspondence referred to by the minister, with the superintendent of education, will show that the percentage of boys who are not through at the required age is very small, and in conversation with myself the superintendent stated that this really was not a serious point.
With reference to the question of the location of the college I have a suggestion to offer. I know that the hon. member for Cumberland is a very reasonable gentleman, as

War Appropriation-Naval Services
are most people who come from that wonderful province. I would invite him to come to Victoria and let us show him the new Royal Roads college. If, after he has visited the place and has seen the kind of deal the government were able to make, he is not quite satisfied that the minister did the right thing in selecting that site for the college, we will have to do something very handsome for him. I am sure, however, that nowhere else in Canada could he find surroundings equal to those at Royal Roads, and that nowhere else could the government have obtained for a very few thousand dollars property valued at something over a million. It is an excellent location, close to the Esquimalt harbour and with year-round facilities, and I am sure that after he has seen the place the hon. member will be satisfied that the minister made the proper choice.


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: Ha? the minister considered the possibility of this country having a seaman's manual of its own, instead of the out-dated manuals the boys have to use at the present time? They are now using volume 1, 1937, and volume 2, 1938, and these volumes are unrevised. In the United States the navy department is issuing "Knight's Modern Seamanship", which is revised right up to March, 1942. That manual is right up to date: it covers everything, oil burners, depth charges, torpedoes, bombs, up-to-date anti-aircraft guns, and everything else. The manual we are using in Canada is the one issued by the British admiralty, and it is dull. A moment ago the minister was speaking of bright boys, but even bright boys find that manual dull, and I believe the Canadian navy should have a manual of its own. [DOT]
While I am on my feet I should like to say something else. If a boy wants to join the navy and he lives in the Stratford district, for example, he has to go to London to enlist. They tell him there that they are full up, and he will have to wait. In Hamilton or Toronto, however, the quotas may not be filled. Could not the navy look after that boy, instead of making him wait perhaps months before he is permitted to enlist?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: It is true that the seamanship manual used is the manual of 1937, as prepared by the British admiralty. It is not up to date, but after all is said and done we have turned out some pretty good seamen with this manual.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I
acknowledge that.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: While other manuals may be a little more modern
or more interesting, I think our manual still is good. However, I shall be glad to look into the point, and I thank my hon. friend for having raised it. As to the second point, it is true that the navy does its recruiting through these volunteer reserve divisions. The nearest to Stratford would be the one at London, and it is quite possible that boys seeking enlistment at London might find the complement there filled. I think that is very likely to happen. The complement everywhere is filled-in fact more than filled. There are some four to five thousand young men throughout Canada waiting to get into the navy. Some of those young men are no doubt in Stratford, some in Toronto, some in Halifax and others at centres of considerable size throughout the country. If a man has special aptitude in a trade, or anything of that sort, I am sure he would instantly be taken in. If he were not taken at London his name would be sent to headquarters and he would be drafted into the navy at once. However, I shall pass on my hon. friend's suggestions to the proper officers.


Mr. BROOKS:: I understood the minister to say fifty students a year would be taken into the naval college at Victoria when it is in operation. On what basis does he arrive at that number? Does he consider that that is all who will be required by the navy? Since the beginning of the war the navy has been greatly expanded, and there is still a great deal of expansion going on. Fifty a year seems a small number of students if we are to have any sort of navy.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: We will not rely on the college for the great body of our officers-not at all. We will continue the training of officers at Halifax and at Esquimalt for the four months period under which they now undergo training.


Grote Stirling: Through the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes. The college will be for the younger lads between sixteen years and seventeen years eight months. That will go on after as well as during the war. But even after the college is established, the vast majority of officers will come in the way they come to-day, namely through one of these divisions. They will receive a short period of training there, then four months' training at the coast, and then they will be sent to sea for further experience. That is the main source from which we will continue to get our officers during the war. After the war the naval college will form an excellent training ground

War Appropriation-Naval Services
for young men who wish to make their careers in the navy or who wish to enter the merchant marine. Then, it may be used by young men who have no desire for life in either the navy or the merchant marine, but who may wish, or whose parents may wish them, to have the benefit of the discipline and the instruction given by the naval college. I believe it will be of invaluable assistance not only to the navy but to the merchant marine, and to our people as a whole. The training given at the college will be excellent in every way, because we have a splendid staff of instructors. The traditions of the Royal Canadian Navy, following those of the Royal Navy, are high. It would be classed with the Royal Military college at Kingston, which we have had for many years.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: What rank would a young man have when taken on in the navy after graduating from the school?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: He would have to start at the bottom of the ladder. He would be a cadet, then a midshipman and then a sub-lieutenant.


Grote Stirling: Leaving the college he would be a sub-lieutenant, just as in earlier years he would be a sub-lieutenant upon leaving the training cruiser. I believe the college is a substitute, is it not? The young man enters as a cadet, does his work as midshipman, and qualifies at the college to go out as a sub-lieutenant.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
believe it is probably something like that, although I should not like to speak without the prospectus before me. I am not sure whether he comes out as a cadet or as a sublieutenant. Some would come out when they have barely reached the age of eighteen. Those who go in at sixteen would probably be out a few months before they were eighteen. Then they have to do a year's cadet training. Certainly the rank of sub-lieutenant would be the highest they could possibly hope for on leaving the college.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: I have heard it stated that although corvettes are thoroughly seaworthy, in the case of one corvette, owing to the fact that the hatches did not fit properly, water got down into the hold, and there was constantly a foot of water in the room in which the men slept. Secondly, I believe it is a regulation that after six months of service a man is given leave. Is it a fact that after two years some have not been able to get leave to go home, and does that condition arise from lack of men to fill their places?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
shall look into the first point respecting the corvette. Of course water may get into these ships in various ways, but I should doubt the correctness of the report that the condition arose because the hatch did not fit closely. However I shall look into the matter and find out if there is anything in it.
As to the second question, leave in the navy is usually given to officers and men when the ship comes to a Canadian port for refitting. That is a suitable time, because the ship is laid up anyway, and the officers and men are usually given leave at such times. I know of no cases where men have been at sea for two years without leave. There may have been men living in Toronto or Montreal at the beginning of the war who, perhaps, served a year or so at Halifax and then some further time at sea. But I doubt if there are any cases where a man has been constantly at sea for two years, without leave. However I shall look into the situation, and get the information for the hon. member.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: The men in question have not been continuously at sea during that period. We will say that their base is Newfoundland, and that they proceed from there to Iceland, or wherever they are bound to go. On returning to their base for refitting they would have shore leave, of course; but do they have the opportunity of going from their base to their homes in St. John, Halifax, Montreal or wherever they may live? I understand certain of the men have not had that privilege for two years.
Mr.- MACDONALD (Kingston City):	I
am sorry if that is so. I shall make inquiries and give my hon. friend the information.


Mr. GILLIS:: Overlooking the naval station at Sydney, Nova Scotia, there is a group of five houses which were purchased some two years ago by the Department of Transport. Last year there was some trouble, because the people were ordered out. Eviction notices were served, but there was no place for the occupants of these houses to go. The housing situation in Sydney is deplorable. Last year I succeeded in having the matter straightened out, with the aid of the Minister of Transport. But a new order was issued some three weeks ago and I understand that the naval authorities now desire the removal of these buildings. There are five families affected, thirty people in all. During the last two weeks I have had several letters from different persons in the city, including the mayor, pointing out that there is no room to be had in the city.

War Appropriation-Naval Services
During the past week or so I have taken the matter up with the Department of Transport, but I have had no success in getting a reply. I wonder if the minister would see what can be done with respect to leaving matters as they are until such time as room can be found for the people affected.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I thought there were only three families, but my hon. friend says there are five. These houses are located on a bank overlooking the naval buildings at Sydney.


Clarence Gillis: That is right.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
understand the occupants of these houses have been in there for some years and I do not think they have ever paid much rent.


Clarence Gillis: Not since the Department
of Transport took over.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The houses are old, and because of their position with regard to the naval buildings, sewage and other drainage I understand seeps down into the cellars of the buildings. I think it is very desirable that these houses should be torn down. I do not know just how I can help my hon. friend. What does he suggest? I know it is hard to get houses in Sydney and I know the city authorities are reluctant to evict people at this time, and have been for some years, because of the housing shortage. If any reasonable method can be found of meeting the situation in order not to inconvenience unduly these poor people-I understand they went in there more or less as squatters-I shall be glad to consider it.


Clarence Gillis: The minister is not correct when he says that they more or less squatted there; they have occupied these houses for years. After the establishment of the naval station, the Department of Transport bought them. There is one thing the minister could do: he could intercede with the Department of Munitions and Supply to consider a prefabricated housing scheme for that city. So far as the city is concerned, they have been trying it for the past two years. Many houses might be made available in that way. As the mayor points out in his letter, if these people are evicted there is no place for them to go except on the street. Last year the Minister of Transport stayed execution, but I notice it is a new magistrate handling this matter this time. Evidently the chap who handled it last year would not tackle it again. The Minister of Transport made an offer last year to the city that if the city would provide land he was prepared to give the buildings
as they were to the city which could move them to the new locations. The mayor's letter is an S.O.S. for a stay of execution until such time as they can find other quarters.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Does the mayor suggest anything that could be done?


Clarence Gillis: No.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: That is the usual type of letter; they suggest that everything should be done by Ottawa. Let the Department of Transport do it, or the Department of Naval Services. I am not referring particularly to Sydney, but many of these cities are very poor at helping themselves or their own people.


Mr. MacNICOL:: Good at passing the buck.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Exactly, passing the buck. The problem is really one for the city. As I understand it, these people are not war workers, and surely the city of Sydney has some degree of responsibility for its own citizens. Every city expects the government to build houses, to put in water mains and sewers and to provide all sorts of facilities and conveniences, disregarding entirely the fact that they themselves are enjoying a fair amount of prosperity as the result of war orders of one kind or another. That seems not to weigh in the balance at all; the whole desire seems to be to pass anything to some other government. However, that is not the fault of my hon. friend, and I shall be glad to look into this case. I know something of it myself, and if any way can be found out of the situation, I shall be glad to consult my hon. friend.


Mr. FULFORD:: There is a matter I should like the minister to bring to the attention of the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Gibson). I understand that like the army and the air force, when a man goes active in the Canadian navy he is automatically exempted from paying income tax. I presume this is done to recompense him for the dangers that he may encounter. I understand, however, that a man in the Canadian merchant marine is not granted this privilege, although the risks may be just as great as those faced by a man in the army. I have in mind an officer on one of the Imperial Oil tankers. I cannot imagine a more precarious job in this war at the present time than bringing oil from south America to Canadian ports. Surely this man is entitled to the same consideration as is given to men in the navy.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: At the present time Canada has no marine corps,

War Appropriation-Naval Services
although practically every other country has found that such a corps is necessary. I believe it would add to Canada's naval prestige if we had such a corps, and I should like to know if the minister is going to do anything about it. The marine corps in the United States really acts as a commando corps. They also have a marine corps division of public relations in the United States which permits of the maximum cooperation between newspapers and the navy department. Has the minister anything to say in that regard?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: We have not considered a marine corps in this country.


Grote Stirling: We have no battleships.


Richard Burpee Hanson: There is not room for them on our warships.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: As my hon. friend knows, our navy started in a rather small way, with only 1,700 officers and men two and a half years ago. It is doubtful that we will feel it necessary to start the formation of a marine corps for some little time, but perhaps some day we may have such a corps.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: A young man from Peterborough joined up some months ago, and when the destroyer he was on was sunk, he was transferred to a British ship. The Westclox club in Peterborough sends out twice a month to all its members parcels containing cigarettes, pipes and other little things that will be appreciated by the men. But the cigarettes are always taken out of this man's parcel. He gets the pipes and whatever else they send him, but the cigarettes are not there. This man is paid by the Canadian navy.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Who takes them out?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I do not know, and they want to know. The Western Clock people send these parcels to all men who have enlisted from their plants. Will the minister look into this?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: It is a large order. I shall find out from my hon. friend the name of the man and what ship he is serving on and endeavour to do something about it. It may be due to some rogueiy on the part of those handling the parcels; I suppose cigarettes are quite precious in certain parts of the world just now. If my hon. friend will give me the name of the ship and the name of the man I shall see what I can do. The Postmaster General (Mr. IMr. Fraser (Peterborough).]
Mulock) would probably be the proper person to handle this.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: When a Canadian joins the imperial army in England he cannot get cigarettes, but in that case he is paid by the British government. This man is paid by the Canadian government, so that his case is slightly different.
It has been suggested to me that perhaps the navy could take a great number of the men who are rejected by the army because of flat feet. In the navy it does not matter, but in the army I know it does.


An hon. MEMBER:: Can you walk on the water?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: They do not use their feet on the water. If they cannot be taken on in the navy, can they be taken on in the merchant marine?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: That is a medical question. I should not like it to be understood that we are taking on those who have been rejected by the other services, but if there is some useful task that they can do, I know that we should be glad to consider them. As to the nierehant marine, there are some old skippers between sixty and sixty-five years of age at sea now who are a good deal over the army or navy age, but they are men of long experience on the sea. If these are the men to whom the hon. member refers, I think it would be considerably easier for them to get into the merchant marine, where the medical standard is not as strict as for the navy or army.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: At
page 2265 of Hansard the minister said, in reference to a man who is missing:
If he is missing, his pay goes on for the rest of the month. I think that is the arrangement. When he is presumed killed his widow or dependent, as the ease may be, falls under the ordinary pension regulations.
If the man is a prisoner of war his pay continues for six months and then the allowance to the wife or other dependent is stopped. I know it is so in the air force; is it so in the navy? If a man is not presumed dead for six months, the allowance is cut off for the full six months. Can the minister give any information on that?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
can get that information for my hon. friend.


Mr. JACKMAN:: A question was asked
last week as to buildings that were being put up for the navy by the Department of Public Works over and above the $20,000,000 expenditure for buildings which the navy itself is putting up.

War Appropriation-War Services


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
think I answered no to that question when it was asked last week. The $20,000,000 covers all the buildings that are being built l'or the navy this year. It does not matter who is putting them up, because we have to pay for them and provide for them in our estimates. The $20,000,000 is the total cost of the new buildings that we are asking for this year.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I have been asked questions from time to time which indicate that people do not understand why it is that the navy is setting up a naval college at Royal Roads after thirty-two months of war when we have got along all this time with the present facilities and without such a college. And where is the navy going to get competent instructors and other personnel for this college? Can the minister enlighten me so that I in turn may enlighten those who ask me?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: That comment has been made about every new undertaking since the beginning of time. You would never start a new college or institution of any kind if you paid' attention to comments of that sort. If we had not started a naval college I think there would have been a great deal more criticism. We would have had people saying: Why are you not doing something to get ready? It is true that for the purposes of the war, assuming it will be over in two or three years, we could get along without a naval college. The naval college will not begin to turn out students until 1943, and then it will begin to turn out fifty or sixty young men a year. In the meantime, hundreds of young officers will have been trained through the shorter four months' training courses. But I do not think there is anyone in this country who will deny that we need such an institution. Four months is a short period within which to train a naval officer. The naval college will be a place to which a young man can go who wants to adopt the sea as a career. He will receive there two years of good solid training fitting him for permanent service in the navy or the merchant marine. I do not think any Canadian who looks at the problems which this country will have to face at the end of the war will challenge the wisdom of establishing such an institution.
Where are we going to get the instructors? That is a question that seems to be based on very little thought. We have as head of the college Kenneth Ketchum, the former principal of St. Andrew's college. Is there in all of Canada a man who enjoys a higher reputation in the teaching of boys and young
men? I do not think there is. He is well known, I am sure, to my hon. friends from the Toronto area, and indeed to many people throughout Canada. He is to head the academic staff of the college. He will have with him some men who were formerly at the Royal Military college, which, as hon. members know, has been closed for the duration so far as its ordinary purposes are concerned. Three or four of its instructors are going to assist us temporarily in the foundation of the naval college. We shall also have some naval officers, Captain Grant and several others of experience.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is he to be the commandant?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes, he will have charge of discipline and the like, and Kenneth Ketchum will be in charge of the academic instruction. There is no dearth of available men to man the college, and man it well. I am sure it will be a credit to this country.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: Is the Wasser-mann test given to young men who want to join the navy?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: We probably do what the other two services do. Is it given in the army?


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: It is optional in the army, I understand.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I will find out about that.



NATIONAL AVAR SERVICES

Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Mr. Chairman, it was intended that I should follow the Minister of Munitions and Supply but it was impossible for him to be here this afternoon. In order, therefore, to save the time of the house and of the committee 1 shall commence with my statement.
With the permission of the committee I should like to make a general statement with regard to the national war services regulations, their operation, their results, the main amendments that have been made since last I addressed the committee on this subject, and then give some comments on criticisms that have been made. That general statement might then serve as the basis for questions from members of the committee.
Last November I gave a brief resume of the procedure that is laid down under the regulations from the time that the Department of National Defence sends its requisition to the Department of National War Services and the man who is called up reports to the training

War Appropriation-War Services
centre. I do not think it necessary to review that procedure again. Roughly, the relationship between the Department of National Defence and the Department of National War Services is that the Department of National Defence sends a monthly requisition to the Department of National War Services. The nature of that requisition was explained to the committee by the Minister of National Defence on May 4. The requisition states the number of men required to report to the training centre; it gives the total number of men required for the month. The detail of how that requirement is broken up is contained in a schedule attached to the requisition. It is indicated, for example, how many men are to report to the various training centres across the country. The requisition not only gives the total number of men required for the particular month and the date on which the men are required to report, but it also breaks down the requisition into the various training centres and administrative divisions.


Howard Charles Green: Which department decides what age the men are to be?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: The matter of age is
settled by a proclamation which is issued under the provisions of the national war service regulations.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is a matter of government policy.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: It is a matter of government policy from time to time. A proclamation is issued. The most recent one called men up who were bom in the years from 1912-1922, I believe. Then it is the duty of the Department of National War Services to comply with the requisition which comes from the Department of National Defence and to call men up for training in accordance with the requisition.


John Ritchie MacNicol: By mail?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: We send out notices to the men in the various administrative divisions.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is,
the notice is sent out by the divisional registrar?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: It is sent out by the
divisional registrar. We operate the regulations through thirteen administrative divisions. In general these administrative divisions coincide in geographical outline with the military districts. There are two exceptions in that regard. Each one of these administrative divisions is headed by a board which consists of three persons. The chairman of the board is a judge of the superior court or other court of 
the province in which the greater portion of the administrative division is located, and there are two other members of the board. There is also a divisional registrar, who is the administrative officer of the division. In addition to the members of the board there are four persons who have a right to be present at hearings of the board and to make representations to it. These persons are respectively, a representative of the Department of National Defence, of the national war labour board, of agriculture, and of the director of national selective service. These four representatives are not actually members of the board, but they have the right to be present at all hearings and to make whatever representations they deem fit.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: What is the basis on which the representative of agriculture is selected? Is he chosen from among the farmers?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: The desire is to find a
person who thoroughly understands the agricultural situation in the administrative division and will see that those interests are safeguarded as far as possible.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Well, he
is named by the minister.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: He is named by the
minister.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Certainly. He represents the minister.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And they act only when
an appeal is being made to the board?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: They appear before the
board when the board hears applications for postponements.


John Horne Blackmore: On whose advice
does the minister name the representative of agriculture? Does he listen to any of the agricultural organizations?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Yes, he listens to them.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weybum):: Does he pay any attention to them?	.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: That, generally, is the
relationship between the Department of National Defence and the Department of National War Services.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Who is the representative of the department of agriculture in the province of New Brunswick?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Mr. T. Allen Best. He is a farmer and returned soldier of Stanley, in York county, New Brunswick.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is there a man by the name of Barker on that list?

War Appropriation-War Services


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Best is the man?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Best is the representative of agriculture.


Ernest Edward Perley: Who is the representative
for Saskatchewan?


Mr. WRIGHT:: Would the minister give
the names of the representatives of the prairie districts?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: As yet only five representatives of agriculture have been appointed. If it is desired that I shall put their names on the record, I shall be glad to do so: administrative division E, with headquarters at Montreal, Anatole Gascon, a farmer of St. Frangois de Salle, Quebec; administrative division F, with headquarters at Quebec, Mr. J. A. DeBlois, insurance broker, of Beauce-ville East.
I have given the name of the representative of agriculture in New Brunswick. Then for administrative division I with headquarters at Charlottetown, P.E.I., Mr. Gordon Holmes, who is a barrister located at Charlottetown. For division N, headquarters at Edmonton, Mr. Walter Bissell, a farmer of Viking, Alberta.


Mr. ROSS (Souris):: When will appointees be selected for the other provinces-Manitoba for instance?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I cannot say when the other appointments will be made. Representations are being made from time to time. The matter is perhaps not quite as important now as it was prior to March 23, when the new regulations relating to persons wholly or mainly employed in agriculture came into effect. But consideration is being given to the subject.


John Horne Blackmore: Did the minister consult the provinces?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: In some cases yes. There is no fixed procedure in regard to the matter.


Percy Ellis Wright: Have all the representatives of labour been appointed?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I think they have, but I am not sure about that. They are not appointed by the Minister of National War Services, of course; they are representatives of the national war labour board.


John George Diefenbaker: What control if any has the minister over the several national service boards in the various provinces with a view to securing uniformity of interpretation and application of the regulations?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I pointed out that the divisions are presided over by a board the
chairman of which is a judge. The decisions of the boards on applications for postponement are final. The boards have exclusive jurisdiction in the matter of either granting or refusing an application for postponement. The subject of uniformity of decision has come up again and again. The hon. member for Lake Centre will appreciate that the decisions on these applications for postponement are decisions on questions of fact, and I do not see how you could have uniformity of decision on questions of facts when the facts vary in different cases.


Richard Burpee Hanson: There could be uniformity in guiding principles, could there not?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Yes. With regard to uniformity in practice, every effort is made to bring that about as far as is possible in view of the fact that the decisions are decisions on questions of fact. We held a conference in Ottawa on April 3, 4 and 5 of the chairmen of the boards and the divisional registrars. They held three sessions on Thursday, two on Friday and two on Saturday. The purpose was to have a general conference on the administration of the regulations, to discuss suggestions for improvement in the regulations, and to consider the kind of matters that the leader of the opposition has just referred to, that is, general principles of practice and the like. I think that is about as far as it is possible to go when the boards are dealing with questions of fact.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What
action is being taken by the department or the local divisional boards with respect to reexamination of rejects? There has been drawn to my attention in my own province the fact that there is a fairly large number of rejects, 10 per cent or more of those called up. A man is entitled to go to his family physician. It is no reflection on the medical profession to say that if a man who does not want to respond to the call goes to his family physician there is a suggestion at least that he might be treated with some leniency. One case came to my attention where a big strapping young man, capable to all appearances of shouldering a barrel of flour, went to his family physician and was rejected on the ground that he had a weak heart. It is almost impossible for me to believe that was the case, and it became the talk of the community. His name was submitted to the local divisional registrar for a recall, and the local official thanked his informant very earnestly and said: "That is just the sort of thing we want." But it should not be left to mere chance. There should be some systematic effort to determine
2302	COMMONS
War Appropriation-War Services
whether the medical examinations in the first instance were correct or not. What is the minister doing about this matter? I called his attention some months ago to this very thing, and I had hoped there would be a systematic method of reviewing rejections. I think the minister will have to change his policy. The question of calling up men for military service has now reached the stage where the men should be examined by a military board. That may cause a little inconvenience and some expense, but at least we would have the assurance that nobody is going to play any favourites. I recommend that course to the minister if he has not already adopted it, and the sooner he adopts it the better.
I should like some information from the minister as to how many rejects have been reexamined, clear across Canada. Has there been a systematic effort in that regard, and what are the results of reexamination?


Clarence Gillis: I rise to a point of order. The minister stated that he intended to make a statement to the committee. Is it the intention to proceed with this department the way we did with the other two? Hon. members are now making statements rather than the minister. I should like the minister to explain to the committee what his department is doing. Is it the intention that we should cross-examine the minister without any knowledge of what the department is doing, or to proceed as we did with the other ministers? This is the most important department of government to-day, handling, as it does, the national selective service programme, and we know nothing about it.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I do not think there is any point of order involved. Any hon. member is free to ask a question in committee at any time. I do not take kindly to the lecture the hon. member has just administered to me.


Clarence Gillis: I still pursue my point of order and ask for a ruling.


The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Bradette):: In committee considerable latitude is given. The minister is here to explain the activities of his department and is willing and ready to answer any questions. If he is willing to do that I believe he is perfectly within his rights; but it is left in the hands of the minister himself.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Of course if the minister objects to the question I shall wait, but I may not be here on another occasion, and I do not want to miss the opportunity to ask a question on this very

important point which I have suggested, and which arises naturally out of the sequence of events which the minister has been detailing.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I had intended to deal briefly with the various questions raised by the leader of the opposition I think on March 25, among which is the matter to which the hon. gentleman has just referred. At that time I indicated that I would welcome any constructive criticism that would make these regulations more workable and better adapted to the purposes for which they were devised because, as the hon. member for Cape Breton South has said, these regulations are of great importance at the present time.
I noted that the leader of the opposition made the suggestion that all men should be examined by army medical boards instead of being examined by physicians of their own choice. I think that when the hon. gentleman considers the whole situation he will agree that his suggestion is not practicable, for two reasons. In the first place the men get their notices at their places of abode. In countless places it would not be possible to have an army medical board, since many of them are far removed from any centre where such a board could sit. So the requirement is that in the first instance, when the man gets notice to report for a medical examination, he may go to the physician of his own choice. But the matter of his medical category does not rest there, and of course it is agreed by everyone that it should not rest there. If the man is category A, then of course there is no further question. If he is below category A, then his case may and should be reviewed. The medical adviser in the division goes over all the medical certificates that come back from the physicians and reviews and checks them. He may direct that a man should report to some other doctor for medical examination, and frequently he does.


Richard Burpee Hanson: How frequently?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: On many occasions. 1 could not indicate the number, but a very careful check is made of the answers given by the examining physician. There is a very complete form which the examining physician is required to fill out as a result of his medical examination, and very frequently the medical adviser, in looking over the answers, comes to the conclusion that the physician was in error in his final decision as to the category of the man, and may change that category himself to a higher category; or if the answers of the examining physician cast any doubt as to the

War Appropriation-War Services
category of the man, the adviser may direct that the man report to another doctor for examination.
That does not conclude the matter, but before dealing with the revision boards I should indicate my second reason for stating that the suggestion made by the leader of the opposition that army medical boards examine all these persons is impracticable; that is, that there are not enough doctors available in Canada to constitute sufficient army medical boards for the examination of these recruits.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is that not an argument for a board? They have them at every district depot, for instance.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Then I think another argument could be presented. It by no means follows that the examination by an army medical board would be better than an examination by a practising physician in the country. Many of the army medical boards are composed of men who graduated only comparatively recently from medical colleges.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What is that?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Many of the army medical boards are composed of fairly young practitioners. I think it will be generally agreed by those who have been studying this procedure, which was worked out in cooperation with the Canadian Medical Association, that the present system, of a preliminary examination by the physician of the man's own choice; a review of that examination by the medical adviser in the division, and then a subsequent review by a revision board, in
the main is working out very satisfactorily. I think it is also agreed, however, that the mere fact that a physician has found a man to be below category A should not be regarded at any time as a final categorization of that man, because a man who is B to-day may become A in two or three months. I agree with the leader of the opposition that in respect of persons in categories below A, they should be continuously the subject of review, except of course in respect of those ailments because of which a man could not possibly become A.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Patent
defects.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Yes, and others of a much more serious nature, even, than patent defects. Under the regulations we have provision for the establishment of civilian revision boards, which are being set up across Canada as rapidly as possible. The purpose of these revision boards is to review the cases of persons who are below A and who might be raised to a higher category than that set by the examining physician or by the medical adviser in the division. It has taken some time to establish these revision boards; they are not completely established as yet, but a very large number have been set up.
I have a statement of the men who have been reexamined as of March 30, 1942, by medical revision boards. With the leave of the committee I will put this table on Hansard, because it indicates the manner in which the boards operate, and the results obtained It is as follows:
Men Reexamined by Medical Revision Boards as of March 30, 1942 Original Categories	Revised Categories
Medical Categories	Number of men	A-l	A-2	B-l	B-2	C-l	C-2	D	EA-l) 	
256	124	5	22	7	19	11	17	51*A-2f B-l 	
538	275	16	61	18	47	27	6	88B-2 	
181	76	8	15	9	22	12	5	34C-l 	
226	80	3	19	6	43	15	3	57C-2 	
254	90	3	21	7	21	33	3	76D 	
219	96	20	8	23	17	13	48E 	
483	127	5	24	16	59	44	20	188No category	
12	7	3	1	1Total	2,169	869	40	182	71	237	160	67	543
* Medical category A-2 was established only on October 4, 1941. As a result, very few men have been placed in this category and none of these was sent before a medical revision board.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: What was the total number raised?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: The total number reexamined is 2,169.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: How many of those have been raised to category A?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Of that number 909 were raised to or confirmed in medical category A.
2304	COMMONS
War Appropriation-War Services
la some instances, as the table will show, those originally in category A were revised downward by the revision boards, and in other cases lower categories found originally by the physicians first examining were raised by the revision boards.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: How many
were lowered?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: It is a matter of arithmetical calculation. Of the group taken, 256 were found by the examining physician to be in category A-l. That group came before the revision boards and the boards found there were in that class only 124 in category A-l.
Then, the original examining physicians placed 226 in category C-l. Reviews by medical boards disclosed that 80 of those men were properly in category A-l. The table shows the results of revisions, but it also shows something else of great interest, namely, the human element involved. The same is found in regard to army medical boards. With respect to those army medical boards there is no certainty of complete uniformity in medical categorization, merely by the device of using such boards. There are differences of opinion.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: Are these so-called revision boards composed only of medical men?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Yes, exclusively of medical men-the best civilian medical men we can find. Each is recommended and selected by the Canadian medical association.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: One board for
each district?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No; there are numerous boards. It seems to me that each week I am signing approvals with respect to members of revision boards. We are appointing such boards as rapidly as we can set them up. A great number of men are now serving on them. I am informed that every person on these revision boards has been recommended by the Canadian medical association.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Are they permanent appointments?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: They have no fixed salary?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No; they are paid a per diem allowance for the days they sit.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: How do these men come before the boards? Does every man come before a board at some time or another?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No, not every man.
Section 12 (4) of the regulations states that whenever doubt may arise as to the accuracy of the "medical examination and certificate form" completed by an examining physician, the divisional registrar may notify the man concerned to submit himself for another medical examination by a medical revision board, of three examining physicians, appointed by the minister, at such time and place as the divisional registrar shall indicate.
We are proceeding as rapidly as circumstances permit with the reexamination of men in categories lower than A-l. Up to the present there has not been a tremendous need in that regard from the point of view of filling the requisitions sent to us by the Department of National Defence. But we are not losing sight of the fact that men found by one doctor to be in one category may really be in another higher category; and it is our desire that there shall be the closest scrutiny of the matter of medical categories.


Howard Charles Green: What about the reconditioning, under order in council P.C. 2229?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: That was provided for by an order in council presented to the house on March 24. The provisions are found in an appendix to the Votes and Proceedings of that date. There has not been a great deal done as yet under the provisions of that order in council. Perhaps I should state that too much should not be expected from the reconditioning of these men. There is a general opinion, for instance, that comparatively few operations can be performed which will raise a man's category from below categoiy A to category A. There is a good deal of doubt, for example, with respect to the curing of hernias by operations.


Mr. ROSS (Moose Jaw):: Will it be possible for the men who might be operated on and raised to higher categories to choose their physicians, or must that be done by some physician nominated by the department?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: The actual reconditioning will be done under the auspices of the Department of Pensions and National Health. I assume it will be done by doctors of their choice, but there is no compulsion in the matter. No one is compelled to undergo surgical treatment. If a man does not want to undergo surgical treatment at the hands of a doctor of the Department of Pensions and National Health, there is no obligation upon him to do so.

War Appropriation-War Services


John Gordon Ross: Would it not be well for the department to consider allowing the applicant to have his own physician, one he knows himself, carry out the operation under the same scale of fees that are paid by the Department of Pensions and National Health? This would enable the doctors throughout the community to carry on some of this work for the government.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I shall be glad to bring that suggestion to the attention of my colleague.
Coming back to the question raised by the hon. member for Cape Breton South, I dealt with the subject of medical examination because the leader of the opposition raised the question this afternoon. I had intended to deal with it later, but if members of the committee will permit me I should like to give a general statement as to the operation and results of the national war services regulations.
The total number of men requisitioned by the Department of National Defence in fifteen training periods from October 9, 1941, to March 12, 1942, was 123,840. Of that number, 88,100 were requisitioned for the first three training periods when the training period was for only thirty days duration, leaving
35.740	requisitioned for the full four months training period, with the trainees subsequently being held in the service of the Canadian army by reason of a ministerial order of the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston). Those are the totals of the men requisitioned by the Department of National Defence. We sent out the necessary notices, heard applications for postponement, sent out notices to report and there actually reported for those fifteen training periods 131,619 men, of which 90,218 were the thirty-day trainees, leaving a remainder of 41,401 who reported to the camps for the full period of four months training and subsequent service in the Canadian army for the duration of the war.
In order to indicate whether we have actually lived up to the requisitions, I shall give another set of figures. The number of men who were actually accepted at the training centres and who underwent training was 120,334, of whom 82,893 were thirty-day men and the remainder of 37,441 being four months and subsequent service men. If hon. members will look at these figures, it will be seen that the total number of four months and subsequent service men requisitioned by the Department of National Defence was
35.740	and that we sent 37,441 fit men who were accepted for training and who actually underwent training, or a surplus of 1,700
over the number requisitioned. I think we can say that our department has filled all requisitions sent to us by the Department of National Defence.
In addition to the four months period men, we also act for the Department of National Defence in recalling men who had thirty-day training. It will be recalled that the men who finished the thirty-day training period were taken on the strength of the militia units and became members of the reserve army, and since that time they have been subject to the reserve army regulations. We act for the Department of National Defence and in the name of that department recall these men for further military training and subsequent service. We received requisitions for the recall of 13,650 thirty-day men. We called up these men, heard their applications of one kind or another and actually sent 14,387 to the training centres. At the training centres 12,539 of the men that , we h. 1 ordered to report were found to be fit. it will be remembered that when the thirty-day training period was in effect we sent men to the training centres with categories lower than A-l, whereas now in respect of the four months men the Department of National Defence asks us to send to the training centres only category A-l men. That generally is a review of the operation and results of the regulations from the point of view of whether we have complied with the requisitions that came to us from the Department of National Defence. I think I may properly say that this performance speaks well for the administrative divisions. I believe it will be generally agreed, although there are some criticisms of individual cases, that the administrative divisions have performed in an excellent manner the difficult task that has been assigned to them.
If I might pass from that subject, I should like to deal with the main amendments which have been made to the national war services regulations, since I spoke on this subject last November. Much the most important amendment is the one that was made by order in council P.C. 2252, dated March 21, 1942, relating to persons wholly or mainly employed in agriculture. That amendment to the national war services regulations was made necessary by the stabilization of employment in agriculture regulations, 1942, as enacted by order in council P.C. 2251. Both of these orders in council are set out in full in the appendix to the Votes and Proceedings of March 24. These amendments constituted a



War Appropriation-War Services
very important departure from the base of the regulations as they had existed up to that time.
There was some misunderstanding as to the effect of these amendments and as to their application to persons who are wholly or mainly employed in agriculture; that is, those persons who on March 23 were wholly or mainly employed in agriculture. In view of that misunderstanding I thought it desirable that I should issue a press release as to the effect of the amendments and their application to the persons who were to be covered by the regulations. With the leave of the committee I should like to put this press release on Hansard so that it may become part of the records of this discussion.


James Lester Douglas: Is it just being released now?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No. This release was issued by me on April 17, and I gave instructions that a copy of this release, which was issued in both English and French, should be sent to every member of the house and of the upper house. I take it that leave to put this release on Hansard is accorded, and I suggest that members who represent agricultural areas might read it and then subsequently, when I am before the committee again, put such questions as they may desire to ask. The release is as follows:
Ottawa, April 17, 1942. Press Release by Hon. J. T. Thorson, Minister of National War Services.
There still appears to be some misunderstanding of the effect of the national war services regulations, 1940 (recruits) as amended by order in council P.C. 2252, dated March 21, 1942, and their application to persons who are "wholly or mainly employed in agriculture".
The national war services regulations, 1940 (recruits), govern the subject of calling up men for compulsory military training. They were amended by order in council P.C. 2252 in order to give effect to a fundamental alteration in government policy as laid down by the "stabilization of employment in agriculture regulations, 1942", enacted by order in council P.C. 2251, dated March 21, 1942.
The national war services regulations are administered by thirteen administrative division boards, each board consisting of three members, of which the chairman is a judge of a superior or other court of the province in which the larger part of the administrative division is situated.
The amendments to the national war services regulations contained in P.C. 2252 apply only to the persons who are covered by the term "person wholly or mainly employed in agriculture". The term "person wholly or mainly employed in agriculture" is specially defined in the amended regulations. The term applies only to the following two classes of persons; it means
(1)	any person, who on the 23rd day of March, 1942, was wholly or mainly employed or engaged in agriculture, and it includes [Mr. Thorson.j
(2)	any person, rvho on the said 23rd day of March, 1942, was employed or engaged, but only seasonally, in a primary industry, but whose last employment or occupation immediately prior to such seasonal employment or engagement in a primary industry was wholly or mainly in agriculture.
For the purposes of the amended regulations, the term "agriculture" means the production of field crops, fruits, vegetables, honey, poultry, eggs, live stock, milk, butter or cheese, and the term "primary industry" means and includes lumbering and logging, forestry, fishing and trapping.
The amended regulations do not apply to any other classes of persons. They do not apply to any persons, who, prior to March 23, were engaged in activities other than agriculture or seasonal primary industries, as defined in the amended regulations. Consequently', any persons who left their occupations after March 23, 1942, with a view to returning to or engaging in agriculture in order to obtain postponements of military training until further notice will not be able to do so. All such persons are still subject to the national war services regulations as they stood before the recent amendments. Such persons may still make applications for postponement of their military training, but such applications for postponement will be dealt with by the divisional boards in the same manner and subject to the same principles as heretofore.
The procedure for administering the national war services regulations, as amended, may be briefly summarized, so far as they relate to the classes of persons covered by the amended regulations, as follows:
(1)	"Notices-medical examination" under section 12 of the regulations will be sent out by the divisional registrars in exactly the same manner as heretofore. There will be no change in this procedure.
These notices must not be disregarded. Failure to comply with the requirements of the notices, namely, to report for medical examination, will render the person guilty of such failure, liable to the penalties imposed by law.
(2)	On receipt of the "Notice-medical examination" the person to whom the notice is addressed may, if he wishes to do so, apply for a postponement order,' but he must do so in writing to the divisional registrar who sent him the notice within eight clear days of the date appearing on the notice.
(3)	If the person who receives the notice is a "person wholly or mainly employed in agriculture" as defined in the amended regulations, he may apply for a postponement order on the ground that he is a person wholly or mainly-employed in agriculture within the meaning of the amended regulations. He need not assign any other ground for his application.
(4)	The application will then be dealt with by the divisional board as it deals with other applications for postponements.
There, is, however, this fundamental difference, namely, _ that if the applicant is a person wholly or mainly employed in agriculture within the meaning of the amended regulations, the board, subject to certain exceptions hereafter mentioned, shall grant him a postponement order until further notice and such postponement order shall be an allocation of such person to agriculture.

War Appropriation-War Services
It is this direction to the board, namely, that the board shall grant him a postponement order until further notice, that constitutes the "fundamental alteration of the policy regarding compulsory military training and service where such service touches persons wholly or mainly employed in agriculture," referred to by the Prime Minister in his speech in the House of Commons on Tuesday, March 24, 1942.
Previously, under subsections (1) and (2) of section 14 of the National war services regulations, it was provided that the board "shall have power to grant an advancement or postponement order when it is of the opinion that it is in the national interest to do so," but there was no obligation upon the board to grant such orders. The matter was left to the discretion of the boards.
It was also provided that "no postponement order may be made for more than six months, but, upon reviewing the application, the board may grant one or more extensions." It was also provided that in respect of certain' applications for postponement, such as by a man engaged in farming, fishing, lumbering, trapping, etc., "the board shall take into account the supply of labour available and the importance of the particular applicant's occupation to the national economy."
There has therefore been a fundamental change of base in the regulations. It is not a question of greater latitude having been given to the boards in the matter of granting postponement orders. Nor is it a matter of preferential treatment. The amendments go much further and constitute a fundamental change of approach, both by the applicant and by the board. When the applicant has shown that he is a person wholly or mainly employed or engaged in agriculture within the meaning of the amended regulations, he is prima facie entitled 'to a postponement order until further notice. He does not have to prove, as was the ease formerly, a special case for postponement of a fixed duration.
The fundamental change in the character of the amended regulations may be stated as follows. Under the regulations as they stood prior to the amendments, the applicant had to make out a special case for postponement. The granting of a postponement order was within the discretion of the board and the postponement order was ohly for a fixed period of time. The applicant was still regarded as being a person primarly required for compulsory military training wrhen his period of postponement was concluded. Under the amended regulations the situation is entirely changed. When the applicant has shown that he is a person wholly or mainly employed in agriculture within the meaning of the amended regulations, it is mandatory upon the board, subject to the ex' ceptions hereinafter mentioned, to grant the postponement order. Furthermore, the postponement order is until further notice and it constitutes an allocation of the applicant to agriculture rather than to military service.
Precautions have been taken against abuse of the regulations and their undue extension to persons not intended to be covered by them. The board is not required -to grant a postponement order until further notice to an applicant if it is established to the satisfaction of the board, either (1) that the applicant is not an essential worker in agriculture, or (2) that -the applicant has at -any time subsequent to March 23 ceased to be actually employed or engaged in agriculture or in -a primary industry. The
onus of proof in each of these cases is not upon the applicant. These safeguards against the undue extension of -the amended regulations to persons not intended to be covered by them are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the divisional boards.
' Where a person is wholly or mainly employed in agriculture within the meaning of the amended regulations and has been granted a postponement order until further notice, there is an allocation of such person to agriculture.
The effect of the amended regulations will therefore be as stated by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons on Tuesday, March 24, 1942, "Under new regulations, farmers, farmers' sons and agricultural labourers will normally not be obliged to undertake compulsory military training and service."
At hearings of the boards, representatives of the Department of National Defence, of the national war labour board, of agriculture and of the director of national selective service are entitled to be present and -to make such representations as they may deem fit. Their presence and -their right to make representations to the boards are intended as guarantees that all interests connected with the war effort and the manpower requirements for the war effort in each aspect of it will be safeguarded.
The divisional boards have since their inception dealt in a judicial and sympathetic manner with applications for postponement made by farmers and other persons engaged in essential activities. In some agricultural areas of Canada, particularly areas close to large cities with large concentrations of war industries, the agricultural situation was becoming serious as the result of a number of causes, such as a large flow of agricultural labour into war industry, extensive voluntary enlistments with the armed forces, and. to a lesser degree, the calling of men for military training, and the ability of the country to carry out its agricultural commitments in the matter of essential food production was being threatened. It was therefore necessary to enact the "stabilization of employment in agriculture regulations, 1942." The essential purpose of these regulations is to prevent the agricultural situation in Canada from deteriorating beyond its present position and to enable the country to carry out the important food production aspect of its war effort.
The purpose and objective of these regulations and of the amendments to the national war services regulations were stated by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons on Tuesday, March 24, 1942, in the following terms:-
The policy of stabilizing employment in agriculture represents what, in effect, is a block allocation to agriculture of the persons best fitted for food production. It constitutes a form of large scale selection for national service which should go far to ensure the supply of manpower essential to the food production aspect of the national war effort. Care has been taken to provide against abuses of postponement orders until further notice. A person who has been granted such a postponement order and has thus been allocated to agriculture may lose the right to such postponement and allocation if he ceases to be actually employed or engaged in agriculture or in a primary industry and such fact is brought to the attention of the board by any of the representatives above referred to.

War Appropriation-War Services
Persons who are not wholly or mainly employed in agriculture within the meaning of the amended regulations should not leave their present employment in the hope of obtaining postponements until further notice. If they can establish a case for a postponement oj military training on sound grounds, they are still free to make application for postponement under the regulations as they stood prior to the recent amendments and the divisional boards will deal with such applications upon their merits. If, indeed, such persons leave their present occupations in the hope of obtaining postponements until further notice and their occupations are essential occupations, they may forfeit whatever claim they may have had otherwise to postponement under the regulations as	they stood before the
amendments.
A conference of the chairmen and divisional registrars of the thirteen administrative divisions will be held in Ottawa on April 23, 24 and 25 for the purpose of discussing the amended regulations and other matters connected with the administration of the national war services regulations generally.
I would point out that these regulations apply only to persons who are wholly or mainly employed in agriculture. That term was specifically defined in the amendments to the regulations and must be read in the light of that definition.
I should also like to make clear that under these amendments the notices to report for medical examination go out in exactly the same way as notices went out before the amendments came into effect. That is, of course, absolutely necessary in order to keep track of the men, for it is impossible to determine without a review of the case whether the man is wholly or mainly employed in agriculture within the meaning of that particular term. It is necessary to keep track of the men, and they get their notice to report for medical examination in the same way as notices go out to anyone else.
There is another point, and I think this may answer what my hon. friend the member for Weyburn has in mind. The regulations are made applicable by the boards to the persons who apply for a postponement order until further notice. The reading of the order in council makes that perfectly clear. The important section of order in council P.C. 2252 is made subsection 3 of section 14 of the regulations, and it is clear from section 5 of the order in council that the applicant must first make application before the board can deal with his case, apply the regulations to his case and give him a postponement order until further notice, as referred to in the amendment.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Would the minister explain the position under the regulations of those who were called up on April 9?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: My understanding of that point which the hon. member raised when my colleague the Minister of National Defence was before the committee is this. The regulations came into effect on March 23, but they came into effect only in respect of persons who made application after that date, so that if persons had been ordered to report before March 23 but had not in fact reported, those persons could, immediately after March 23, when the regulations came into effect, have made application on the ground that they were persons wholly or mainly employed in agriculture. Then they would have brought themselves under the regulations. If they did not make the application, then of course there was no way for the board to deal with their cases.


Mr. SENN:: In that connection, what provision was made for acquainting these young men, at the time they were called up or any time subsequent to the passing of the order in council, that this course was open to them; and, if they were not aware of that course until they appeared before the boards, were they made acquainted rvith it then? Is there any provision for that being done?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: This is one of those questions which involve difficulties. When you make changes in the law it takes a certain amount of time for everyone to become familiar with them. I believe a great deal of publicity was given to the changed policy as a result of the Prime Minister's statement in the house on March 24, and the manner in which the press carried that news. Indeed, if we are to believe the newspaper reports, a tremendous number of men flocked back to the farms. All the administrative boards were notified immediately of the amendments, and I think, by and large, as much publicity was given them as possible.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: What date did you give your press statement?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I did not issue my press release until April 17. I was absent in the west prior to that time for some days.


Richard Burpee Hanson: As a matter of fact, there was not any notification given to each individual-


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Oh, no.


Richard Burpee Hanson: -as he came up in answer to the call?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Oh, no. Notifications were not sent to individuals.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I did not say that. He was not told when he reported for duty that he had certain rights and what could bring him within those rights?

War Appropriation-'War Services


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I do not know what happened at the training centres.


Angus MacInnis: But would it make any difference whether he had been notified for an examination if on the 23rd of March, 1942, he was engaged wholly or mainly in agriculture? I have in mind paragraph (jj) of section 2 of order in council 2252. I assume that paragraph means what it says, and if it does it would not make any difference whether he had been notified before this went into effect or afterwards, if he was engaged wholly or mainly in agriculture.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Subsection 5 of the same order in council requires a person who is wholly or mainly employed in agriculture to make an application. If he does not make application, how is he to get his postponement order until further notice? The board grants postponement orders until further notice only in respect of persons who have applications for them.


John Horne Blackmore: What would be the position of a young man who had been called from agriculture four or five months prior to the passing of this order in council of March 23, and would have been entitled to postponement of military service had the order in council been passed before he was called, but who has gone into the army, taken his training, and been detained for military service? What can that young man do in order to qualify for postponement of service? Is there any way in which he can get back to the farm?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No; there is no way in which he can get back to agriculture, either permanently or indefinitely, unless the Department of National Defence lets him out.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Then they do not let him out permanently.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: The Department of National Defence does not let him out permanently except in cases of discharge, the number of which is very limited.
I may be able to say something which will satisfy the hon. member for Lethbridge. The purpose of the regulations relating to the stabilization of employment in agriculture, 1942, was to prevent the agricultural situation in Canada from getting any worse th^n it was. In some parts of the country it was a good deal more serious than in other parts, agricultural labour having almost vanished from those districts. But it was felt that by and
large across the country, Canada, from the point of view of its agricultural commitments as part of its war effort, could fill those commitments provided there was not any further undue strain on the ranks of agriculture. Therefore the essential purpose of the regulations was to prevent the agricultural situation in Canada from deteriorating from its then position. It was to make sure that there would be enough agricultural labour left on the farms to enable this country to carry out the agricultural objective of our war effort, namely, to raise as much in the way of essential food supplies for Britain and our other allies as could be transported overseas, and also enough to maintain the life of the nation. That was the essential purpose of the regulations.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


John Horne Blackmore: When the committee rose at six o'clock the minister was explaining to some extent what should be done with respect to a soldier who had been called up for training some months prior to March 23. He had made it clear that the regulations of that order did not apply to that soldier. Would he explain whether or not a soldier who had been called up, say four or five months prior to March 23 and had applied to the Minister of National Defence for consideration, which had been granted, would have to apply to the minister's department afterwards?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: This matter was dealt with quite extensively by the Minister of National Defence, and a number of questions have arisen out of the discussion that took place when that point was up for consideration.
When a man who has been called up under the national war service regulations reports to the training centre he is out of the jurisdiction of the Department of National War Services and is subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of National Defence. On March 12 of this year order in council P.C. 1916 was passed, by way of amendment to the reserve army (special) regulations of 1941. Under section 23 of these regulations as amended, provision is made for an application for leave being made by the R recruit, as he is termed. He makes that application to his commanding officer, in writing, showing the reasons and facts upon which it is based,

War Appropriation-War Services
together with statements corroborating the facts made by statutory declaration or attestation under oath. The commanding officer forwards the recommendation to the district officer commanding. The district officer commanding may forward the application, with whatever recommendation or representation he may see fit, to the appropriate national war services board. It is not obligatory upon the district officer commanding to forward the application for leave to the national war services board. The reason for not making it mandatory for the district officer commanding to forward the application is to discourage frivolous applications. I think hon. members can rest assured that every bona fide application, every application with merit in it, will be referred by the district officer commanding to the national war services board.
The reason why this arrangement was arrived at was, in the main, to secure uniformity of treatment in dealing with applications for leave coming from, persons who were soldiers by reason of the fact that they had reported to a training centre and were subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of National Defence. In the regulation that I have cited, No. 23 of the reserve army (special) regulations of 1941, referred to in order in council P.C. 1916, it is provided that leave may be granted upon such circumstances, reasons or grounds being established as would have entitled the applicant when called out ab initio to postponement before the commencement of his training. The idea was that the district officer commanding would forward these applications for leave to the national war services board, and the national war services board would deal with these applications for leave upon the same circumstances, reasons and grounds as would govern the board in dealing with an application for postponement of military training. That was the purpose, to get uniformity.
The boards hear these applications. They may investigate the case and, after a review or rehearing thereof, may make recommendations to the district officer commanding. On receiving a recommendation of the board the district officer commanding will grant leave for the period recommended by the board. It is mandatory upon the district officer commanding to grant the leave in accordance with the recommendation of the board. That, of course, is subject to the exigencies of the military situation, which might require that that leave be curtailed or refused. Apart from that, the recommendation made by the board is binding upon the military authorities.
(Mr. Thorson.]


Alfred Johnson Brooks: What is the effect of the recommendation of the commanding officer? Why is it asked for?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I suppose it is asked for in the ordinary run of procedure. The man makes his application for leave to his own commanding officer in the training centre or whatever unit he is attached to, and his application goes to the district officer commanding.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Does the minister not think it is the policy to follow the recommendation of the commanding officer rather than of this board? Is not that what is developing?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: There have been two schools of thought on the subject. It has been thought that since the man is a soldier he should be dealt with in the ordinary way as a soldier, make his application for leave to his commanding officer and let his commanding officer determine the granting or refusing of the application. But it was represented that in connection with these applications for leave made by R recruits, the Department of National Defence did not have the machinery for dealing with them in a uniform way across the country, whereas the national war services boards have had long experience in hearing applications and, knowing the conditions in the districts from which the young men come, perhaps would be better able to deal with the applications from the point of view of the national interest. I should point out, of course, that these applications for leave may come from the R recruit at any time within three months after he is enrolled and commences training. If he has been at the training centre for longer than three months, these regulations do not apply to his application. That is the explanation of the regulations.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I do not want to interrupt unduly, but does the minister not think this places too much responsibility on a commanding officer, who has men under him from all over the district? He does not know the particulars, except as they are presented to him in affidavits by people in certain sections of the district or province, and he has to make his recommendation to the district officer commanding. There should be a more thorough investigation by the board, and perhaps the commanding officer should not be asked for his recommendation. That is the point I was making, that he might simply forward the application to the board and let it make a more thorough investigation than he is capable of making. I think in most cases the recommendations of the commanding officers

War Appropriation-War Services
are being accepted, and those recommendations are made without knowledge of all the facts.	.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: There may be some merit in the suggestion of the hon. member for Royal. The officer commanding must transmit the application to the district officer commanding.


Mr. WEIR:: Just on that point, this R
recruit may have been enrolled, say in military district No. 10, but before completing his three months training he may be moved to another military district, where he makes his application for leave. Which officer deals with his application, and to which board of review is it referred?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: That question has been
the subject of some discussion as between the various chairmen. It was the general view that the application for leave should go to the division which called1 up the man, because that is where his registration card and file would be, and where the board would know about his individual case. But the general opinion, I think, is that the application might well be referred in the first instance to the board1 in the district in which the man actually is located, so that the applicant for leave may appear before that board in person and make his representations. Then, if that board is perfectly satisfied that the application is in order, it may grant the application in order to speed things up. If, on the other hand, it is not completely satisfied that the grounds for the application are sound, it can refer the application to the division which called up the man in the first instance, in order to get information which is on that man's file in the administrative division which handled his first call up. I think it is working out not too badly.


Mr. McIVOR:: I know the standard of
morality is higher now than it was in the last war, but human nature is still human nature, and so I should like to ask the minister if there is any opportunity for an advocate to go before a board in order to plead the case of a young man and get him off for a fee. That was the case in the last war, and I think it should be guarded against.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Section 16 deals with
the point raised by the hon. member. That section provides:
All hearings of the boards shall be in camera, and no person shall be entitled. to be represented by council, advocate or solicitor-


Mark Cecil Senn: If the minister has completed
his statement-


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No, I have not. I have only started.


Mark Cecil Senn: I wanted to make a few general observations about a matter which I think is of great importance, but if the minister would prefer to have me wait I shall do so. I thought that when he sat down he had completed his statement, as such.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: If the hon. member for Haldimand does not mind, I did intend to go on with my general statement.


Mark Cecil Senn: I do not want to interfere with that.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Then that might become the basis for such questions as hon. members might care to put.


James Arthur Ross: While the minister is dealing with the call-ups, would he explain how the quotas are arrived at in the various military districts? In some districts young men from twenty-one to thirty are called up, while in others young men over the age of twenty-five are not called up. How are these quotas arrived at, or how are the different ages fixed?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: My understanding is that the Department of National Defence makes its requisition, which it breaks down into administrative divisions on the basis of population. But the reserve of man-power available for call for military training may vary in the different districts by reason of factors of one kind and another. Eor example, there would be a smaller reserve of manpower available for the purposes of these regulations in areas contiguous to districts where there are large concentrations of war industries. That is one illustration. Then areas in which voluntary enlistments have been greater than in other areas also would show a smaller reserve of man-power available for call under these regulations. Another factor that is going to be of some consequence will result from the recent regulations relating to persons wholly or mainly employed in agriculture. When we have had some experience in the application of these regulations we shall be in a better position to rearrange the basis for setting the separate quotas in the thirteen different administrative divisions, in the light of the knowledge that we shall have as to the reserves that are available for call under these regulations. It is true that there is at present an unevenness. We are making greater inroads on the reserves in some administrative divisions than in others.


Angus MacInnis: How has that worked out in the last call made for men. I understand that in military district No. 3 the men called

War Appropriation-War Services
are in older age groups than those called up in some of the other districts. Has the minister the figures for the various districts, on the basis of the last call?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No; I do not think I can get those figures for my hon. friend. It. will also have the complicating factor of the recent regulations regulating persons wholly or mainly employed in agriculture. I think when we have had the experience of the application of those regulations we shall be in a better position to review the reserves left.


Angus MacInnis: Is there any uniformity in the method as it is applied? I understand that we began with the 21-year olds, and then went up to 24 and 25. When they have been called up, do we take the 26- and 27-year olds, until we have completed the list, or is there some other way of doing it?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Up to the present time the system has been to take the youngest age group, and to go through that group before going into the next one. That is, the men are called by age groups according to juniority of age. The hon. member for Vancouver East will recall the Prime Minister's statement of March 24 that we intend to change that method of calling men, and to make the call applicable to all the men in all the age groups covered by the proclamation. That is to be done by a system of drawing by lot. Back of that is the view that that would be a more equitable manner of making the call. At present all men up to 30 years of age are covered by the proclamation, and are liable to call. It is now proposed to call these men by lots, and all the men in all the age groups subject to the proclamation will take their chances in the draw. The new system will come into effect as soon as the administrative arrangements can be worked out. As soon as such arrangements are worked out I shall make a detailed announcement with regard to the new method of calling men by lot rather than by age groups.


Mr. DUPUIS:: Does that include farmers' sons?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: The position of men wholly or mainly employed in agriculture, within the meaning of the definition in the recent regulations, will be the same as it is now. That is, they will have to pay attention to the notices to report for medical examination. When they receive those notices they will have the right, if they wish to exercise it, of applying for a postponement order on the ground that they are wholly or mainly employed in agriculture within the meaning of the regulations.
[Mr. Maclmiis.j
It is mandatory upon the board to grant these postponement orders until further notice, unless the board is satisfied that the -man is not essential to agriculture.
I stated this afternoon that I had issued a press release relating to this very subject, in which I had pointed out the fundamental change that has taken place with regard to the regulations, so far as they concern persons who are wholly or mainly engaged in agriculture. I suggested to hon. members that they should read this press release with care, and that perhaps at a later date when I shall be before the committee again they might ask such questions as they may wish.
Perhaps at this juncture, since the subject has been raised, I should make special reference to two paragraphs in the press release of April 17. I said this:
There has therefore been a fundamental change of base in the regulations. It is not a question of greater latitude having been given to the boards in the matter of granting postponement orders, nor is it a matter of preferential treatment. The amendments go much further, and constitute a fundamental change of approach, both by the applicant and by the board. When the applicant has shown that he is a person wholly or mainly employed or engaged in agriculture within the meaning of the amended regulations he is prima facie entitled to a postponement order until further notice. He does not have to prove, as was the case formerly, a special case for postponement of a fixed duration.
Then I went on to say:
The fundamental change in the character of the amended regulations may be stated as follows: under the regulations as they stood prior to the amendments, the applicant had to make out a special case for postponement. The granting of a postponement order was within the discretion of the board, and the postponement order was only for a fixed period of time. The applicant was still regarded as being a person primarily required for compulsory military training, when his period of postponement was concluded.
Under the amended regulations the situation -is entirely changed. When the applicant has shown that he is a person wholly or mainly employed in agriculture, within the meaning of the amended regulations, it is mandatory upon tlie board, subject to the exceptions hereinafter mentioned, to grant the postponement order.
That is, the board must do so.
Furthermore, the postponement order is until further notice, and it constitutes an allocation of the applicant to agriculture rather than to military service.
That is what I mean by saying that there was a shift of base.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: WThat does the minister mean when he says the board must do it? The board is both judge and jury?

War Appropriation-War Services


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: It is mandatory in the regulations. The regulations impose the duty upon the board unless, as I pointed out, the board is satisfied either that the applicant is not an essential worker in agriculture or that the applicant has at any time subsequent to March 23 ceased to be actually employed or engaged in agriculture or in primary industry.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: There is no appeal from the board; the board is both judge and jury; it has only to satisfy itself.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: The board carries out the regulations.


Angus MacInnis: In the calling up of men for the next draft will the men who were called up for the thirty-day period and who have gone back to their employment be subject to call before the older age groups are reached?	.
Mr. THORSON; In the case of each requisition	the	Department of	National
Defence specifies the number of new men who are to be called up; that is, those who have not had any military training, and the number of men who have had thirty days training, who are to be recalled.


Angus MacInnis: I have a particular reason for raising this point at this time. A few days ago I had a wire from a young man in Vancouver,	a	labour	organizer	who	wasorganizing the employees in a government industry in	that city.	I brought up	thismatter in this house. He was born in 1912 and consequently is in the thirty-year age group. Application was made or was about to be made to a conciliation board. A day or so following that, he was visited in his hotel by two detectives of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who asked to see his registration card.	He	showed	his card	and	they
went away. He then got in touch with me and told me that he had a hunch that this was a prelude to calling him up for active service. He told me that he was in the thirty-year group and that there were lots of younger men who had not been called up. He told me that he would not be surprised if he received a call in a few days. His hunch was right, for in a few days he was told to report for service. There is this peculiar fact. This man was not registered in Vancouver; he was registered in Toronto which was and still is his home address. [DOT]
The government will have to make out a good case to satisfy me in this instance. They should find some better way of opposing organized labour, or they should find some better way of showing their good faith in the
principles of P.C. 2685 and not go about picking up a labour organizer and forcing him into the army. When this man's proper time comes and he is taken up in the regular way, he has no kick nor have I, but to take him now just because he is trying to organize the workers in a government-owned plant is not just playing the game.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I would not accept the statement that the government or the board went out of its way to pick up this man in advance of his time. If the hon. member will give me the particulars I shall be glad to make inquiry into the matter. I think that the new system when it goes into effect-


Angus MacInnis: The new system is not yet in effect.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: It will be very soon. When it goes into effect everyone who is subject to the proclamation will be called up in the order in which his number is drawn. In that event there cannot possibly be any ground for complaint of the nature that my hon. friend has mentioned. If he will be good enough to give me the particulars of the case he has mentioned I shall be glad indeed to look into the circumstances.


Angus MacInnis: I shall give the minister the facts of the case. I drew the attention of the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) to the case, and he was good enough to give me a full report on it. But that report does lead me to believe that the powers were anxious to get this man out of the way.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I do not think the question asked by the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Mclvor) was answered to the satisfaction of all hon. members. On April 21 I drew the attention of the minister to a case in my constituency. A young man had applied for postponement through the regular channels, but it had not been granted. He then interviewed a lawyer in my constituency who is a strong supporter of the administration. For a consideration of $50 the lawyer agreed to handle the case. The man paid $25 cash and the remainder was to be paid when postponement was granted. The minister's reply of April 22 referred me to the section he quotes, and he concludes as follows:
It is not at all necessary for a man called up for military training and service to go to a lawyer for advice, hut if he does so, it is entirely a private matter between the man called up and the lawyer concerned-both as to the point of legal advice being sought and the understanding as to the fee to be paid for such advice.



War Appropriation-War Services
I wrote to the'minister again on April 28, as follows:
I understand that the young man in question made his representations to your board in the regular manner, and was unable to secure postponement. But he has been able to secure postponement after getting the services of a strong party supporter who received a $25 fee to commence representations and later received another $25 after postponement was granted.
As a result of the very serious abuses which developed during the last -war, I feel that it is important that some department of government should be concerned about discouraging such procedure as I have outlined. I think you can understand that this sort of thing will have a very disturbing effect in families where applications for postponement have not been granted.
I should appreciate it if you would reconsider this question and inform me regarding your conclusions.
I have no idea how general this sort of thing is, but the minister should give us something more convincing than his letter to me of April 22.	-


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I have yet to hear that the members of the board in Saskatchewan are friends of the administration. I wish to point out to the hon. member that it is the board that grants applications for postponement, not the district registrar. The chairman of this board is Mr. Justice Embury, who is not known as a Liberal. One of the members is Mr. Carl Stewart, who certainly is not a Liberal, and the other member is Mr. George H. Bickerton, president of the United Farmers of Canada, Saskatchewan section. There is not a single Liberal on the board. My information from Mr. Justice Embury is that the board has been unanimous in dealing with the applications that have come before it. If the person to whom the hon. member has referred employed a lawyer, it was very foolish of him to do so because he need not have done it. He could have made his application which would have been heard by the board in both a judicial and sympathetic manner and considered in the light of all the facts. His case would have been considered by the board in Saskatchewan which is composed of the members I have mentioned, not one of whom is a friend of this administration politically.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The members of the committee will recall that I did not say a word about the members of the board.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: It is the members of the board who grant applications for postponement and nobody else.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: It was the lawyer who got results.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: 
Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: What is the suggestion
made by the hon. member? Is he attacking the integrity of the board that grants the application?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: My letter of April 28
to the minister set out what I thought should be done. It is important that some department of government should be concerned about discouraging the sort of procedure I outlined in my letter. The minister's letter to me of April 22 indicates that his department is not concerned about that sort of procedure.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: We cannot stop a man
from employing a lawyer if he wants to, but there is absolutely no necessity for anybody employing a lawyer in connection with an application for postponement.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: But in this case he
was not able to get a postponement until he engaged a lawyer and paid him his fee.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: He could have come
and put his own case before the board.


Richard Burpee Hanson: He did
do that.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: It is a matter for the
board to deal with in each case. If the man wants to employ a lawyer he may do so, but he does not have to.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The minister has not
followed me. I stated that this man had already used the machinery provided by the government and had found that he was not granted a postponement.


Vincent Dupuis: Was he refused a
postponement.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Yes, and he then
retained a lawyer, a supporter of the administration.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: What has that to do
with the matter?


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: That is what
we want to find out.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: That is what I want
to know. I should like to know whether the minister is concerned over this type of abuse

War Appropriation-War Services
being allowed to develop in this country without some department of the government paying attention to it.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: If the person who was
engaged was able to present new facts which had not occurred to the applicant, that is a matter for the applicant; but the fact that he engaged a Liberal lawyer, friendly to the administration, had1 no effect on the board that granted the application. Probably that was just proof of the fact that the lawyer was an assiduous digger after new facts to present to the board.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: So the applicant would be better off if he had a lawyer?


Richard Burpee Hanson: On behalf
of my profession I ask the minister, how could a country boy, the son of a farmer, put into the form of a statutory declaration the facts that would carry conviction with the board without employing somebody skilled in that sort of thing to assist him?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: He can do so if he
wishes to.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is it not
almost a necessity that he should do so?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Not at all.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The regulations absolutely provide that the evidence must be submitted by statutory declaration.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Then I
misunderstood what the minister read.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: That was in connection with applications for leave.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Then I was wrong and I withdraw the whole thing, but I suggest this to the minister, that while it is quite proper to keep lawyers out from before the board, a good lawyer, if he is an honest man-and most of them are-will tell the man what he should do and start him along the right road. I do not think the fact that the lawyer in Saskatchewan was a Liberal had anything to do with the board's decision, but the lawyer evidently knew what he was doing and collated the facts and presented them in such a manner that the board granted the application.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I must say that the board acts in the most informal way possible. In connection with these new regulations, for example, the boards are adopting this procedure: When they send out the notice to report for medical examination, they also send out a questionnaire for the applicant to fill 44561-147^
out. The boards deal with the majority of applications for postponement in the most informal way when they are satisfied that it is a bona fide case.	.


George Hugh Castleden: When did they start that procedure?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: The procedure is of recent origin in connection with these amendments to which I have just referred, because the amendments themselves are of recent origin. But that would be the general procedure.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Judging from the number of applications approved, vrould the minister not say that the applicants have made out a pretty good case all over this dominion, and particularly in some sections?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I think good' cases have been made where the boards have granted postponement. Knowing the work the boards have done and the patience with which they have discharged their duties, I certainly do not wish to set myself up in judgment over the boards because I think that, by and large, they have done a very difficult job in a very judicial, sympathetic and understanding manner.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I have said they are good boards.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I think it is generally conceded that they are very good boards. , Mr. CASTLEDEN: Who is permitted to appear for an applicant?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: There is not any fixity about it. The boards can hear anybody who can give evidence relating to an application for postponement. If a person applies for postponement on the ground, for example, that he is essential to some war industry, someone connected with that plant can give evidence as to the facts. There is no fixity as to who may come and give evidence. The board has the power to find the facts.


George Hugh Castleden: Have the boards the power to refuse permission to anyone to appear on behalf of an applicant?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: It is not so much a question of appearing on behalf of an applicant as of giving evidence or statements relating tc the application.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Can the minister give, by provinces, the number of applications made throughout Canada and the number granted?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Yes. For the convenience of hon. members I might lay on the table certain documents relating to the operation of the regulations, and the results.

War Appropriation-War Services


John Ritchie MacNicol: Would the minister give the total?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I can give the total.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Put the documents on Hansard.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Yes; why not put them
on Hansard?


Richard Burpee Hanson: If they are not too long.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I was going to suggest having them incorporated in an appendix to the Votes and Proceedings. There are quite
a number of tables. They give the whole record of the operation of the national war service regulations up to date, and the results, and if I put them on record it would perhaps serve to reduce the number of questions that might be asked. The statistics will be found in the tables.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Better put them on Hansard.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: If it is the desire of the committee I will put them on Hansard. The tables follow:



TABLE I

[Stage Direction]
Number op Men Requisitioned by the Department op National Defence (Army) Since the Inception of the Four Months Training Plan, Covering Training Periods from March 20, 1941, to March 12, 1942
Only Category "A" men are accepted by the Department of National Defence (Army)
Military training periods
4.	Mar.
5.	April
6.	May
7.	June
8.	July
9.	Aug.
10.	Oct.
11.	Oct.
12.	Dec.
13.	Jan.
14.	Feb.
15.	Mar.
20/41.. 17/41.. 20/41.. 19/41... 31/41... 28/41... 2/41... 30/41... 4/41... 8/42... 5/42... 12/42...
Total
Ontario	Quebec	N.S.	N.B.	P.E.I.	Man.	B.C.	Sask.	Alta.	'A"	"B"	"C"	"D")	("E"	"F")	"G"	"H"	'T'	"J"	"K"	"M"	"N"	I otal150	885	390	50	830	560	232	185	33	320	265	440	350	4,690160	950	385	55	895	600	248	20C	37	335	285	465	385	5,000128	750	316	44	720	,478	198	16C	30	268	228	372	308	4,000172	453	156	30	538	295	134	108	20	180	154	250	210	2,700172	453	156	30	538	295	134	108	20	180	154	250	210	2,700172	453	156	30	538	295	134	108	20	ISO	154	250	210	2,70086	226	79	15	269	147	66	54	11	90	77	125	105	1,35086	226	79	15	269	147	66	54	11	90	77	125	105	1,350168	441	158	29	529	287	130	106	22	178	151	245	206	2,650210	549	196	36	659	357	162	132	27	222	188	305	257	3,30012b	333	122	23	386	217	96	76	24	139	114	190	154	2,000208	549	202	38	637	358	160	125	38	229	188	314	254	3,300838	6,268	2,395	395)	(6,808	4,036)	1,760	1,416	293	2,331	2,035	3,331	2.754	35,74010,	396	10,844

[Stage Direction]
Number of Men who Reported to Basic Training Centres of the Department of National Defence (Army) since the Inception of the Four Months Training Plan, up to March 12, 1942
Military Training Periods	Ontario	Quebec	N.S.	N.B.	P.E.I.	Man.	B.C.	Sask.	Alta.	Total("A"	"B"	"C"	"D")	("E"	"F")	"G"	"H"	T	"J"	"K"	"M"	"N"	4.	Mar. 20/41	
5.	April 17/41	
6.	May 20/41	
7.	June 19/41	
8.	July 31/41	
9.	Aug. 28/41	
10.	Oct. 2/41	
11.	Oct. 30/41 	
12.	Dec. 4/41	
13.	Jan. 8/42.... 14.	Feb. 5/42	
15.	Mar. 12/42	
Total	174 177 133 201 171 1S9 102 110 194 221 184 285	950 993 768 523 396 458 240 263 463 666 402 579	389 374 371 223 159 144 121 109 222 209 160 227	59 59 48 39 29 35 15 25 37 55 31 50	1,051 1,128 1,065 686 587 520 355 343 646 870 523 881	670 667 526 344 366 304 264 330 281 535 209 419	271 274 212 179 170 189 62 89 161 212 110 181	215 227 167 148 130 158 76 111 126 188 120 185	36 44 35 28 21 29 25 19 28 34 28 33	344 356 272 185 195 171 126 83 223 247 156 293	284 317 235 164 134 168 80 87 159 188 103 164	515 528 413 295 310 274 131 187 276 355 237 354	383 388 297 209 224 238 142 118 222 251 150 247	5,341 5.532 4,542 3,224 2,892 2,877 1,739 1,874 3,038 4.031 2,413 3,898(2,141	6,701 12,	2,7081 482) 332	(8,655 13,	4,915) 570	2,110	1,851	360	2,651	2,083	3,875	2,869	41,401
IMr. Thorson.]

War Appropriation-War Services

[Stage Direction]
Number op Men Rejected for Medical Reasons Upon Reporting at Basic Training Centres op the Department of National Defence (Army) Since the Inception of the Four Months Training Plan, up to March 12th, 1942
Military training periods	Ontario	Quebec	N.S.	N.B.	P.E.I.	Man.	B.C.	Sa.sk.	Alta.	Total	Per- centage"A"	"B"	"C"	"D"	"E"	"F"	"G"	"H"	"I"	"J"	"K"	"M"	"N"	%4. Mar. 20/41	6	72	36	4	80	80	21	*29	1	24	11	39	17	420	7-95. Apr. 17/41	8	122	34	3	96	87	15	12	10	12	35	6. May 20/41	9	62	29	7	114	76	25	16	5	41	15	24	19	442	9-77. June 19/41	21	76	18	6	92	48	13	9	5	21	4	15	11	339	10-58. July 31/41	17	33	14	3	66	49	26	20	8	18	4	13	17	288	1009. Aug. 28/41	7	37	15	3	48	34	21	17	9	11	1	17	11	231	8-010. Oct. 2/41	5	13	16	1	44	34	12	12	7	8	7	20	4	183	10-711. Oct. 30/41	12	11	18	3	32	42	6	12	3	7	2	16	8	172	9-212. Dec. 4/41	13	38	33	5	90	38	16	18	10	17	4	29	13	324	10-613. Jan. 8/42	17	88	23	11	114	64	19	22	8	28	3	22	13	432	10-714. Feb. 5/42	20	44	30	8	45	31	13	20	5	9	5	14	6	250	10-315. Mar. 12/42	20	62	36	10	89	72	27	23	6	25	4	15	18	407	10-5Total	155	658	302	65	910	655	214	210	67	219	72	259	159	3,945	b-51,180	1,565

[Stage Direction]
Number of Men accepted at Basic Training Centres of the Department of National Defence (Army) since the Inception of the Four Months Training Plan, up to March 12, 1942
Military training periods	Ontario	Quebec	N.S.	N.B.	P.E.I.	Man.	B.C.	Sask.	Alta.	Total"A"	"B"	"C"	"D"	"E"	"F"	"G"	"H"	"r	"J"	"K"	"M"	"N"	4. Mar.	20/41	168	878	353	55	971	590	250	186	35	320	273	476	366	4,9215. April	17/41	169	871	340	55	1,032	580	259	215	44	346	305	493	366	5,0756. May	20/41	124	706	342	41	951	450	187	151	3a	231	220	389	278	4,1007. June	19/41	ISO	447	205	33	594	296	166	139	23	164	160	280	198	2,8858. July	31/41	154	363	145	26	521	317	144	110	13	177	130	297	207	2,6049. Aug.	28/41	182	421	129	32	472	270	168	141	20	160	167	257	227	2,64610. Oct.	2/41	97	227	105	14	311	230	50	64	18	118	73	111	138	1,55611. Oct.	30/41	98	252	91	22	311	288	83	99	16	76	85	171	110	1,70212. Dec.	4/41	181	425	189	32	556	243	145	108	18	206	155	247	209	2,71413. Jan.	8/42	204	578	186	44	756	471	193	166	26,	219	185	333	238	3,59914. Feb.	5/42	164	358	130	23	478	17S	87	100	23	141	98	223	150	2,15315. Mar.	12/42	265	512	191	40	792	347	154	162	27	268	160	339	229	3,486Total	1,986	6,038	2,406	417	7,745	4,260	1,886	1,641	293	2,426	2,011	3,616	2,716	*37,44110,847	12,005	
* Surplus of 1,701 men over 35,740 requisitioned by the Department of National Defence (Army).

[Stage Direction]
Number of Men Examined by Civilian Physicians, Showing the Number placed in each Medical Category Since the Inception of the Four Months Training Plan, up to March 12, 1942
Provinces	Adminis- trative divisions	Total No. of men examined	Medical Categories	"A"	"B-l"	"B-2"	"C-l"	"C-2"	"D"	"E"	Num- ber	%	Num- ber	%	Num- ber	%	Num- ber	%	Num- ber	%	Num- ber	%	Num- ber	%A	5,650	3,168	56-0	468	8-2	192	3-3	198	3-3	257	4-5	114	2-0	1,253	22-7B	11,226	6,797	60-8	1,400	12-4	396	3-4	465	4-0	461	4-0	194	1-7	1,513	13-7C	6,319	3,622	57-2	586	9-3	236	3-8	271	4-1	281	4-5	150	2-3	1,173	18-8D	1,088	633	58-1	9S	9-0	26	2-3	42	3-8	42	3-8	20	1-8	227	20-224,283	14,220	58-6	2,552	10-5	850	3-4	976	3-9	1 041	4-3	JE	20,733	7,804	38-2	2^246	10-8	1,386	6-7	1,522	7-1	1,797	8-5	799	3-7	5 i 179	24-0u	16,384	5,561	34-5	1,374	8-3	1,058	6-3	1,088	6-5	1,352	8-1	587	3-4	5,364	32-937,117	13,365	36-5	3,620	9-7	2,444	6-5	2,610	6-9	3 149	8-3	3-6	Nova Scotia	G	4; 820	2,156	44-7	286	5-9	77	1-5	167	3-4	827	17-1	1	1,306	27-4New Brunswick	11	3,898	2,183	55-1	136	3-6	49	1-2	56	1-3	57	1-2	562	15-1	855	22-5Prince Edward Island.	I	602	372	61-7	32	5-3	11	1-8	15	2-4	25	4-1	9	1-4	138	22-3Manitoba	J	6,884	4,029	58-5	711	10-4	253	3-8	275	3-7	220	31	180	2-7	1,216	17-8British Columbia	K	5,783	3,326	58-0	542	9-8	175	31	203	3-4	229	4-0	136	1-8	1,172	19-9Saskatchewan	M	6,671	4,149	62-6	636	9-4	199	2-9	353	5-2	240	3-6	279	4-3	815	110Alberta	N	6,695	3,803	57-0	462	6-9	158	2-2	244	3-4	222	3-4	709	10-9	1,097	16-2Grand Total...	96,753	47,603	49-3	8,977	9-3	4,216	4-3	4,899	4-9	6,010	6-2	3,740	3-8	21,308	210
War Appropriation-War Services

[Stage Direction]
Application for Posiponement of Military Training Submitted to Administrative Boards of the Department of National War Services Since the Inception of the Four Months Training Plan, up to March 12, 1942
Provinces	Adminis- trative divisions	Seasonal and Essential Occupations	War- time indus- tries	Other indus- tries	Uni- versity and college students	All other reasons	TotalFarm- ing	Lum- bering	Trap- ping	Fishing	Otheh?	"A"	618	1	4	461	33	178	848	2,143"B"	803	3	170	2,20,5	553	219	1.291	5,246"C"	3,839	171	6	2	3S8	[DOT] 828	160	1,390	6,784"D"	45	7	2	1	10	211	34	71	3815,307	181	8	4	572	3,705	586	591	3,600	14,554"E"	1.076	295	3	658	6,033	185	142	2,148	10,540"F"	5,225	558	2	102	3.207	125	65	516	342	10,1426,301	853	5	102	3.865	6,158'	250	658	2,490	20,682"G"	859	106	119	319	18	32	79	706	2,238"II"	653	65	69	128	77	150	1,142"I"	388	2	8	28	33	13	1	17	490Manitoba	"J"	1,470	7	5	60	145	62	80	99	422	2,350British Columbia	"K"	433	92	2	53	17	434	217	392	1,684	3,324"M"	2.218	5	2	3	8	87	237	2,560"N"	1,230	2	187	4	40	300	1,763
Grand Total			18.859	1.313	20	417	5,264	10.422	1,178	2,024	9,606	49.103

[Stage Direction]
Applications for Postponement of Military Training Granted by the Administrative Boards of the Department of National War Services Since the Inception of the Four Months Training Plan, up to March 12, 1942
Provinces	Adminis- trative divisions	Seasonal and Essential Occupations	War- time indus- tries	Other indus- tries	University and college students	All other reasons	Total	Per- cent- ageFarm- ing	Lum- bering	Trap- ping	Fishing	Others	"A"	603	1	4	157	32	178	776	1,751	81-6"B"	575	3	50	1,660	157	167	421	3,033	57-8"C"	3,728	154	6	2	382	826	146	1,037	6,281	92-6"D"	37	6	2	1	6	95	33	53	233	61-14,943	163	8	4	442	2,738	189	524	2,287	11,298	72-6"E'	632	123	3	160	5,846	83	109	718	7,694	73-0"F"	3,582	172	1	66	1,810	108	32	427	101	6,299	62-14,234	295	4	66	1,970	5,954	115	536	819	13,993	67-6"G"	547	82	85	256	2	70	449	1,491	66-6"R"	586	61	58	121	76	139	1,041	91-1Prince Edward Is...	"I"	331	2	6	21	3	10	1	14	388	79-0Manitoba	"J"	902	4	5	37	116	62	66	76	311	1,579	67-7British Columbia..	"K"	390	75	2	48	17	407	201	391	1,563	3,094	930"M"	1,370	3	1	3	8	73	112	1,570	61-3"N"	1,172	2	178	4	40	261	1,657	94-0
Total			14,475	687	19	305	3,124	9,178	581	1,787	5,955	36,111	73-a
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation-War Services

[Stage Direction]
Number of Men Called out Under National War Services Regulations, 1940 (Recruits)-Consolidation 1941-Who Volunteered for Active Servide Overseas, in the Navy, the Army and the Air Force, After Reporting to Training Centres of the Department of National Defence (Army), up to October 2nd, 1941
Military training periods (since inception of 4 mths. training plan)	Men called out under N.W.S. regulations accepted at N.D. basic training centres	Royal Canadian Navy	Active en Canadian Army- Active	listments Royal Canadian Air Force	Total Active enlistments	Percentage of enlistments for Active Service4. March 20, 1941	4,921	89	800	461	1,350	27-45. April 17, 1941	5,075	79	1,115	345	1,539	30'36. Mav 20,1941	4,100	39	996	372	1,407	34-37. June 19, 1941	2,885	43	709	393	1,145	39-68. July 31,1941	3,676	24	826	575	1,425	38-89. August 28, 1941	3,823	36	1,187	417	1,640	42-9*10. October 2, 1941	2,221	12	552	280	844	380Total	26,701	322	6,185	2,843	9,350	35-0
* Latest figures available from the Department of National Defence (Army).

[Stage Direction]
Convictions under National War Services Regulations, 1940 (Recruits) (Consolidation 1941)
as Reported to the Department
Provinces	Adminis- trative	Section of National War Sen ices Regulations, 1940 (Recruits) (Consolidation, 1941)	Totaldivisions	20-9	26-1	29	30	31	33	34	35	36	37b	"A"	1	1	2"B"	1	1	1	3"C"	1	1	1	31	"D"	5	5"E"	1	4	5	6	1	5	22"F"	4	1	6	6	1	18"G"	0	"H"	1	1*T"	[DOT][DOT]j"	3	4	3	17	27"K"	13	1	3	1	18"M"	94	5	18	3	120"N"	5	1	17	23
115	17	5	19	74	1	2	3	5	1	242
Vincent Dupuis: Does table VIII show the numbers by provinces?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Not that particular return. All the other returns are by administrative divisions and by provinces.


John George Diefenbaker: Would the minister allow a question? One set of statistics apparently is omitted-how many called failed to report.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I can put that on Hansard as well. It is a statement of men unaccounted for since the beginning of operations up to March 31, 1942, by administrative divisions and by provinces. The total of such men, according to this statement, is 11,568 since the beginning of operation of the regulations.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What percentage would that be of the total called?

War Appropriation-War Services


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: The total number of
persons to whom medical notices were sent out in the course of that period of time was 311,825. The percentages can be worked out from that. But this figure is subject to certain observations. A good many of the men who are included in this list have enlisted.


Richard Burpee Hanson: They would be accounted for if they had enlisted.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: They have not been
accounted for yet. I am giving that just by way of illustration. We keep these lists of persons who have not reported circulating continuously throughout the thirteen administrative divisions, with a continuous follow-up. We send them continuously to the three national defence departments. Recently one of these lists came back from one of the divisions; it contained 244 names, and it was reported back that sixty-five of these persons had enlisted. It is a rule that when a person is reported as not having given attention to the notice to report for medical examination, a list of such persons is turned over to the police for investigation. I can assure my hon. friend that every effort is being made to run these persons down and follow up the cases of persons who have failed to report. When I speak of this list as being a list of men unaccounted for, I might by a stretch of language describe them perhaps as possible delinquents. But the reality of delinquency is very much less. The observations and general opinion of the mounted police are that real delinquents are not much over 1 per cent.


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbuiy):: How many convictions have there been?	*


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I find the number of convictions in one of the tables. They total 242. That table is included in the list I mentioned a moment ago. The record of delinquency is a record of comparatively small numbers, and we are anxious that the number should be as small as possible.


Mr. McGARRY:: With regard to the privileges granted to farmers, providing special postponement or exemption, how does that apply to the young man who is engaged partly in farming and partly in fishing? Does the same regulation apply in such a case?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Before dealing with that question may I point out that another ground for unaccountability is changes of address and movement from one part of the country to another. But gradually we pick those people up.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Would the minister give those by provinces?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: They are given by
provinces.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Will the table be put on record?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Yes. The table is as follows:
Men unaccounted for (possible delinquents) since the beginning of operations up to March 31, 1942.
Administrative			
Province	Divisions	No. of	Men
	r a	762	
Ontario		J B	1,141	
	C	411	
	L B	244	
			2,558
Quebec 		( E	1,577	
	I F	3,309	
			4.886
Nova Scotia	G	123New Brunswick	H	40Prince Edward Island	I	46Manitoba	J	780British Columbia ...	K	1,406Saskatchewan	M	240Alberta	N	1,489
11,568


John George Diefenbaker: The minister says there are 11,568 missing, or possible delinquents. How many of those in that class have actually been picked up; and of those picked up, how many have been prosecuted? It is important to know the degree of enforcement that is taking place.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: All who were picked up and who were possible delinquents have been prosecuted. With regard to persons who have been located in various ways who previously had not reported for medical examination when they were called up, it is not possible to give the figures. But a standing order is given to the divisional registrars with each requisition that goes out to them saying that they are to call up men who have been located in their divisions who had been reported to them as not having paid attention to the notice to report for medical examination. There is a continuous effort to locate those men and bring them in. We look upon our job in the department as having for its purpose the putting of men in training centres rather than in gaol. I should be glad if any cases of possible delinquency were brought to my attention, because I am as deeply concerned as I can possibly be-and I am sure my officers share the same view-that these regulations, dealing as they do with human lives, should be administered with the utmost integrity. I would welcome any information or particulars coming from any source as to failure to report either for the medical examination or to the training centres.

War Appropriation-War Services


Angus MacInnis: In view of the fact that the minister just now made a point that these regulations should be administered with the utmost integrity and care, I think insufficient attention is paid to the principle involved in the case that was raised by the hon. member for Mackenzie. This is not merely that the man engaged a lawyer and got his exemption; it goes much deeper than that.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Does my friend know anything about the facts of that case?


Angus MacInnis: No, not at all, but I have no doubt that the hon. member for Mackenzie knows all the facts, and evidently he has put them before the minister before bringing them up in the committee. I do not think the facts in the matter are disputed.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: They apparently were disputed.


Angus MacInnis: Besides that, the minister knows what happened in Saskatchewan during the last war, when lawyers followed like vultures the men who were called up-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I never heard of such things.


Angus MacInnis: All right. Our lawyer friends have started now. Would it not be possible to have the regulations provide that no one could appear for an applicant? My attention is drawn to the fact that no one is supposed to appear now. Section 16 states:
(1)	All hearings of the board shall be in camera and no person shall be entitled to be represented by counsel, advocate or solicitor: Provided that at hearings of the board the representative of the Department of National Defence, the representative of the national war labour board, a representative of agriculture and a representative of the director of national seleetiye service shall be entitled to be present and to make such representations as they may deem fit.
(2)	The board shall consider all applications and the decision of the board shall be final and conclusive and binding upon all concerned.
That does not fit in with the statement of the minister that counsel could appear.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I said that counsel could not appear.


Angus MacInnis: Did the minister not also say that if a man wanted to pay somebody $25 to put other facts before the board, which the man did not place before the board himself-


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Counsel cannot appear on behalf of the man.


Angus MacInnis: Then how is he going to place facts before the board?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: He can write.


Angus MacInnis: That is quibbling with words. Surely, if a person is allowed to write a letter, he is making representations. It does not matter how he makes those representations; he is appearing before the board, unless it is specifically stated that he cannot appear by writing. The point is that this man evidently had $50 with which to pay a lawyer.


Vincent Dupuis: He is free to do that.


Angus MacInnis: Quite so, but supposing he has not the $50? He is free also not to have it, in which case his application will not receive the same hearing. Evidently that is what happened. If a person can stipulate that he is to receive $50 for pleading a man's cause, then he may stipulate that he shall receive $100 or $500, and it will depend upon how much money a man has and how much he is willing to pay. I submit that the spirit of section 16 should be carried into effect-


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: It is.


Angus MacInnis: -and that no one should be allowed to appear in any way for an applicant; that is, as solicitor or lawyer. A boy's father could appear; an employer could appear to state the functions being performed by a person in that particular industry, but certainly the principle is wrong that a solicitor may appear and charge a fee for appearing on behalf of an applicant. If that is to be allowed, it would be much better for the government to employ its own counsel in each particular district.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I must reply to the hon. member for Inverness-Richmond, who has been waiting patiently for an answer to a question he asked some time ago. He asked what would be the position with regard to the case of a person who was a farmer and a fisherman. I should point out to the hon. member that the term, "person wholly or mainly employed in agriculture" includes two classes of persons. In the first place it means:
. . . any person who, on the 23rd day of March, 1942, was wholly or mainly employed or engaged in agriculture . .	.
It also includes:
. . . any person who, on the said 23rd day of March, 1942, was employed or engaged, but only seasonally, in a primary industry but whose last employment or occupation immediately prior to such seasonal employment or engagement in a primary industry was wholly or mainly in agriculture.
Everyone knows that there are a great many people whose basic occupation is farming but who, in the fall and winter, may engage in a primary occupation such as lumbering, forestry, fishing or trapping. The term "primary industry" is also defined in the regulations, so

War Appropriation-War Services
that if this man was in the main a farmer and in winter time was a fisherman, he would be covered by these regulations, on the ground that these primary temporary occupations are really carried on by the man in conjunction with his occupation, as being wholly or mainly employed in agriculture.


Richard Burpee Hanson: How about this case? In the bay of Fundy, where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty-four hours, many of the fishermen own and fish what are known as weirs for sardines. These men live on the land. In the summer they are engaged in fishing for half the time and in farming the other half. Surely these men would be classified as farmers, which I think would be the proper classification for them, and surely they would be exempt.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I should think in the main they would be. The persons whom I was attempting to describe were those only ' seasonally employed in a primary industry. The person described by the leader of the opposition is a man who is perhaps a farmer all the year round, and during the summer he is a fisherman.


Richard Burpee Hanson: He is a fisherman the whole year round, and a farmer in the summer.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: In such a case it becomes a question of fact, and I do not think I should go any further than to say that the circumstances in each case would be looked into, all the facts being taken into consideration.


Mr. HOWDEN:: I have a case in point, in connection with which I was going to ask the minister a question. This man is undoubtedly a farmer, has done nothing else all his life, has done it all the time, but I have reason to believe that on March 23 he was in a training camp. Would he be eligible for postponement, under those circumstances?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No. He is in the army, and he is not covered by the regulations to which I have been referring. I indicated that the purpose of these regulations was to prevent the agricultural situation in Canada from deteriorating beyond its then position. The only persons who are covered by these amendments are those who, on March 23, 1942, were wholly or mainly employed in agriculture, within the meaning of the regulations, or primary industries as being incidental to agriculture. If one might use rather loose phraseology, those are the persons who are frozen in agriculture, in order to prevent agriculture from deteriorating beyond

its then position, and it is only the persons who were frozen in agriculture and who remain in agriculture who come within the ambit of these amendments.


John Power Howden: In other words, they must have been employed in agriculture on March 23 in order to come under these regulations?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Yes.


Vincent Dupuis: In reference to the remarks of the hon. member for Vancouver East with regard to the employment of lawyers, although the regulation states that it is forbidden to do so-


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: He is not
forbidden to hire a lawyer; that is what we are objecting to. The lawyer cannot appear in person.


Vincent Dupuis: He is not allowed to appear.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: That is
correct.


Vincent Dupuis: I have had experience not
only as a member but also as a lawyer. Although it is easy to reach the board, the recruit does not usually know how to approach it in the proper way. Of course the board would tell him to make a sworn declaration stating the facts which would plead on his behalf to obtain postponement. Generally speaking, however, those recruits prefer to see their members or their lawyers in order to have a draft declaration prepared, and to study the law as it stands to-day, so that in the declaration all the facts relating to the postponement may be set out. My experience has shown me that if the farmer's son makes his own declaration, he may forget the main point which would bring about his postponement.
For instance, it is pointed out that if the father is sick and has only one son. it is necessary that the recruit bring a doctor's certificate. In practice, however, that does not suffice; he has to bring a sworn declaration from the doctor. All these facts lead me to the belief that it is much wiser for a recruit to consult not necessarily a lawyer but certainly some educated* person such as a minister of the church, a notary or a member of parliament, who may draft his declaration. Under those circumstances he would certainly have a greater chance of obtaining some consideration-although he has not much chance.
I have had many experiences, because I have helped all those who have come to my office to draft declarations. I have told them what to do. I can say, however, that not many of them received postponements. I have in mind all those sons who before the

War Appropriation-War Services
war were permitted and even encouraged by their parents to work in industry in neighbouring towns and cities. Since the begin* ning; of the war those young people have worked in some war industries in the fall and winter months, so that they might earn a few dollars to help the father meet his mortgage payment, taxes and other pecessary expenditures. Farmers' sons have always done that. But the interpretation of the law as it stands to-day is that if a farmer's son were working in a war industry on March 23, or working in any place other than a farm, he has lost his right to ask for postponement.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Who said that?


Vincent Dupuis: I was told that. This is
why I should like to have an official answer.
I have many individual names where, due to the fact that those farmers' sons were not on the farm on March 23, although they were primarily or mainly engaged in agriculture, they were refused postponements.
There is another point I should- like to clear up. When the government announced its four-months programme for trainees it was stated that those men would train for only four months. As far as I am concerned-and I am sure many representatives of farming constituencies were in the same position I thought sincerely that it was for a period of only four months. Not only did I encourage the young boys to go, but I tried to offer every possible argument to induce them to become acquainted with military exercises and orders.
I told them that their training was very important; that we were in a war; that it was our duty to do whatever we could do, and to be ready whenever

God forbid-we were invaded or had to defend our own homes.
But as soon as they were enlisted another declaration was made whereby these four-months trainees were informed that they would have to remain for the duration of the war. I know of many farmers' sons who were the only help on their fathers' farms in Quebec. Those were farms of 120, 200 or 300 acres, or arpents, as we call them. The father would be left alone in the fall and winter, when the young men chose to take their training. But at the end of four months the young men were kept at the camps, and the fathers were left alone-and they are still alone-to cultivate their farms.
I am one who believes that this war will not be won by soldiers with empty hands and empty stomachs. We have to produce food. We have to produce armaments and munitions not only for our own army but for the allied armies. I recall some observations in an address by Mr. Eric Knight, an Englishman
who stated, among other things, "Well, gentlemen, in the morning you get your toast, with a square of butter which you very easily use at breakfast time. In England that square of butter is our ration for a whole week."
If it is true-and I believe it is-that the English and many other people are rationed to that point to-day, then I submit strongly that farmers should be permitted to produce not only the quantity necessary to permit the English people to have a proper ration, but that they should produce more and more, as do those men working in the dry docks who build more and more ships to carry the food necessary for those glorious and heroic people who are now the defenders of civilization, and who are now preventing the invaders from coming to our shores.
That is my conviction. I say that if there were those who did not make any request for postponements when the four-months system was announced, or when they were called to pass their medical examinations, those requests were not made because they believed that after four months they would be through with their training, and that they would have learned something which would help them m the defence of their country, if the need arose.
The minister has just announced a new policy whereby the men are to be chosen by lot. If a farmer's son is chosen, will he be bound to report to the training centre pending the decision of the board, or will he be permitted to remain on the farm with his parents?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I have already answered the question put by the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville (Mr. Dupuis). The position of a person wholly or mainly employed in agriculture will be the same as it is now, notwithstanding the fact that the method of calling men will be by lot instead of by age groups. If his lot should come up and he should happen to be a person wholly or mainly employed in agriculture, he may under the regulations apply for a postponement on these grounds.


Vincent Dupuis: But in the meantime he will stay at home?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: There has not been any call upon him up to this time. I hope I have made that clear to my hon. friend.
The hon. member raised two other questions. He referred to the man who was ordinarily a farmer but who on March 23 was working in a munitions plant. Sometimes I despair of trying to write press releases with precision that will cover all points that occur to me, because hon. members do not read

War Appropriation-War Services
them. The point to which my hon. friend refers is covered by the press release. These persons are in. exactly the same position as they were before the regulations were amended. If any one of such persons could make out a sound case for the postponement of his military training when he receives notice to report for medical examination, he can still do so. His position is no worse and no better than it was before. He is not deprived of his right to apply for postponement. If his case merits ordinary postponement, ordinary postponement will be granted, but it will be a postponement for a fixed period of time, subject to extension if the circumstances warrant.
The other point raised by my hon. friend had to do with those persons who were called up for four months but who expected that when they served their four months they would be permitted to return home to pursue their ordinary activities. Soon after the four months' period was put into effect the Minister of National Defence announced that when these men had finished their four months' training they would be held for service with the active army in Canada for the duration of the war. The minister made that statement on April 26, 1941. Prior to that time there had been two calls to report for four months, the first to report on March 20 and the second to report on April 17. Then came the announcement of the Minister of National Defence that these men would be held for the duration of the war.
The boards were instructed to visit the training centres. The boards dealt with the applications of all men who had been called up for four months' training without knowing that they would be held for the duration of the war and who wanted to place their cases before the boards. These cases were dealt with on the same basis by the boards as they would have dealt with applications for postponement if they had been made in the first instance before the men were ordered to report to the training centres. My understanding is that the various divisional boards made a thorough review of the cases of men who were called up on the understanding that they would be required for only four months' training, in advance of the announcement made by the Minister' of National Defence that they would be held for the duration.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Did the boards visit every camp?


Mr.   THOBSON@: I would not go so far as
to say every camp, but they reviewed the applications of those who wanted to make application for postponement and had been called up under these circumstances.


Mark Cecil Senn: We have had considerable discussion to-night about postponements and the method to be adopted by young men who have been engaged in agriculture to get postponement and exemption. It seems to me that in all instances these young men have been endeavouring to do what they considered was m the best interests of the country and of their own particular occupation. This whole discussion has raised an important question. There are three main considerations which we must observe if we are to be successful in, winning the war. The first one, of course, is the obtaining of young men for the active service forces and the other forces that are being created throughout the country. The second is the manufacture of munitions. The third, wnich I think is of equal importance, is the production of foodstuffs, not only for the people of Canada but for overseas as well.
. A serious situation has arisen in the dominion in the form of a shortage of man-power for agriculture. Everyone realizes that we must have men to man our armed forces, but I am sure that everyone realizes equally that we must have foodstuffs in abundance. ' So serious has this shortage of man-power been throughout Canada that a great many farmers heard with considerable disappointment and some consternation the statement the other day by the Minister of National Defence that men could obtain leave from the units only on compassionate grounds and only in very exceptional circumstances.
That there is an acute shortage of manpower in agriculture throughout Canada, I think no one will seriously deny. In February and March a survey of agricultural conditions m Ontario was undertaken by the federation of agriculture assisted by the Ontario department of agriculture. Part of that survey was carried on in my own county and I understand it is now complete. I have under my hand a paper entitled "Preliminary report of Haldi-mand county farm survey." It gives some figures covering the first 108 farms that were surveyed in that county which I think are indicative of conditions that prevail throughout the sections of Ontario where mixed farming is carried on. There were 108 farms in the preliminary survey, and those 108 farms average 120 acres in extent. They have a population of 391 persons, but of those 391, only 143 were male adults, or an average of about 1-3 male adults per farm. Anyone who has very much knowledge of farming operations knows that is not sufficient man-power to enable such farms to produce as they should produce.

War Appropriation

War Services
Moreover, it was shown that during 1941 at least one-third of the hired help on those farms left, either to enlist or to go to the cities and work in manufacturing industries of one kind or another. It was further shown that to-day. there are at least forty-five men urgently required on those 108 farms. It was also stated by a number of farmers with insufficient help that production on those farms could be increased anywhere from 50 to 75 per cent if they had sufficient labour.
The average age of the male adults on those 10S farms was fifty-three years, which means that quite a percentage were anywhere from sixty-five to seventy years of age and over, and therefore not in a position to carry on farming operations as actively as younger men could do.
The survey also showed that wages since the beginning of the war had increased by 80 per cent, which makes jt almost impossible for farmers to engage hired help of any kind, because farm prices have not increased nearly to the extent of price increases of other commodities.
I might give the committee one instance that came under my observation. It is my very next-door neighbour; I live on the farm myself. He is a young man, thirty-five years of age, with a wife and two children. He owns 150 acres of land and has a dairy herd, some twenty-five milch cows and a number of young cattle, besides other stock. He has been endeavouring since last fall to carry on operations on that farm alone, except for the assistance of his wife. The other day I found both him and his wife out in the field trying to get their seeding done, while the grandmother was looking after the children in the house. That is the condition which prevails in large areas of Ontario. I think it may safely be said that those conditions are somewhat general, particularly in those areas in Ontario in which mixed farming of one kind and another is being carried on, dairy production, the production of live stock, fruits, vegetables and so forth.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: In western Ontario
particularly.


Mark Cecil Senn: We will include western
Ontario particularly. There are three causes for the present situation in regard to the lack of man-power on Canadian farms. The first cause I have already indicated, namely the exodus to the city of so much farm help and of so many farmers in areas mostly surrounding the large manufacturing cities, lured there
by high wages and the shorter hours of labour than those which obtain on the farm at the present time. I may refer to that a little later.
The second great cause of the conditions that have arisen has been the voluntary system of enlisting. I hesitate to say that it has been an entire failure; I do not think it has. I would be reluctant to make such a statement because I honour more than words can tell the loyal young men and women who from a high sense of duty to their country and the empire have enlisted to fight its battles. I believe, however, that a cause of general disappointment has been the administration of the mobilization act as it exists to-day. The disappointment is that a system of selective service was not inaugurated immediately after registration was completed. I believe it would have been much better. The great majority of the Canadian people think it would have been much better, if our men and women had been placed in their proper categories, having regard to their qualifications for labour, and if the man-power of this country had been regimented and placed in the particular occupations for which they were best fitted. The voluntary system has been objectionable because it has taken from the farm many young men who were more usefully engaged in the production of foodstuffs than they could ever possibly be in either the active or the reserve army.
The third cause I would assign is the fact that a large number of young men have been taken from the farms to man the reserve army and the trainee camps.
The government undoubtedly have been aware of this increasing shortage of manpower on the farm. They have been warned about it on a great many occasions. About a year ago or a little earlier I had the honour to move in this house a motion, on going into supply, asking for a parity between farm prices and prices of other commodities. At that time I instanced clearly that there was a decided shortage of labour on the farm. I poinfed out that farmers were unable to compete in the labour market with other industries. In making this presentation I was ably seconded by other hon. gentlemen such as the hon. member for Qu'Appelle, the hon. member for Lake Centre, and many others. But the government took no action whatever. As a matter of fact, the motion was voted down.
Again early this year the Canadian federation of agriculture met the government and laid certain facts before them. As reported in

War Appropriation-War Services
the Ottawa Journal of January 28, 1942, Mr. Hannam, president of the Canadian federation of agriculture, had this to say:
The challenge of increased production to agriculture could only be met:
1.	If farmers are assured the fullest possible quota of skilled man-power "consistent with a balanced allotment of Canada's available manpower between the active forces, agriculture and industry"; .
2.	If farmers are assured an income adequate to pay skilled help, maintain and increase farm equipment and increase herds and flocks;
3.	If farmers are given guidance on production goals, looking ahead more than a year with the assurance that returns will enable them to meet the cost involved.
There he laid down three principles. First, we must have increased production, and we have from time to time been asked for increased production by the Minister of Agriculture and others representing the government. But if we are to have increased production, we must have skilled man-power on the farm in greater numbers than we now have it.
Second, we must have parity of prices because the disparity between prices of farm products and prices of other commodities lures men living on the farm into other industries in which they can find more lucrative employment. Third, Mr. Hannam mentioned that we must have leadership, direction as to the classes of commodities we should produce on the farm. I made that abundantly clear last year. The government have failed in their duty in this regard, that the farmers are not put in a position to know what it is necessary- to produce either for export or for consumption within our country. We have a Department of Agriculture, and we have a board set up for the veiy purpose of studying problems of this kind and to give leadership because the farmers must know a considerable length of time ahead what is required of them, for they have to make their plans at least a year or more before the finished product comes on the market. Unless they are given leadership, which they have not had from the beginning of this war, it is impossible for them to cany on as they should be allowed to carry on and as they are willing to carry on if the opportunity presents itself.
A third occasion on which the government were warned of the situation was just the other day when the Ontario agricultural council came to Ottawa and interviewed members of the cabinet. The gentlemen on the Ontario agricultural council are representatives of the county councils-most of them rural councils-throughout the province, and they know very well the position in which

agriculture is placed in Ontario. I listened to a part of their presentation; I have read their brief,' and it seems to me that they presented a very strong case to the government and showed clearly that conditions were not as they should be and that the supply of labour on the farm at the present time is not adequate.
I want for a moment or two to refer to order in council P.C. 2252 and what is known as the freezing of farm labour on the farms as of March 23. I was very much interested indeed when the minister mentioned his press release of April 17. There is one sentence which I should like to read to the committee and comment upon:
The essential purpose of these regulations is to prevent the agricultural situation in Canada from deteriorating beyond its present position and to enable the country to carry out the important food production aspect of its war effort.
From that it is clear that the minister realizes that the production of food is essential, but I do not agree with the idea that there is sufficient labour on the farms at the present time "to carry out the important food production aspect" of our war effort. In fact it seems to me that the laying down of the principle of stabilizing employment of men engaged in farm labour on March 23, while to a certain extent it helps the situation, is something like locking the stable after the horse has been stolen. Any action which the government took should have been taken much earlier. The minister has given enough figures to show that, under the situation as it exists, and with the shortage of farm labour, there are altogether too few people in Canada to increase production as they have been asked from time to. time by the Minister of Agriculture to increase it. I fully realize that it is necessary that it should be increased, because the quotas of different classes of farm products have been enlarged owing to the agreements that were made with Great Britain this year, and I am sorry' to say I fear greatly that Canada is going to fall short of its quotas unless some extra provision is made for farm labour at the present time or before the year is over.
I fully agree with what the president of the federation of agriculture stated, that the farmers should have a greater income if they are to be able to procure labour at all. The fact remains-I think it is generally true all over the dominion; at least it is in Ontario- that farm wages have risen very much more than the income from the products of the farm. One has only to travel through Ontario to see that there are farms lying idle at the present time. Many other farms have been

War Appropriation-War Services
gradually going back to grass, and the fanners are living there and producing only enough to maintain themselves, because of that shortage of labour.
The farmers of Canada are just as loyal as any other class. They realize as keenly as any other class the danger in which this country stands and in which our liberties are at the present time. They are being asked, as I said before, to increase production. We do not need to have any fear that they will not produce to the limit of their capacity, but that capacity is definitely limited. It is limited by lack of man-power, a condition which in some measure is due to lack of policy on the part of the government at a time when it should have taken action.
Following the registration of 1940, immediate steps should have been taken to allocate man-power to the different branches of industry, including agriculture. Only by such a scheme could maximum production be secured and maintained and the ranks of our military forces filled as they should have been. I suggest to the minister that men are in the active service force and in the reserve army to-day who should never have left the farms; they would be of infinitely greater service to the cause of freedom and to the war effort were they producing necessary foodstuffs. I therefore urge the administration to act promptly and to act before it is too late and before our capacity to maintain our quota of foodstuffs becomes hopelessly demoralized and wholly unattainable.
I have nothing further to say. More consideration should be given to this topic and further efforts should be made on the part of the administration to supply a greater source of labour to the farmers of this province and of the dominion.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: The hon. member for Haldimand has in his usual able manner indicated the needs of agriculture in this country and the desirability of seeing that we can fulfil the agricultural commitments which are part of our war effort. Undoubtedly it is one of our war objectives to produce in Canada as much in the way of essential foodstuffs as can be transported to Britain and our other allies.
We feel that the fulfilment of that part of our war objective must be safeguarded. Each purpose of our war effort has its man-power requirements, and it is essential to safeguard the man-power requirements of the agricultural portion of our war effort programme. When we were studying the situation we were able to form an estimate that between August, 1940, and January, 1941, approximately
130,000	men had left agricultural production
in order to go into some other field of activity. Others were of opinion that that estimate was too low and that the figure should be 160,000 men. Those men had left agriculture for other activities, as indicated by the hon. member for Haldimand. There had been a great rush from the farms into the cities to engage in war activity of one kind and another. There was also a very large drain on agriculture as the result of extensive voluntary enlistments.
There was also the lesser drain as the result of the calling up of men for military training It was felt that this drain should cease, if we were to fulfil our agricultural commitments. It was also felt that we would be able to fulfil our agricultural commitments by and large across the country if we prevented further undue drain of agricultural labour. That does not mean to say that the situation is wholly cured in every part of the country, but by and large we believe that this large scale allocation of labour to the essential purpose of the production of food will serve that purpose of our war effort and will safeguard its fulfilment. It may be that the production of a certain commodity will fall in one part of the country, but it will probably increase in another part. The areas that were hardest hit were areas like western Ontario and the territory contiguous to Montreal; indeed, all the milkshed areas contiguous to large cities or cities where there were large concentrations of war industries. In some of those areas the depletion of agriculture has been so great as to be quite serious. In other parts of Canada it is not so serious. All the facts that the hon. member for Haldimand referred to were, I believe, taken into account by the government in framing this policy. We decided that if we took the men who on March 23 were wholly or mainly employed in agriculture and in a sense "froze" them in agriculture, we would be allocating to the essential purpose of agricultural production practically adequate man-power, taking it by and large across the country. That was the case which was presented to us; that is some of the background of this policy, and those are some of the reasons for making this allocation of manpower to the essential purpose of agricultural production as part of our war effort.


Mark Cecil Senn: Does the minister not think there is an element of unfairness in compelling men to stay on the farms at this time, where they are getting a comparatively low wage for long hours of labour, while men who left the farm prior to March 23 are in the cities enjoying much higher wages and shorter hours of labour? It seems to me that the government should make some provision to remunerate

War Appropriation-War Services
men of that class for staying on the farm, whether it be by way of bonus or some other way. It seems to me only fair that something should be done to put those men on an equal basis with their brothers and cousins who have gone to the cities and are enjoying much higher wages.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: There is definitely that element of unfairness, I am free to admit. We did give some consideration to the question of a bonus, but it was felt that it would be almost impossible to work out any kind of bonus scheme that would be at all adequate. If you fixed a certain amount, in one part of the country it would be a pure gift; it would be much too high. On the other hand, in some areas that I have particularly mentioned, if a bonus were paid to farm labour to keep men on the land or attract them, to the land, it would not be enough to counterbalance the superior attractions of high wages that would pull men from the farms into war industries.
But there were some other factors involved in the consideration of the whole question, one being that to a certain extent the drain from the farms into war industries was coming to an end. Then there is the exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, conception of equality of sacrifice in time of war. I do not think there can be equality of sacrifice and maximum effectiveness at the same time. What equality of sacrifice is possible between the airman whose days may be numbered from the day he enlists and the man who works in a munition plant or on the farm? What equality of sacrifice is there between the soldier, sailor or airman who offers his life, and the person who does absolutely essential war service? You can perhaps have equality of contribution to the effectiveness of the war effort; I do not think you can have equality of sacrifice.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: There is not even equality of pay.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No. But there is a difference between equality of contribution to the effectiveness of the war effort and equality of sacrifice. I cannot think of any scheme that can bring about equality of sacrifice in time of war and at the same time make for maximum effectiveness. There is not equality of remuneration or reward either. There is no equality of remuneration between the soldier, sailor or airman, and the young man who works in a war industry at a high rate of pay; or between the man in the war industry and the man on the farm who has his difficult task to perform. They are all essential to the effectivenes of the war effort, but there is not equality of remuneration and

there is not equality of reward. The man who enlists voluntarily has his own remuneration and his own reward. It is inside him. He knows that he answered the call of his country when the call came. When this conflict is all over he will remember, even if everyone else has forgotten, that he answered when the call came. That is his reward, andi that reward cannot go to anyone except the volunteer. So these conceptions of equality of sacrifice and equality of remuneration are easy to talk about, but the thing with which I am sure every hon. member is concerned is maximum effectiveness, even though that has to be achieved: at the expense of such things as equality of sacrifice.


Mr. CHURCH:: I have seen the operation of this act and these regulations in Toronto and district, the main recruiting city of this dominion, and in my opinion the act and the regulations have been weighed in the balance and found wanting. I would point out that conditions have changed a great deal since the last war. With this act and all the rules and regulations with regard to delinquents, postponements and so on, I do not know how you are going to get an army, at least in Ontario. The farmers did not object when their sons voluntarily went into the air force or the navy. Both those services have long waiting lists, and it is only the army that has had trouble in getting recruits under this cumbersome system. That is not the fault of the minister; it is the result of the system. I took the same ground previously, before the minister was in charge of the department, and objected strongly to this act. These boards are headed mostly by judges; but if courts took as long to choose twelve jurors as these boards require to get twelve soldiers, the jury system would have been abolished long ago.
To those who represent farming constituencies I say that Ontario is taking action. I think almost 30 per cent of those attending the secondary schools of Toronto have gone on the farms already. The other night I handed the minister a thirty-six page extract from a Hansard debate in the British House of Commons concerning women in the old country, where they are doing a great deal of farm work, and in which regard they are far ahead of us in this country. These boards meet; they receive applications, and business is conducted as in a court of law. With the way they meet, and all the postponements that are granted, I do not know how you are going to get very many men into the army. How are we going to fight Hitler, in his third spring offensive, when we have

War Appropriation-War Services
all this trouble in getting an army in Ontario and the other provinces, with all the clamour and agitation going on for postponements and exemptions? Everyone wants somebody else to go into the army and fight for them.
Large numbers of boys from the farms of Ontario have gone to the cities and towns, where they are working in munitions plants. They will not work on the farms. I was talking to one of the judges who preside over these exemption boards, and he said that something should be done. In some cases two or three sons have gone to the city from one farm. Even high school boys in huge numbers have gladly gone from the city to the farm, although they can make five times more in munitions work than they can on the farms, and as a result we have not the number of men on the farms that we need, although the city help has gone to assist them. The whole system under this mobilization act is wrong; it is too cumbersome and too circuitous, costly and inefficient. We never should have introduced it. The old method of recruiting was better. No wonder the military authorities are complaining. We could have had a million men under the voluntary system, but recruiting was not given a chance with it, on again, off again, on again, just according to the season. The sources of recruits for the army, which is the only service to which this act applies, were dried right up from the start with all the postponements, evasions and antiquated methods, and the way the recruiting under the voluntary system was handled. Canada is lagging away behind, as far as the army goes. The lack of one division of infantry to oppose Japanese infiltration brought about the loss of Singapore. It was the old simple system that took that island; the rifle, the bayonet, the machine gun, the tommy gun, and especially the infiltration of the infantry led to that great disaster. In Australia they are handling the farm and army situation better than we are, though they had a hundred thousand men overseas, and though they lost many men in Crete, Greece and Libya. If Hitler should appear off our coast or in the St. Lawrence, or if we should be invaded by the Japanese, we would hear less talk about these exemptions.
These boards move in a mysterious way their wonders to perform. They meet; they postpone; they talk, and as I have said, I wonder that we got as many men in the army as we did. Recruits are needed; that is primary, not secondary. Men are needed in the army, and you are not going to get them by going about it in this way. In my opinion the entire act should be repealed and abolished.
We have three war departments, and we never should have divided them up. They should be reunited in one department, because this separation has led to untold waste, duplication, and the spending of a mint of money. Even in the Department of National War Services, think of the number of forms and stationery and the amount of waste-paper. I do not know how many vaults are needed to house it all, but in Toronto I have seen the billboards, the advertisements, the literature and all the rest of it. In spite of all that the act has been a complete failure -and, in my opinion, should be repealed. We should go back to the old system. If we had the three departments brought together again,
I am sure we would bring about greater efficiency and economy, because we need action and time is most important since we were an unmilitary dominion.
I do not know how we are going to get the men we need for our army this year. The enemy are at the front door, the back door, the side door and all the other doors, but our men are not going into the army. They shun it for the air force and navy. I think we should have a better, more simple and modern system. -I have some sympathy for the minister. I am not unfriendly toward him. Perhaps he has done the best he could, but I think the system is altogether wrong. The minister might evolve a better system which would get far better, surer and quicker results than have been obtained so far. I have seen the operation of this act in the city of Toronto, and I say we are not getting the recruits. One employer may say, "I need this key man." The answer is, "well, we will try to get you a postponement." Probably the man sees his member of parliament or some city official; they see the board, and action to aid a postponement is taken accordingly. How are we going to get the men? We are now more than half through the third year of the war, and the situation is not as it should be in regard to recruiting. No wonder voluntary enlistments have fallen down. They have none of this trouble in the navy and the air force, as I have said; we hear very little from the farmers in opposition to their sons going into those services, and there is no demand for postponement there.
In my opinion this farm situation is largely a provincial rather than a federal matter. Agriculture is something in regard to which there is concurrent jurisdiction between federal and provincial authority, but in war time a great deal of the farm work should be gone into and controlled by the provinces. I believe the first duty of a citizen is to defend his country and the defence of the

War Appropriation-War Services
realm, and, if necessary, to leave his farm, his business, or his job. I admire what the farmers of this country have done. During the last war many boys from the finest farms of Ontario went to the war without coaxing; they have done the same in this war, and many do not want to farm and stay at home.


Howard Charles Green: As I understood the minister's explanation of the policy of the government with regard to farm labour, it is that there is no need to provide for more farm labour, but that what is required is to prevent any further decrease in the farm labour available. It is possible that this policy will not go far enough, that the government may have to make some provision for increasing the available supply of farm labour, and I should like to know whether any consideration has been given to plans having that object in view.
I have one or two suggestions which might be considered by the minister. First of all, there is order in council P.C. 2250, which prohibits the 'employment of men from seventeen to forty-five inclusive in non-war jobs. As I read that order in council, it is designed to force these men into the armed services, or into war jobs. There is apparently no intention of forcing these men into agriculture. It may be that the government has some order in council, or could take some step which would help channel those men who leave non-war jobs in industry into agriculture. At any rate, I would suggest that the minister give consideration to some move of that kind.
The other suggestion is with regard to women. As I read the announcement made by the government on March 24, it had in mind using more women in war industry. However, no mention at all was made of using women in agriculture. It may be that that would be another source from which quite a large body of agricultural help could be obtained.


John Ritchie MacNicol: May I ask the minister,
in reference to the discussion which has been going on, if the government or his department is taking any notice of the fact that the farmers will have great difficulty in obtaining large tires and gasoline for their tractors. Unless they are able to obtain tires, tractor repairs and gasoline to operate the tractors, of which nearly every farm in the country has one or more, many more men will be required on the farms than are now there.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The minister
has not yet answered the question I put to him before supper, and one which I asked the 
Minister of National Defence some time ago. I asked what happens to the men who were called to report on April 9. My interest is not that of having any man kept out of training, if he ought to be in training. My interest is that the whole question of calling up men for military service shall be as fair and impartial as possible, so that people will not feel that there is any discrimination, or that any particular person or group of persons is being penalized.
With reference to the men called on April 9, there was a piece of serious muddling somewhere. I do not know who was responsible. However, I am asking the minister to look at the facts. Order in council P.C. 2252 was passed on March 23 and tabled in the house on March 24. It was passed along with other orders in council. They were not generally made known throughout the country until March 25. The minister knows just as well as anyone that there are hundreds of little hamlets throughout Canada where the people get their mail only once a week. There are thousands of people, particularly in western Canada, who do not get even a weekly paper. Many of these people knew absolutely nothing about the new regulation. Those who . did know did not properly understand it. As a matter of fact, the newspapers generally inferred that the exemption for men on the farms was automatic. Proof of that is that the minister himself subsequently issued a press release trying to clarify the situation.
Even those who did understand the regulations were in a quandary. When I returned home for the Easter recess many of these men came to me, or called me by telephone. They were men who had made applications for postponement, but who had been refused postponements on the ground of the regulations as they existed prior to March 23. I telephoned the board and they said, "Why, not only can we not consider postponements under the new regulations, but we have hundreds of applications for postponements under the regulations as they were before March 23, and we have not been able to reach them yet." Some of those cases were still being heard on the morning of April 9. Some men were granted postponements, turned round and went back home.
The other evening I asked the Minister of National Defence a question along this line, and his reply was much the same as that made a little while ago by the Minister of National War Services. The Minister of National Defence said at that time, as reported at page 2154 of Hansard:
He should have made his claim then. The rule is that if he does, and shows that he was wholly or partly engaged in agriculture at

War Appropriation-War Services
that time, the burden is on someone else, I suppose the army authorities or the Department of National War Services, itself, to show that he was still, even though wholly or mainly engaged in agriculture, not essential thereto.
I "do not know why he has not made that application. Perhaps he has.
Then he went on to say:
If he has not made that application and has gone into the service he may still apply to the commanding officer, who will refer the application to the board through the district officer commanding.
But that is a totally different thing. Then the minister is reported as follows, on the next page of Hansard:
My hon. friend is under a misapprehension when he speaks of a provision having been made. The only provision which has been made is the provision that when an application is made for compassionate leave-not for seeding, but for leave under special circumstances- the commanding officer makes a recommendation, whatever it may be, and passes it on to the district officer commanding, who sends it to the board.
These are two different things: the one-postponement from military service; the other-leave on compassionate grounds for a
stated period of time.
I would not want these men to feel that they had been misled by anybody. But they made reference to members of parliament and to the board, and said, "We have been called. Some of us have asked for postponement and have been refused. Some of us did not ask for postponement because, under the regulations as they existed prior to April 23, we were not eligible. Now comes a new postponement, two weeks before we are due to report. What are we to do?" In every case they were told, "Unless you get word not to report, you should report. Otherwise you are liable for action under the war services regulations." These men came in and reported. If some young man stayed at home and said, "I am not going to report until I have had a decision regarding my application under the new regulations for indefinite postponement", he still has a chance to get a postponement. But these other men are now out of the jurisdiction of the Department of National War Services and under the jurisdiction of the Department of National Defence. They cannot obtain postponements now. But they can apply on compassionate grounds for leave to do spring work. It'is a pretty serious situation. In some ways these men were almost enticed into Regina under false pretences. They were brought there under the impression that it was impossible now to apply for leave under the new regulations.
The secretary of the board told me frankly, "We have hundreds of applications made
under the old regulations. We cannot begin to deal with the new regulations at the present time." Yet, according to both the Minister of National Defence and the Minister of National War Services, these men were eligible to make application. Nevertheless the board was not in a position to hear their applications or proceed with their cases.
I believe with reference to this group that something ought to be done. Either the regulations passed on March 23 should have been held over until after April 9, or they should have been brought down early enough so that these men would have had some opportunity to make their representations to the board. It is a serious matter for the men, because this is not a matter of training for thirty days or even for four months. It is a matter of service until the end of the war. I believe the impression will be prevalent in some quarters that these men were called in and told to report without being informed, as they should have been, that they had the right to make an appeal for postponement.
One other question I should like to ask the minister has to do with the press release. He says that, a definite change has taken place with respect to this order in council. I am not clear as to where the fundamental change is. As the regulation stood prior to March 23, if a man were called he had the right to make an application for postponement on certain grounds. The onus was on him to prove that he had the right to such postponement. The board was to decide, and its decision was final. It seems to me the change is that instead of the man having to satisfy the board as to his right to postponement, the board must satisfy itself that he has that right.
The minister said a little while ago that these regulations were mandatory. They are mandatory only on the board to satisfy itself. It is the prosecuting attorney and the judge.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I may say that it is mandatory upon the board to grant the postponement order, whereas previously the granting of a postponement order was within the discretion of the board.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: It is only mandatory [DOT] upon the board to grant a postponement order if the board is satisfied that it should be issued. In other words, the decision is still with the board; the onus is not on the board to do anything except satisfy itself that the man does or does not deserve postponement. It seems to me that there has been no fundamental change at all, the situation is exactly as it was before except probably that the board has a wider basis for

War Appropriation-War Services
granting postponement. Whereas before it granted postponements only on compassionate grounds, where it could be shown that it worked a hardship on a man's family if he were taken away, because the father and mother were incapable of carrying on-[DOT]


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Has the hon. member forgotten section 14, that it is in the national interest? Applications for postponement are not granted solely on the basis of hardship on the applicant.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: It has been granted in many cases for that reason. It was granted in a particular case where a father already had three sons overseas and they were taking his last son. The father was blind, and the board decided to grant a postponement because they felt it was warranted. I think that was quite fair and proper. The only difference is that it has been placed on a more factual basis. I am not complaining about that, but I do not think the minister is correct when he says that there has been a fundamental change. There has been no fundamental change. A man still has to apply to the board, and the board must still decide in its own wisdom, without any appeal, whether or not the man is essential to agriculture. There is no appeal; it is merely up to the man to prove, or for the board to disprove, that he is essential to agriculture. Personally I cannot see that any great change has "been made. I should like to ask the minister to give some consideration to those men who were called on April 9 but who were never properly informed about this regulation. Even if they had been properly informed, they were never given sufficient time to make proper representations to a board and have their cases heard, as they had a right to do under PC 2252.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I shall be glad to take note of what my hon. friend has said, but I cannot add anything to what was said by the Minister of National Defence and what I stated this afternoon when the point was raised. There was nothing before the board after March 23 to indicate that the person desired to apply for postponement under the terms of that order.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Did the
boards have these orders in council?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Almost immediately after they were published.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: How many postponements were granted on the basis of these regulations?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I would not have any return as yet on that particular subject. I have no doubt that a good many persons who were called to report on April 9 had not any intention of applying for. postponement.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Many of
them had been rejected already.
Mr. j. IIORSON: Many had made their applications for postponement and had been rejected.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: On the basis of the old regulations.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: On the basis of the old regulations. In the case of the western boards, the Saskatchewan board particularly, I think the record of performance in respect of applications for postponement from farmers indicates that they are fully seized of the importance of agriculture to the national economy. I filed tables showing the applications made. The tables show also the grounds of the applications and the extent to which they were granted or otherwise. I wonder whether there are as many cases as my hon. friend would indicate. I shall be glad to look into the question further. Thus far not many cases have been brought to my attention. The answer is the one I gave this afternoon, that the amendments apply to the person who makes the application under them and not otherwise.
_ Naturally there would be some confusion in view of the fact that the call was fixed for April 9 and the regulations were not announced until March 24. If the course suggested by the hon. member for Weyburn had been followed, namely, that we should have postponed the announcement of our regulations until the April call was filled, I am satisfied that a great many persons who have had the benefit of the regulations, if it is a benefit, would not have come under the regulations. Perhaps it is as broad as it is long. Whenever any change of this sort is made in procedure, a certain amount of adjustment must of necessity take place. Every effort was made to meet the situation and comply with the requisition that was sent from the Department of National Defence. I shall be glad to look into the question which my hon. friend has brought to my attention.


George Hugh Castleden: Will the minister explain how the boards confirm any statements made to them by applicants for postponement?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: There is no fixed method, but there are various sources of information available to the board. Frequently a board is satisfied with an application on its merits, or it may inquire of prominent people in the

War Appropriation-TFar Services
district or make use of other reliable sources of information that are open. If the board thinks a case looks doubtful, it may refer the file for police investigation. There is no fixity about it. I think the beauty of the system is its flexibility and the informality with which the board deals with the applications.


George Hugh Castleden: I think too much flexibility might not work in the best interests of the applicants and the country. You must be careful who the informants are and what the information is.
In the administration of the act there are several features which I think are objectionable and which lead to a degree of discrimination and therefore of injustice, which should be avoided. But it is perhaps only natural when things of this kind are done by order in council. This government has been an order in council government, and the objections to that have been numerous and very strongly expressed, certainly from this side of the house. What the hon. member for Weyburn said this evening is only too true. People are not familiar with the regulations; they are not familiar with the orders in council. Members of the house know from their own experience that it is difficult enough for them to try to keep up with all the orders in council that are being passed. Then press dispatches are put out, and there are press releases, and amendments to the regulations. People do not know the regulations, and certainly they do not understand the procedure. I have found in my own experience that a vast number of people who have been called up have no idea how they should proceed in presenting their case before the board. The boards are not sufficiently approachable, and the recruits do not understand their rights and privileges.
One of the main tasks of a department that is being administered as this one is, with orders in council constantly changing the basis of approach to the problem, is to see that the people are completely informed. There seems - to be a lack of imagination on the part of some officials to realize that many of these people who are being called up do not read very much, and that there are people of different languages and different races who cannot read the English language any too well. The department should do more towards informing these people fully and seeing that abuses do not arise. In the house this evening we have had recorded a serious case where one kind of justice was meted out to a man who could hire a lawyer to conduct his case and where a different decision had been handed out when the man had presented his own case. Was that not the case that was
presented here this evening, the case of a man who failed when making his own application for postponement which was afterwards granted when a lawyer appeared for him? The facts of the case have not been denied.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No facts of the case were given.


George Hugh Castleden: The facts of the case were given very clearly, and there was certainly no indication that the administration was going to take any steps to remedy that situation. When there can be one law for those who have money to engage somebody to present their case for them, and another law for those who cannot afford to engage help, conditions in Canada are in a very serious state, and when that happens in the conscription of men it is a sad reflection on the administration. I am only saying what I am saying in the interests of having that fairness and even-handed justice which should prevail. If justice is not even-handed, it is not justice, and the duty of every member should be to see that everything is done to maintain justice.
I know personally of the case of a man on a half-section of land who applied for postponement and received it. He made a second application and got one month's postponement. He was then called up and further postponement was denied him. That man then had to go back to his farm, and he took all the stock he had into town and sold it for whatever he could get. His cattle were not finished, and he suffered a terrific loss. He had to abandon his farm, and the latest report I had was that no one was working that land. It was left without any cultivation and without any protection even for the buildings and machinery the man was forced to leave there.
Another case was brought to my attention of a man farming a large tract of land. His father had 900 acres of land under cultivation, also 100 head of cattle and thirty-five head of horses. The father was fifty-eight years of age, and the boy, twenty-four years old, had been most useful in operating the farm. He understood how to run a tractor, and he was really a key-man in agriculture if anyone can be considered such. That boy made application for postponement. He probably could not present his case as well as he might have done had he had more education and been more familiar with the English language. His efforts to get a postponement were not successful. He was called up, and the father was left to operate the farm as best he could. These are actual cases where men have been called up. I only hope that where there is less ground for postponement than in these cases, the applications have not been granted.

War Appropriation-War Services
There are one or two constructive suggestions I should like to leave with the minister. First of all, I would say: Keep the people informed and see that all those who are liable to be called are fully informed as to their rights and privileges. Second, I would say that the boards should be made more approachable, more easily accessible. Third, they should be enlarged. Other persons than employers might be permitted to present the case for any man. The instructions that are sent out to those being called up should be complete and in full detail. There should also be some form of central board of appeal from the decisions of the local boards. I know the minister says that it is entirely up to the boards of the various provinces. The reason why I have not brought more of these matters to the attention of the minister has been that his attitude has been that it is entirely the responsibility of the various provinieal boards.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: That is correct.


George Hugh Castleden: I also say this, that in cases where men are called up, the period in which they might be granted the right to appeal their case should be extended beyond what it is at the present time.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Is the hon. member referring to the eight days from receipt of notice?


George Hugh Castleden: No. Sometimes these men get called up before they realize their rights in -the situation. Some men have been granted their postponement on condition that they enrol in the reserve army. That was the procedure.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I have not heard of any such case.


George Hugh Castleden: That was common procedure in Saskatchewan for some time.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I have not heard of such a case.


George Hugh Castleden: I shall be glad to give the cases to the minister.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: That was the thirty-day training.


George Hugh Castleden: This man was granted postponement from service conditional upon his enrolling in the reserve army.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: If he made up his thirty days by enrolling in the reserve army, he would be exempted from the thirty-day training.


George Hugh Castleden: This was a postponement granted this year.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I have not heard of any such case, and I would be interested in having the particulars.


Mr. FLEMING:: It is quite common.


George Hugh Castleden: It was quite common in Saskatchewan. I know that there is a regulation form put up. This was printed in red ink at the bottom, -that this postponement is granted conditional to the person who has been granted the postponement enrolling in the reserve army. I am not complaining of it. But that immediately takes the matter of an appeal or an application for further postponement out of the hands of the local board. Then the man, if he wishes to obtain postponement, must apply, I understand, according to the regulations, -to his commanding officer within three months of the time he enrols. Then his application goes in front of his commanding officer. In case a man has enrolled or enlisted in the army he is granted three months, is he not, from the time he enlists, in which he can make further application for postponement or another hearing? A long enough period should be granted to each man so that he will have time to place his application before the proper authority.
These are -the suggestions I offer to the minister.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: I thank the hon. member for his suggestions. I was going to deal with the more important amendments, and there is just one other in which I think hon. members will be interested. When persons were found to be conscientious objectors or Mennonites or Doukhobors, the boards had power to direct these persons to alternative service in substitution of the military service to which, on religious grounds, they objected. Originally that alternative service was limited to four months, by reason of the fact that that was the regulation at the time the four months training was put into effect for men who were called up. Recently we amended the regulations and made the alternative service of conscientious objectors of the same duration as military service.


Grote Stirling: For the duration of the war, that is?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: For the duration of the war, so that with regard to persons who take objection to military service on the grounds of being Mennonites or Doukhobors or conscientious objectors within the meaning of the regulations, if their contentions are maintained, their military training is postponed and they may be directed to alternative service for the duration of the war. Recently I entered into an agreement with the minister of lands of

Labour Conditions
British Columbia under which a very large number of conscientious objectors will be doing, in lieu of military service, alternative service of an important national character, namely the prevention of forest fires in that province.


Howard Charles Green: Would the minister give the approximate number?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: We have undertaken to send to British Columbia up to a thousand of these conscientious objectors, provided they are available.


James Arthur Ross: On what basis will they be paid?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: They will be paid on the same basis that they have been paid for the alternative service. My recollection is t'hat they got fifty cents a day.


Grote Stirling: The minister is not sending any more Doukhobors to British Columbia?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: We will watch the Doukhobors for the hon. member for Yale, and not send them as forest fire preventers. They are not included in the list which we shall furnish to the minister of lands of British Columbia.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Are they issued with clothing in addition to the fifty cents a day?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: No.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: They buy their clothing out of the fifty cents a day?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: So far they have bought their clothing.


George Hugh Castleden: Was the system of granting postponement conditional upon enrolling in the reserve army condoned by the Minister of National War Services?


Grote Stirling: He never heard of it.


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: It is a practice of which I am unaware. I shall be glad to look into that matter as well as into the other suggestions put forward by the hon. member for Yorkton.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Tuesday, May 12, 1942