1942-05-07

[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. E. MICHAUD (for the Minister of Transport) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 68, respecting the Toronto harbour commissioners.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

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

Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	How many houses were built by Wartime Housing Limited within the city limits of Halifax?
2.	What types of houses were built and how many of each type?
3.	What was the cost per unit of each type?
4.	How many of each type are now occupied?
5.	What rental is charged for each type?
6.	Are there any restrictions to the type of tenants?
7.	Do all tenants occupying homes come within the regulations?
8.	Was an application received from the city of Halifax for the use of any other houses within the city limits?
9.	What arrangements, if any, were made with the city of Halifax in respect to renting these houses?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	541 houses.
2.	Wartime Housing Limited built within the city limits of Halifax the following number of H type houses: Type HI and H2-332 houses; Type Hll and H12-162 houses; Type H21 and H22-47 houses.
Note: The above types are four-room bungalows with two bedrooms except type Hll and H12 which are six-room houses with four bedrooms.
3.	The average cost per unit for each type of house is as follows: Type HI and H2- $2,045.60; Type Hll and HI 2-$2,803.05; Type H21 and H22-$2,196.55 (estimated only).
4.	The following number of houses are occupied: Hi and H2-320 houses; Hll and H12-140 houses; H21 and H22-46 houses.
5.	The rental rates are as follows; Type HI and H2-$25 per month; Type Hll and H12-$32 per month; Type H21 and H22- $27.50 per month.
6.	Yes, they are rented to men and their families engaged in the manufacture of munitions or engaged on defence projects or as otherwise directed by the Minister of Munitions and Supply.
7.	Yes. Excepting where exceptions were made by the minister in the case of the armed services and other government services.
8.	Yes.
9.	The city of Halifax was offered certain houses for a specific tenancy. No houses were available in Halifax for this purpose when the city desired same; houses in Dartmouth were offered the city of Halifax in substitution but were refused.


WARTIME PRICES AND TRADE BOARD NEWS SUMMARY
Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	How many are employed on the staff of the wartime prices and trade board for the production of the wartime prices and trade board news summary?
2.	Who edits the material appearing in the news summary?
3.	What is the, (a) daily cost, (b) monthly cost of issuing the news summary?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	Two, part-time.
2.	This sheet is prepared solely for distribution within the board's staff and its purpose is to keep members of the staff informed as to board orders and press releases, additions to or changes in senior personnel and in brief summary form to direct their attention to newspaper items and articles in the weekly and monthly press that may be of interest to them.
3.	(a) $6.75; (b) S175.50.


NATIONAL WAR LABOUR BOARD
Mr. COLD WELL:: 1.	What is the personnel of the national war labour board and what organizations or interests recommended the appointment of each of them?
2.	Who are the members of the executive of the national war labour board and what salary or other remuneration does each receive?
3.	(a) Who acts as chairman of the board or executive when the Minister of Labour is occupied elsewhere; (b) how many meetings of the board has each member attended; (c) how many meetings of the executive has each member of the executive attended?
4.	What is the exact procedure of the board for the consideration and settlement of cases which come before it?
5.	What provision is there for labour unions to present their case before the board through the personal appearance of their representatives and what provision is there for them to appear before the executive of the board?
. 6- (a) How many cases concerning wage increases or bonus payments have been before
Questions

the board to date; (b) how many of these were brought before the board through applications by employers and how many through applications by employees; (c) how many wage increases have been granted by the board on employers' applications and how many on applications filed by employees; (d) how many bonus payments or increases have been granted to each of the two groups of applications; (e) what in each case were the grounds for granting the applications and what were the grounds for refusal in those cases where the application was rejected?


Mr. MITCHELL:: The first five questions have been answered. I can answer the sixth if the hon. member who asked the questions will give us time to get the necessary material. We have been under pressure for the last two or three days because of the national boards which are meeting here.


Mr. COLDWELL:: Yes, I understand. That
is all right.
Mr. SPEAKER; The last part of the question stands.


Humphrey Mitchell: Members of National War Labour Board
1.	Honourable Humphrey Mitchell, M.P., chairman.
Dr. Bryce 51. Stewart, Deputy Minister of Labour, vice-chairman.
Name-Position and Address-Nominated by
Bell, John A.-General chairman, Order of Railroad Telegraphers, 139 Pacific avenue, Toronto, Ont.-International Railway Labour organisations.
Deschamps, A.-President, Builders Exchange, 680 Sherbrooke St. W., Montreal, Que.-Canadian Construction Association.
Dunn, W. - Financial secretary-treasurer, Toronto District Labour Council, 404 Merton street, Toronto, Ont.-Trades and Labour Congress of Canada.
Hodge, George-Manager, Dept, of Personnel, Canadian Pacific railways, Montreal, Que.- Canadian Chamber of Commerce, and by Railway Association of Canada.
Jackson, Gilbert-President, Sentinel Securities of Canada Ltd., Toronto, Ont.-Canadian Manufacturers Association.
McClelland, John-Valois, Que.-Trades and Labour Congress of Canada.
Mosher, A. It.-President, Canadian Congress of Labour, 230 Laurier Ave. W., Ottawa, Ont.- Canadian Congress of Labour.
Picard, Gerard-General secretary, Confederation of Catholic Workers of Canada, Quebec, Que.-Confederation of Catholic Workers of Canada.
Stovel, J. H.-Vice-president and general manager, Dome Mines, South Porcupine, Ont.- Canadian Manufacturers Association, and by Ontario Mining Association.
Taylor, H.-Industrial Relations Department, Canadian National Carbon Co. Ltd., Toronto, Ont.-Canadian Manufacturers Association.
(Mr. Coldwell.]
Members of Executive Committee
2.	Chairman, Honourable Humphrey Mitchell, M.P.; vice-chairman, Dr. Bryce M. Stewart, Deputy Minister of Labour; George Hodge- serves without remuneration-recouped actual out of pocket expenses; J. A. McClelland- $8,000 per annum.
3.	(a) In the absence of the chairman, the vice-chairman presides at board meetings.
(b)	Twenty meetings of the National Board have been held. The following is the attendance list:
Meetings
(days)
Chairman	 15
Vice-chairman	 9
Bell, John A	 20
Deschamps, A	 18
Dunn, W	  19
Hodge, George	 20
Jackson, Gilbert	 20
McClelland, John A	'	20
Mosher, A. R	 20
Picard, Gerard	 20
Stovel, J. H	 19
Taylor, H	 20
(c)	The executive committee has held 53 executive sessions.
The following is the attendance record at the regular meetings of this committee:
Meetings
Chairman	 18
Vice-chairman	 46
George Hodge	 52
J. A. McClelland	 49
In addition the committee has been in conference almost every day.
4.	All decisions of the National Board are made by the board itself. Method of procedure in dealing with applications of the board is in accordance with the by-laws as adopted and provided in order in council P.C. 8253. A copy of the by-laws is submitted.
The attached letter of instructions also indicates the procedure followed in giving notice of applications and hearings and recording of decisions.
5.	Answered by No. 4.
6.	To follow.
The National War Labour Board By-laws
1.	(1) In these by-laws unless the context otherwise requires,-
(a)	"bonus" means the cost of living bonus for which provision is made in the order;
(b)	"National Board" means the National War Labour Board;
(c)	"national employer" means
(i)	any employer engaged in
(a)	the operation of lines of steam or other ships, railways, canals or telegraphs, including all services ancillary thereto, connecting any province with any other or others of the provinces or extending beyond the limits of the province;
(b)	the operation of any system of air, bus or truck transportation connecting any province with any other or others of the provinces or extending beyond the limits of the province;

Questions
(c)	the operation of any electrical power or transmission works connecting any province with any other or others of the provinces or extending beyond the limits of any province, or serving two or more provinces;
(d)	mining;
(e)	the operation of any shipyard.
(ii) any other employer who is so designated by the National Board, either specially or as a member of a class so designated, pursuant to the provisions of these by-laws.
(d)	"Order" means the War Time Wages and Cost of Living Bonus Order (order in council P.C. 8253 of October 24, 1941, and any amendments thereto).
(e)	"Regional Board" means a Regional War Labour Board;
(f)	"the administration of the order" includes the administration of order in council, P.C. 7679 of the 4th October, 1941, and the administration of the Pair Wages and Hours of Labour Act, 1935.
(2)	Any employer, other than a national employer, who employs persons in two or more regions, shall, for the purposes of the administration of the order, be deemed to be an employer carrying on business as in each of such regions in respect of his employees in each of such regions.
(3)	Other words and expressions used in these by-laws shall, unless the context otherwise requires, have the same meaning as in the order.
The National Board
2.	(1) The meetings of the National Board shall be held at the call of the chairman, or in his absence at the call of the executive committee, at least once in each month unless otherwise directed by the National Board.
(2)	The chairman, or in his absence such other member of the executive committee as he may designate, shall preside at any meeting of the National Board.
(3) The decision of the majority of the National Board at any meeting shall be the decision of the National Board and in the event of a tie the chairman shall have a casting vote.
(4)	There shall be a secretary of the National Board who shall keep the minutes of the meetings and the records of the National Board.
3.	(1) The chairman, or in his absence such other member of the executive committee as he may designate, shall preside at any meeting of the executive committee.
(2)	The decision of the majority of the members of the executive committee present at any meeting shall be the decision of the executive committee.
(3)	The secretary of the National Board shall be the secretary of the executive committee and shall keep the minutes of the meetings and the records of the executive committee and shall conduct such correspondence and perform such other duties as the executive committee may direct.
4.	(1) The executive committee shall,-
(a)	through the chief executive officer, control and direct the staff in the office of the National Board or assigned to the administration of the order in respect of national employers;
(b)	report to the National Board on such
matters and at such times as the National
Board may require.
(2) In any case where any immediate action by the National Board is urgently required and where the executive committee is of opinion that it is not in the public interest to delay such action until the matter can be referred to the National Board the executive committee may act for the National Board and for such purpose may exercise all powers conferred by the order or by these by-laws on the National Board and shall report such action to the National Board at the next meeting thereof.
5.	The chief executive officer of the National Board shall carry out the directions of and shall perform such duties as are assigned to him by the executive committee.
6.	The chairman, any member of the executive committee, the chief executive officer or the secretary of the National Board may sign any document or communication on behalf of such board.
Regional Boards
7.	A regional board may make such rules as may seem expedient for the conduct of its business and proceedings not inconsistent with the provisions of the order or of these by-laws.
8.	(1) A regional board shall exercise control and direction over the staff in the office of the regional board or assigned to the administration of the order in respect of employers other than national employers in the region with respect to which such regional board is appointed.
(2) A regional board shall comply with any request of and shall give effect to any order or direction by the National Board.
Administration
9.	The National Board shall
(1)	control and direct the administration of the order in respect of national employers;
(2)	supervise the regional boards in the administration of the order in respect of employers other than national employers;
(3)	from time to time issue such rulings and instructions to the regional boards or prescribe such form or forms for use by the National Board or regional boards as may be necessary to ensure uniformity in the administration of the order.
10.	The National Board may from time to time designate any employer or any class of employers, not included in the classes of national employers enumerated in these bylaws, as a national employer or as national employers.
11.	(1) A regional board shall be charged with all duties and responsibilities in respect of the administration of the order in respect of employers, other than national employers, carrying on business within the region with respect to which such regional board is appointed.
(2)	For such purpose a regional board may act for the National Board and shall perform all duties imposed upon the National Board and may, subject to the provisions of these bylaws, exercise all powers conferred on the National Board by the order.
(3)	A regional board shall be governed in the performance of such duties or in the

Questions

exercise of such powers by any rulings or instructions issued by the National Board and any decision, order or direction of any regional board shall be in accordance with such rulings or instructions.
(4)	Where with respect to any matter the opinion of a regional board is divided in respect of the interpretation or application of the order or of any ruling or instruction of the National Board or where in any case in the opinion of a regional board there is doubt in respect thereof, the regional board shall not make any decision or give any order or direction with respect to such matter or in such case until the regional board has referred such question of interpretation or application to the National Board.
Procedure
12.	Any application by any employer or employers or any employee or employees or any association of employers or of employees requesting any board
(a)	to prescribe increased wage rates; or
(b)	to defer payment of any bonus for any period or to adjust the amount of any bonus; or
(c)	to determine any dispute as to whether a bonus is payable or the amount of any bonus; or
(d)	to exempt any employer from payment, in whole or in part, of the bonus;
shall be required to be submitted in writing.
13.	(1) Any application in respect of a national employer shall be referred to the National Board and any application in respect of an employer other than a national employer shall be referred to the regional board for the region in which such employer carries on business.
(2)	The	National	Board	or	any	regional
board to which an application is referred shall give notice in such manner, as, in the circumstances, it deems sufficient to any person, firm, corporation or association having an immediate interest in the matter in respect of which such application is made and shall give an opportunity for representations to be made by or on behalf of every such person with regard thereto.
(3)	The	National	Board	or	any	regional
board to which an application is referred shall make such inquiries and investigations into the matter in respect of which such application is made as it deems necessary for the proper disposal thereof.
General
14.	(1) Any regional board to which notice is given of the modification of any labour agreement inconsistent with the provisions of the order to bring it into conformity therewith or to which notice is given of the suspension of any other condition of work suspended in the interest of war production shall send such notice to the National Board.
(2) The National Board shall keep a record of all such notices and of all notices of a like nature sent directly to the National Board.
15.	All meetings, records, deliberations and discussions of the National Board or the executive committee or of any regional board shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed unless such disclosure is authorized by the National Board or the executive committee or by the

regional board, respectively, and any such disclosure shall be made by the chairman of the National Board or in his absence such person as he designates for such purpose or by the chairman of the regional board or in his absence such person as he designates for such purpose.
16.	Subject to the approval of the Minister of Labour the National Board may from time to time amend these bylaws.
National War Labour Board
To Chairmen and Chief Executive Officers Regional War Labour Boards. Administrative Procedure Letter No. 4 Re: Giving notice of applications and hearings, recording of decisions, etc.
A.	Notice' of Application:
1.	Application in writing received. If the material in support of the application is not complete, an opportunity to complete it should be given to the applicant.
2.	If application is accompanied by a consent by or on behalf of all parties having any immediate interest in it no notice need be given.
3.	If application is not accompanied by such a consent, the chief executive officer of the board to whom application is made shall give notice as follows;
(a)	if the application is made by the employer, to all employees having any immediate interest in it either individually or by posting a form of notice (draft form attached) in the office, plant or works of the employer. The employer may be directed to post such notice for such period and in such manner as the board directs and to furnish proof of the posting;
(b)	if the application is made by or on behalf of all employees having any immediate interest in it, to the employer;
(c)	if the application is by some but not all employees having any immediate interest in it, to the employer and the other employees who have any immediate interest in it.
4.	In the event that the working conditions in respect of which applications are made are covered by a collective agreement, it will be sufficient if notice to the employees is given to the signatories on their behalf of the collective agreement.
5.	Upon receipt of an application, the chief executive officer will analyse all material submitted with the application and all representations, if any, made in respect thereof and if necessary request further material and make an investigation. A summarized analysis of all material will then be submitted to the board together with any suggestions of the chief executive officer.
B.	Notice of Hearing:
If the board considers it necessary, for the proper determination of the questions submitted in the application, to hold a hearing, notice of the holding of the hearing shall be given in the same manner as that outlined in the case of notices of applications and shall state the time and place of the hearing, together with the order of the appearance of the parties, if necessary.

Questions
C.	Recording Decisions:
Tlie decision of the board will be recorded by a minute in the following manner:
"An application having been received from
	, employer, (or employees or on
behalf of employees of	 employer)
requesting the board to
(state question for decision) and all parties having any immediate interest therein having consented (or-"and an opportunity having been given to all parties having any immediate interest therein to make representations with regard thereto");
The board finds
(state finding of board) and that it is fair and reasonable to
(state proposal to be made by board) and prescribes and directs..."
(direct board's proposal to be carried out)
D.	Announcing Decisions:
The formal decision of the board shall be given to all the parties concerned in the manner set out above and shall be in the following form or in a form as nearly analogous thereto as the circumstances permit:
"In the matter of the Wartime Wages and Cost of Living Bonus Order, and
In the matter of an application of	
employer (or employees or on behalf of
employees of	employer) for	
(state briefly the substance of the question submitted in the words of the minute)
Finding and direction
The above mentioned application having been considered by the board and all parties having any immediate interest therein having consented to the granting thereof (or- "and an opportunity having been given to all parties having an immediate interest therein to make representations with respect thereto") the
Regional War Labour Board for	
has found	
(insert in the wording of the minute) and has found
(insert in the wording of the minute) and has directed
(insert in the wording of the minute) Chairman,
Regional War Labour Board for
E.	General:
1.	In the case of an application to the board to determine whether certain employees are above the rank of foreman or not there will not, of course, be any finding as to fairness or reasonableness or any direction and the decision will be limited to a direct finding.
2.	Every finding, decision, determination, order or direction should adhere strictly to the words of the clause in the order under which it is made and the methods outlined above.
3.	No reasons for any finding, decision, determination, order or direction are to be given unless authorized by the National Board.
F.	Printed Forms:
Printed forms covering notice of application, notice of hearing, and the imparting of decisions are being prepared. Until these are supplied, the use of Regional War Labour Board letterheads containing the wording outlined herein will suffice.
E.	R. Complin,
Chief Executive Officer.
Ottawa, Ontario.
January 26, 1942.
Regional War Labour Board
for	
Notice of Application under
Wartime Wages and Cost of Living Bonus Order (P.C. 8253)
Take notice that an application to the
Regional War Labour Board for	has
been made by or on behalf of	requesting
such Board to	
Representations in respect of such application may be submitted in writing by or on behalf of all parties having any immediate interest therein to such Regional War Labour
Board on or before	after which date
such Regional War Labour Board may, without further notice, give consideration to such application. If the board considers it necessary to hold a further hearing, notice of such hearing will be given.
Chairman, Regional War Labour Board for


EXEMPTION OP DIVINITY STUDENTS FROM MILITARY SERVICE
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Are divinity students in the various theological colleges and universities of Canada exempt from joining his majesty's forces in this war?
2.	If so, by what authority and how many of each denomination have been so exempted in each military district?
3.	What are the regulations and interpretation given to it by the various exemption boards, what instructions do these boards act on and who instructs them?


Mr. THORSON:: 1.	No.
2.	See answer to 1.
3.	Section 6 of National War Services regulations, in so far as this question is concerned, reads as follows:-
"The following persons shall be excepted from being called out:-
(b)	Members of the clergy or religious orders.
(c)	Regular clergymen or ministers of religious denominations."
All students, including divinity students, taking courses leading to degrees or diplomas in universities or colleges, may complete their studies if they become members of the Canadian Officers' Training Corps or auxiliary training units thereof, where such exist, and undergo the training required of such members to the satisfaction of the military authorities.


RADIO LICENCES
Mr. HANSON (Skeena):: 1.	What was the total number of radio licences issued for 1941?
2.	What was the total amount collected?
3.	What was the total cost of collecting such licences?
Canadians in Japan

4.	How many radio licences were issued in each province, and in the Yukon Territory, in 1941?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	1,615,473.
2.	$3,904,016.
3.	$473,115.84 (commissions $275,738.65;
administration $197,377.19).
4.	1941-42
British Columbia	 137,363
Alberta	 120,930
Saskatchewan	 121.084
Manitoba	 103,807
Ontario	 603,331
Quebec	 399,722
Nova Scotia	 71,429
New Brunswick	 48,425
Prince Edward Island .. ..	8,644
Yukon	 173
Northwest Territories .. ..	565
1,615,473
Above figures from 1st April, 1941, to 31st March, 1942 (not final for fiscal year).


QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN
Mr. JACKMAN:: 1.	How many pensions are being paid under the Old Age Pensions Act in each of the provinces of Canada as of a recent date?
2.	What is the average amount paid to each individual pensioner?
3.	What is the aggregate cost to the dominion and provincial governments of all pensions paid under the Old Age Pensions Act during the last available calendar year, or twelve months fiscal period?
4.	What would have been the additional cost to the dominion government if the maximum pension had been raised from $20 to $25 per month during such twelve-month period?
5.	What would have been the estimated cost under the act to the dominion government during such twelve-month period if the pensionable age had been lowered to 65 years instead of 70 years ?
6.	What was the cost of administration to the dominion government during such twelvemonth period?
7.	What amount was recovered by the dominion government during such twelve-month period under, (a) section 9, subsection 2, of the Old Age Pensions Act; (b) section 9, subsection 3, of the Old Age Pensions Act?
8.	What would be the estimated cost under the act to the dominion government of granting an old age pension of $25 per month to all citizens of Canada, irrespective of private means, on the basis of the 1941 census, (a) on the basis of the 70-year age limit; (b) on the basis of the 65-year age limit?
[Mr. Hanson (Skeena).J
9.	How much was paid to each province by the dominion government under the Old Age Pensions Act during 1930, 1940 and 1941?
10.	At what time or times were audits made of the accounts and other records of each province relating to old age pensions?
PRIVILEGE-Mr. CLAXTON


REFERENCE TO STATEMENT OF MR. POULIOT IN DEBATE ON MAY 5
Mr. BROOKE CLAXTON (St. Lawrence-St. George):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. Speaking in the house on Tuesday, the hon. member for Temiseouata (Mr. Pouliot) is reported at page 2166 of Hansard to have referred to a report in the New York Times of a speech which I made at Williamstown. The hon. member states that I said, quoting this report:
We cannot afford to fight in North America, dominion parliamentarian warns.
The quotation ends, and the hon. member goes on:
Imagine! If the enemy comes here, we must surrender at once.
Wrhat I said was:
The only place where we cannot afford to defeat the enemy is in North America. We cannot afford to wait until the enemy is here.
I should think that every hon. member would agree with that sentiment.


VICHY REPRESENTATION
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: I may say to the leader of the opposition (Mr. Hanson) that Mr. Dupuy has arrived on this continent to-day and I expect he will be in Ottaw'a this evening.


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: Good.


CANADIANS IN JAPAN
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: In accordance with the government's policy of making public as quickly as possible all reliable information received about the welfare of Canadians in enemy hands, a statement about conditions in Hong Kong, received from the British embassy in Chungking, was given to the press last night. It reads:
His Majesty's representative at Chungking reported that he has received information from

Munitions Assignment Board
22l:<
sources which are considered reasonably reliable concerning the conditions under which Canadian prisoners are being held by the Japanese.
These reports would indicate that Canadians are receiving a good ration of rice supplemented by vegetables and bread daily, and a small quantity of meat. They are allowed to send out their trucks to bring in their food. They are also reported to have their own ovens for baking bread.
The information which has come to hand further discloses that very little disease exists, with the exception of a few cases of dysentery, and that supplies of quinine are on hand in the camp.
From the same reports it would appear that ttinre is a shortage of warm clothing and blankets.
The house is aware that two days ago the Secretary State for Dominion Affairs made a statement in the House of Commons, London, with regard to a decision taken by the United Kingdom, in consultation with the governments of the dominions and of the other united nations, to transfer the protection of British interests in Japan from Argentina to Switzerland.
The welfare of Canadian nationals in Japanese hands, members of the Canadian forces and civilians alike, has been the cause of anxiety to the Canadian government ever since the outbreak of war with Japan. Throughout this trying period the Argentine has been our protecting power in Japan. The Canadian government deeply appreciate the services which have been rendered by the Argentine government, the Argentine foreign office and, in particular, by the Argentine embassy in Tokyo. As a result of their efforts, they have made progress in their work on behalf of Canadian prisoners of war, despite the refusal of the Japanese government to recognize any neutral government as protecting Canadian or British interests in Hong Kong.
Our government's decision to transfer the protection of Canadian interests in Japan from Argentina to Switzerland has been taken in order that the protection of Canadian interests in axis countries should be in the hands of a single protecting power. As Switzerland has assumed the protection of Canadian interests in Germany and Italy, and territories occupied by Germany and Italy, since the United States entered the war, Switzerland has been asked to take over the protection of Canadian interests in Japan. Canadian interests in Japan and Japanese-occupied territories are inextricably bound up with the interests of the United Kingdom and other parts of the Commonwealth, and it is felt that administrative arrangements for their protection can be effectively centralized in a single protecting power.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It is not clear from the statement made by the Prime Minister with respect to persons in Hong Kong whether the increase in diet applies to prisoners of war or merely to internees. Could the Prime Minister enlighten us on that point?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The only information that has come to us is from the source I have indicated and the word used is "Canadians". The dispatch did mention the word "camp", which might indicate prisoners of war.


MUNITIONS ASSIGNMENT BOARD
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. H. HARRIS (Danforth):: I wish to address a question to the Minister of Finance. Can he tell the house what would be Canada's financial implications in connection with the proposed membership in the munitions assignment board of the united nations? While I am on my feet perhaps I might address a question to the Minister of Munitions and Supply. Can he enlighten us as to whether Canada has made any further commitments with regard to the North American supply council? Perhaps hon. gentlemen who were in conference in Washington during the last forty-eight hours might tell the house and the country what has taken place.


Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):: With regard to the first matter, it is not so far advanced that any statement can be made as to Canada's financial implications. I am not sure that I understand what the phrase means, whether it relates to cost to Canada or perhaps something more, but in any event, as I say, the matter has not reached a sufficiently advanced stage to make possible any statement about it.


Joseph Henry Harris: It would probably mean a new treaty?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not know.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Will the minister make a statement at a later day?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes.


Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):: In the matter of the British
supply council in north America, this is a coordinating body for all British supply activities in the United States. It was organized, I believe, in December, 1940. I happen to be a member, not particularly representing Can-
British Coal Shortage

ada, because Canada has no particular business with the supply council in the United States, but it is the connecting link between the British purchasing commission and the British food mission, the British shipbuilding mission, and a number of other missions that are functioning in Washington.



BRITISH COAL SHORTAGE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. H. A. BRUCE (Parkdale):: I wish to direct a question to the government and more specifically perhaps to the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston). In view of the serious shortage of coal in England as stated in the British House of Commons to-day, when it was found necessary to take
7,000	men from the army and put them back in the coal fields, and as we have already sent a forestry corps overseas, will the government consider sending a battalion or draft of miners from the coal fields of Nova Scotia as well as miners from northern Ontario, who are among the best trained in the world-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: -to help in Britain's coal
fields?


Mr. SPEAKER:: I think that question should be placed on the order paper.



MILITARY SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Richard Burpee Hanson: I wish to ask a question with reference to a motion which yesterday stood in the name of the hon. member for Huron North (Mr. Cardiff) asking 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 sendee in any theatre of war. The Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent), asked to have that motion stand on the ground that he wanted to consider whether or not this request could be complied with without violating privileges which are said to exist with regard to certain communications between the Department of Justice and other departments of the government. I wmuld ask him if he has come to any conclusion. If not, when will he come to a conclusion and make an announcement?
tMr. Howe.]
I may express at least surprise that there should be any question about producing to the house a legal opinion of the Department of Justice on such an important matter of public policy. Heretofore on request I have always been supplied with copies of legal opinions, and perhaps I am not violating any confidence when I say that the minister was good enough to give me this very opinion, though I had no idea that there was any secrecy attached to it. Of course I have not made it public in any way. I think there is an important principle involved. Surely, when the Prime Minister and, I believe, the Minister of National Defence intimate that the government have received such an opinion from the Department of Justice, we ought to know the nature of that opinion. Surely the public are entitled to legal opinions of that kind. I do not think there can be any question about it.
Hon. L. S. St. LAURENT (Minister of Justice): There is no intention of not having this order made or of not producing these opinions, of which there are two. The house will appreciate that the Department of Justice could not produce these opinions, as they are directed to other departments of government. In my view, there are certain communications in the nature of opinions from the Department of Justice to other departments of government which should be privileged. It was only for the purpose of making some reservation and avoiding making that reservation in too broad terms that I asked yesterday that the item stand. As a matter of fact I wish to consult His Honour and the Clerk of the House so as to make a reservation that will not go beyond the practice of the house.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Wednesday, May 6, consideration in committee of a resolution to provide sums not exceeding 82,000,000,000 for the year ending March 31, 1943, for granting to his majesty aid for national defence and security-Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Vien in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ANGUS L. MACDONALD (Minister of National Defence for Naval Services): Mr. Chairman, not often do I claim the attention of this house or of any of its committees. As a matter of fact, if I were to disregard answers to questions, the tabling of returns and other formal occasions of that nature, I could say

War Appropriation-Naval Services
that I have spoken to the house only three times since I have been a member of it, that is, since November, 1940. I have felt that enough speeches were being made on the war without my adding to the number, and I agree with what was said by a newspaper man some months ago that if words could win the war we would have beaten the axis long ago.
It might be of some advantage to the committee if, before any detailed consideration of the estimates of the Department of National Defence for Naval Services be undertaken, I should give to the committee a broad outline of the work of the Royal Canadian Navy. That work is part of the greatest naval undertaking of which history has any record. Every continent in the world, with the exception of south America, is wholly or partly engaged directly in this great struggle. This fact alone implies that men and supplies have to be transported over great distances and that much of that transport has to be over the sea. Five-sevenths of the surface of the earth is covered with water, and since the conflict is now universal or global in character the magnitude of the task of the merchant navies of the allied countries, and of the task of the ships which escort those navies, must be apparent to all.
It is the simple truth to say that if you were to set out by ship from the western shore of Canada across the great Pacific ocean, continue on through the Indian ocean, then around through the Red sea and into the Mediterranean and back into the Atlantic-or you could take the alternative route, down by the island of Madagascar and the cape of Good Hope into the Atlantic-and thence across the Atlantic to the eastern shore of Canada, you would have practically circumnavigated the globe. Over all that tremendous distance, over all that great expanse of water, you would be liable, if you were in a British or allied ship, to attack at any given instant of time. In not a single foot or fathom of those waters could the ship be considered absolutely safe from enemy attack. The allied nations are on the circumference of a great circle, a circle as great as the world; the enemy is within the circle, and he has been and is now able to make sudden thrusts to break the circumference of the circle at any given point. Hence you have thrusts in the Japanese area extending from Australia to the shores of India; you have thrusts by the Germans all along the eastern coast of Europe. It is an easy thing to do; it is a difficult thing to counteract.
Over that 20,000 miles of sea line the ships of the allied countries must ply, carrying men and materials; and where these merchant ships go, escort vesels ought to go also. In the first
years of the war the main line to be guarded was the line running between North America and Great Britain. From the very beginning of the war the Canadian navy has cooperated with the Royal Navy in the defence of that line, and while in recent months the conflict has spread to the Pacific ocean, and, in consequence, other supply routes have to be guarded and maintained, still the Atlantic route, linking Europe and North America, continues to be and always will be of prime importance. That line is now guarded and watched by navies of the United Kingdom, the United States, and Canada, and it is guarded in almost equal measure by these three navies.
Historically the role of a navy has been to provide battle fleets and to escort merchant ships. The navy's function was to engage the enemy surface craft in direct combat and to protect merchant shipping. Then in the history of naval warfare two new menaces appeared, the mine and the submarine. So that where at one time we needed powerful ships and powerful guns to deal with surface attack, now new methods of naval warfare have to be evolved. These methods take the form of small but fast craft such as destroyers, corvettes, mine-sweepers, motor torpedo boats and smaller types of ships.
It is along these lines that the Canadian navy has developed. Up to the present our navy has been primarily a convoy navy, and its main purpose has been to match in speed and power the attacks made by enemy ships. But as the enemy improves the speed and striking power of his ships we must at the very least keep pace, and desirably we should outstrip him. It is no secret now that some of the enemy U boats, some of the enemy submarines of the more modern type, are considerably faster and stronger than formerly. It is known also that German submarines can leave their bases on the shores of Europe, cross the Atlantic, spend some time hunting ships along the ocean lanes or along the Canadian or United States coasts, and still be able to return to their bases on the shores of Europe without the necessity of refuelling. It is no secret either that submarine attacks have been carried out within sight of the Canadian coast and within sight of the coasts of the United States within recent months.
Our naval engineers here and in the United States and Britain are constantly on the alert to meet these new threats to the safety of our convoy routes. In spite of all that can be done to ovecome submarine attacks it must be admitted that during this year, 1942, merchant shipping losses have been very heavy, particularly in North American coastal waters.
2216	COMMONS ,
War Appropriation-Naval Services
Richard Burpee Hanson: Does the minister mean convoy shipping?


Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):: I am just coming to that. The reason for this condition is to be found in the difficulty of providing convoys for all ships that ply the seas, and the very fact that the enemy has had such a considerable degree of success against non-convoyed ships is proof of the effectiveness of the convoy system. We must provide merchant ships to replace those that have been lost; but, Mr. Speaker, merchant ships alone are helpless to-day, in a war of this character. To the utmost limit of our ability to produce and man them, we and our allies must turn out fighting ships to guard our freighters, our tankers, our supply ships of all kinds that are carrying the products of our farms and factories over the seas. It would be vain and fruitless for us to speed up and greatly increase our production of war supplies for overseas, unless we could transport those supplies overseas. It would be senseless for us to encourage our farmers to produce more and more food for our allies if vre could not carry that food to them.
I come now to the growth of the Canadian navy. I may remind hon. gentlemen that when I first spoke to the House of Commons on naval matters I pointed out that at the beginning of the war the Canadian navy had some fifteen ships available for service; and at the time of my first speech, in November, 1940, I was able to say that this number had increased to 165 ships. At that time I expressed the hope that by the end of the fiscal year 1941-42, that is by last March 31, w'e might reach the figure of 250 ships. I can now say that this figure has been far exceeded, and that at the end of the last fiscal year there were more than 400 ships flying the white ensign and under the command of the Royal Canadian Navy. These ships range from auxiliary cruisers down to destroyers, corvettes, minesweepers, motor patrol boats, motor torpedo boats, and a large number of other auxiliary craft. So that in ships alone the navy to-day is nearly thirty times as great as it was at the outbreak of war.
What about man-power? When the war began the number of men in the navy was 1,774. In late 1940 we planned to have about
23,000	men in the navy by the end of the then coming fiscal year, that is, by March 31, 1942. That was our estimate of strength at that time, but that figure too has been well exceeded. Instead of 23,000 men, on that date the Royal Canadian Navy had more than 31,000 men, or an eighteen-fold increase over the figure at the outbreak of war. These men have been enlisted in all parts of Canada. Most of

them have come from the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve, of which there are some eighteen divisions in the dominion, from Charlottetown on the east to Vancouver on the west. Every province has given its share of men, though I am bound to say that the provinces of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and British Columbia, where the tradition of the sea is strong, have given larger numbers per capita than the other provinces. But as I have said, we have had our share of recruits from all provinces. We have had them from the banks of the St. Lawrence and the Quebec seacoasts, from the shores of the great lakes, from the province of Manitoba, as well as from the prairie provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta, and there is no lack whatever of recruits for the navy; there is still a very considerable w'aiting list for that service.
Most of our men serve on Canadian ships or in Canadian shore establishments, but more than 1,100 Canadians are serving with the Royal Navy on every type of ship. You will find them in battleships of the British navy, in cruisers, in destroyers, in corvettes, in motor boats, in submarines and in every other type of craft. You will find them on every sea. They have fought in every part of the world-in the Atlantic, in the Pacific, in the Indian ocean and the Mediterranean sea. As a matter of fact when the Royal Navy cruiser Dorsetshire was sunk in the Indian ocean a few weeks ago, no fewer than six of her officers were Canadians, among them the son of my colleague the Minister of Munitions and Supply. Fortunately all those young Canadian officers were saved when that ship went down.
The personnel, the man-power of the Canadian navy, depends on several factors. One of these, of course, is the number of men available. In this respect, as I have pointed out, there is no shortage. A second factor is the number of ships. Here for some time the production of ships and the training of men have proceeded at an almost equal pace. But the third factor, which is now beginning to constitute one of the main problems of the navy, is the supply of properly trained officers and petty officers. The training of these men is of necessity, from the very nature of the case, long and varied. They can learn some things on shore, but after they have had all the training that can be given on land there is still a long period of sea training necessary before you have an efficient officer or petty officer. Normally-I am speaking now of peace time-a man would not be given command of a ship unless he had served for some years at a school or shore establishment, then

War Appropriation-Naval Services
a period of service at sea, then, more time on shore, and then again to sea as a junior officer. In the British navy in normal times it would take a man from twelve to fourteen years, from the time he entered the navy as a youth, before he would be considered fit to command a ship. In war time of course there are many cases in which that time has to be considerably abridged. But with a navy such as ours, which at the beginning of the war had only 1,774 officers and men, it can be seen how difficult was the task and how difficult is the task to-day of providing from so small a nucleus for the expansion which has taken place.
We have been fortunate in having in the country a large number of professional seamen, men who manned our fishing fleets and our mercantile marine, on our great rivers and lakes, and on both oceans. Many of these men have found their way into the navy, and have been of invaluable assistance. But in spite of that, and desirable as that accretion to our strength has been, we have had to rely for our personnel mainly on men who have had no great amount of training in ships. The bulk of our personnel has come from the civilian population-from the clerks, the labourers, the doctors, the lawyers and business men of our cities, towns, villages and hamlets. But just as the Canadian army in the last war was made up largely of this sort of men, and just as that army acquitted itself with such gallantry on the battlefields of Europe, so, I am sure, will the Canadian navy, recruited in much the same manner, continue to prove worthy of itself and of Canada.
Perhaps I should say a word to the committee about naval training. The training of naval ratings, the men on the lower decks, in the ranks, is begun ordinarily at one or other of our eighteen volunteer reserve divisions. At these divisions the rating receives preliminary disciplinary training for a period of about eight weeks. He is then transferred from the division to a coastal area, either on the east or west coast, and he receives there what is called "new entry training." This training lasts for a period of ten weeks. Following this he is drafted to sea. After he has his sea legs he may be brought ashore for more highly specialized training, such as training in gunnery', torpedo work, wireless or anti-submarine work. I may say that every effort is put forth by our officers and petty officers to place technical and skilled men at the kind of work where their qualifications will produce the best results. So much for the training of ratings.
Now to the training of officers. This is usually undertaken in the first instance at one of the volunteer reserve divisions. The prospective officer attaches himself to one or other
of these divisions, and undergoes a certain amount of training there. In due course he will be interviewed by a selection board of naval officers who decide whether or not he is likely to become an efficient naval officer. If the decision is yes, he is then called to an officers' training establishment at Esquimalt or Halifax, where he is given a four months' course. During that time he is known as a probationary' sub-lieutenant. If he is successful in his course he drops the term "probationary'" and becomes a sub-lieutenant, and is assigned to duty either on a ship or in some shore establishment.
I believe the committee will be glad to know -and it is indicative of the very high calibre of the men we have been able to attract to the ranks of the naval service-that no fewer than 512 of the men who entered as ratings, in the ranks, have been promoted to officer ranks since the beginning of the war. Officers in command of ships, and all others charged with the supervision of men, are constantly on the alert to discover among those under their command those qualities of initiative, courage, leadership and resourcefulness necessary for good officer material. There is no bar to advancement in the navy, except the bar of inefficiency.
There are one or two further matters in connection with training which I shall mention. In addition to the training we undertake ourselves directly, in the divisions and at the posts, we have also taken advantage of various training schemes arranged throughout the country to qualify young men in the mechanical trades. The navy has now some 700 young men who have entered upon courses which will last for approximately three years, and which will qualify them for positions as artificers skilled in engine room, electrical and other types of mechanical work. These young men begin the course at about the age of seventeen years; and in due time they will form a reservoir of well-trained, technical men who will be available for the naval service.
In this connection I would point out that several universities across the country have helped us greatly by training naval technicians, particularly in radio and anti-submarine work. With the development of scientific warfare, and with the increasing complexity of its instruments, technical training has become increasingly important. It has been said, and said truly, that a ship to-day is not only a ship; it is an arsenal and a floating machine shop as well.
We require skilled mechanics on ships. We also require skilled mechanics in naval dock yards for the purpose of repairing the ships.



War Appropriation-Naval Services
I am sure I need not emphasize the importance of prompt and efficient repair work. A fighting ship is of no value whatever tied to a dock. If she is damaged she must be repaired as quickly as possible and made ready for sea again. Some of this work of course can be done in private yards; but the naval dock yards must be prepared to do their full share. With that in view it may be necessary to increase the establishment at these dock yards.
Not only do we have to consider repairs in our yards, but we have to take account of new inventions which seek to counteract or to anticipate the tactics of our enemies. We have to incorporate these in our ships from time to time, if the ships and their crews are not to be placed at a serious disadvantage. I am happy to say that so far as repairs to ships are concerned, the work carried on in Canadian yards is done in approximately the same time and with the same skill as is shown in the yards of the United States and the United Kingdom.
A new type of service on which the navy is about to embark is to be provided by the women's corps. Like the army and the air force, the naval service feels that there are many posts and positions now being filled by men which could be filled equally well by women, and that immediately new posts arise, they should be filled by women. Accordingly, we propose to establish a women's branch of the service similar to the Women's Royal Naval Service, or "Wrens", as they are called in Great Britain. Some leading members of the British women's service will arrive shortly in Canada to assist in the organization of the branch here. When the organization is fully under way it is expected that several thousand Canadian women will be incorporated into the new branch.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What do you propose to use them for?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: There is a great variety of work that they can do, such as clerical work, decoding, deciphering, car driving, and possibly messenger work.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Administrative work.	t


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Administrative work and the like. I should like to say that there are women's auxiliaries which in many cases have attached themselves to branches of the naval volunteer reserve divisions throughout the country. These have done a fine work, all voluntary of course, in providing comforts in the way of 
clothing, reading matter and the like for men at sea. What these women from one end of Canada to the other have done is fully appreciated by the men who have to brave the rigours of the north Atlantic winter. I know they will always remember with profound gratitude the interest and the support of these women's auxiliaries.
Another organization to which I should like to refer is the Navy League of Canada, whose work, particularly on behalf of merchant seamen, has been of great importance and great value. These men are out in all kinds of weather and in all seasons, in the cold of winter and in the heat of summer; their calling is dangerous enough in peace time, but is trebly dangerous now, and anything that can be done for them is well deserved. The navy league has given particular attention to these gallant merchant seamen. It has built hostels in coastal ports and in ports on the St. Lawrence river; it has provided clothing and other comforts for men in many parts of Canada, not only for Canadian merchant seamen, but the seamen of our allied friends as well. The navy league has' always taken a special interest in the sea cadets. Last summer the Canadian navy decided to assume fuller responsibility for the sea cadets, and we secured the services of Mr. R. C. Stevenson of Montreal to act as coordinator of sea cadet activities. He is responsible to the Department of National Defence for Naval Services, but he works in close association with the navy league. I may say that there are now 2.700 sea cadets in Canada who range in age from twelve to eighteen years. By the end of the present fiscal year we hope that that number will be increased to some 8,000. We have found from experience that many young men who have had training as sea cadets have been able to shorten considerably the training time ordinarily consumed by new entries into the navy. Many of our best officers and ratings have had training with the sea cadet corps.
One word about the medical services of [DOT]the navy. I may say to the committee that we now have 170 doctors and some 40 nurses in the Royal Canadian Navy. Forty doctors are with the Royal Navy, so that the total number administering to our own personnel is 130 doctors. I am glad to be able to say that the health of the navy is good. In
300,000	hospital days there have been 23 deaths from illness. Recruits for the navy show a high standard of health; for only 10-3 per cent of those who apply for enlistment have had to be rejected, and after enlistment only about 3 per cent of the personnel have had to be discharged on medical grounds.

War Appropriation-Naval Services
The naval service also carries on very extensive research work, some of it under the direction of eminent medical men in this country. Among these I might mention Doctor C. H. Best of Toronto, whose research work with Doctor Banting in the field of insulin brought him international fame. He is now a naval officer, and he and many others are giving their attention to the study of diets on board ship and on shore, even to the study of seasickness, to the study of conditions which affect the eyesight of men, to the problem of the fatigue among technical operators, to the effect of noise on men's nerves and the possibility of eliminating it, and so on.
I think the committee knows in a general way what the duties of the Royal Canadian Navy are. I have often said that they are threefold. In the first place, they guard the coasts of Canada; in the second place, they escort convoys across the seas, and, in the third place, they take aggressive action against the enemy whenever possible. All these three functions very often merge one into the other. For example, if a Canadian vessel is escorting a convoy across the Atlantic and attacks and destroys a German submarine on the way, she is discharging all three functions at once. She is, of course, escorting and protecting her convoy, she is guarding the coasts of Canada by destroying an enemy vessel, and she is also taking aggressive action against the enemy. I think it would be correct to say that up to the present the task of convoying ships has been the main task of the Canadian navy. In a war of this kind the convoying of ships is a matter of the greatest importance. The task of carrying food and other supplies from Canada across the seas falls to the merchant navies of the united nations, and the task of escorting those merchant ships falls to the battle craft of the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada.
Our navy, consisting of a goodly number of small craft such as destroyers and corvettes, is peculiarly suited to the task of convoying. That was the work which we were asked to undertake at the beginning of the war; that was the work that lay nearest to our hand and that is the work we have continued to do for the past two and one-half years. How important that work is to the success of the common cause will appear readily when I say that since the beginning of this war more than 56 million tons of cargo have been carried from these shores across the Atlantic, and that more than 9,000 ships have been convoyed over those waters. I exclude from
those figures, of course, troop convoys which have also left our shores and which have had gratifying good luck in their voyages. The work of the convoy has all the dangers of sea warfare-the submarine, the mine, the surface raider, the enemy aircraft-in addition to ordinary perils of waters. All these dangers have to be braved to-day by the men who go down to the sea in ships, and more than five hundred members of the Royal Canadian Navy have given their lives since the outbreak of the war. Seventy-two honours and decorations have been awarded to our personnel.	.
A word as to our plans for the future of the navy. In the present fiscal year we hope to enlarge our personnel by some 13,000 officers and men. In other words, I hope that by March 31, 1943, the Canadian navy will have a strength of about 44,000, and in the same time I hope we can add not far, from 100 ships to our fleet.
Another thing I should mention is the opening of the naval college at Esquimalt, on the west coast of Canada, in September or October of this year. I think everyone will now agree that the closing of the old naval college which was first established at Halifax in 1910 was a most unfortunate occurrence. I have already told the committee something of the difficulty that we experience in providing trained officers and petty officers, and this difficulty has been greatly aggravated by the fact that since 1923 no naval college has existed in this country. It is my fervent hope that this naval college, once established, will be continued forever and will become a training ground for men seeking to adopt naval life as a profession, whether as officers of the Canadian navy or in the mercantile marine. I hope also that after this war Canada will resume and even enhance her position as one of the great trading nations of the world, sending her goods to all parts of the world; and if that is to be so, we must have in this country an establishment wherein men to man Canadian ships can be fully trained.
It is only thirty-two years since the foundations of the Canadian navy were laid. Indeed, many of the men w:ho were Canada's first naval cadets and recruits are still on active service. It is a new navy; in comparison to the sea forces of other great nations it must be called a small navy; but it is shaping its own traditions of valour and service, and it draws much of its inspiration from the Royal Navy itself.
I wonder if there is in any country a fighting service that has had so long, so important and so glorious a place in that country's history as the British navy. Its record goes

War Appropriation-Naval Services
back almost to the beginnings of the nation; for the people of Britain realized early that a strong navy was absolutely essential to the defence of their island. The pageant of British naval achievement is great and colourful, and in it at one time or another are to be found some of the great names of England. Drake the Devon man, is there, and Hawkins and Howard and Blake, and Sir Richard Grenville of the Revenge, and Rooke and Rodney and Frobisher and Raleigh and Collingwood; and above them all the towering figure of Nelson himself. They are joined in this war by a great and goodly company: by the men of Montevideo, by the naval heroes of Narvik, by the gallant Captain Fogarty Fegen, of the Jervis Bay, going to certain death to protect his convoy; by those men who stayed in their ships off the coast of Crete under terrible naval and air attack and who, suffering grievously as they were, nevertheless made good their promise that no German troops would be landed on that island by sea. They are joined by the men who fought against overwhelming odds in Malaya and at other points in the far east; by the men of Dunkirk, where the seamen of England, the fighting ships of England, the merchant ships, the yachts, the tugs, and the motor boats rescued 335,000 troops from irreparable disaster. It has been well said of the British navy by a Britisher:
Theirs is a great imperial service, a service whose tradition is silence, whose devotion to duty is as unobtrusive as it is instinctive, the graves of whose heroes are recorded neither in brass nor in stone, for they lie in every latitude, in the fathomless depths of the unplumbed, salt, estranging sea.
It is with that service, Mr. Chairman and hon. members of the committee, that the young Canadian navy has the honour to be associated. It is in that service that many of our officers and men have been trained. It is the traditions of that service that we take as our own.
There are some, I know, in the world to-day who look back into history and who raise their eyes from the record to tell a dismal tale of Britain's mistakes and England's misdeeds in the past. Let us admit that she has made mistakes, as what nation has not? What shield is without its shadow? But for my part, as I have said elsewhere, admitting errors and recognizing faults, I take my stand on the words of a Greek statesman, spoken twenty-five centuries ago, "For even when life's previous record shows faults and failures, it is just to weigh the last brave hour of devotion against them all." And against all the mistakes, all the injustices, all the faults of their country's past, I set the heroic stand of the British people in these times, their stand

for world freedom, justice, order and decency, and I await with complete confidence the tilt of the scale. The main burden of enemy attack has been borne by the island of Britain for two and a half years. For two and a half years she has had to experience the most ruthless sort of warfare. Her lanes of commerce have been savagely attacked. Her cities and her countryside have been blackened by enemy bombs. ' Her people, young and old, have experienced the full force and horror of war. Yet she bears herself gallantly, this nursery of freedom, this mother of democracy. She draws on her deep reservoirs of courage and tradition. She kindles the imagination of the present with the torch of the past. She appeals not in vain to the great exploits of other days and her seamen remember the tradition of Drake. Drake dying ordered his drum to be taken to England, declaring that if ever the country stood in dire peril they should beat it and he would come back from his grave.
Take my drum to England, hang it by the shore,
Strike it when your powder's runnin' low.
If the Dons sight Devon, I'll quit the port o' Heaven,
An' drum them up the Channel as we drummed them long ago.
In that setting, Mr. Chairman, in that background, the Royal Canadian Navy proceeds to its task and moves forward to its destiny.


Mr. STIRLING:: I feel sure that the members of the committee have listened with deep attention and very great interest to the account which the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services has given of the affairs of his department. He has touched on the very close association which exists between the Royal Canadian Navy and the Royal Navy. He has referred to the fact that the Royal Canadian Navy draws its officers and men from all the provinces of Canada through certain channels, and it has always appeared to me that we must never omit the expression of gratitude to those who in the earlier days of the Royal Canadian Navy laid plans so well that those plans have been successful in doing exactly what they were intended to do.
I do not go back to the years before the great war. Canada has a naval history beginning then. I refer rather to what happened after the great war, after Canadians of all ages and ranks had served with the Royal Navy for the common purpose. After the great war, when we were settling down into a period of idealism, when we were wading through idealism, and setting up for ourselves ideals that unfortunately have not been attained, plans were laid to maintain

War Appropriation-Naval Services
a navy for Canada. It was realized that the way which it might be possible to follow would be to create and to maintain a small permanent force, and it has only been with great difficulty on many occasions that that little Canadian navy has been preserved. For again and again, through those years of peace, there were those in this house and in the public press who endeavoured to belittle the efforts which went to maintain the Royal Canadian Navy. Still it survived, because fortunately successive governments realized that it would not be reasonable to destroy that little naval germ which had been established with so much difficulty in Canada.
That was what one might call the first part of the plan. The second part was to make arrangements for the provision and then the training of those who should enter the Canadian navy. That was a twofold effort: the Royal Canadian Volunteer Reserve, to which the minister has alluded, and the Royal Canadian Naval Reserve, to which he has also referred, explaining that it was formed from those whose wrork takes them on the sea in the ordinary way in the merchant navy.
I think it is a remarkable thing that the Royal Canadian Naval Reserve, created at a time when Commodore Hose, now Admiral, was chief of the naval staff, and created so that there should be representatives of it in all the provinces of Canada, should have been so successful in retaining the interests of Canadians. For although two of the provinces do not. touch salt water, and three others touch it but very little, yet we find that through the interest and the call of the navy, the attraction, history, whatever may be the reason, through all these the Royal Canadian naval volunteer reserves have been successful in keeping up the stream when the pressure of war has come, so that to-day the minister is able, in the third year of the war, to describe the extraordinary increase both in numbers and in tonnage in what was once this little naval germ in Canada.
Of course, the retention of the permanent force, small though it was, was only possible because of the training which was available to our young officers and petty officers in their close connection with the Royal Navy. Our cadets, our midshipmen and sublieutenants took their early training in the Royal Navy. Our vessels were not numerous enough or large enough to give them experience. It was necessary for them to be with the Royal Navy. Ever since the creation of the Royal Canadian Navy these junior officers have gone to the Royal Navy and received the training, yes, and the traditions, beaten deep into them
from association with the Royal Navy. Our gunners, our torpedo men, our signallers and petty officers have gone there and received instruction and they with our young officers on their return have imparted that instruction and assisted in the training of what has now grown to the very considerable naval effort of Canada.
I should like the minister to give us a great deal of information in expansion of the bare outline which he did give. I think, if I may say so, he did wisely in touching on a good number of points connected with the navy, but perhaps we had better take them one by one. He might deal with two or three that occur to my mind on which I think we should like to have some information. In the first place the estimated figure for this financial year, is, I believe, $269,000,000. I believe that is S120,000,000 greater than the corresponding figure for last year. Last year the minister divided that into a considerable number of headings. We should like him on this occasion also to divide the amount up, indicating as he goes where the principal increases have gone.
Then with regard to training, the references which he made in his speech appeared to me to cover principally the training which is afforded to the officers and men of the volunteer reserve. I should like also to know what the state of the Royal Canadian Navy entry is. So far as I am aware we are still receiving boy entry and we are still receiving cadet entry both for executive and for pay. I should like him to tell us whether the routine of peace days has in any way been departed from in the training which they receive. For instance, do our cadets go over and receive similar cruiser training to that which they received when the Frobisher was the training cruiser?
With regard to the training of the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve, the minister referred to the first lot of training and the second lot of training which took place at the sea coasts. I should like him to amplify that and give us detailed description of the training establishments which must of necessity have been set up on both coasts to provide for that training; and also to tell us, on the question of training, with regard to those who enter from the Royal Canadian Naval Reserve, the merchant service and the fishing' boats, whether those officers and men also receive refresher courses before they go to sea in the corvettes and the like.


Major James William Coldwell: Wre have listened to an interesting outline this afternoon, similar in some respects to the information which was given us on another occasion. I am sure

War Appropriation-Naval Services
every hon. member of this house feels a debt of gratitude to the men who are serving in the navy and in the merchant marine, and anyone who speaks at this time, as the minister did himself and the hon. member for Yale a few moments ago, cannot but appreciate the tremendous place which the navy holds in the minds of all our people and the task which it performs in the great struggle in which we are now engaged.
I was interested in hearing the minister recite "Drake's Drum"; for as a boy I was brought up in the district in which that legend originated, in the land of the men to whom he has referred, the men of Devon; great as are the traditions of the navy, those who at this time are engaged in convoying or in operating the merchant ships are perhaps engaged in an even more difficult and dangerous task than that of the men of ancient times who sailed the oceans and brought their ships in safety to the shores of new distant continents.
The hon. member for Yale was asking some questions about training and the establishments that have been set up for training the personnel of the Royal Canadian Navy. I have no doubt the minister will give those answers in a little while. It is interesting to note that many of the men who have joined the navy in recent months came from the prairies, from regions where there is little water, and many a young naval lad's first sight of the sea was the day he began to take training at one of the coasts or on a ship. That they have made good seamen goes without comment, because we have heard it on every hand. When we were in Great Britain we met at Portsmouth some of our Canadian boys who were serving in the Royal Navy, and had an opportunity of chatting with them about their experiences. I wish to take this opportunity, when discussing the personnel of the navy and their training, to express the hope-I am not the first to raise the question; it has been brought up by other hon. members on both sides of the house- that the pay and particularly the allowances to the dependents of our naval men will be increased. Only at noon to-day the wife of an officer who is looking after wives of men who are serving, not in the navy but in the air force, was telling me of the really deplorable conditions under which some of the wives and families of our naval men are living in Montreal and in other Canadian ports. It is a blot upon this country that the allowances to the men engaged in such a difficult and dangerous task are so much less than those given to men in the army or the air force. I would not of course have it underfMr. Cold well.]
stood that I think the allowances made to the dependents of men who serve in the army and the air force are at all adequate in these days of increased costs of living. That they are inadequate serves only to emphasize the point I am making, that the wife of a man serving in the navy, and receiving $15 a month less than the wife of a man serving in the army or the air force, has to live upon a standard that is impossibly low at any time but more particularly in these days of high prices.
I am glad to know that the number of our ships is being increased so rapidly. I realize of course that many of them are small ships. I recall that before the war broke out our friend and colleague at that time, Mr. Grant MacNeil, then the member for Vancouver North, often spoke in this house on the necessity of obtaining fast small boats for coastal patrol work. That policy is being carried out to a degree to-day. And if I may say so, the very fact that we are building many corvettes and many smaller boats and that we have so many of our young men serving in these small ships, is another reason why we should give every consideration to the conditions ashore under which the men and their families live. Those of us who have been on mine-sweepers, or corvettes know very well that the quarters are cramped; the ships are small, and on the stormy Atlantic to live on one of those boats must be indeed uncomfortable to say the least. Everything this house and the government can do to make conditions as favourable as possible for the men who go down to the sea in ships, both of the Royal Canadian Navy and the merchant service, ought to be done. I was brought up by the sea, and have often seen the ships of the Royal Navy anchored in the bay. In Canada I have seen our ships at Halifax in winter time. I realize that difficult and, in bad weather, dirty as the job was along the coasts of Britain, and particularly along the shores of the English channel, it was not comparable to the difficulties and discomforts which the men of our Atlantic coast, in particular, have to undergo. When I saw ships coming into Halifax almost encased in ice I marvelled at the courage and fortitude of the men who had to withstand not only the mighty waves of the ocean but the frigid cold of winter on the Atlantic coast. And when we think that during the past few months they have helped to convoy hundreds of thousands of tons of shipping and supplies across the sea, not only to the beleagured island of Britain but also to our allies in Russia, to our troops in Africa and now across the Pacific ocean, facing not only the dangers of the weather but also torpedoes, bombings from

War Appropriation-Naval Services
the air and every devilish device which the ingenuity of man has brought to bear in this great war, we cannot but marvel at their courage. So I say that anything we can do to improve conditions for the men while they are at sea, to provide proper recreational facilities for them when they come ashore in the great ports, and to provide adequately for their families, should be done. I am not going to repeat what I have said so often about Halifax, but we should see that the wives and families of these men are properly housed and provided for.
The matter of housing accommodation is one into which I think the department should look very carefully, and which I think should be strictly supervised by the rent control authorities. I refer to the rent that has to be paid by these seamen-yes, and this applies to the air force and to the men in the army, to some extent-who from time to time have to move with their families from place to place, who have to find new quarters and who therefore are not always protected by the rent restrictions which protect those of us who have been located in the one place for the past two or three years. We should see that these men are not victimized through being charged high rents in the various cities and ports to which they have to move.
As this discussion proceeds I have no doubt that the minister will be asked a great many questions with regard to our ships and our men, and as to the conditions under which those ships operate and the men serve. I do not propose to ask any questions now, but we as a group have some questions in mind which my colleagues and I will be asking as the question period progresses. However, I do want to take this first opportunity of urging upon the government the necessity of seeing to it that these men are remunerated-not properly, because money cannot properly remunerate them-to an extent more nearly commensurate with their services, and that at least their wives and dependents are protected to a far greater degree than they are a>t present. The other afternoon I said some-. thing about the delinquency in Toronto among the children of men overseas and women working in factories. I understand that the same condition exists in Montreal and other seaport and industrial cities. As I said then, each of our defence departments should see to it that the government and the treasury board are made aware of the requirements, so that a suitable appropriation may be made in order that the children of the men and women who serve may be well looked after by the communities in which they live. That will require federal grants and appropriations.
We may be proud of the part that has been played already by the small Royal Canadian Navy, which is expanding month by month. I think we owe a debt, as a parliament and as a nation, to the men who are serving us in many capacities in that navy and in the merchant service of our own and the allied countries.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: Mr. Chairman, since the beginning of this war I have derived a great deal of satisfaction from the fact that this country has given so much attention to the navy, and has recognized the necessity for increasing it. I can remember as a small *boy wondering why Canada, with the resources which should enable her to build a great navy, should limp along so helplessly in this regard in the great British commonwealth of nations. The history of the British empire and the British people has been intimately and inextricably bound up with the sea, with ships. For over a thousand years the Britishh navy has been supreme, until it has become a tradition, almost an instinct, on the part of British people to expect that their fleet should be able to conquer any other fleet or any combination of other fleets that might be brought against it. Why Canada did not build a powerful and efficient supplement to the British navy, I never could make out.
I welcome the report of the minister indicating that our navy is expanding. There is quite a tendency on the part of many people to believe that when this war is over we are going to emerge automatically into a new order in which we no longer will be called upon to defend ourselves. Judged by all history and all common sense, Mr. Chairman, ideas of that sort are utter nonsense. We should build permanently, build deep and strong, and build for the future. Perhaps men will be able to organize a giant, superworld-state under the canopy or wings of which all nations may be able to rest quiescent, but I see no evidence of it. I should say the first thing for us to 'do is to be strong. If a great super-state should be built up willing and able to guard the peace and safety of the world, that will be the time to relax our efforts toward making ourselves secure, but certainly we should not do so before such a state has been evolved. We are going, I fancy, into an era of great tribulation. Probably the most -war-like time in all the world's history stretches before us within the next generation. I believe the minister and his department should have this in mind, so that they may not build temporarily. They ought not to cease to build when the war is over, but should prepare themselves for an era of perhaps fifty years during every one of which

War Appropriation-Naval Services
the ships of Canada and the men of Canada shall be ready and able to go forth upon the seas and meet any enemy which may come.
There will be those who will wonder how Canada could sustain such a programme financially. With that aspect of the question I am not going to deal, except briefly to point out, as has been stated many times already, that what is physically possible can be made financially possible. The number of ships Canada can build and man will depend upon the iron., coal, timber and other necessities for the building of ships which can be found in Canada. It will depend, too, upon the number of men and factories which can be found to build the ships, and the number of men who can man the ships. Let us adopt a progressive policy, one which values children; and I think we shall have no difficulty in raising sufficient Canadians through the years to come, to man and to build as large ships and as many ships as we need.
I should like to add my voice to those who have contended that better pay should be given to those in the navy. We should make the navy attractive not only romantically but economically. I feel that the men who join our forces, whether the army, the navy or the air force, should move among us as select men, as the elite. I see no reason why they should be paid an income so small that they are fearful of the future or, shall I say, hesitant about living generously in the present. I believe it is possible for Canada to provide all her fighting men with all the needs of life, not only while the war endures, but just as long after the war as they shall live.
It is a most shortsighted and destructive policy on our part to neglect the possibilities of the children of our fighting forces. There is no reason why there should not be a good family for every man in the fighting forces, and no reason why anyone should hesitate to marry and to rear' children because- of financial circumstances and anxieties. We would all grant that those who join the fighting forces are the noblest among us. They are strong; they are courageous; they are healthy. Surely they should be the parents of the generation to come. I would urge upon the minister that he do everything in his power to make it possible for every one of the men under his direction to have a good home, a good family and complete confidence in his economic future.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: Mr. Chairman, I shall have a number of questions to ask as the debate proceeds, but I rise at the present

time with only one purpose in view. In the gallery to-day sits the father of one of those fine boys on H.M.S. Dorsetshire of the Royal Navy. I do not mind giving the boy's name. It is Lieutenant-Commander Ross Wilson, and his father is Mr. Leslie Wilson. His mother, whose maiden name is Mabel Ross, I have known ever since I was in the kindergarten. She is the daughter of Sir George Ross. His grandfather, Sir George Ross, was one of our greatest Canadians. Although he was on the opposite side of politics from me, I had known him many years, and he was always a great friend of mine.
I speak about Ross Wilson for only one purpose, and that is because he exemplifies to my mind the boys of this country who are serving Canada, and who have been educated at such schools as Upper Canada college, St. Andrew's, Trinity college, Ridley college, Bishop's college school, Lennoxville, Que., Appleby college, Pickering college, or in the collegiate institutes of Ontario. I cannot say enough about the fine performance he has given.
I should also like to point out that a great deal of credit is due to yacht clubs of one kind or another, which have offered opportunities for these young lads to gain experience on the water. I should like to pay a tribute to my own yacht club, the Royal Canadian Yacht Club of Toronto. And while on my feet may I pay a further tribute to my grandfather, ' George Gooderham, and to my uncle George H. Gooderham, for all they have done for the yachting activities of this country. I believe I am justified in taking this opportunity to pay tribute to these men who have done so much toward manning our Royal Canadian Navy, and I know the minister will agree with my observations in that regard.
There are other matters I should like to discuss. I have taken up some of them privately with the minister, and to some of my inquiries I have not received answers. With respect to those I shall question the minister in committee.
I should like to close my observations by quoting some verses which all Canadians should know-I believe all do know them. These verses really do not mean only England. They go much deeper than that; they include Canada, our way of life and every thing it exemplifies. These are the verses:
When Britain first, at Heaven's command. Arose from out the azure main,
This was the charter of the land,
And guardian angels sung the strain:
Rule, Britannia, rule the waves,
Britons never will be slaves.

War Appropriation-Naval Services
"Britons" means us; it means all we stand for in Canada; it means French-Canadians and German-Canadians and it means magna charta. And one more verse:
Thee haughty tyrants ne'er shall tame;
All their attempts to bend thee down
Will but arouse thy generous flame,
But work their woe, and thy renown.
Rule, Britannia, rule the waves,
Britons never will be slaves.


Mr. MacNICOL:: Mr. Chairman, as honorary president of the Navy League of Canada, Ontario division, I would be derelict in my duty on behalf of that body if I were not to rise at the earliest opportunity and thank the minister for his very kind references to the work that has been and is being done by that organization. I do so with very great pleasure. What has amazed me since Canada first began to take part in this sea warfare has been the record of the achievements of our various ships. They have done splendidly even though they are not large. Our men have given evidence of being as brave and of possessing as much fortitude as the men in any other fleet. On reading the names of those who have suffered or who have been lost, I have been amazed to see the number who came from the provinces remote from the sea, especially the western provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. Later when the minister is ready to give us some figures I should like to have the number who have enlisted from each province. All reports about fighting on the sea have recorded the conspicuous gallantry of these young men. We should expect of those who were born near the sea a love of the sea and a willingness to render excellent sea service, but the record has been the same of those who come from my own province of Ontario and from Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. It gives a clear indication and example that fortitude and strength and heroism are not confined only to people living close to the sea.
Like others who have spoken, I have been pleased with the expansion in our naval forces as outlined by the minister. In this connection I was glad to hear what the minister said about the personnel of our ships. As he said, there is no use in having ships unless we have the personnel to man them. I believe I first became associated with the navy league in 1917, the year it was founded. A famous man from Portsmouth, one of the great union heads, came here; I believe his name was Peter Wright. He had performed a great work in keeping up the morale of the people in the old country, and he brought with him the same high spirit. I met him on several occasions and I was always thrilled by his bravery.
The navy league has done a splendid work. There are sea cadet corps right across Canada, commencing in Vancouver, then Calgary, Regina and a most excellent corps in Winnipeg. In its day, if it was not the strongest numerically it was certainly one of the best trained corps in Canada. At the head of the lakes there were corps at Fort William and Sault Ste. Marie. Then there was an outstanding and very strong corps at Toronto. This was the headquarters for Ontario as well as the principal branch of the Navy League of Canada. In Ontario there were corps at Welland, London, Kingston, and Ottawa, as well as at Montreal, Quebec, Saint John, New Brunswick, and Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island. Tl'.ere was also an excellent organization at Halifax.
I often think of the splendid men and women who gave their time freely to this work. The women tried to make things comfortable for the boys around headquarters and in the different towns and cities. They provided comforts of one kind and another and occasionally a dinner to encourage the young lads. I think of the men who trained them. The amazing thing to me is that there were so many men who were willing to give of their time and means, particularly of their time, in training these young lads in the way they should go. In years gone by when the present Minister of Pensions and National Health, at that time minister of defence, would bring down the estimates for cadet training I never failed to support them. It always surprised me that there were members in this house who bitterly opposed voting money for this most laudable work of training young men. Cadet training taught them to be civil, to be courteous, to be manly, to do the very things that are so much required to-day by young men in our navy. I thank the minister sincerely for his kindly remarks about the Navy League of Canada and for his support of the league since he became minister.
It may be a little early to suggest it, but I do suggest to the minister that some plan be initiated by the department of naval services to provide some means of living or some plan of living after the war for the thousands of men now in the naval service. The minister has told us that there are some
33.000	in the service, with the number constantly increasing until we may reach perhaps
40.000	or 50,000. Many of these young men never worked at anything else in their lifetime ; their only training has been in the naval service. Many of them came from the farms of the west or Ontario, and when they leave the service they will know nothing about the problems of life outside the service. I hope the minister will start now to consider

War Appropriation-Naval Services
some plan under which thousands of these fine naval personnel can be placed in permanent positions after the war.
After the last war I went to England as a member of a delegation to interview Lord Jellicoe, who at that time was head of the colonization service, if not of all England in any event of the Anglican church. I was greatly interested in the keen grasp that that great man had of the need of doing something for the thousands of men who had served under him at Jutland and under other admirals during the great war. As a result of that meeting the navy league was successful in placing here in Canada several thousands of those wonderful men; I have just forgotten the exact number. Many of them were placed on farms, and at that time the navy league made it its business to keep in contact with the men who had been placed as a result of the work of Lord Jellicoe and his committee. On many occasions it was my great delight to visit some of these families and observe how they were getting along. They made good. That type of man could not do anything else but make good. I hope the minister will proceed at once to initiate some plan to take care of the personnel of the Canadian navy after the war.
I can remember the bitter debate that took place in this house at the time the naval college was closed. I hope that never again will this parliament have to listen to such tirades as were delivered on that occasion against the men who were interested in maintaining the strength of this empire. I do not blame only those who were in the house at that time; I blame also the pacifists outside the house. Any man who advocated a vote for the sea cadets or for the maintenance of our military institutions was branded a warmonger. I am glad to say that that is all past. Nobody to-day would have the unfairness to charge supporters of the maintenance of our defence institutions with war-monger-ing. But, Mr. Chairman, this empire would not be in the difficulty it is in to-day, and many thousands of the gallant men of our empire would not now lie dead in Malaya, in the oceans and elsewhere had not dear old England too succumbed to much the same kind of pacifist talk that we in this House of Commons had to endure, and that had such an effect on the estimates of the then Minister of National Defence, now the Minister of Pensions and National Health. I was always glad to support him against such attacks, and on many occasions urged him to increase the grants for cadet training. It is too bad that that was not done.
May I now pay a tribute to another part of the group which constitutes our naval

strength; I refer to the men back in the factories-workmen, designers, draftsmen, machinists, riveters, and those who organized the plants for the building of ships. On many occasions in past years I have heard those who operate these plants denounced in this chamber as being everything they should not be. Yet I do not know what this country or Great Britain would do to-day without the men who in years gone by erected plants and factories and organized their businesses to produce what we are making to-day. Reflect on what this country has done since the war broke out. It is a matter for wonder what the artisans in our factories and the men who operate the factories have done. As the minister has said, they have increased the number of Canadian ships from 15 in 1939 to over 400 at the present time. This result reflects great credit on all Canadians engaged in the making and operating of ships; I might even add that it is creditable to the humble man on the street whom we hear calling "Rags, bones, scrap iron", men who gather waste materials. Scrap iron is cutting a big figure in this war. It is by far the most important part of the iron used in steel plate. The men who are working down the iron mines are doing a wonderful job; my heart warms to them, because many a time I have been in the iron mines, and I know they deserve great praise. But without scrap iron it would be difficult to turn out steel with the rapidity with which it is being produced to-day.


Mr. REID:: It is almost impossible to carry on without scrap iron.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That is true. Those who have knowledge of the achievements of engine factories, without whose product, of course, our ships could not operate, must be proud of what Canadian plants are doing. The Canadian Allis-Chalmers company, a tremendously large concern with branches in several cities of the dominion, has a very large plant located partly in my own riding and partly in that of the hon. member for High Park. It is currently turning out the 1,200 horse-power engines, one each week, which are required to propel corvettes. I am happy to salute with all my heart the men engaged in producing engines in Canada, from the lowliest worker in these great plants to the men in the highest positions. I am happy to say further, from my close connection with many plants, that the majority of the head men in these large institutions came right up from the humblest ranks in the plant. That is a great tribute to the opportunities given to the Canadian worker to advance and the advantage he takes of those opportunities.

War Appropriation-Naval Services
I would not omit a reference to the men in the mines of Quebec-at Asbestos, I believe. What could we do without the men who produce the asbestos which not only covers pipes but provides material for the apparel which sailors to-day have to wear to withstand the flames of bombs if they should be unfortunate enough to be on a ship on which bombs fall. The asbestos miner deserves credit too.
Ours is a great country. Every Canadian may well be proud not only of those who man the ships but of those who make the ships.
The minister could, I know, have gone much further than he did in telling of what has been achieved. In making his statement he displayed an eloquence which few men possess, and a power of expression which carries conviction. He could have told us much more about what our men are doing; but, having done it before, I assume he thought it unnecessary to say more about their work in the guarding of convoys, in which I believe that five hundred lost their lives-heroes, every one of them.
Some days ago I went to offer my sympathy to the mother of a young man who lost his life in the sinking of the Spikenard, one of our ships from which, I believe, only seven were saved. It would thrill anyone to talk to a heroine like that lady. Her courage, her realization that her boy had made the supreme sacrifice for the maintenance of this empire, exemplifies the spirit which will save the empire. I am one of those who believe that we shall win the war in spite of everything, because our people continue to display the courage which their forefathers have shown down through the ages. I read this boy's last letter to his mother, written from England. It was a fine letter, indicative of the kind of bringing up he had had. His mother's words were always in his mind. It mattered not to him what might happen; he was serving, he believed, in the highest cause to which a man could devote himself. His chum, I believe one of the seven who were saved, later sent a cablegram which showed the unflinching spirit of the boys on the ship. It was addressed to this heroic mother, formerly Mrs. Walker, now Mrs. T. W. Cartmill, living at 117 Lappin Avenue, Toronto, and it read:
Regret Sammy went down with his ship.
Sammy Walker was his name. Well, that is a British tradition, to go down with the ship. That is what Admiral Tom Phillips did on the Prince of Wales out there east of Malaya. It is a British tradition, to go down with the ship and not to run away from it-fighting with the ship to the last, and then, if necessary, going down with it. That is the British spirit.
I might add one word to what the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Cold well) said in reference to pay and allowances, because from Toronto quite a number of men have enlisted in the navy and many times men have come to me asking why their pay and allowances are not the same as the pay and allowances in the army. I do not know what the rates are, so I cannot speak from knowledge of any comparison, but if they are not paid on equal terms I know the minister will do anything that is necessary to improve the situation.
There was another matter that came to my attention. I am not sure of the facts, but my memory is that if the commander of a ship in Halifax, say, was moved to Victoria he would have to pay his own way out. The minister shakes his head. I am glad to know that has been changed, because that would be manifestly unfair.
And now a last word with regard to recreation on shore. The minister knows there is a bit of conflict going on in Halifax in connection with some club. I am not familiar with the particulars, but I believe, as I think the minister does-and every other hon. member believes it too-that the finest and most comfortable places should be provided for men when they come ashore from their ships. While I am not a drinking man myself- I have never tasted liquor, so that it means nothing to me personally-I realize that many of these men do like a glass of liquor or a glass of beer. It is their business whether they take it or not, and all I say is this. I ask the minister to make certain that where any sailor returns to shore and wants a glass of beer, or something stronger than beer, he will have a comfortable place to which to go, some place where he will not be a prey to strangers of one sort or another, and that he will get the very best that can be provided-not something that is drugged, bootlegged stuff or something that will do him injury. Liquor has its rightful place, and I presume that when the sailor comes in after having been frozen or half-frozen for weeks, passing through storms and terrible times, if he thinks a glass of liquor will do him good he should get it. I expect that he will have that privilege and that he will be given pure, unadulterated liquor under the best possible conditions. The department should see to it that he is not compelled to go to places where his health might be ruined, and unfit him to return to the ship.
The minister has quoted some verses and I was glad to hear him. He has the Scotch flair. What would you expect from a man named Angus Macdonald? It is a Scotch
222S

War Appropriation-Naval Services
characteristic to love verses and I, too, have been thinking over some verses I have read. I do not believe the poet's name is known, and I am not quite sure whether the title of this particular poem is "The Sea is His", or "The Sea is God's". Two verses occur to me and I should like to quote them-I do so from memory:
Count me the splendid captains Who sailed with courage high
To chart the perillous waves unknown: Tell me where these men lie.
To light a path for ships to come They moored in Deadman's Quay.
The sea is God's, He made it,
But England shall keep it free.
As 1 repeat these lines I think of the admirals to whom the minister referred- Frobisher, Hawkins, Collingwood, Nelson, Jellicoe and Beatty, all those gallant men from away back, from the time of Drake, in the earliest days of the navy, when British sailors sailed the seas and founded those harbours and colonies that have made possible the commerce which has built up our empire. The other verse is this:
0 little land of England 0 mother of hearts too brave,
Men say the trust will pass from thee Who guardeth Nelson's grave.
Aye, but these braggarts shall learn Who'd hold the world in fee The Sea is God's, He made it,
But England shall keep it free.
Canada is doing a noble part to-day to help Britain in keeping the seas free.


Thomas Reid: There are one or two questions which I wish to put to the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services, but before I do so I join with those who have given praise to the men who man our ships. Too much cannot be said of those who day after day toil in our Canadian ships. The minister this afternoon spoke about the numbers of men in the navy, and he gave a lengthy resume, one which we were all delighted to hear. Most. hon. members will be pleased to hear of the great number of ships and the numbers of men that comprise the Canadian navy. I say to the minister, keep up the good work, because the navy, of which the minister is head, is at present doing a splendid service. We have no doubt it will continue to do equally good work. The minister spoke of the training of seamen, personnel and so on. I will make this suggestion.
I have met many men in British Columbia who had been in the naval service either with Great Britain or in the Canadian navy during the last war, and these men have said to me: "Why cannot our services be utilized? We were experienced seamen in those days and we did our duty. If the Canadian government 
wants us, We are ready and willing to do the same again." I think the country could very' well make use of the services of these men. They got their sea legs many years ago, and with very little training now they would once more render extremely valuable service.
Another suggestion. While we are waiting for ships, while we have a waiting list of four or five thousand men, it might be advisable to look into the idea of having some of these men placed on coastal ships.. We could give them some training, because we have coastal ships in British Columbia which go into the open waters, and many of these men could be put on these ships so as to get their sea legs and gain the necessary experience. During the time we are waiting for more ships of our own, this could be done. It was only natural that the navy should take over a number of vessels and ships at the outset, because we had then very few, having only fifteen in all.
The naval department took over certain fishing vessels from owners in British Columbia. My view regarding that is that they should have been rented from these owners only until such time as more suitable naval boats could have been built. Those boats were splendid for the purpose for which they were built, but they were not built as naval ships. If the minister intends to keep them in the naval service, I am of opinion that they will not give the same service as proper naval vessels constructed for naval work, and I think they could well have been replaced rather than bought outright and retained in the service.
The two questions I have in mind are regarding the naval college at Esquimalt, how many men are attending the college there and how many have graduated from it; also regarding Deadman's island, what development has taken place there in connection with naval training.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: With regard to Deadman's island, no naval development has taken place there up to the present. It has been suggested that some sort of naval barracks might be established there, and that matter is now being considered.
Regarding the number of men who have attended what my hon. friend calls the naval college, I assume he means what we call Royal Roads, Esquimalt, where officers go to receive the training to which I referred in the early part of my address. At the time of the last record I have here, which is April 1, it shows there were at that place 136 officers and 129 ratings, a total of 265. That

War Appropriation-Naval Services
number of officers would be apart from the staff. They would move out about every four months.


Mr. NOSE WORTHY:: I am sure every hon. member with the tang of the sea in his blood has been thrilled by the references made by the minister this afternoon to the great historical figures of British naval history. We have also been interested in the glowing picture he has given of a fast and greatly increasing Canadian navy. There are a few points on which he touched to which I should like to make reference and on which I think the committee might be entitled to further information.
The minister told us in round numbers of the increase which has taken place in the Canadian navy since the beginning of the war. He told us we now have a navy thirty times as great, I think he said, as at the beginning of the war. That in itself does not give us very much information, for my recollection of the Canadian navy at the beginning of the war is that it was very small indeed. He gave us the number of ships which have been added to the navy. I wonder if in order to round out that picture, he would be willing to give us a break-down of those figures showing the various classes of ships included in that total.
He spoke also of the duty and the great service rendered by the ships in convoying. We heard of 56,000,000 tons of goods convoyed safely across the ocean, and 9,000 ships. Would it be in the public interest for the minister to give us the other side of that picture? May we have from the minister the total value of ships and cargoes sailing from Canadian ports that have been lost during the war; first, those lost within convoys or while being convoyed, and second, those lost without convoy? That would enable us to get a clearer picture of the work that the navy is performing and the dangers and difficulties with which the navy is faced.
No mention was made by the minister of the future programme pertaining to the building of merchant shipping; that I presume comes under another department. It is a matter very closely related to the navy, since our success in getting our goods delivered to the battle fronts depends to a large extent upon the number and nature of the merchant marine as well as upon the number of navy ships. I trust that at some later time in this debate we may be given a report of the programme for the building of merchant ships as well as ships for the navy.
At two or three points in his statement the minister referred to the matter of research, invention and so on. He gave us some details regarding research being made into such matters as the health of seamen aboard ships, diet and so forth. Could the minister tell us what organization exists to take advantage of Canadian engineering ingenuity and inventiveness for the inventing and production of new and improved types of ships, guns, et cetera, whether there is any organization of that kind or any council of marine and civil engineers employed in that particular field, or whether we take all our designs for ships and equipment and defence from the British navy?
A reference was made to the naval cadets. I should like the minister to inform us whether he and his colleagues in the other defence departments have yet been able to agree upon a basic educational course for the cadets of the three branches of the service. I have some knowledge of cadet training, some knowledge of the confusion which the training of three different classes of cadets is causing throughout the schools of the country at present. There is an undesirable competition and in some cases dissension and jealousy arising between the cadets of the different forces. In one school in Toronto, for instance, we have sea cadets; in another, army cadets, and in another, air cadets. Principals of schools, staffs and educational authorities are finding this very confusing.
I remember sitting in at the council meeting of an educational association over a year ago, when recommendations were sent by it to the military authorities suggesting that the major part of the training in the three cadet branches should be uniform, and that any specialized training should be taken after the period of basic training had been completed. That would enable us to establish a type of school cadets all of whom would receive the same basic training, wear the same uniforms and consider themselves of equal importance in the defence of the empire.
Much has been said already with regard to rates of pay for our seamen. One feature in that connection we must not overlook; that is, the effect which adequate pay and allowances will have upon the morale of our people. I can think of few things that would give our war effort greater impetus than adjustments which would give more adequate pay and dependents' allowances not only to our sailors and seamen but to the members of the other services as well. Over the weekend I met a number of social service workers in my riding who informed me that there were ill it a large number of families where

IFar Appropriation-Naval Services
the husbands are in the armed forces, which families to-day are receiving less than they were when the husbands were on relief. That information is authentic; that state of affairs actually exists in connection with enlisted men who left behind them large families. The situation was so acute in York South that social workers were undertaking to raise a sum of money to assist some 250 such families in that one riding, 250 families whose subsistence allowance these workers felt was below the level required to provide a decent standard of living, even the standard maintained by the relief authorities there. Cases of that kind do more to impede our war effort than all the labour strikes we have had.
A good deal was said by the hon. member for Davenport with regard to those who contribute indirectly to the services of the navy. I would simply add to what the hon. member said that what these workers want from this parliament is not praise or eulogy. They want, first, an adequate wage and, second, the right to join their trade union and the right of collective bargaining, a right wrhich will give them some dignity as human beings. That is the need of the men who assist in the building of the navy. That, too, would add to our war effort to a great extent.


Mr. BENCE:: When the army estimates were under consideration the other day I asked the Minister of National Defence to make a statement in connection with this question of dependents' allowances, with particular reference to the navy. At that time the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services gave a very short explanation, which appears at page 1947 of Hansard. At the same time he stated that he was not in a position to give the figures, but that he was having a conference, I think with the treasury board, on Thursday morning, at which he hoped the whole matter would be adjusted.
I am sure the committee would be interested to learn the result of that conference, and to hear a statement by the minister in regard to it. May I point out to hon. members who are not familiar with the dependents' allowance in the navy, that what are known as service ratings and other ranks, which, as I understand it, means all those in the navy other than commissioned officers, are given a dependents' allowance of $22.50 a month, while the amount paid in the army is slightly more than 50 per cent greater, or, in other words, $35 a month. I am not for a moment suggesting that the $35 a month paid by the army is more than adequate. I join with other hon. members who have expressed their belief that it is not adequate, and that some sort of cost of living bonus should be given to the dependents of
rMr. Noseworthy.]
those in the army, as it is given to various civilian groups in this country. I would point out, however, that the dependents' allowance paid by the army is 50 per cent greater than that paid by the navy; and if the wife of the man in the army is having a hard time to get along, the wife of the man in the navy must be having a very much harder time. I know the minister pointed out that there were reasons for the difference. Among other things he said that a larger subsistence allowance was paid in the navy to those men living out of barracks. I suggest to him that this is very poor comfort for the wives of the men who are living in barracks, or on board ship. The minister might give us the number of men living in barracks and the number living out of barracks, in order that we may ascertain how many men in the navy are benefiting by the special subsistence allowance to which the minister referred.
In that connection also I think I should refer to the dependents' allowance in the case of naval officers. Hon. members may be interested to learn that for all officer ranks the dependents' allowance is set at $30 a month, with no variation such as exists in the army. So the dependents' allowance paid to the wife of a naval officer is $5 a month less than that paid to the wife of a private in the army. It seems to me there must be some very unusual reason for the fact that the dependents' allowance in the case of naval officers for all ranks from navy sub-lieutenant to navy commander is fixed at a maximum of $30, while army officers have a graduated scale of dependents' allowances, ranging from $45 for an army lieutenant to $60 for an army lieutenant-colonel. I believe the committee should be given some explanation of the reason for this discrimination.
The question of allowances for children is a matter which it seems to me should be of considerable interest to hon. members, because it is of some concern to me. Would the minister tell the committee in what respect the allowances for children were changed as a result of the announcement made by the Minister of Finance last November? At that time the Minister of Finance indicated that so far as the army was concerned, whereas previously an allowance for only two children was paid of $12 a month, it had been extended to provide $9 a month for the third child and $6 a month for the fourth child. The prior arrangement as to allowances for the children of men in the navy was that they should be paid $7.50 a child, up to four children. Would the minister tell the committee what change lias been made in that regard?

War Appropriation-Naval Services
I have been informed-and I do not know whether my information is correct-that the wives of men in the navy who are under the age of twenty-two years are not entitled to allowances.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: That has been straightened out.


Alfred Henry Bence: It has been changed?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes, some time ago.


Alfred Henry Bence: I am glad to hear that.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Perhaps I should say something with regard to allowances, because that subject has been mentioned by almost all hon. members who have spoken with respect to these expenditures. It is quite true that there has been some difference between the naval regulations regarding pay and allowances on the one hand and the regulations of the army and the air force on the other. How that arose it is difficult now to say; but there is no doubt, as the hon. member for Saskatoon City has just pointed out, that the condition did exist. For example, for a time the navy paid dependents' allowances of $7.50 to each of four children. For a long time the army paid allowances for only two children. It made no difference if a man had ten children, he was given allowances in respect of only two. In those days the navy was better off in that respect. Then, last November the army and the air force increased to four the number of children who might benefit under dependents' allowance regulations. As my hon. friend has correctly pointed out, the total allowance payable for four children was raised to $39, made up in this way: $12 for the first child, $12 for the second, $9 for the third and $6 for the fourth. The navy allowance remained at $30 for four children.
One of the great problems has always been that the daily pay received by men in one service has not at all times corresponded with the pay received by similar ranks in the other services. Nor has the amount allowed for out-of-quarters allowance in the navy corresponded with the allowance in the army. On that account, when we have come to deal with the question of other allowances it has been pointed out to us that while we were low in one respect we were high in another. The problem of working out these various basic rates of pay, wives' allowances, children's allowances, and out-of-quarters' allowances has been rather complicated.
I have been before the treasury board several times. It is true that only last
Thursday I thought I had the treasury board soundly convinced as to the wisdom of a certain course of action. I found, however, on Saturday that I had not succeeded on Thursday well as I had hoped; and I had to endeavour to convince them again to make some adjustment, to give a little here and to take a little there. But that great body, the treasury board, which is always just, if not indeed always generous, has, I think, seen the light. I hope that by tomorrow I shall be able to say that allowances made to wives of men in the navy and to the children of men in the navy have been put on a parity with allowances to wives and children of men in the other two armed services. I believe I shall be able to say that, so far as the treasury board is concerned, by to-morrow afternoon they will have agreed, and that the matter will have been straightened out. We may, however, have to take a little reduction somewhere else.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The minister's statement makes it very apparent that at least up to this moment there has been a disparity between allowances to dependents of those in the navy and allowances to dependents of those in the air force and the army. I have always thought that, and I have pointed it out in the house on more than one occasion. However, I have never got anything definite before from the minister by way of an admission.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: My hon. friend probably asked the other ministers.


Richard Burpee Hanson: We have always been told that there are counterbalancing perquisites, if that is the right term to use, or compensations to members of the naval staff.
' I am rather surprised to hear the minister intimate what the treasuiy board is going to do to-morrow. It seems to me rather like forcing their hand, if I may suggest that to the minister. I was once a member of treasury board, and I have always found-


Angus Lewis Macdonald: They are not very popular.


Richard Burpee Hanson: -that
members of the treasury board are pretty hard-boiled, when it comes to the other fellow's department. They are pretty stiffnecked when it comes to dealing with allowances for other ministers' departments, but they are not so stiff when they are dealing with their own. I believe that is the history of all treasury boards. During the time I was a member of treasury board that was par-

War Appropriation-Naval Services
tieularly so, because money was hard to find. We had not as generous a public behind us in those days, as we have in wrar time. I can recall with w'hat great glee members would sharpen their pencils and start in to see where they could cut. I remember particularly the question of motor cars for members of the permanent force. A colonel always wanted a Buick car but, so far as I can remember, he never got beyond a Ford-and I thought in days of depression if he got a Ford he was lucky.
I make these observations only in passing. May I add my tribute to the Royal Canadian Navy, and a word of congratulation to the minister upon his eloquent passages in describing the romance of the British navy, of which those of us of British descent are always so proud. I was born by the sea, and until I was twenty-two years of age I sailed the sea, and the turbulent waters of the bay of Fundy. Anybody who has lived down there knows what that means.


An hon. MEMBER:: Political waters.


Richard Burpee Hanson: No;
political waters have always been fairly smooth for me; I am not referring to them. Anyone who as a youth, as I was, sailed the waters of the bay of Fundy knows that it requires some skill. I will say that it is with the greatest possible pleasure I reflect that as a young man I sailed the sea, and it has been a matter of great regret that my search for opportunity to earn a living has meant my leaving it.
I am interested in the Canadian navy. I have always supported efforts to build it up, and I remember with deepest regret how in the early twenties, after the war and when there was a change of government, the activities of the navy declined, particularly in the matter of naval education. To-day we are apt to be tremendously loyal to the necessities of the time. But I recall that the chief objection to naval education and naval training came from my hon. friends to the left- absolutely. Let there be no mistake about that. Not many are here to-day of those who were here then, but their predecessors in office, if I may so term them, those men, and women too, raised their voices on each and every occasion it was possible to raise 'them against the theory of Canada maintaining a navy and of naval education. Well, time brings great changes. It is not necessary perhaps to hark upon-


John Horne Blackmore: May I interrupt the hon. gentleman?


Richard Burpee Hanson: I will not include my hon. friend because his group is

of a later day and generation. I am referring rather to the men on our immediate left and his immediate right. There were those in this house in the days between 1921 and 1925 who used to boast of the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Crerar) as their leader.


Mr. CRERAR:: Not during that day.


Richard Burpee Hanson: No, that is not quite correct; my mind is running astray for a moment. It is not worth while harking back to those days. It is a matter of history and history will bear me out. But it is a matter of regret to-day that we did not do more in the days that are gone by. That may be the old story of hindsight and foresight. If we had known what was going to happen, I think we would have all tried to do more.
There is no doubt that the Canadian navy performed valiant service in the days that are immediately behind us, and I know it will perform valiant service in the great conflict in the days that are immediately ahead. Some of us had the occasion to investigate what is being done. We were able to go on board the corvettes and faster destroyers and motor torpedo boats when we were in Portsmouth last September. We were able to see the risks that are undergone by these boats as a matter of course. That is one of the romances of this war.
I should like to pay a tribute to the merchant marine. When we were in England we heard a great deal about the gallantry of the merchant marine at the time of the evacuation from Dunkirk. Had it not been for the merchant marine the number of troops left on the continent would have been much greater. The men of the merchant marine, about whom so little is heard and for whom so little has been done, go down to the sea in ships, and in ordinary times they work for a very small wage. I hope that Canada will build up a merchant marine that will be worthy of the name and that our flag will be seen on the seven seas when this war is over.
Those of us who are laymen ordinarily look upon the vessels of the navy as being fighting vessels. The minister has not indicated as yet, but I hope he will do so before this discussion is over, the break-down of the 400 ships to which he has referred. I am sorry to think that perhaps we have not as many real fighting ships as we ought to have. There is no doubt that great progress has been made in the building of corvettes, mine-sweepers and other small naval craft of that kind. I recall in one discussion held in this house not so long ago that the minister intimated that plans were being made for the building of destroyers

War Appropriation-Naval Services
and, if I recollect aright, something in the nature of a cruiser. However, I stand ready for correction on that.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I hope it will be that.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I know something of the difficulty in the way of building larger war vessels in Canada at this time, especially when we are keeping in mind the need for the rapid building of merchant ships. As a matter of information only, I should like to know how rapid the growth has been with respect to really effective ships of the corvette and mine-sweeper type. The minister will recall that in the early days of the war a large number of pleasure boats were bought in the United States with almost feverish haste. I am not going to criticize that action because I understand the condition that existed at that time. However, it always seemed to me that it was not necessary. I should like to know how many were bought, what money was paid for them and what has been their usefulness. In my own mind I always questioned the usefulness of these yachts. I may be all wrong about it. I am only giving the reaction in my own mind which, I admit at once, may be based upon data that is not wholly adequate. I know that a great deal of criticism reached me about this. In the early days, in an effort to build up a navy, I know there was a great deal of haste without perhaps as much discretion as should have been shown. The minister might give us some information about that.
As I say, I should like to have the breakdown of our ships in order that we may know what are really the effective ships. Not long ago a man told me that in counting the number of ships which composed the Canadian navy they must take in every sixteen-foot rowing boat. I do not suggest that that is true, but the 400 ships mentioned by the minister must of necessity include a large number of small ships in the nature of tenders and that sort of thing. While they serve a useful purpose in the navy, I know it is not contended that they are effective naval vessels.
There are one or two other matters to which I should like to refer briefly before six o'clock. The first is the establishment of the naval college on the Pacific coast. I have no objection at all to that, but I suggest to the minister that he probably will have to reestablish the Halifax naval college if he is to satisfy public opinion on the Atlantic coast. I do not know what thought he has given to this, but it does seem to me that if you are going to train men for the navy, consideration
should be given to training them on the Atlantic coast and not removing them to the other coast. I do not mention this in any sectional way at all. There are no better sailors in the world than those who go down to the sea in ships from our Atlantic coast, and in that statement I include those who come from the bay of Fundy, the most turbulent water in that portion of the Atlantic coast. Is the minister ready to make any announcement in regard to the matter?
I should like to know how a young man can get a commission in the Royal Canadian Navy without first enlisting as a rating. How is that arranged? I know that men just out of college do get commissions without having to enlist as ratings, and I should like to know the modus operandi.
Then I should like to ask the minister if he intends to give the committee any information with respect to the future programme of naval training.
One other matter has been referred to, the trouble at the Ajax club in Halifax. Has the naval department as such any responsibility in the premises? There has been a violent controversy in the city of Halifax with regard to that matter. I do not pretend to know the rights or wrongs of it, but I do know that a great deal of feeling has been stirred up over that one incident. Perhaps the minister, if he knows anything about it, will tell the committee and put the position right on paper so that the public may have the official view as to what was the trouble, where the responsibility is, and what is going to be done.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. MacINNIS:: I want to ask the minister a question, but because of certain points raised in the discussion this afternoon I wish to say a few words before I put the question. I am afraid the naval minister's language was a little too lyrical because I noticed that some of the staid and prosaic members on my right, for instance the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) and the hon. member for St. Paul's (Mr. Ross) burst into verse.


Richard Burpee Hanson: They were overcome by emotion from the minister's speech.


Angus MacInnis: That is exactly what
happened. I realized that, and that is why I think he should have curbed his own emotions a little. It is fine to recite "Rule

War Appropriation-Naval Services
Britannia," and "Britons never, never will be slaves." It is a stirring poem. But I have read other poems by equally distinguished poets. For instance, no one would doubt the capabilities of Shelley as a poet-


Thomas Reid: And Scottish poets.


Angus MacInnis: Yes. I was wondering
whether someone would recite "Scots, wha hae." But Shelley did not say "Britons never will be slaves". He said:
Men of England, wherefore plough For the lords who lay ye low?
Wherefore weave with toil and care
The rich robes your tyrants wear?
Wherefore feed, and clothe, and save,
From the cradle to the grave,
Those ungrateful drones who would
Drain your sweat-nay, drink your blood?
There are two sides to the sailor's life, and we should not allow ourselves to be so carried away by our emotions at a time like this. I do not object particularly to poetry; as a matter of fact I like it, though sometimes I do not like the way it is recited. But this afternoon other statements were made which I think were altogether out of place in this discussion. Attempts were made to apportion blame for Canada's unpreparedness for the w'ar. If we are to have a discussion on that question I have no objection. We in this group are ready to go into the facts and show who was to blame for Canada's unpreparedness. What surprises me is the power and influence of this little group over here.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What!


Angus MacInnis: The power and influence of this little group over here-that we were able to prevent the government from doing something they were anxious to do. My hon. friend (Mr. Hanson, York-Sunbury) was a member of a government which from 1930 to 1935 had a large enough majority in this house, and a leader who could shove anything he wanted through the house; and instead of increasing the military preparations of the country, that government did nothing about it. I am not blaming them. In the parliament before that, the government had a majority that could do anything if they wanted to do anything, but they rarely did want to do anything. That those governments did not carry out an armament building programme was not because of any obstruction by this group of seven members. But if we are so influential in that regard, how is it that we have failed to get this government and other governments as well to pass progressive legislation which we advocated? We urged for the passing of unemployment insurance legis-[Mr. MacInnisJ
lation year in and year out for years. It was only when the war was at our door, although unemployment insurance had been in the Liberal party's programme since 1919, that an unemployment insurance act was passed. Why have we not better old age pensions legislation? Is it because of obstruction from this group? It is because the government does not want it. That is why. If we are to discuss who is responsible for military unpreparedness, let us have notice, and we shall discuss it at the proper time and in the proper manner.
Tributes have been paid to the merchant marine. I wonder whether my hon. friends who are paying those tributes know the conditions which the sailors of our merchant marine have to endure. Do my hon. friends know that until 1934, when the Canada Shipping Act was passed, though not proclaimed even then, we were operating under the Merchant Shipping Act, which was passed in 1857, and that sailors' wages were reckoned in pounds, shillings and pence? Almost the first thing I did when I came here in 1931 was to move an amendment to the Merchant Shipping Act, proposing an eight-hour day for the men in our merchant marine. The only thing sailors on Canadian ships will get are belated tributes from people who do not expect to give them anything better than that.
Why were we not better prepared for the war? The hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) knows quite well what I am talking about now because he worked sedulously for better preparation. He knows that ships of the Canadian Pacific Railway plying between Vancouver and the orient, with the exception of the officers, were manned by Chinese. The hon. member for New Westminster and a few others from British Columbia tried year after year to get that changed. Why was it not changed? Was it because governments did not have a majority? No; but because the governments were more interested in the profits of the Canadian Pacific than they were in building up a merchant marine for Canada. When war broke out, all these vessels were manned not by Canadians but by Chinese.
I do not know whether after this war is over, we shall have a country that will be armed to the teeth, but I will say, if that is going to be the state of affairs, if that is going to be the condition in which we are to find ourselves, then we have lost the war. Let us remember that the sentiment throughout the world after the last war was, "no more war," and that a condition of the treaty of Versailles was that the nations should reduce their arma-

War Appropriation-Naval Services
ments. But there is another consideration before we can decide whether we are going to have a large army, navy, and air force; in the ultimate analysis all these things depend on our foreign policy, on the relations we build up between ourselves and the rest of the world. It is because we did not build up the necessaiy relations that we are fighting this war, and not because the nations of the world did not engage early enough in the armament race. It is about time we began to talk sense-even if we are engaged in a war. We are engaged in the war reluctantly. I am proud to say that, and when we finish it I hope we shall have sense enough to build a different kind of world, a world in which we can live not by building huge navies or air forces or armies but by abolishing them. Only by doing that can we demonstrate our humanity and the right to be called Christians, a Christian nation.
The question I was going to ask the minister is this. I believe an agreement exists between Canada and Great Britain under which the Canadian government is obligated to maintain the naval port at Esquimalt so that it will be in condition to repair all British naval vessels in time of w&r. I was informed that some little time ago when the Warspite arrived at Esquimalt for repairs they found that the naval people at Esquimalt had failed to install the machinery necessary to operate the main gates of the docks. The result was that the Warspite, instead of being repaired at Esquimalt, had to proceed to Bremerton, Washington, where she was repaired. I would ask whether that is the case and, if so, has the situation been remedied?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
cannot answer my hon. friend's question with definiteness at the moment, without looking at the record. I know, however, that a very large ship was handled at the dock at Esquimalt-I shall not give the name of the ship- and handled satisfactorily so far as I know. There was, I think, some difficulty on the first day; I think the ship in some way knocked off some of the blocks. But that is a thing that might happen and is not in any sense a reflection on the nature of the dock. As to the particular ship mentioned by my hon. friend, I am not aware of the incident to which he refers, but I shall at once find out about it and report to him.


Mr. GILLIS:: I listened with great interest
to the minister's presentation. He told quite a nice story respecting the development of the navy, and he eulogized the work being performed by the men of the navy, particularly those serving on the water. If hon. members
are sincere in their appreciation of the work of these men, the best way they can show that appreciation is by removing some of the grievances which the men performing that wonderful service have.
I wish for a few minutes to associate myself with the hon. member for Saskatoon City (Mr. Bence) and develop a little further the question of dependents' allowances as applied to men who serve in the navy, particularly the lower ratings. I was pleased to hear the minister make the statement that he is doing everything possible with respect to having these rates revised, at least to conform with the rates paid in the army, and we trust that the treasury board will show their recognition that an injustice is being committed and that they are prepared to show their appreciation in some practical way and not by mere lip-service.
I have before me a table of rates which, for men who are performing services such as those being performed by the men of the navy, are, in my opinion, a disgrace. I want to draw particular attention to them. It may be of some assistance to the minister in his representations to the treasury board. These are dependents' allowances, and the figures come from the minister's own department.
The marriage allowance for the wife is 75 cents a day, and 25 cents a day for each child. For other dependents, such as mother, dependent brother or sister or otherwise, it is 65 cents a day. The foregoing allowances are payable with the proviso that marriage allowance plus dependents' allowances shall not exceed a total of $2 per diem for officers, or SI .75 per diem for ratings. In effect, this means that a sailor who may be supporting a dependent mother, and is already in receipt, of SI .75 per diem by way of allowance, can receive only 25 cents per diem for the dependent mother. That, in my opinion, is something that should be rectified.
Dependents' allowance is graded according to the income of the dependent as follows-I want the minister to listen to these figures because I think there is something wrong with them. If the income per month is nil, the allowance per diem is 65 cents. If the income per month is $15, the allowance per diem is 50 cents. If the income per month is $10. the allowance per diem is 35 cents. According to the table the larger the income, the higher the allowance; there must be something wrong with those figures.
Further, it states that under a recent order in council the board may grant a supplementary award of dependents' allowance of 15 cents per diem to a dependent if, in its opinion, there are extenuating circumstances to warrant it; that at this point the functions

War Appropriation-Naval Services
of this board cease, but further assistance might be available to a dependent. In other words, as I understand it, this means that if, for example, the mother or the wife is not completely dependent and is receiving the maximum award under this supplementary assistance, in case of sickness and so forth the board has no authority to grant any additional allowance.
Then there is the dependents' board of trustees. It has a peculiar function. In cases of urgent need it may augment dependents' allowance "by a special grant of an unspecified amount, provided that the dependents' allowance board has conceded dependency and that full award of dependent's allowance has been granted previously. Application for such grant should be directed to that board." As I read that, the dependents' board of trustees has practically no function. It has no regulations to guide it; it is merely a matter of the board exercising its own opinion, without proper regulations to guide it and proper tables set out. In my opinion the board has only a very limited function; the whole thing is on a charity basis, and it is time that we showed our appreciation, at least to the extent of taking care of the dependents of the service we eulogized this afternoon.
I can readily understand the mind of a man who is on the water, and who knows the situation of his family. One case in particular has been brought to my attention, that of a radio operator who is on the water for eight, twelve or more months at a time. He has a wife and one child, and her total dependents' income is $29.50 a month. I do not consider that that woman is receiving an allowance; I say that she is on relief, because on that limited sum she cannot, in view of the present cost of living, maintain a home, including the cost of fuel and everything else in connection with it. The mind of that radio operator at sea must be in constant turmoil when he thinks of his family trying to eke out an existence on an allowance of that kind. I believe there is nothing that can break down the morale of a man any quicker than conditions of that kind. My experience has been that the man who serves in the army or navy is not concerned with himself. He offers himself in the service of his country, and, if necessary, his life is at stake. He is content to fight for his way of life. But meantime he is leaving his dependents in the care of the people at home charged with the responsibility of running the country. The least he can expect is that during the time he is separated from his country, and the time he is prepared to lay down his life, if neces-
sary, the family he has left behind should be at least maintained with some degree of comfort.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: My hon. friend knows, of course, that in addition to the amount he has indicated, the rating or petty officer, as the case may be, has to assign some of his own pay. That will supplement considerably the amount of $22.


Clarence Gillis: I quite understand that.
However, I was thinking of the comparison of rates between the army and the navy. For instance, the wife of a naval rating receives $22.50 a month, while that of a soldier in the army receives $35. A wife with two children is paid $15 a month by the navy, while the army pays $24. A mother whose son is in the navy receives $19.50, but if her son is in the army she receives $25.
I can see no reason why the rate in the navy should not conform to that in the army. I take off my hat to the boys serving on the water. The two services cannot be compared. In saying this, I am not attempting to underrate service in the army, because I know a little about both.
Another category of men who serve on the water, and one to which this parliament should give full consideration, is our merchant seamen. These are the men who serve on convoys. They do not have uniforms, nor do they enjoy any of the glory attached to other services. But they are performing one of the most essential services of to-day, and certainly one of the most dangerous. Yet they get very little consideration for their work.
I should like to bring to the minister's attention a point in connection with the merchant navy which I consider very foolish. I refer to the practice of drifting around the country. On my way home when the house adjourned for the Easter recess, between Montreal and Halifax I met a trainload of British merchant seamen. They told me they had landed in New York on a boat from the old country. The crew had been discharged in New York, and they were then being transported to Montreal, and from there to Halifax to get another ship. I do not know whether I am correctly informed, but they did say that while they were in transit in Canada the Canadian government were responsible for their transportation. I believe it was $5 a week they were being paid until such time as they got another ship. They were also provided with meals. What I cannot understand is that that crew

War Appropriation-Naval Services
had come from the old country to New York aboard ship. They were discharged at that port, and another crew was put aboard that ship while the first crew was transported all over the north American continent in order to get another boat to take a cargo back to England. In my opinion that is poor organisation, and there is something wrong when we find drifting of that kind. If a boat comes from the old country with a cargo, I cannot understand why that crew could not take the boat back whence she came. The eastern ports are crowded with seamen awaiting ships and drifting around like that, when they could be better employed on the water. I believe that particular phase of transportation by water should be strictly supervised, and under the direction of the naval department. I am not quite sure, but I have been given to understand that that particular phase of each sailor's life is under the supervision of some other department.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The Department of Transport.


Clarence Gillis: I believe someone should take hold of it, and do some organizing. To . my mind, it is silly to have men, after leaving their boats, drifting from one end of the country to the other, lboking for other boats.
While I am on my feet I should like to bring the subject of port facilities to the minister's attention. I have corresponded with him for a considerable time concerning wharfage facilities at Sydney. Perhaps hundreds of boats will pass through that harbour this summer, as they have been doing since the outbreak of war. On many occasions boats with cargoes, the vessels having been slightly damaged, enter that port. In order to repair the boat it is found necessary to discharge the cargo. Much delay has been occasioned because of the fact that at Sydney [DOT]there are no proper wharfage facilities where the boat could be tied up, and where it could be repaired in proper time. That, too, I am informed comes under another department. I believe the matter has been referred to the Department of Transport. The condition has existed since the outbreak of war, and I know it is far from satisfactory, as far as those persons in the naval department charged with the responsibility of directing traffic in and out of that harbour are concerned. Something should be done about the matter.
All these are emergency conditions which have to do specifically with our war effort, and they should not be under the jurisdiction or direction of a peace-time department. In
my opinion they should be taken hold of by the Department of National Defence for Naval Services, and that department should see to it that those who are directing affairs in the ports are given proper facilities with which to work.
I understand, too, that an essential repair plant in that harbour has been tied up for some time because of some dispute with respect to noise. Certain people do not want the project to be developed in that place, and their attitude is impairing our war effort. That plant is necessary, and I suggest the minister should not be backward in any way in taking hold of matters of that kind and straightening them out. If we delay long enough, we may be seriously handicapped in the future.
I should like to get some information from the minister. Let us take the case of an army veteran in receipt of war veterans' allowance to the extent of $25 or $30 a month. It is my understanding that if the son of such veteran enlists in the navy and makes an assignment of pay to his father, a deduction to the extent of the assigned pay is made from the allowance.
There is another request I Should like to make before I take my seat. A few days ago the Minister of National Defence gave a complete table of the pay and allowances of all ranks in the army, which table appears at page 1925 of Hansard for Tuesday, April 28. Would the minister place on Hansard similar schedules with respect to naval ratings?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I shall be glad to do that. I cannot give them at the moment, but I will place them on Hansard for the benefit of my hon. friend.


Clarence Gillis: Could the minister give us any information as to the question I asked with regard to the war veterans' allowance?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I should not think that the situation he mentioned would be the case, but if my hon. friend has knowledge of that having happened, of course I will accept his word on the matter. I should doubt very much that a thing like that would happen. As I understood it, the hon member's question had to do with a veteran of the last war, in receipt of a war veteran's allowance, whose son has now enlisted in the navy and, as a consequence, the allowance to the father might be stopped. I should very much doubt that this would be the case. I know of no such instance, but I will make certain by to-morrow, and if that should be the case I will certainly look into it.


Mr. HAZEN:: On November 22, 1940, the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Black)

War Appropriation-Naval Services
directed the minister's attention to a Canadian Press dispatch, which appeared in newspapers all over Canada, stating that the city council of Halifax had asked the federal government to establish Canada's proposed naval college at Halifax. The dispatch went on to say-I am not quoting the exact words-that the hon. member for Victoria, British Columbia (Mr. Mayhew) had stated that he had been authorized to announce that the college, or academy, as I think he called it, would be located near Victoria. Among other things the hon. member for Cumberland asked these questions. Was the dispatch correct? What reason could the minister give for not locating the naval college at Halifax, and why should not the minister himself make such an announcement, rather than a private member? During the course of his reply the minister said:
It is true that we acquired a site in western Canada for use in the same way as we have provided accommodation at Halifax, and for the same purpose-a short period of training for officers. That, I think, is what my hon. friend the member for Victoria, B.C., had in mind when he spoke to the press men. They have construed that to mean that a site for a naval college has been selected. That is not the case; a site has not yet been selected for the college.
I understand from the hon. member for Cumberland, who is not able to be present this evening, that Halifax claims the naval college belongs to Nova Scotia, for two reasons. The first, if I understand the matter correctly, is as a matter of right, on the ground that the college was originally established there and remained in Nova Scotia until it was destroyed in the Halifax explosion, when it became necessary to find another location, temporarily at least, and it was moved to Esquimalt. The second reason why they claim it should be located in Halifax is in order that it may be in comparatively close proximity to Great Britain and to the British navy. What is the present position? Has the college been definitely located in British Columbia or, if not, what is the position at the present time?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: A decision has been arrived at since the statement from which the hon. member has quoted was made. That decision is to establish the college near Esquimalt, British Columbia; and, as I said in my earlier remarks, it will be opened in September or October of this year.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: I should like to make a few remarks in regard to the medical services provided for the navy. A couple of evenings ago the hon. member for Renfrew South (Mr. McCann) expressed the view that there should be one combined medical service for the army,
fMr. Hazen.]
navy and air force. Doctors, of course, are allowed to have different opinions on many matters; therefore I venture to disagree with the hon. member in this regard. I think it highly desirable that the navy should have a medical service of its own. Conditions affecting the navy are different from those affecting the army. Medical men who give their services to the navy will soon become specialists in that kind of work, and I think it is highly desirable for the navy to have its own medical service. I am glad to note that the head of that service is a very competent officer, Surgeon Commander McCallum, and I also wish to compliment the minister and -his department upon having been able to secure the services of Doctor Best of Toronto. Doctor Best is well known, as the minister indicated to-day, as the co-discoverer of insulin. He is a man of exceptional ability in research, and I feel quite confident that the work he will do for the navy will be of great value. I presume the minister will have a hospital established on each coast especially for the navy, because I feel sure that will be necessary. We have the experience of Great Britain to guide us in these matters. There is a separate medical service for the navy, one for the air force and another for the army. Many of us remember Netley naval hospital, Portsmouth, which has been established for many years, and where splendid work is done for the navy.
I thought I should like to express my opinion in regard to the value of the services being rendered by the medical men in the Royal Canadian Navy, and as to the necessity for its being a separate service, which I am sure will justify itself before this war is over.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I thank my hon. friend for his comments and approval of the course which the navy have taken in regard to its medical services. I may say that hospitals have been established and are in use at each coast. These may be enlarged as necessity requires.


John Horne Blackmore: How does it tome about that rates of pay in the case of naval ratings' dependents are inferior to those which obtain in the case of the army?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I hope that by to-morrow I shall be able to say that the matter has been adjusted. This goes back over a considerable number of years. As I said before six o'clock, there was a time when the navy paid children's allowances up to four children, whereas the army at that time would pay allowances only for two children. Last November the army decided to pay allowances for four children, and the navy remained as it was. The navy

War Appropriation-Naval Services
allowance is somewhat lower, being only $7.50 a month per child. A man in the navy who lives out of barracks receives a somewhat higher allowance than a man in the army similarly situated. This is another historical anomaly I have never been able to get to the bottom of, but it is there. There is no good reason for it, but it is so. While some naval men were getting less money in certain respects than the army, other navy men were getting more. We are trying to adjust this matter so that there will be substantial equality between the services. Some naval ratings may have to take a cut, that is, those men who live out of barracks, in order that the wives and children of all may have a little more. I hope the whole matter will be worked out by to-morrow at three o'clock.
The hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis) raised a question about a certain ship. I am informed that there was never any question of that particular ship being sent to that port for repairs. She was at that port but not for the purpose of being repaired. As my hon. friend probably knows, the dock there is not a naval dock; it is owned by the Department of Public Works. After his stay in Esquimalt the captain of that ship wrote to an officer of the department here to say how pleased he was with the treatment he had received in that harbour.
Mr. MaeINNIS: Will the minister tell the committee if the Warspite was repaired at Bremerton? There must be something wrong because naval men to whom I have talked were very wrath about the matter.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The information I have from an officer of the department is that there was never any question of the Warspite going to Esquimalt for repairs, although she was at Esquimalt. Any repairs that were needed were intended to be made elsewhere, namely, at Bremerton. In any event the dock at Esquimalt is a public works dock, not a naval services dock. The captain of the Warspite wrote to say how good they were to him at Esquimalt.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: I am sure the people of Canada and the members of the House of Commons will be glad if the minister is able to make an announcement to-morrow with reference to dependents' allowances. While it is true that those living out of barracks have been getting a slightly higher rate, the men who are at sea and who are taking the greater risk are the ones penalized by this inequality in dependents' allowances. As the minister knows, a large number of his personnel have come from the prairies, particularly from around Regina and Calgary.
During the Easter adjournment I had parents come to me about this matter, and I know the minister has been concerned about it. A man with a son in the navy since before the war came to me and said that the wife and one child of this man were receiving dependents' allowances of only $27 a month. This man was working to earn his own living, but he had been sending a sum of money monthly to his daughter-in-law in order to help keep her and her child. She could not begin to live on the allowance she was receiving. I shall certainly congratulate the minister if he is able to announce something to-morrow. Could he give us a break-down of the sum of monej we are voting in this resolution for nava services?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The hon. member for Yale (Mr. Stirling) asked for that information and there were several other questions asked by him. The total amount asked for naval services is $258,542,713. This is divided into some nine or ten headings, which I can give to the committee in round
figures. They are:
Civil salaries and wages	 $ 3,768,000
Pay and allowances	 53,195,000
Travel and transportation		2,585,000
Operating expenses of properties 1,455,000 Ships: acquisition by purchase, construction, charters, repairs
and upkeep	 80,153,000
Equipment division components.	3,923,000
Purchase of new machinery and repairs to buildings and
machinery	 2,874,000
Buildings: acquisition, construction and purchase and rental
of land and buildings	 21,955,000
Stores, equipment and supplies. 52,720,000
Armament stores	 34,166,000
Sundries	 1,743,000
That is the analysis of the total vote asked for by this department. My hon. friend asked, I believe, for a comparison with last year's estimates. I shall give it to him as accurately as I can, but last year there was a slightly different division of these items.


Grote Stirling: If the minister could just indicate where the bulk of the $120,000,000 excess has gone-or as he wishes.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: It was SSO,000,000 odd. Last year the estimate was $169,000,000. This year, pay and allowances are estimated to be $20,000,000 more than last year; repair of ships, $7,000,000 increase; repair of buildings, et cetera, about $4,000,000 increase; stores, that is victualling stores and naval stores, up roughly $13,000,000; armament stores, up about $20,000,000.


Grote Stirling: That is about $65,000,000.

War Appropriation-Naval Services


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The difference between this estimate and last year's is about 188,000,000. Those are the main items of increase over the estimates of last year.


Grote Stirling: Judging by the figure
which the minister gives of the increase in the number of ships, I am surprised that the item in this estimate of $80,000,000 is only $7,000,000 bigger than last year.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Of course our last year's programme of shipbuilding was very heavy, probably even heavier than this year's. Last year showed a tremendous development of corvette building. From the opening to the end of navigation last year we commissioned on an average, I think, two ships a week.


Grote Stirling: How far can the minister go in breaking down the figure of ships? The leader of the opposition asked if we might have those figures.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
can go some distance but not all the way; that is, I do not wish to give exactly the number of any particular type of ship, but I can approximate it. First of all, the leader of the opposition asked how many of these ships were real fighting ships and how many were simply boats. About half of the number which I have named are what might be called "shooting" ships; they are equipped with various types of armament, some of them with depth charges or torpedoes. All of them are ships which are capable of taking the aggressive in an action.
As to an analysis of the total number of fighting ships, let me take corvettes first. On the water to-day there are, let me say, roughly 75 corvettes. That is not the exact figure. There are roughly 45 mine-sweepers. There are more than a dozen armed yachts. The leader of the opposition asked whether the armed yachts were of any use. They are. They are used for patrol purposes along the coast. They are armed with guns, and they also carry depth charges, so that they are ships of considerable value along the coast of a country.


Grote Stirling: Are they on both coasts?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes. Most of them are on the east, but two or three of them are on the west. We have about two dozen of the Fairmile motor launches, between twelve and twenty destroyers; we have several auxiliary cruisers. The precise number is probably known to most hon. members and I will not give it. That is an analysis of the

important types of fighting ships in our navy. There are a good many others which I have not mentioned, such as gate vessels, tugs, harbour motor-boats, and so on, that I will not speak of here.


Grote Stirling: May I ask with regard to the other half, the 200-roughly speaking

which are not fighting ships. Do they go right down and include 16-foot pulling boats?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: No.


Grote Stirling: Are they apart from those?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes,


Grote Stirling: What is the total of all we have?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: As I said, we have a total of probably 400 ships of all kinds. They would include tugs, harbour vessels, patrol vessels of one kind or another, fishermen's reserve vessels and that sort of thing, which I have not given in this analysis.


Grote Stirling: But the minister does not include such things as pulling boats, whalers and craft of that sort in the 200?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: No.


Grote Stirling: They are in addition to the 400?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes.


Mr. GREEN:: Is it the intention to acquire any more destroyers or larger warships during the current year?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes. We have destroyers building now, as my hon. friend knows.


Howard Charles Green: In Canada?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: We have not actually laid the keels. We have acquired quite a lot of material. It is very difficult to get destroyer steel now. I hope that the last bit of essential material will be acquired very soon and that the keels will be laid within a matter of weeks. But there are destroyers being built in the old country besides those I have mentioned here. Some are almost completed, and others are on the ways in the United Kingdom.


Howard Charles Green: Are we acquiring any larger ships such as light cruisers?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: No; we have none in mind at the moment.


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: The minister in the break-down he gave referred to 150 ships out of the 400. Can he give any indication of the size or type of the other ships?

War Appropriation-Naval Services


Mr. POULIOT:: I have just a word to say
before the minister replies. I was not in my seat, but I listened from the gallery to the discussion both this afternoon and to-night, and I must commend the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services for the way he is bringing forward his estimates. This is the way it should be done. He is not surrounded by the whole navy; he is alone. Besides that, when a member asks for information the minister gives the details and shows good-will. This is the way in which estimates should be piloted through the committee, and it is the way it has been done by most departments. He seems to have nothing to hide. By the way, he was premier of his province for a number of years and is true to the traditions of Joe Howe, the great parliamentarian, the great figure of Nova Scotia. Of course, it is my great pleasure to say things like this. They are much more pleasant than when I have to say the contrary. What the minister has done will set an example which, I think, should be followed by each of his colleagues. The minister is not supposed to know the names of all the sailors, but he does his best, and, as I say, he shows good-will. I commend him very highly. I am delighted at the way in which he is piloting his estimates through the committee.


Angus MacInnis: One word in that regard. I do not think that the comparison which the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) is trying to make is quite fair. We had the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) before us for two weeks, and he was the essence of good temper. He gave information and, if anything, he was too ready to give information. He gave it in the fullest way, and I must say for those of us sitting here that while we have nothing to complain about with regard to the present minister, we must certainly commend the Minister of National Defence for the way in which he gave information.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am the first to agree that the expression of opinions is free, and if some members are satisfied with the way in which the estimates are piloted through the committee in some instanced, so much the better for them. They are not asking for much. What we are here for is, first, to enact legislation and, second, to check expenditures. The expenditures of all departments should be given to us in sufficient detail that we may understand how the department is being run. That is ministerial responsibility to the members of the House
of Commons and of the Senate. It is responsibility for all expenditures that are made in the department. I make no comparisons; I have named no one except the . minister who is now piloting his estimates through the committee. I say he is doing well, and I am not alone in that opinion. Many of my colleagues have remarked the same to me. I do not change my mind because of different views that may be expressed, however respectable they may be.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) asked for some information regarding the remaining ships making up the round figure of 400. Some of the remaining ships are classified as patrol boats. They are of varying sizes, and a good many fall into that class.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: They are not armed?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Some are armed to some extent and others are not. Then there are examination vessels, of which there are twelve. Those are not included in the figures I gave of armed ships. Then there are boom-maintenance vessels. There are about twenty of these, which are used in connection with the maintenance of booms across mouths of harbours. There are gate vessels used where submarine nets are placed across gates through which friendly vessels may be allowed to pass. There are twelve or fourteen of these gate vessels. Then we have about five auxiliary tankers. We have tugs to the number of about ten, and we have a large number of harbour craft, probably over 100. These are of varying sizes. Some of them are 48 feet in length and some a good1 bit longer. There is one which is 107 feet, another 97 feet, another 125 feet. They are used for harbour work. They are not included in the breakdown of armed ships which I gave. There are munition lighters to the number of five and a few diving boats, and there are nine boats that are used for training purposes in the R.C.N.V.R. divisions. These run from small ones of forty feet up as high as boats of 145 feet in length. I think that accounts for the 200 odd boats that I did not include in my first statement.


Howard Charles Green: The information the minister has given concerning the construction of destroyers in Canada is rather discouraging. On November 11 last the minister said, as reported at page 4268 of Hansard:
The plans for building destroyers are well in hand, and we hope to begin that work very soon.



War Appropriation-Naval Services
Then in the booklet "Canada at War" for April, 1942, we find on page 13 this statement referring to destroyers:
Two more vessels of the same type are being built in Canada.
Apparently that information is inaccurate, and the keels have not yet been laid. Is there not some way in which the construction of these boats could be hastened? After all, they are the largest fighting ships that Canada has, and it does seem that we should be doing everything possible to hasten the construction of these destroyers.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: My hon. friend is quite right; the suggestions he makes are sound and commendable. When I stated on November 11 last that we expected shortly to undertake the building of destroyers I spoke correctly. But my hon. friend will remember that on December 7 the United States became involved in war, and the steel for destroyers, or at any rate certain kinds of steel which is not manufactured in this country-steel which we had hoped first, to get from Great Britain and then turned to the United States to secure- that steel was denied us. On the outbreak of war, the United States government and manufacturers naturally decided that they should keep all their steel there until the situation became clearer. We have received certain shipments of steel from the United States; arrangements have been made for the construction of destroyers at Halifax; things are being shaped up, and the keel steel will arrive, I believe, very soon. Make no mistake; every effort is being made to get it. But my hon. friend will understand how difficult it is for a country that finds itself plunged into war, and has a tremendous shipbuilding programme of its own-an inconceivably big programme in the matter of both merchant ships and war ships-to let steel go even to a friendly country such as ours. But I think that difficulty is being pretty well overcome now. We shall have the steel, and the keels of those destroyers will be laid in a very short time.


Howard Charles Green: Can we not produce steel
of that kind in Canada? Is it a different kind from that used in corvettes?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: My colleague the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) would know more about that, because he has to build the ships. I understand it is specially treated steel processed by a special heat treatment, that is not available in Canada at present.


Howard Charles Green: Can we not produce that
type of steel in Canada?


Clarence Decatur Howe: We can, but it would seriously interrupt our other activities.


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: There is one
phase of the work in which the navy is engaged that was not dealt with at any length by the minister in the admirable address he gave this afternoon. Were it not for the fact that from time to time reports are given in the British House of Commons in connection therewith, I would not bring it up. The contribution of the Canadian navy and all it means, the great sacrifices being made by the men of that service and of the merchant marine, after the recital that has been given us to-day will make us all realize even more clearly that the success of the united nations depends upon keeping the sea lanes open. During the past couple of weeks various statements have been made in the United States senate and house of representatives in regard to the problem of keeping the sea lanes open, and in particular to the submarine campaign going on on the Atlantic, designed to prevent shipments of tanks and munitions and aeroplanes to Russia, to the near east and to Great Britain. According to information published in Washington on April 17 last, considerable improvement is taking place as far as submarine attacks on the Atlantic are concerned, and in the issue of the United States News which I have before me it is stated that the great problem facing the united nations to-day is to keep the sea lanes open, and that for every two ships now being launched by the united nations, three ships are being sunk by axis submarines. It adds that there has been improvement recently.
I do not want to ask any questions that might in any way tend to endanger the safety of the united nations or Canada. But the other day the senior ranking officer of the navy made a speech in which he pointed out the serious situation on the Atlantic. If that statement be true, the people of Canada should know and realize the condition and the position in which we are. The people of Canada to-day want to know the facts, but only those the revelation of which could be of no assistance to the enemy. Is the minister in a position to-night to tell us whether or not there is an improvement on the Atlantic, whether or not we are winning on the one front where it is necessary to win in order to secure victory on land? I should like him to tell us if he can what expansion, if any, is anticipated in the navy during the coming year. We have heard frequently that the government of Canada has a plan for Canada's part in the war effort. Is that plan the exten-

War Appropriation-Naval Services
sion of the army, further expansion in the air force, the extension of the navy or an acceleration of munitions production?
We heard to-day an address eloquent in its terms, inspiring in its viewpoint, telling Canadians what Canadian navy men are doing and the wonderful advances made by our navy. I think all of us are proud of the work that has been done in the expansion of the Canadian navy, proud of the contributions it is making, proud of the acceleration in the service it renders, as the hon. member for Yale (Mr. Stirling) said with the pride that must be felt by a father whose son is in that navy. We are proud of our navy, and we do not want any information that might in any way aid the enemy. But if the situation is bad on the Atlantic, let the people of Canada know it; let them realize what we are up against; for if there is one thing that the people of Canada must have to-day, it is a message challenging them to greater effort, a message from those in authority, a message that has not yet been given. We should know that the challenge we face is of our survival. What are the dangers that we must overcome? What are the sacrifices the people must make individually in order to secure victory? To-day the minister went a long way in giving detailed information. I have refrained from asking some of the questions which the minister has felt free to answer; but without going into any elucidation which could be construed in any way as being of assistance to those who to-day are our enemies, I ask him to let the people know what the situation is and what our responsibilities are, so that we may realize what we are up against and what further responsibilities we must undertake. The men in the factory, the men who produce destroyers and other ships of war, will have a renewed determination if they know the challenge that is before them.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: My hon. friend has raised a point, I must say, with great fairness and courtesy, and with due regard for the importance of the subject. I could give him an answer now, but I should prefer to wait until to-morrow in order that I may do justice to my hon. friend, to the manner in which he has raised the question, and to the importance of the question itself.
I know the statement to which my hon. friend refers. It was made by the chief of the naval staff a few weeks ago, as to the presence of submarines on our coasts. He expressed the view that this year, submarines might well be found operating in the gulf of St. Lawrence and perhaps in the St. Lawrence river itself. There is no doubt that this is a very distinct possibility. There is no reason why sub-
44561-142J
marines could not get into the gulf of St. Lawrence and operate there. There is every likelihood that they may do so. As I said this afternoon, already they have come within sight of our eastern shores; they have come within sight of the shores of the United States, both east and west, and there is no reason why they may not continue that practice.
As to the general situation on the Atlantic, as I have said I should prefer to give a little thought to such a statement. The Atlantic is a large body of water. The line between eastern Canada and Great Britain is one thing; the coastal lines up and down, north and south, are another. It would be true to say that it is the north and south line, the coastal traffic line, which in the last three months has sustained the most severe attack. More than that I should not care to say at this moment. But to-morrow afternoon, if my hon. friend will grant me that much grace, after a little more preparation, I should like to make a statement.


Mr. HANSELL:: Much has been said
to-night in respect of the pay and allowances of those in the navy. I do not wish to labour this point, because I understand that to-morrow the minister will bring down a statement which we anticipate will announce at least an increase in the allowances to dependents of those who sail the high seas.
I do not rise to ask a question; I rise to offer a suggestion to the minister. I do not think we should be satisfied if to-morrow the minister's statement gives the dependents of those seamen any less than is given those who are in receipt of allowances as being the dependents of those in the army.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Hear, hear; quite right.


Ernest George Hansell: I anticipate that if the minister brings down a statement which shows that there will continue to be a difference in those allowances, a few questions will be asked, and a discussion of the subject will be precipitated. I quite understand that there may be some reason for a difference in pay as between the various ranks in the navy and the comparable ranks in the army. What I have in mind is simply this. I can understand that there may be a difference between the pay of a plasterer and the pay of a carpenter, though they are both engaged in the building and construction industry. But when it comes to the dependents' allowance, I do not see why there should be any difference between the allowance given in respect of the navy and that given in respect of the army. Surely the wife of a seaman eats ns much bread as

War Appropriation-Naval Services
does the wife of a soldier; surely she wears just as many clothes, so I see no reason for that difference. If, after this statement to-morrow, a difference still exists, I think the minister will have to be prepared to answer this question: What is -the determining factor which causes the dependents' allowance in one service to be different from that in another? I want the minister to grasp the point. What is the determining factor which brings about the difference between the dependents' allowance in one service and that in another, since the seaman has a wife and children, the man in the army has a wife and children, the man in the air force has a wife and children, and they are all wives and children. The minister should be prepared to answer that question if the statement he brings down indicates that the allowance to dependents of seamen is to be any less than that to dependents of men in the army.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I should like to answer some questions, in the order in which they were asked this afternoon. First there were questions asked by the hon. member for Yale, as to training, the standard *of training in the Canadian navy, and whether we are taking in boy seamen, cadets and midshipmen. The answer to these three questions is that at the moment we are not taking in boy seamen or cadets or midshipmen. There is a small number of these men in the Canadian navy, from previous years, but no more are being allowed to enlist for the time being. The hon. member also asked whether naval cadets still went to England for training, as they did in peace time. The answer is no. We believe that our own naval college at Esquimalt will take care of that.
Then my hon. friend asked for a brief description of the training establishments at each coast. I can deal with that matter only in a very general way, but I may tell him that there are barracks at both Halifax and Esquimalt where men are lodged and fed. Unfortunately there is not enough barracks accommodation to take care of all the men, so in the Canadian navy we have some seven thousand men who have to live and eat out of quarters. But we have barracks at these places. We have various training buildings, gunnery schools, torpedo schools, schools wherein submarine detection instruments are studied. We have a signal school now situated at St. Hyacinthe, Quebec. We have one radio direction finding school, where instruction is given in that very important work-and so on-at each coast.
Then, I am asked if the men receive refresher courses before going to ships, such

as corvettes. The answer would be, not in all cases. Some men would go right out of their training course, and sign on a corvette.


Grote Stirling: That question applied more to the Royal Canadian Naval Reserve. Do we take men from the merchant navy and give them refresher courses?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes.


Grote Stirling: When do they take those refresher courses?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Some men might go right in upon entry. A good engineer might go right in. Others might take preliminary training. A very young man might be sent to one of these five or six training schools. But the chief refresher course for any rank would be for the man who had been at sea for a time and who is considered to have special aptitude for gunnery, torpedo work, signalling or anti-submarine work. He would be taken ashore, and perhaps given special training in that type of work.
Then the leader of the Social Credit group (Mr. Blackmore) raised a question as to why we do not endeavour to build up here a navy which would be auxiliary to the Royal Navy. He went on to say that we should be strong and that we must build for the future. I must say I agree very largely with what the hon. member has said. That brings up the point discussed by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis), as to disarmament. That subject might hardly come within the scope of this debate, but offhand I would say that disarmament is a splendid thing-if everybody disarms. But it is a ridiculous thing if only a few disarm, and others are allowed to go on arming-as they did in the last ten years. They did go on arming at a furious rate, while countries against whom they were arming did very little but talk about it. World disarmament practised by everybody is excellent. Disarmament practised by a few amounts to something very like suicide for those who disarm.
The hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) who, I am sorry to say, is not at the moment in his seat, wanted to know the number of men enlisted from each province. I shall give those figures, and he may get them from Hansard. These are the figures for all ranks, up to the end of March. While the figure for Prince Edward Island may seem small, in reality it is probably the best showing of any province, taken on a per capita basis. I believe that applies not only to the navy but to other services as well. The record of that province is equally good with respect

War Appropriation-Naval Services
to those services. These are the figures for enlistments:
Prince Edward	Island	 841
Nova Scotia	 3,897
New Brunswick	,.... 1,172
Quebec	 4,802
Ontario	 10,135
Manitoba	 2,241
Saskatchewan	 1,890
Alberta	 2,435
British Columbia	 4,480
These figures give a total somewhat different from the 31,000 I mentioned this afternoon, but the figures I gave at that time were round figures. It will be remembered that these are the figures for enlistments, and that among those men, some have been discharged through illness, or for other reasons. The figure I gave this afternoon was the actual strength of the Canadian navy at March 31. 1942.
Recreational facilities at Halifax was another subject mentioned by the hon. member. Some question was raised by the leader of the opposition with respect to the Ajax club. The navy had no official supervision over or association with that club. True, it was a club originally designed for the benefit of ratings of the Royal Navy, and it was later extended to include ratings of the Canadian navy. However, some difficulty arose in connection with the securing of a liquor permit. I had nothing to do with that. The difficulty arose in another place, and the upshot was that the club could not procure a permit. It was not deemed advisable to give it permission to sell liquor. It was located very close to a church, unfortunately, and some objection was taken from that quarter.
I may say, however-and I wish my hon. friend who is honorary president for Ontario of the navy league were here-that the Navy League of Canada has undertaken to do something which I believe will be much better than any club facilities of the ordinary kind could be. They have agreed to take over those splendid athletic grounds in Halifax known as the Wanderers' club grounds. Hon. members representing Halifax will know the location. It is a very beautiful site, with trees growing all around, the whole being surrounded by a high board fence. It has been used for many years as an athletic field for the playing of football, baseball and cricket, and it possesses an excellent running track. It is the intention of the Navy League of Canada to have at that point facilities for sailors, not only to provide them with ordinary canteen facilities for the purchase of cigarettes, and so on, but to provide athletic equipment whereby men coming in from boats may play football, baseball, cricket or bowls, or any of those other sports which
should be available to men who have been confined on small ships for long periods of time. I believe that is a most excellent arrangement. I know the grounds well, and I know that the sailors, while there, will be more or less secluded. They will not be on the street; they will not be crowding the sidewalks in any way, and they will have this magnificent opportunity for wholesome sport, and the use of showers, dressing rooms and that sort of thing provided by this magnificent organization.


Douglas King Hazen: Will they have a wet canteen, too?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I have no doubt a wet canteen will be there. I do not try to run these things, but from what I hear I would assume there would be a canteen where beer would be provided. I think that covers the matter of recreation at Halifax.
The hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) raised the question of men who had served in the last war in the naval service being ready to serve now. I may say to him that we shall be delighted to have these men if they are not too old and if they are otherwise fit to serve.
My hon. friend also asked about Japanese boats which had been taken over or bought outright. I think we have some eighteen of these former Japanese fishing vessels in the navy. My hon. friend will understand that the Department of Fisheries has now taken charge of practically all these vessels. Where a small vessel is involved we find it better to buy outright rather than to pay charter prices which in two or three years will amount to the cost of the vessel. We would then have to return the vessel to the owner and probably have to make a lot of repairs in order to restore it to its original condition.


Grote Stirling: Who sets the price?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: In connection with these Japanese vessels there is a board of which Mr. Justice Sidney Smith is chairman. This board controls the whole thing. In the case of ordinary vessels, if the price cannot be agreed upon either for purchase or for charter, there is a board at each coast.
The hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) raised the question of convoys and the number of ships in convoy that had been lost. I should prefer to leave this question until to-morrow when I deal with the question raised by the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker). It is all part of the same story.


Grote Stirling: What educational standard is required in that case?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: At
least senior matriculation.


Grote Stirling: Nothing like as stiff as
was required for entry into the Royal Canadian Navy.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: It is a different type. You mean the cadet entering the Royal Canadian Navy? Yes. I think on the whole it might correspond to that. I think a good matriculant would be able to qualify for the Royal Canadian Navy. It is true that some of the examinations are set in England, and a lot of our bovrs have trouble because of not having followed the same course of study, but I would think that entry into the Royal Canadian Navy at the age of sixteen or seventeen years-that is about the age a boy gets his senior matriculation-would call for the same general level of education. The hon. member for York South knows more about that than I do, although at one time I did know a good deal about it. I should think that senior matriculation would correspond roughly, although it may be a little off in some subjects from what would be required of an entrant into the R03U1I Canadian Navy.
Both my hon. friend and the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) inquired about the future programme of naval training. I intimated that within the next year we hope to add some 12,000 or 13,000 men to the strength of the navy, and also we hope to add not far from 100 ships. I doubt if we can expand very much faster than that. We are going to be faced with the problem to which I referred earlier, that of obtaining trained officers and petty officers. That is the great problem. We can get all the men we need, but it is hard to get officers to command ships of war. Ship commanders require some knowledge of gunnery, some knowledge of torpedo work, some knowledge of signalling, considerable knowledge of navigating, the ability to handle men and to sail a ship. These cannot be obtained overnight. A man must have a certain amount of training on land, and he must have a certain amount of training on the sea. He can get that training only at sea. He cannot be given theoretical training alone. Some of the men who went into the navy in the early days of the war have acquired a wealth and a variety of experience in two and a half years, wdiich in ordinary peace times would take them six or seven years to acquire. They will be a great help to us, but we shall still feel the lack of skilled petty officers and officers. I fear that that will be our greatest problem in the next .year or two.

War Appropriation-Naval Services


Douglas King Hazen: Is junior matriculation a
prerequisite for a rating obtaining a commission?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: No, not necessarily for a rating who is promoted to a commission. He is considered to have acquired quite a bit of knowledge already. However, that is necessary for a man going straight into a commission.


Grote Stirling: The reason why I asked with regard to the training establishments on both coasts is that it is commonly recognized that one of the greatest difficulties is this question of providing the Royal Canadian Navy with the necessary ships' complements. The minister has indicated that there are so many on hand now that they have to live out more or less where they can, and then they have to undertake their training in what training establishments at present exist. Am I not right in believing that there have been one or two fires in establishments of that description, which, of course, must have reduced that quantity of establishments very considerably?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I do not think that actual training was much affected. My hon. friend is referring to fires at Halifax. The last fire there was in a hut used for sleeping and messing, so that training facilities were not greatly affected. The fire which occurred about a year ago was in a sort of sleeping-messing hut. I believe there was also a classroom in it, but it was not exclusively devoted to that purpose. It was an old wooden building.


Grote Stirling: It was separate from the main barracks?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes. At Halifax there are well over a hundred buildings of one kind or another. In the whole naval service there are some 500 structures of one kind or another either built, or building, or for which plans are being prepared. Halifax, with well over a hundred, has a greater number than any other place. I do not think these two fires interfered with the actual training. The matter of quarters may have been rather bothersome for a little while.


Grote Stirling: The minister referred to St. Hyacinthe as a signal school. Is that the only one, or is there another, a Pacific school? Does he contemplate being able to use St. Hyacinthe for that purpose or is a move in contemplation? If a move is in contemplation does he expect to have to build for that purpose?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: We do not intend to remain permanently at St. Hyacinthe. We were given the quarters
there by the army only out of grace. It is really an army camp, and they have frequently asked us to get but. We have endeavoured to stay on until we had some other place ready, but I understand that the army has a regiment there which wishes to use those quarters as a barracks, and we shall have to get out. A move is contemplated. It is desirable, of course, to have the school on the east coast near a great centre of training, because otherwise you have to be shipping ratings up and down to St. Hyacinthe from Halifax and other ports, and the problem of transportation becomes a very considerable one.


Grote Stirling: How many at a time does the minister expect to handle at the signal schools?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I believe when the school is going full blast, there will probably be over 1,500, perhaps as many as 2,000, training in signalling. But we have not that number now. The number at St. Hyacinthe at the moment is 1,049.


Grote Stirling: Officers and ratings?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Officers and ratings. There are 34 officers and 1,015 ratings.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Has anything been done to develop a uniform course for the sea cadets?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I am glad my hon. friend brought that up. He did so before, and I failed to notice it. I should like to look into it. I think we wrote a letter on that point to the educational services in all the provinces. I am not quite clear as to what they all replied, but I think I can say this. The naval service so far in the matter of cadets has not associated itself so closely with schools as the other two services. I think the great majority of our cadet corps, if not all of them, are made up of schoolboys, and they are in all cases part and parcel of the school life. I do not know that the matter to which my hon. friend refers was of such prime importance to us as it was to either the army or the air force. If my hon. friend will allow me, I will look again into the correspondence with the provinces and make a complete answer later on.


Mr. GRAYDON:: Will the minister give us some additional information with respect to the training of the men in the navy? Having in mind that a good deal of the progress and development which have occurred in connection w'ith the training of our army has been the result of close association with the British authorities, can the minister advise the committee to what extent the training of our

War Appropriation-Naval Services
naval personnel is proceeding in close collaboration with the British navy? Most of us in Canada have the conviction that the British navy is second to none with respect to its traditions and its achievements all through the years. I believe that the British navy contains officers and men the like of whom the world has never seen in point of real effectiveness on the water. I have no doubt that in Britain the schemes and plans of training of men for the navy are in a highly perfected condition, and I have been wondering whether the Department of National Defence for Naval Services is collaborating with the British naval authorities so that some part of their tremendously important experience is made available to Canadian naval officers and men. I would couple with that an inquiiy as to how closely the work of the Canadian navy is joined with that of the British navy in the general war operations at this time. We in Canada are amateurs in naval affairs compared with the seamen of the motherland, and it would seem to me wholly within the realm of common sense that we should seek, wherever possible, to take advantage of the work which has been and is being done by the British government in the development of sea power efficiency, an achievement which, as I have said before, approximates the best that the world has known.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I may say to my hon. friend, first, in a general way that there is, of course, the very best of good feeling and the clearest of understanding between the naval officers here and the naval officers in the United Kingdom.
In the second place, a great many of our officers have been trained in the British navy. All senior officers of the rank of captain and above have had experience on British ships, and even some below the rank of captain have done their year or two on British ships of various types-battleships, cruisers and the like. In that way they have acquired close contact with and knowledge of the methods pursued by British officers. Furthermore, we have 1,100 Canadian officers and men now serving with the British navy. Some of these we hope to get back and some we have already got back. They had the advantage of a year or so of serving on British ships of war, and their experience will be very valuable here. As to what is the actual cooperation between the navies, I fancy my hon. friend refers to the disposition of ships on the Atlantic at this time, or something of that sort, rather than the exchange of men.


Gordon Graydon: I do not want any intimate details that should not be revealed, but a general idea.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Cooperation on the Atlantic is very close as between British and United States ships and our own. The burden of convoying on the Atlantic is shared in about equal proportions by the three countries, Great Britain and the United States doing perhaps a little more because they are bigger and have more ships. But we are doing nearly one-third of the work. I am speaking of convoying now, not of engaging in any great battle with battleships, because we have not the battleships. Our navy is a convoy navy up to the moment, and the distribution of the work on the Atlantic works out roughly at one-third British, one-third United States and perhaps a little less than one-third Canadian.


Howard Charles Green: What is the situation on the Pacific? Is there cooperation there with the United States navy?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes. Of course, the problem is somewhat different there, but there is close cooperation between naval headquarters on the Pacific coast and the corresponding United States division to the south. In every way there is frequent exchange of signals, intelligence and so on.


Angus MacInnis: What kind of armed vessels are used for convoying? I thought the vessels used were larger than anything we have.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The common type of vessel used in convoying before the war would be the destroyer, but since the beginning of this war we have developed the corvette, which is cheaper and much easier to build than the destroyer. It has not the speed or the power, but it is a very useful vessel to attack submarines. Even the mine-sweeper, which is very much the same as the corvette in some respects, can be used as an escort ship. Any ship that can carry depth charges and move a little faster than the submarine under water is of some use as an escort for convoys, but I should name the typical escort for convoys as destroyers and corvettes. The great battleship, I suppose, would not be used normally for the escort of convoys unless it was a convoy of exceptional importance, a very large troop convoy, where you wanted a battleship to deal with some other battleship. But if you are not going to deal with battleships but want to hunt submarines, the destroyer and the corvette will do the trick better than the battleship.


Gordon Graydon: Is there any scheme of coordination between the work of the air force here and that of the navy, as there has been in so many other countries since the

War Appropriation-Naval Services
war began? If one judges the news correctly, the question of air protection in the naval force has reached the position where air protection is practically the most essential part of some of the work the navy has to do. Could the minister tell us what scheme has been adopted between our air force and our navy with respect to any events that may occur in the future which would necessitate close collaboration between the two branches?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: That is a very interesting question, in answer to which perhaps full details cannot be given in the very nature of things, but I may say this to my hon. friend. Take the east coast where there is a naval establishment and also an air force. There is a very close degree of cooperation. Air patrols go out so many hundred miles over the water daily. Many patrols go out; they report to the naval authorities and naval vessels anything which they see, and that experience in itself is very valuable as a lesson in cooperation. What my hon. friend raises primarily, I think, is the point that has come to the fore so much in recent months, and that is that naval power alone, if attacked by air power, is at a great disadvantage. That, unfortunately for us, has proved only too true in recent months. Torpedo bombers diving down and launching torpedoes which go over the water have proved singularly effective against some of our ships. We have not had that form of attack on our coast. We have not had surface attacks on our coasts, but when it comes I believe the experience which the air force has already gained, and the navy as well, by cooperating with and reporting one to the other, signalling one to the other, and collecting information for their mutual advantage, will be quite valuable.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Have any
steps been taken to develop any type of fleet air arm?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: No, not yet. We have not got that yet.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That
situation obtains in the United States. Would the minister care to express an opinion-perhaps he would be too modest-as to the advantage of the navy having its own air force, as they have in the United States, compared with following the practice we have of a separate force working in cooperation with the navy? There are two schools of thought about that in the United States, as I have read-and elsewhere too, a colleague of mine suggests. In England I have heard a good deal of murmur, shall I say, on the part of the senior service in the navy that
they do not have control of the air force on this patrol work. It is a matter of opinion, I suppose, and I am wondering what the minister's opinion is, if he has formed one. There are two distinct schools of thought about it in the United States and possibly in England. Has Canada developed any thought along that line?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I do not know that I have any definite view on that point; I have no aeroplanes in any event. But the British system is, of course, to have an air force, an army and a navy. The navy has some little air force of its own. It has a fleet air arm, and in addition to that there is cooperation between the navy and the regular air force. The United States system does not provide for any separate air force. The army has its own air arm, and so has the navy. There are two views about it. One view is that this new thing, this air force, a new up-and-coming element, should not be checked and held down by the older service, that they should not shackle the new to the old. That view has prevailed in the United States up to the moment, though I cannot say what changes time may bring. I have no definite views on the matter myself. Sometimes one works well, sometimes the other.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: Has any thought been given by the minister's department to the question of providing housing for the families of men of the navy? In the United States large appropriations have been set aside for providing suitable houses in locations where large numbers of naval men and officers are stationed. The figures which the minister has placed on the record to-night give some indication of the very serious problem existing in many parts of Canada. For example, he informs us that 10,135 have joined the navy from Ontario, 2,241 from Manitoba, 1,890 from Saskatchewan, 2,425 from Alberta. It naturally follows that men from these inland provinces are going to find themselves at sea eventually, and owing to the very small allowances available hitherto there is not much chance of these men seeing their families very often. I know a critical situation has already developed. Large numbers of people have flocked to Halifax. The Department of Munitions and Supply has assumed responsibility for building temporary houses for people in cities and towns where war industries have been established. In Halifax houses have been built to accommodate people who have gone there for employment in connection with munitions and supply work, but the families of men of the navy are not permitted to occupy these temporary war-time houses. The



War Appropriation-Naval Services
Minister of National Defence was asked the other night whether his branch had given consideration to the providing of houses near military establishments, and he stated that so far no such plans had been undertaken. It would seem to me that at this stage, with a navy thirty times larger than Canada had at the commencement of the war, and the very large sums that have been appropriated for naval services, some consideration should be given to what appears to be an essential part of naval activities, that is providing some place for the families of the men and their officers to live.
The figures that the hon. member for Cape Breton South placed before us this evening showed that a wife with three children would be allowed $45 a month. Assuming that she had $20 a month assigned pay, that would provide $65 a month. It is usually taken for granted that not more than 25 per cent of the monthly income should be spent on house rent. Twenty-five per cent of $65 equals $16 and some cents available for house rent. My information is that in Halifax it is impossible to secure any sort of suitable quarters for that amount. It seems to me that since the government so far has not seen fit to permit Wartime Housing Limited to make their houses available for the families of those in the army, the navy and the air force, either these departments must undertake this very essential service, or the necessary changes must be made to permit Wartime Housing Limited to provide a sufficient number of houses in centres to which large migrations have taken place. Is the minister prepared to make a statement as to the consideration that has been given to this question and whether some policy might be outlined?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes; a great deal of consideration has been given to that problem. For some time the naval authorities at Halifax have been investigating the number of families that are there and in need of housing, or better housing than they have been able to secure up to the moment.
The problem is not very simple; like many of these problems it becomes more and more complex as you get into it. As far as the navy is concerned there are only two points that would trouble it-Halifax and perhaps Esquimalt. Our great concentrations of men are at these points. But the army has, say fifty places in Canada where camps have been set up; the air force has a good many; and at once the question is raised, "Are we to build houses at every place where we have a camp, in order to permit soldiers' families to come fMr. Nicholson.]
there and visit their men?" I think something has to be done for the families of ratings, but I think that must be coupled with this provision, that a soldier who goes to Halifax to get on a ship and perhaps has to wait there a week or two, cannot expect the government to guarantee that he is going to get accommodation for his family at that point. What the Department of Munitions and Supply has done in the case of industrial plants is to say, "These workmen are going to be here continuously up to the end of the war; they have to have their families with them." We may have to say the same thing in the case of workmen in the naval dockyards who are permanently employed there and want to bring their families there. I can see no distinction between the two cases. But I can see a good deal of distinction between that and the case of a sailor who comes to Halifax for a week or two, or perhaps a month, out of the year and wants to have his family there. I think we shall have to say to these people, "No, it is all right for you to come to Halifax, but you cannot expect us to provide a house for your family." In -the case of men permanently stationed there, I regard the situation as completely different, and I agree with what my hon. friend said in -that respect.


Douglas King Hazen: The hon. member for Lake Centre this evening brought up the matter of the loss of shipping. That is a very important matter. The minister has told us that he will make a statement about it to-morrow. I had intended to refer to it briefly and to ask one or two questions. If the minister will permit me, I will put them on the record. I do not expect him to answer them now. Perhaps he will not consider it advisable to answer them at all, but if he thinks it is not against the public interest to answer -them, I hope he will do so when he makes his statement.
The questions have to do with the convoying of ships. If ships travelling along the sea lanes of the Atlantic coast are not convoyed, is the failure to provide convoys for these ships due (1) to lack of cooperation between one defence department and another either here or in the United States? (2) to any lack of cooperation between Canada and the United States? (3) -to a shortage of ships in the navy?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I think my hon. friend can make a pretty shrewd guess as to which is the correct answer. I should certainly say, as I said before, that when we speak of the Atlantic we must remember that the route from eastern Canada to the United Kingdom is one thing, the north-

War Appropriation-Naval Services
south route is another. There is certainly no lack of cooperation between any departments in this country in that regard.
I can answer question No. 1 immediately. As to question No. 2: "Is it due to any lack of cooperation between Canada and the United States?" I should say there is no lack of cooperation between these two countries in that regard. Then as to question No. 3: "Is it due to lack of ships?" I can only say to my hon. friend that he is getting warmer and warmer as he goes along with his questions.
Mr. MacIiNNIS: A short time ago the minister mentioned naval dock yards and said it might become necessary to provide homes for the workers in those yards. How many dock yards are being operated by the navy department at present, and how many workers are engaged in those yards?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: It would take me some little time to get the number of men. The main docks, of course, in which the navy is interested, are the dock at Esquimalt; the floating dock at Prince Rupert-of course these docks do not belong to us, but we use them-and the naval dockyard at Halifax. There is also a dock yard at Esquimalt which is ours, in addition to the drydock. Then we are constructing small docks at various points along the eastern coast. They are really marine railways, which can take ships up to 3,000 tons. Perhaps five or six of these are being constructed now. They are really small docks in themselves, for the accommodation of ships from destroyers down, and I think they will prove very useful.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Those are principally for cleaning and repairs?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes, repairs and refits.


Joseph William Noseworthy: The minister told us there was no organization within his department for carrying on research into design and construction, or improvements in ships of the navy. Would he tell us by whom and where the ships now being constructed were designed?


Grote Stirling: That is very closely akin to a matter about which I was going to ask the minister, if the hon. member will permit me to interrupt. As I understand it, in a general way we have accepted the design and blueprints of the vessels which are being built for us, that is for the navy, by the
Department of Munitions and Supply, from the Royal Navy, and those designs are based on the experience they have obtained over the years. When this matter is under discussion with men in the industry, this point has come up again and again. Are we adapting these designs, these working drawings and the materials which are used in the construction, to the facilities that we have at our hand? The question came up with regard to a contract for some boats; I forget the description of them now. The specifications called for copper air tanks, and it was pointed out to me that for the purposes for which these boats are going to be used by the navy, galvanized iron tanks would be just as good, last pretty well as long as the boat itself might be expected to last, and be considerably cheaper, and that the material would be more easily obtained. The same argument applied to the rather expensive use of teak in finishing. Are there not Canadian woods just as good for the purpose? In the case of rowlocks, as another example, on a pinnace, a whaler, or a pulling boat in the Royal Navy, they have had machined rowlocks since away back, but in recent years I believe that in this country we have substituted stamped rowlocks.
These matters would affect not only the economy of the work to be done but also certainly the time which would be occupied therein. This was emphasized in my mind at the time General MeNaughton was oyer here bringing his knowledge of Canadian manufacturing to bear on the contracts which were being carried out in this country. The minister will remember that it was with some pleasure that General MeNaughton was able to point out that Great Britain is now becoming more and more interested in changes in design which Canadian engineers and Canadian industry are ready to make so as to adapt the pieces of machinery being made to the method of construction in force on this continent. If that is the case with regard to munitions, using the word in its larger sense, it appears to me that it could well be adapted to the construction of the craft whose design we have taken, I believe in almost every instance, from Great Britain.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I may say to the hon. gentleman who asked the question originally that we have not had in this country a constructor branch in the navy; that is, we have not had a branch in which men would be engaged in planning and revising the construction of ships. We are now just beginning the organization of such a branch, under Captain Harrison, and I have

War Appropriation-Naval Services
every hope that this branch will expand and become a very useful part of the naval service.
The hon. member for Yale is quite right; up to the present we have had to rely upon the British admiralty for designs; and with the exception of the naval dockyards at Halifax and Esquimalt, where the navy itself might undertake to build whatever small boats it needed, we have followed the British design. Wherever Canadian woods can be substituted for woods that would require to be imported, that is done; but there are cases where that is very difficult. My hon. friend mentioned teak. We have not yet discovered, I am given to understand, a proper substitute for teak, meaning by that a substitute which will embody all the qualities which teak is supposed to possess and which will in every way serve the purpose. I believe that experiments are being carried out all the time. Woods are being tested for this and that, to discover whether they will be suitable as substitutes for mahogany, teak, oak or other kinds of wood that are specified in the British -designs. I think that is all I can say in reply to my hon. friend.


Angus MacInnis: What is the policy of the minister's department in regard to the transportation of officers and ratings, as between the two railway systems. There are great numbers of naval men travelling at the present time, and I was wondering about the policy of the department with regard to the road over which the men should travel.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The regulations I have here state that the railroads are to be used according to the best interests of the naval service. There is always some wrangling between the roads. In the last few days I have had telegrams from one of the railroad brotherhoods saying that there is a hearing taking place before the railway committee, and all that sort of thing. About a year ago the naval service called in representatives of the two roads and said, "Try to agree on some division among yourselves. Agree on a division of territory, or some other division; and let us have your decision." They did agree. Later, some of the senior people of one of the roads said they knew nothing about this agreement. Later still, however, they said, "I guess there was an agreement, and we will accept it."
The agreement w-orked out so that within a certain territory naval personnel would travel by the Canadian National Railways, and within certain other territory they would travel by the Canadian Pacific Railway. As a matter of fact, the agreement works out so that one railway gets considerably more than the other.
LMr. Macdonald (Kingston City).]
However, I cannot go into all the details of the arrangement. One railway says, "We get a little more money, but we have to hand over a good deal of it to the other road. While we sell the tickets, a good deal of travelling is done on the other road." All I can say to my hon. friend is that we have had these two representatives meet with naval officers. They worked out an agreement and signed it and, for the moment, I think we had better let it stand at that.


Angus MacInnis: What is the number of naval passengers transported by each road in the last two years, or since the beginning of the war?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I cannot give that information at the moment. It would be rather difficult to get, unless a certain year were indicated, say the year 1941. I could give my hon. friend totals, if it would serve any purpose. Last year, in freight, passenger and express receipts the Canadian National Railways got something like
SI,250,000	from us, and the Canadian Pacific Railway got something less than 8600,000.- As I have said, the Canadian National will argue that their business was not profitable, and that they had to give away a lot of this money to the Canadian Pacific. However, they will have to fight that out among themselves. They have agreed to it, and we will let it stand.


Angus MacInnis: Did the minister say that the Canadian National got $1,250,000?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Approximately that; and the Canadian Pacific got a little less than $600,000.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Has the person travelling the opportunity to choose the route, or does he have to go where he is sent?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: When they are sent on draft they are sent by a certain route, but if they are on leave or travelling alone I believe they would have a choice, and could take either railway.


Mr. BROOKS:: It is a pleasure to hear the deserved praise rendered the silent service, as it is often called. We hear very little about the sacrifice made by men in the navy until some tragedy occurs-a ship sinks, or something of that kind.
I should like to ask for some information with respect to recruiting for the navy. In the early stages of the war young men were encouraged at the different training centres throughout Canada to join the navy. In the last year that has not been so, and I know that recruiting for the navy has been more

War Appropriation-Naval Services
or less discouraged. Many young men from my part of the countiy, the maritime provinces, have followed the sea for their livelihood. The hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg (Mr. Kinley) mentioned that point yesterday. These men have a great preference for the navy. They do not feel altogether at home in the artillery, the infantry, or some other branch of the service, and they are disappointed when they are told that there is no opportunity for them to join the navy. In view of the great expansion in our Canadian navy it seems to me that more effort should be made to utilize these young men in that branch of the service. I know the department has been taking younger men from all parts of Canada and sending them to schools. Those young men are given preference over other men who have followed the sea all their lives, as fishermen, and as men engaged in other work along the coasts. Is that situation improved, or is there any possibility of improvement?


Mr. POTTIER:: A few minutes ago the
minister gave the number of enlistments by provinces. Could he now give the number of applications by provinces?


Mr. SENN:: In the course of his remarks
this afternoon the minister described how young men who contemplate going into an official part of the navy were educated, and the courses they have to follow. Would he state if there is a waiting list of those young men, and how they are chosen from time to time? I know of one or two cases which have been on the waiting lists for some time.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Is the hon. member referring to officers?


Mark Cecil Senn: Yes, officers.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: There is a very considerable waiting list for officers and men. There are probably 4,000 or 5,000 men whose applications are on file but who have not yet been taken into the navy. The list remains constantly about that figure. Some of those who applied a year ago or six months ago may be in by now. Their places on the waiting list are taken by more recent applicants. Therefore there is that waiting list of
4,000	or 5,000 men waiting to get into the navy.
The same is true with respect to officers. Selection boards which go around the country inform me that if they want thirty officers, usually about 100 apply. It is useless to take more than are needed. The result is that the other seventy have to wait, and take their chances when the next, board comes round in a few months. Of course, the seventy may go in as ratings. It is absolutely impossible to take into the navy all who apply.
Mark you, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Royal has said that a year ago men were encouraged to go into the navy. However, as far as I know, the navy has never spent five cents on recruiting. I have seen posters showing a picture of an army soldier, an airman and a naval rating; but so far as I know, we have never spent anything on recruiting literature, posters, advertisements or anything of that kind. Still, the number of men is there. We just cannot handle them; that is all.
Nova Scotia has given us about 3,900 naval recruits. That is a very large proportion, larger, I believe, than that of any other province with the exception of Prince Edward Island, where the proportion is slightly higher. That is a much higher proportion than has been given by any other place. A good many of these men have been bred to the sea and have found their way into the navy. Saskatchewan has a greater population than Nova Scotia, and we have had some 1,890 men from there, something less than half the Nova Scotia figure. That is no reflection upon Saskatchewan because it has probably given more men to the army. But it would be a great mistake to confine naval recruiting to the eastern and western shores of this country. Recruits from the prairies make excellent seamen. Their physique is good, and there are really many things to be done on a ship besides sailing it. There is gunnery, torpedo work, signalling work, anti-submarine detection, radio work and mechanical work of all kinds. There is a place on a ship for a man who is accustomed to mechanical work. The navy tries to get men from every province of Canada, but inevitably it will draw more men from the provinces by the sea.


Mark Cecil Senn: I was not clear as to the explanation the minster made with regard to those who wanted to become officers. I think he made some reference to the fact that the younger applicants might take the place of the older ones.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
said that there was a waiting list of between three and four thousand men, and a man who has been on the list for six months might finally get into the ranks as a rating. But that does not diminish the waiting list, because we find that for every man we take on there is another fellow outside waiting to get on the waiting list. It is the same with officers. I think we could take in three officers tomorrow for every one for whom we have room. That is the way it runs; if you want ten, thirty are there waiting.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The hon.
member for Peel (Mr. Graydon) raised an

War Appropriation-Naval Services
interesting question with reference to cooperation between the navy and the air force on the coasts. Could the minister carry his answer a step further and give us some information with reference to the coordination of services on the coasts. Of necessity the navy is primarily concerned with seeing that convoys get safely across the ocean, but there is another task within their jurisdiction, the defence of Canadian shores. In the last few months another stage in the war has developed. There is now the possibility of fairly large surface ships approaching Canada, not so much with the idea of invasion as with the idea of shelling naval installations or even landing marine parties to destroy radio equipment, dock yards and so on. A military commander has been appointed for each of the coasts, and last week the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) explained something of the cooperation that exists between the military command and the air force.
Would the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services explain how the navy fits into this picture? Will the naval patrol vessels-I suppose torpedo boats would be mainly used against surface craft-come directly under command of the military commander responsible for the defence of the coast, or is there merely some cooperation? The minister said before that there was always cooperation. Naturally we would expect that, but more and more the lesson that this war seems to be teaching the united nations is that in many instances coordination is not enough, that in modern warfare the different arms of the service must be synchronized with the command under one individual when there is a specific task in mind. Could the minister tell us how the naval forces on the coasts tie in with the military command?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
should like to think over that question until to-morrow. I may say that General Elkins is in command of the east coast. He is the senior commanding officer there, in complete command of the Atlantic area.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Of all services?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes. He is recognized as the man responsible for that area. General Alexander is in command on the west coast. That means complete command, but I do not think in either case the general would undertake to dispose of ships. My hon. friend will realize that the best work a ship can do is out at sea, not in harbour. If it is going to fight, it should fight well out, and that is where most of our ships are. General Elkins probably would

not have many ships even if he were given command of all the ships in the harbour. They are out on the sea, half way across the Atlantic or all the way across the Atlantic, and they will fight out there if they see anything to fight. So the question of wheher General Elkins is in command of the naval forces at Halifax is not a vital matter. But there is complete cooperation, and I believe there was complete cooperation before we had a unified command. They exchanged signals and information, and they have a combined operations room where maps are available and upon which the disposition of the forces are shown. The association is most harmonious and, on the whole, very satisfactory.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I appreciate what the minister says with reference to ships. Naturally they do most of their fighting at sea, but I notice that in the defence of Bataan, General MacArthur used a number of small torpedo boats, what the British call E boats, in resisting surface craft. These boats made sudden dashes out of harbour and used other similar tactics. These torpedo boats were placed completely at the disposal of General MacArthur. If he decided that an attack should be made to synchronize with some other operation, he had the placing of the naval forces at his disposal. I am not asking the minister to discuss what strategy they have in mind, but I presume that something of that sort would be worked out in Canada and that the two men in charge of our coasts would be given the disposal of such naval ships as were available.
I have one or two other questions I should like to ask the minister. If he is not able to answer them now, he can give me the information to-morrow. The minister mentioned a sum of $21,000,000 odd which was being asked for building. What portion of this amount is to be used for the erection of new buildings and what portion for the purchase of buildings? Then the minister mentioned some twenty-four yachts which had been obtained. I presume that these were pleasure yachts, and I should like to have some idea from whom they were purchased and what prices were paid.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I cannot give the exact particulars, because as a matter of fact the transactions occurred some two and a half years ago. The yachts were purchased from various persons in Canada and the United States in the latter days of 1939 and the early days of 1940. I believe in practically every case they were pleasure yachts. They were brought to this country, and necessary changes were made, such as stiffening the decks so that guns could

War Appropriation-Naval Services
be mounted. They are used for patrol purposes along the coast. The information must be on the record somewhere. I can get the exact cost of this. I think the question was asked a year or so ago as to the exact amount paid for these yachts.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Were they purchased outright?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I understand that all were purchased. The transaction occurred before I came here, and it was carried on by the Department of Munitions and Supply. My distinct recollection is that they were purchased outright from the owners and converted by the department to naval purposes.
My hon. friend asked about the $21,000,000 which were to be used for buildings.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Yes, as to how much of that would be for the erection of new buildings and how much would be for purchasing buildings already erected and for the commissioning of them. I might get the information to-morrow.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I shall have to assemble it from one or two places, and it will take a little time.


Douglas King Hazen: With regard to the building which is being erected in Ottawa for this department, could the minister tell us when the department expects to occupy it, whether it is a permanent or temporary building, how many employees it is expected that it will house, the approximate cost, and who is the contractor?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The building at Ottawa for naval services is constructed of wood, with a foundation of concrete blocks, so that it is not permanent in the sense that a building of brick or stone would be. It is to cost, roughly, about three quarters of a million dollars. I believe it is being built by the firm of Hill, Clarke and Francis, a well known contracting firm of this neighbourhood. The number of persons employed at headquarters is about 557 officers and ratings, and 1,053 civilian staff; that is, clerks and others who are not in the naval service.


Douglas King Hazen: When do you expect to occupy the building?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Well, one hates to make predictions in these days, but my hope is that they will be installed there by August.


Howard Charles Green: There is a question with regard to the dependents of naval men which I
should like to have cleared up. On November 14 last, the Minister of Finance outlined his plans for a war allowances adjustment fund from which payments would be made in special oases. That is, if there were more than four children and there were hardships, or in other cases of hardship, this fund could be drawn upon. But in making that statement he said that the navy handled their own dependents' allowances, and I am not clear whether the families of naval men are entitled to get payments from this fund. Incidentally,
I should like to wish the minister good luck in his wrestling with the treasury board tomorrow on this question of increasing depend-' ents' allowances. If the ministry had to go out in the ridings and meet these dependents of naval men-and I know of cases where the wife and children of a naval man are living in the same street as the wife and children of an army man, one drawing a larger allowance than the other-they would know that it causes great misgivings, and more than anything else, I believe, has hurt the morale of the men in the navy.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Oh, no. The morale is very high.


Howard Charles Green: I admit that, but I think this has been one of their main complaints, and a justifiable complaint.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Quite so.


Howard Charles Green: I hope the minister will be successful to-morrow.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I thank my hon. friend. I have every hope of being successful. I see some of the treasury board members here, and I know they are impressed with what has been said to-night.


Howard Charles Green: Would the minister answer my question as to whether or not the dependents of naval men can draw on this special fund?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: We have a representative on the dependents' allowance board, and, while I have never looked into the matter, I have always assumed that they do. But I will make sure.


Howard Charles Green: Could the minister check that up?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I will.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Aircraft
[Stage Direction]
Friday, May 8, 1942