1943-05-28

OFFICIAL REPORT


[Stage Direction]
2|ousie Of
Commons! ©efiates
[Stage Direction]
Friday, May 28, 1943

Mr. T. F. DONNELLY (Wood Mountain) moved:: That the first report of the standing committee on agriculture and colonization, presented to the house on Wednesday, May 26, be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I promised the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis) that I would table a copy of the decision of the national war labour board in the case of the employees of the Montreal Tramways. I now do so.



LABOUR CONDITIONS

[Stage Direction]
AGREEMENT WITH UNITED STEELWORKERS UNION -"CRISIS IN steel"
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. There has come to the desks of members of parliament this morning a publication of the United Steelworkers of America entitled "Crisis in Steel." It contains serious allegations against the government in connection with the settlement of the strike in January of this year. Among the startling allegations made there will be found at page 3 of the publication the following:
There was indeed a settlement solemnly agreed upon by both parties. The steelworkers' leaders had promised to recommend the terms and to urge that work be resumed at once. The government had promised to. implement those terms. The steelworkers * kept their promise; the government did not.
In view of the statement made in the publication, and the rather widespread press comment thereon, I would ask the Prime Minister
(Mr. Mackenzie King) to make a statement to the house, commenting on the allegations the steel workers have made.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, my recollection is that yesterday the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) asked that certain questions appearing on the order paper in the name of the hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) should be passed as an order for return. I suggest that instead of having a return made which might not be immediately available to hon. members, the contents of the return might be placed on Hansard. It would I think constitute a reply to my hon. friend's question. I believe the replies to the questions asked by the hon. member for York South will be found to answer pretty conclusively the statements contained in the pamphlet to which my hon. friend has referred. In other words it would place on record the government's statement of the position. So far as I am aware, the government has implemented to the full every undertaking it gave at the time it had its conferences with the steel workers.


Gordon Graydon: I would ask a supplementary question. I have no knowledge f what was contained in the return, which I understand the Minister of Labour tabled, nor am I sure that it dealt with the matters discussed in the booklet "Crisis in Steel". Does the information which has been tabled represent the full government answer to the questions which have been raised in this booklet?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I have not
read the booklet, so that I am unable to say whether or not it is a full answer. I suggest that the house agree to having the documents which have been tabled as a return printed in Votes and Proceedings. I believe the replies as given there will be found pretty well to answer what my hon. friend has in mind.


Gordon Graydon: Perhaps any further
questions I may have to ask with respect to this had better be reserved until such time as I have had an opportunity of seeing what the government's answer is in this other matter.

Labour Conditions



TRANSFER OF MINERS TO COAL MINES FROM OTHER INDUSTRIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Labour arising out of two telegrams I have received, one from the steelworkers union and the other from the mineworkers union of Nova Scotia. Copies of these telegrams have been forwarded to the Prime Minister. The telegrams express apprehension if the order regarding the transfer of miners from other essential industries is put into effect immediately without due investigation into the physical capabilities of men so transferred. They are requesting an extension of the date at which the order becomes operative and suggest that a representative of the Department of Labour should proceed to the Pictou shipbuilding plant to conduct such an investigation. Will the minister explain to the house the machinery that will be used in applying this order? Are the miners' union and the steelworkers' union and the shipbuilders' union in Nova Scotia being consulted and working with selective service in the application of the order in council? If not, why not?


Humphrey Mitchell: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) for giving me notice of his question regarding the transfer of miners from other essential industries, and in respect of the physical capabilities of men transferred to underground work who are physically incapable, and in regard to those who feel that a transfer even to surface work would be detrimental and would like to have their cases investigated and if necessary a medical examination made.
The hon. member asks as to the machinery which, will be used in implementing the government's decision in regard to moving coal miners back to coal mines. The answer, of course, is that our chain of employment offices across Canada will be used. At the moment, as hon. members are aware, the order is not effective and does not become effective until June 1, 1943. However, any men who report for work are being placed. When the compulsory features of the order become effective it will be the duty of each employer to send any ex-coal miners he has in his employ to the employment offices, and it will be the duty of the employee to report. At this stage he will be immediately 
placed in the coal mines if there is an opening for him and if he is found to be fit and capable for the work. If there is no immediate opening for him he will be allowed to resume his former employment on a temporary permit. Transportation will be supplied and the other conditions set out in the order in council will go into effect.
If the man objects to the transfer he has a right of appeal to the court of referees, whose decision is final. At this stage if there is any question in regard to physical capabilities, a medical examination will be arranged.
Before the government decided to pass the order in council it was considered by the national selective service advisory board, on which labour is represented, and the board approved the recommendation in principle. A further conference was held with the coal mining industry advisory committee, on which are representatives of coal mine operators and coal mine workers.
As stated in answer to a question raised by the hon. member for Cape Breton South the situation at Pictou, where a large number of men from the coal mines who have engaged in shipbuilding are required to return to coal mining, will be investigated. As a matter of fact arrangements to this end have already been made.


Clarence Gillis: Would the minister mind explaining who comprise the court of referees?


Humphrey Mitchell: It was established under the unemployment insurance legislation, as my hon. friend no doubt knows. We are using these courts all the time right across Canada as appeal courts for men who feel that their transfer to some more essential industry is not fair or in keeping with the principles underlying the order in council.


Clarence Gillis: Rather slow for an emergency.


Mr. McGARRY:: I wish to ask a question of the minister relating to the fuel shortage so far as the supply of labour is concerned. In the effort to deal with the fuel shortage crisis, does the minister deem it necessary that all men who in peace time were engaged in mining, but are now employed in other industries, should be reverted back to the mines?


Humphrey Mitchell: My reply to my hon. friend is, yes. Further, replying to the hon. member for Cape Breton South, whose question I did not quite catch, but who asked, I believe, whether the board of referees would rule on the case of a man who thinks he has

Committees oj the House.-Procedure
been unjustly dealt with, I wish to point out that these boards of referees are composed of employers and employed; in the majority of cases the employees are representatives of trades unions, and it is somewhat like the policy adopted in Great Britain under similar circumstances, where there is a compulsory transfer of labour.



ONTARIO ELECTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: I should like to ask the Prime Minister what arrangements have been entered into between the government of Ontario and this government with respect to the delivery and distribution of voting proxies for the armedi forces overseas in connection with the contemplated provincial election in Ontario. I would ask the Prime Minister to inform the house on these points. First, have the proxies been sent overseas and, if so, when were they sent and through what department of this government? Second, how and by whom will the proxies be distributed to the armed forces overseas? Third, have any arrangements been made by this government for any officials of the dominion government or the Ontario government to proceed overseas in connection with the work of such distribution, and, if so, what officials are being sent by either the federal government or the government of Ontario? I understand that in the normal course of events the government of Ontario must work in cooperation with this government in connection with the work involved.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am not in position myself to give my hon. friend an answer, but I think my colleague, the Minister of National Defence for Air, can give at least some of the information requested.


Hon. C. G. POWER (Minister of National Defence for Air):: I am not in position to answer all the questions that have been asked.


Gordon Graydon: Do your best.


Charles Gavan Power: All I can say is that Major Lewis, who is the chief election officer in the province of Ontario and therefore in charge of matters concerning elections, called upon me, and I think some of the officers of the defence forces. Without asking us specifically to take any particular action, he inquired if we would cooperate to the fullest extent possible. We told him that we would. Speaking on behalf
of the three ministers, I do not think there will be any difficulty about cooperating with the Ontario government.


Gordon Graydon: Perhaps the minister's knowledge does not go this far, but does he know whether t'he proxies have yet been sent?


Charles Gavan Power: We did not discuss details. All that was said was that we would be willing to help out and do whatever they asked us to do, having regard to the exigencies of the operation.



COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. C. GREEN (Vancouver South):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. On February 22 he moved for the setting up of a select committee of the house to consider and review the defence of-Canada regulations and also the law relating to naturalization and deportation, I believe the committee met subsequently to choose a chairman, but no meetings have been held since the appointment of the chairman. The subjects to be considered by this committee are of great importance, and I should like to know if there is not some way by which the government can see to it that the work of this committee is commenced now so that something may be accomplished before the house adjourns.
Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice): I do not know that there is any way in which the government can direct the proceedings of a select committee of the House of Commons. As the hon. gentleman has stated, this committee was set up on February 22. I have turned up Votes and Proceedings of the house to see what happened, and I find that on March 17 and on March 24 certain changes were made in the personnel of the committee. A notice for a meeting on March 26 appeared in the Votes and Proceedings of March 22 and the following day. I heard after March 26 that a chairman had been chosen. When I received notice yesterday from the hon. member that he intended to ask these questions, I mentioned them to the1 hon. member who I understand had been chosen as chairman. He told me that he had been discussing the possibility of holding a meeting this week with other members of the committee, but it was found that some of the members of the committee were to be away on official business to-day, the day suggested for the meeting. He told me that
3122	COMMONS
Committees of the House-Procedure
arrangements were being made for the committee to meet some day next week. I have no doubt that the fact that the hon. member has brought the matter to the attention of the house will make the members of the committee realize that all the members of the house are interested in the matters which have been referred to the committee for consideration.


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: What steps should a member of that committee take to bring about a meeting. Each week for the past four or five weeks I have asked Mr. Dun and the chairman of this committee to hold a meeting, but without any success. I wonder if the Minister of Justice can tell me what should be done.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I have searched the rules of the house and I have not found anything which deals specifically with that. I understand that the select committees meet upon notice which the clerk of the committees causes to be inserted in Votes and Proceedings. I am sure that the hon. gentleman, who is a member of the committee, will experience no difficulty in arranging with the chairman of the committee or with the clerk of committees to have a notice of meeting published in Votes and Proceedings.


Gordon Graydon: I had some difficulty in connection with the public accounts committee. I brought it up in the house once or twice and finally I asked the Prime Minister about it. He suggested that there was a certain procedure which should be followed and he was good enough to give me the procedure. He said that any member of our party who had been appointed a member of the public accounts committee could write to the clerk of committees. That was done at once by one of our members, and although the committee had been set up quite a while before, we finally did get action. I think that is the procedure that must be followed, if I can take the Prime Minister's word on that particular point.
There is another matter I should like to bring up in connection with the radio broadcasting committee. Surely the government has some responsibility in connection with these committees. It is all very well to try to throw it off on private members, but there is some responsibility upon the government to take action with respect to these committees. On May 7, the radio broadcasting committee was set up, but since this other matter came up I have been making inquiries and I find that nothing has been done to

call this committee. That was three weeks ago, and there is a lot of work to be done by this committee. If we are to finish this session within any reasonable length of time we may have the same result that we had last year, that is, the report of the committee will be left to the last and there will be no opportunity to discuss it, perhaps no opportunity even to move concurrence. Then there is likely to be criticism of hon. members if they attempt at the next session to discuss matters that should have been discussed at this session.
This committee is under the jurisdiction of the Minister of National War Services, and I should like him to make some explanation as to why the committee has not met. I feel that the government has a responsibility, even greater than that resting on private members, with respect to the calling of these committees and seeing that they function.
Hon. L. R. LaFLECHE (Minister of National War Services): I am hardly in position to give an explanation to the leader of the opposition, but I am in position to express my gratitude to him for having brought up this matter. Having assured myself that certain gentlemen who I understand will be called as witnesses will be available at an early day, yesterday I suggested to certain gentlemen who are members of the committee that we should have an early meeting. I am sure these hon. gentlemen will get busy and do as requested.



RESTRICTIONS OF DELIVERIES TO THREE TIMES A WEEK

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. C. ABBOTT (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to refer to the question which was asked on Friday of last week by the hon. member for Shefford (Mr. Leclerc) who said that he had received several complaints with regard to the order of the wartime prices and trade board prohibiting ice deliveries to private residences oftener than three times a week, and urged that deliveries be authorized at least four times a week.
The wartime prices and trade board have considered the situation and although the hon. member is not in his seat he will be glad to learn that the order has been amended providing that for the period commencing May 31, 1943, and ending October 2, 1943, distributors may make regular deliveries of ice to an ordinary place of residence up to six times each week provided that not more than one such delivery shall be made to any one place of residence on any one week-day.

Seed Potatoes



SEED POTATOES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):: May I ask the Minister of Finance whether he is prepared now to make the statement on seed potatoes which he hoped to make?


Douglas Charles Abbott: During the last few days seven questions have been asked by hon. members regarding potatoes. This is a problem that concerns the Department of Agriculture from the point of view of production and the wartime prices and trade board in so far as the questions relate to the price of potatoes. As most of the questions were about prices, it was decided that the answers should be given on behalf of the Minister of Finance, though part of the information has been obtained from officials in "he Department of Agriculture.
In addition to dealing with the specific questions asked, I propose to adopt the suggestion of the leader of the opposition and make a brief statement regarding the potato situation in general.
The yield of potatoes in 1942 was unsually good, 70 million bushels being produced in Canada compared with 65 million bushels in 1941. But like many other foods, consumption has been rising. Canadian consumers have been eating more potatoes, while substantial quantities have been converted into the dehydrated product for use by the armed forces and shipment overseas. Consequently, in spite of the good crop, shortages have appeared. These have been most acute in British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec, which are deficiency areas and dependent for part of their supplies upon outside sources.
Another factor contributing to the shortage has been the reduction in imports of new potatoes from the United States this spring. Normally, fairly substantial quantities of United States potatoes are marketed in Canada before the Canadian crop is available. This year the United States is suffering from a more serious shortage of potatoes than Canada, with the result that prices in that country have risen above Canadian ceiling prices and only a very few cars have been imported.
In order to distribute available supplies of potatoes as equitably as possible, the wartime prices and trade board has adopted some exceptional measures. On shipments of potatoes from the maritime provinces into Quebec and Ontario, the board has, in effect, been requisitioning cars of potatoes and directing them into districts of greatest need.
In order to make prairie potatoes available in eastern Canada, the board has also been paying a freight subsidy equal to the difference between the laid down cost of the potatoes shipped from the prairie provinces and the eastern Canadian ceiling prices.
I will now deal with the specific questions asked. The hon. member for Huron North (Mr. Cardiff) asked a series of questions relating to seed potatoes. He asked:
Must potatoes sold as seed potatoes be labelled as such, and if not, what check is there to show that they are not potatoes for domestic consumption?
The answer is that certified seed potatoes must be sacked and labelled as such. The hon. member then asked:
Is there a ceiling price on potatoes sold for seed and, if so, how much?
The answer is that there is no ceiling price on certified seed potatoes. I would point out, however, that only a very small fraction of the potatoes sown in Canada-possibly less than 10 per cent-are certified seed, the balance being ordinary table stock, on which there is a ceiling price.
The final question of the hon. member for Huron North was:
Has the minister received any complaints that potatoes being used for domestic consumption are being sold as seed potatoes?
The answer to this question is that neither the Minister of Finance nor the Minister of Agriculture has received complaints that ordinary table stock 'potatoes are being sold as certified seed potatoes.


Gordon Graydon: Do I understand that neither the Minister of Finance nor the Minister of Agriculture has ever heard of these complaints?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is right. I think what my hon. friend intended to ask was whether seed potatoes were being sold for domestic consumption, but his question was whether table stock potatoes were being sold as certified seed potatoes. If he intended to ask the question I have just suggested, complaints have been received that certified seed potatoes have been sold for domestic consumption and an order of the board was passed on May 12 prohibiting such sale.


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: Are ordinary potatoes being sold for seed?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The majority of potatoes sold in Canada are not certified seed potatoes, but the ordinary table stock potatoes.
The hop. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) also asked two questions, one relating to the price of seed potatoes and the
Seed Potatoes

possible effect of such price on seeding, and another as to what precautions had been taken to guard against a serious potato shortage next fall and winter. Prices of certified seed potatoes not being under a ceiling have risen to somewhat higher levels than usual as compared with ordinary table stock potatoes. These prices have not interfered with demand, however, which is very active. I am informed that the quantity of certified seed potatoes distributed in Canada this year is higher than ever before, the increase in Ontario and Quebec being in the neighbourhood of 25 to 30 per cent.
Exports of certified seed potatoes were placed under control by permit several weeks agO' and supplies which would otherwise have moved for export are now being diverted into the domestic market.
Now as to the steps taken to stimulate production during the present year. First, I should point out that ceiling prices on table stock potatoes have been fixed at levels substantially higher than prevailed during the base period, even after taking into account normal carrying charges, which may provide some encouragement to production.
The Department of Agriculture has also been active in its production campaign. At the dominion-provincial meeting in December, definite plans were laid for increased potato acreage, and dominion and provincial departments of agriculture have been in constant communication on production plans in subsequent months. The goal for 1943 is 560,000 acres against approximately 506,000 in 1942. Each province has accepted a share of this dominion total and has been carrying on active promotional work. I might also mention in this connection the victory garden campaign.
Yesterday the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson) referred to newspaper reports of a black market for maritime potatoes. I am informed that some preliminary investigations have been made by officials of the wartime prices and trade board in the maritimes, but so far no evidence has been received to substantiate the report that such a black market exists. The situation is being further investigated.


Gordon Graydon: May I ask-I do not
know whether to call him "the deputy minister"-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: "Assistant to
the minister."


Gordon Graydon: May I ask the Prime
Minister how we are supposed to address parliamentary assistants?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Parliamentary
assistant to the Minister of Finance.


Gordon Graydon: Then I ask the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance this question. Has his minister, or has the Minister of Agriculture, or his parliamentary assistant, had any reports or complaints that potatoes have been coming to dealers' hands or retailers' hands as the ordinary domestic product, not certified seed, which were then sold to the public at the higher, un-ceilinged prices of certified seed potatoes? I believe most hon. members have had complaints of this practice here and there.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No, we have had no complaints that ordinary domestic stock potatoes have been sold as certified seed potatoes. That is a proceeding which would be contrary to the regulations, and a person involved would be subject to prosecution. There have been some complaints of certified seed potatoes having been sold for domestic use, and as I pointed out a moment ago, an order has been passed dealing with that.


Mr. COLDWELL:: What [DOT] steps will be taken this year to encourage farmers to store potatoes? Last year there was a bountiful crop on the prairies, and many thousands of tons this winter have been destroyed because' they were not stored. I know of farmers who have caves of potatoes who are just feeding them to the stock, because there has been some deterioration during the winter; and when, in the autumn, the crop was bountiful they were not encouraged to take care of them. I know I drew the situation on the prairies to the attention of the Minister of Agriculture-last December, I think it was-and suggested that some steps should be taken to keep the potatoes for further use, but they have been destroyed.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am not in a position to answer that. As I pointed out at the beginning of my statement, the question of production is the primary responsibility of the Minister of Agriculture, but I will bring the hon. member's question to his attention and ask him to have it answered.


John Horne Blackmore: With reference to the question of seed potatoes, it would be unfair to ask the minister to give offhand the prices at which these potatoes are now sold throughout Canada. But would he give the house on Monday an idea of these prices? It has been drawn to my attention that prices for seed potatoes asked by the retail stores in Ottawa are exorbitant beyond all reason. I

War Refugees
myself called at two. or three stores yesterday and asked, as though I were a prospective buyer of seed potatoes, what the price was, and I hesitate to mention it on the floor of the house lest I should be accused of extravagance. I submit that the matter should be looked into at once. Now is the time to see to it that the seed potato situation is attended to and not in two or three weeks' time, when it will be too late.


Mr. ILSLEY:: How wide an area does the hon. member wish me to cover? He has asked me for a statement covering prices in all parts of Canada. Do I understand that that is what he wants?


John Horne Blackmore: Take the prevailing prices in the different provinces, in the various centres of the provinces. If the prices mentioned to me in Ottawa yesterday are any indication of the prices prevailing throughout the country, I would say that a large percentage of prospective planters of seed potatoes will not plant them at all.


Mr. MacNICOL:: What was the price?



INQUIRY AS TO DISTRIBUTION OF PRICE CHARTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yesterday was the first day of meat rationing; and yesterday, also, the ceiling was raised on meat prices. I understand that there are price charts printed on meat prices. Can the minister tell us.whether those charts have been issued yet to the retailers and also to the householders?


James Lorimer Ilsley: To the retailers?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: And the householders.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I am not in a position to give the hon. gentleman that information.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Can the minister find out?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Oh, yes.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Because there were no price charts issued up to yesterday morning.



WAR REFUGEES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. S. H. KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct to the Prime Minister a question of which I gave him notice earlier in the day. Has the government received a copy of a resolution adopted recently by the annual conference of the western division of the Canadian Jewish Congress, which was held in Winnipeg? The resolution to which I refer requested that sanctuary be provided in Canada for a reasonable number-and I quote these words directly from the resolution, "sanctuary for a reasonable number"-of Jewish refugees who may be released from nazi-held territory. In the light of the untold suffering of these people, will the Prime Minister make a statement either as to the nature of any reply to this resolution, or as to the attitude of the government in this matter?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I did not receive my hon. friend's note until just before coming into the house. I had not an opportunity to find out definitely whether the particular communication to which he refers has been received, but I think I should be safe in saying, having regard to the number of communications which have been received on the subject to which he refers, that it would be among the number.
Yesterday the hon. member for York-Sun-bury (Mr. Hanson) asked me if I would consider making a statement with respect to refugees from Europe generally, and the government's attitude towards the problem. I had better wait, I think, until I make the statement on refugees generally before attempting to reply to that part of the problem which would refer exclusively to members of the Jewish community. I shall, I expect, be making the statement in the course of a few days.


Major James William Coldwell: May I ask the Prime Minister, Mr Speaker, whether, when he makes a statement on the refugee situation, he will call an item in external affairs so that there may be an opportunity for discussion, instead of giving a statement that will not afford that opportunity.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I may take up the subject when I get to the estimates of the Department of External Affairs.
Procedure in Questions



CANADIAN FORCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: May I ask the Minister of National Defence a question respecting seeding leave for the armed forces. As the minister knows, seeding operations in Canada have been delayed because of the weather to the extent that farmers have not had a similar experience in several decades. I know that in the various military districts seeding leave has been granted to a great many soldiers. May I ask the minister, first, what was the normal or average period of leave granted to men in the armed forces to enable theta to engage in spring seeding operations this year; second, is the tainister giving consideration to the extension of this period of leave, in view of the fact that some farmers may find that leave will be over before they can get on the land?


Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):: The normal period for which leave was granted was, on the average, six weeks. With regard to requests for further extension, I am advised that, except in the case of one particular formation, there have been practically no requests. I may say that in that particular formation the general officer commanding has been instructed to use his discretion, having regard to the military situation and to the merits of the case, and I propose to give instructions that the same consideration be extended in connection with any other applications which are made where the circumstances are such that the seeding operations have been seriously interfered with on account of weather, and the applicant has not been able to utilize the full six weeks of leave granted.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Minister of Labour a question, notice of which I sent him yesterday? Has the' government reached a decision-


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order. Hon. members have been asking whether the government has reached decisions concerning different matters and whether it has decided upon a particular policy. I must direct the attention of the house to the form of questions that are being asked on the orders of the day. These 
questions are out of order. In view of the urgency of certain questions, however, for example with regard to seed potatoes and matters of the kind, I have allowed them; but I must once again point out that there are only certain questions that can legitimately be asked on the orders of the day, and certainly questions concerning government policy are not among them. Some hon. members seem to have taken the position that the mere giving of notice of questions to a minister is sufficient to justify these questions and to bring them within the rules of the house. That is not so. Hon. members may ask only such questions as are of immediate urgency and such as ministers may reply to in accordance with the rules; but simply to give notice of a question which may not properly be asked under the rules does not justify it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The question which I was anxious to direct to the Minister of Labour had to do with the status of dominion and provincial minimum wage rates. I wonder, Mr. Speaker, whether a statement in that regard is permissible.


Thomas Vien: That is hardly a question that can be asked on the orders of the day and certainly it should not be put. I must point out further that a practice is coming into vogue in the house of putting supplementary questions to elicit answers in addition to those given by ministers. If the rules permitted it, that would be entirely proper; but the rules do not permit of supplementary questions being asked. I have allowed a number of these questions where explanations or statements by ministers might reasonably be requested, in circumstances where the minister would no doubt wish to have his remarks made as clear as possible. But I must point out that the rule is as I have stated. '



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: I wish to make one request of the Prime Minister and of the government, if I may. We are now proceeding with the war appropriation bill in committee. I am not sure what the procedure will be with respect to calling in sequence the various departments in committee, but two of the departments have now been called, that of national defence as related to the army and national defence for air, the minister in charge

War Appropriation-Army
of which gave his statement a week ago to-day. After these two departments which have now been opened up have been disposed of in debate in committee, I would ask the government to consider seriously the question of allowing the Department of Labour to be taken up next. I make that request for this reason. During the debate in committee we have found ourselves handicapped in the discussion of man-power by reason of the fact that we have dealt with the subject in piecemeal fashion, and the Minister of Labour has expressed on two or three occasions the desire to get on and to give his remarks on the man-power question. We feel that manpower at the present time is perhaps the most important problem facing us in parliament and I should like to see the committee come to grips with it in a broad way rather than, as I have said, only in the piecemeal manner that has been possible so far. I should like to have the Prime Minister consider this suggestion and, if it is not possible, he might at least give us an undertaking that at the earliest opportunity the man-power situation will be brought up for discussion.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I would assume that the logical procedure would be to conclude with the departments of defence before taking up any other department. Munitions and supply is of course a department that is much concerned with the question of man-power. Whether it would be advisable to have that department taken up before the Department of Labour is a question which I should like to have a word about with my colleague, the Minister of Munitions and Supply, in conjunction with the Minister of Labour, but it might be understood that either of these two departments, as might best suit the convenience of hon. gentlemen opposite, could be taken up after the three defence departments are disposed of.


Gordon Graydon: I can understand the Prime Minister's position with respect to the three departments of defence. They may be interrelated in such a way as to make continuous discussion of the three desirable. I cannot agree, however, that munitions and supply should come before labour, because the man-power situation must be grappled with in the house and we cannot do it properly until the Minister of Labour makes his statement.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I was not
suggesting that we would not proceed first with labour, but that in the absence of the Minister of Munitions and Supply I did not wish to make a definite statement.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, May 27, consideration in committee of a resolution to grant to his majesty certain sums of money for the carrying out of measures consequent upon the existence of a state of war-Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Bradette in the chair.

Mr. POULIOT:: In order to save time I
sent to the minister a copy of a memorandum with regard to one man who was described as a deserter. He was not guilty and the case was so bad that the department informed the provost marshal that the man did not have to report at all. The discussion of the estimates must be thorough, and that is impossible as long as we stick to theoretical questions and answers. We must get down to the facts; we must expose the facts as they are in these cases. That should be very easy, because I can refer the minister to the departmental files, and I have no objection to passing over my own files after Hansard is through with them. A few days ago I quoted some letters from various counties. I have others to-day. I need not take time to read them now but I will send them to the members representing the respective counties, so that they may deal with these matters.
There are some cases which are very interesting and very novel, and which would seem incredible if the quotations were not from official papers. Here is a file, No. 51-C-14, and another number Q-39-S-203. The number of the man is E-29326; I will not give his name. Six years before he enlisted he was working as a lumberman and struck his ankle with an axe, as a result of which he was deformed. Then he worked on a tractor and a tree fell on him, breaking his shoulder. As a result he was unable to carry a rifle on his shoulder, and he was totally unfit for military service. However, he was accepted, and on June 27, 1940, was transferred to Camp Borden.	He wanted to transfer to depot
No. 5, Quebec city, but was not allowed to do so.	On August 20, 1940, Commander
MacLachlan, who was then deputy minister, informed me that this man was to be discharged as unfit. I wrote Lieutenant-Colonel Mercier on August 28, 1940, and again on September 7, asking for a discharge for this man. On September 6, 1940, Colonel Des-Rosiers, whom I have found to be an excellent official of the department, informed me that this man was suffering from congenital mental

War Appropriation-Army

deficiency and was unfit for service. His injuries to his ankle and shoulder were not mentioned.


The CHAIRMAN:: If the hon. member will allow me to interrupt, we are now discussing item No. 3, dealing with travel, transportation and freight, and I must absolutely abide by section 2 of standing order 58, which states:
Speeches in committee of the whole house must be strictly relevant to the item or clause under consideration.
Surely the hon. member must realize that he and all the other members of the committee have been given a great deal of latitude so far, but there comes a time when a line of demarcation must be drawn. .This is the time, and I am now going to abide by the rule I have just read.


Jean-François Pouliot: Item No. 2 was passed last night under certain conditions; at page 3118 of Hansard the minister said:
I'would say that no one will be shut out by reason of having allowed this item to carry. No one will be shut out from receiving an answer to such questions. As a matter of fact, I have made notes of the questions asked.
I understood I could go on with these matters to-day, otherwise I would have objected to the item passing last night. I was right here when the statement was made, and that was my very clear understanding. However, if that is not the case I will not insist upon dealing with this matter; I will not impose upon the committee. Yesterday a sort of committee was formed behind the curtains; some members went out while I was speaking, so that there was hardly a quorum left; they were all behind the curtain, but two minutes later there were more than fifty members in the house. I want to know if a joke was played on the committee last night when item No. 2 was passed. If that is so I shall not insist; I will take my medicine all right, but I will remember what happened on other occasions. I want to know if I can go on now, after what was said by the minister last night.


James Layton Ralston: I think my hon. friend is wrong in his construction of the reservation. That reservation was made in answer to a question by the leader of the opposition, who referred to certain questions which had been put during the course of the debate, to which answers had not been brought down. The hon. gentleman referred particularly to questions asked by members of his party. At page 3118 of Hansard he said:
A number of questions were asked by some hon. members in this party during the afternoon

and evening sittings, and if the item is to carry it should be with the reservation that the minister will answer the questions asked.
Then I said:
I will, as fully as I can.
Mr. Graydon: I should have said that they were asked not only this afternoon and last night, but during other parts of the debate. I should like to have them answered.
Mr. Ralston:	I would say that no one will
be shut out by reason of having allowed this item to carry. No one will be shut out from receiving an answer to such questions. As a matter of fact I have made notes of the questions asked.
Then the time was agreed to. I say to my hon. friend that I do not think that reservation carries him far in connection with his contention. But I must say something further. I do feel responsible in connection with this matter, because at five minutes to eleven I interrupted the hon. member for Temiscouata when he was dealing with medical matters, and asked that I might place on record some information with regard to the man who had been referred1 to earlier by the hon. member for New Westminster. At that time, at page 3116 of Hansard, I said:
I want to ask my hon. friend if he would mind dealing with this matter when we go on to-morrow.
On that understanding the hon. member for Temiscouata yielded, and so far as I am concerned, Mr. Chairman, I feel that I am bound not to take any objection to-day. I rather think it was the understanding of the committee.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: On that understanding I do not see how I can apply the rule, and my ruling cannot apply.


Mr. McIVOR:: Might I have a word?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: The hon. member for Temiscouata has the floor.


Jean-François Pouliot: I have no objection to the hon. member saying what he wishes to say.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: I think the hon. member for Temiscouata understands now that we would like him to be brief in his remarks. He can be very pointed and very intelligent; now we would like him to be very brief, because the temper of the committee is not in favour of any more long speeches from that source.


Jean-François Pouliot: I thank my hon. friend for his kind words, to which I am not accustomed, but I would suggest that he should address the Chair while we are in committee. I say, however, that even if there were no such reservation-and I thank the minister for what he has said-I would be strictly in order under

War Appropriation-Army
this item, because it deals with travel, trans-. portation and freight. I am referring to the case of a man who was transferred from Quebec to Camp Borden, back to Quebec city and back again to Camp Borden; he was like the wandering Jew. If any case comes under this item it is this one, but in addition I have something else to say.


James Layton Ralston: Just for the information of all hon. members I suggest to the hon. gentleman that these matters could be discussed quite properly under item No. 5.


Jean-François Pouliot: Oh, yes, I could take up all these cases under item No. 5, but I should like to get rid of them and I do not want to take much more of the time of the committee. Just for a change I should like to go to the movies to-night if I am free. But there is another point. These items represent the subdivisions of a large item, and we can decide to take one item after the other only by unanimous consent of the committee. These are not like ordinary estimates, as I have stated on more than one occasion. However, I shall not be long. If the minister prefers I shall take it up later; I am in his hands. Both deputy ministers had told me this man was unfit; one had made the statement in August, and the other in September. Well, what happened? I received a letter from Lieutenant-Colonel Mercier stating that he was pleased to inform me that all necessary proceedings had been taken to settle the case with the shortest possible delay. On October 16 I wrote another letter, and on October 29 I.received the following from his office:
From the information received to-day about this soldier, that man has not been discharged from the army, and will be at the hospital at Riviere du Loup. It seems there has been a contradiction in the information that has been supplied, regarding the locality w'here he should be, and also his status in connection with the active army.
Mention is made of the letter they had received from Camp Borden.. It was a long time after that the statement was made by officials of the department that he was unfit.
Then, on November 2, 1940, the lieutenant-adjutant of the Royal Canadian Army Service Corps training centre at Camp Borden wrote as follows:
We are enclosing a certified true copy of M. F.Bi 227, classifying the marginally named as category "E" and recommending his discharge from the army.
2.	Our records show that Pte. Slight, F., was admitted to Christie Street Hospital. Toronto, 4-7-40, and discharged from there 27-7-40. He was then granted a six-day pass to return to his home in Riviere du Loup, P.Q., w'here his wife w'as ill.
That is true.
A special extension was granted by Major Ross-Smith of our training centre, permitting this soldier to stay with his wife from 12-8-40 until 26-8-40.
3. On August 23 we received a telegram from a Dr. D. Saindon at Riviere du Loup stating that Pte. Slight was suffering from appendicitis and would require an operation. From that date our information about this-man is vague. We were informed that he had been admitted to Riviere du Loup Hospital 19-9-40, and awaited his discharge from hospital before proceeding with his discharge from the army.
4.	Please let us have any additional information concerning the marginally named, that might help to clarify his case, at your earliest convenience.
Then here is a letter I received from the medical office of the army at Quebec:
(Translation): You will find enclosed the letter we have received from the adjutant, R.C.A.S.C. training centre, at Camp Borden.
According to a telegram dated October 22, 1940, from Dr. D. Saindon, of Riviere du Loup, this man has never been in hospital.
As you may see, there is some contradiction. The man does not belong to district No. 5. However, if I could ascertain the facts-and only the man himself can explain the extension of his leave at Riviere du Loup-I could easily find out his status.
If this man has not been admitted to the hospital at Riviere du Loup, I am afraid he will he considered as a deserter. However, his case must be cleared up.
(Text): He was considered a deserter at the time, after it had been stated by army officials that he was unfit. Then, on November 15 he received a telegram from Camp Borden, which I translate as follows:
Return at once Royal Canadian Army Service Corps training centre, Camp Borden, Ontario.
And this is signed "service training". This was received after he was declared unfit. I learned he was sent to Quebec city, and was about to be put into the clink. He was about to face a court martial, after all that. Finally he was discharged as unfit. The trouble is that this man should never have been accepted in the army. There are many similar cases respecting men who have been sick. I shall refer to a number of them. It was not because they did not wish to be in the army, but because their families complained that the men were not in good physical condition, or in a state of health to stand regular training.
I have before me the files for H.Q. 869-P-872 (DM); H.Q. 405-P-5000 (DM); H.Q. 869-L-2263 (DM); H.Q. 869-L-1578 (DM); and E/577,820. These are all files respecting men who were put into the army in error. I do not complain only about army doctors. Some of them are good and some are bad. The
War Approprialion-Army

same applies to civilian doctors. But I say sincerely and frankly to the minister, because I am in earnest, that in many cases the civilian doctors rely on the army doctors, and some of them are not very attentive to the medical examinations of recruits. They were being paid only a dollar, and did not realize that they had made a lot of money as family physicians. This is not true of many civilian doctors, but it is true of some of them. On the other hand, I understand the army's position. The army doctor will say, "Well, this man has been examined by his family doctor, and placed in category A-or E, as the case may be. He knows the family well, and understands the circumstances, and therefore it is something like a political football. I understand they have many .men to look after.
Here is another file. Doctor Fortin wrote me this letter with respect to one of these men:
(Translation): As evidenced by the enclosed certificate, the above named man is suffering from a disease which should make him absolutely unfit for military service. In spite of that, an English-speaking physician did not hesitate to include him within category "A". Is the physical condition of a man totally disregarded? Sooner or later, and perhaps within a short time, this man will have to undergo a rather serious operation. I cannot understand why such an attempt is made to increase the number of unfit men, in view of the fact that this man had a job and was able to earn his living.
(Text): That man could look after himself. Here is the affidavit from the doctor:
(Translation): This is to certify that this man is suffering from an active suppurating otitis in the right ear. which makes him absolutely unfit for military service. This man should normally be put in category "B".
(Text): Then, I have the following memorandum respecting E-626,786:
(Translation): The man is suffering from anaemia. He is unable to withstand long marches, because the little toe of the right foot overlaps the next toe. Chafing occurs during long walks, and this is quite painful. The man cannot wear regulation boots, and even with other shoes he is unable to withstand long marches.
His left shoulder and arm were scalded during his youth, and since that time, his skin is quite sensitive in that part of the body. He still has very large scars in front of the shoulder and behind, and also on the upper part of the arm.
He is suffering from rheumatism in the left arm after exertion. He is unable to carry a ' rifle on his left shoulder.
_ Finally, the' bone at the base at the spine is very much enlarged, so that the man is unable to assume an erect position when sitting, and even when walking he has to stoop in order to avoid pain; as soon as he stands erect he breaks into perspiration.
[Mr. Pouliot.l
(Text): What I have read states that the last bone of the spine was just as big as a closed fist, that the man could not stand upright, nor could he sit normally. I had to fight his case, because he could not become a good soldier.
Then, here is case Q-39M-3119, respecting a soldier whose toes turned under his foot. I believe this condition is called hammer toes. He could not walk, nor could he wear shoes without great pain. Afterwards he was classified in E category. He should never have been accepted in the first instance. It was not proper to accept him as a soldier, because he could not perform a soldier's duties.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Were these men passed and accepted?


Jean-François Pouliot: Oh, yes.


John Ritchie MacNicol: They could not have been, subjected to any medical inspection.


Jean-François Pouliot: Surely; I shall have something to say to the committee about that These are not theoretical cases. I bring these facts before the minister. I know he is willing to run his department well. We are the ones who get the immediate reaction to these matters. I hold no rancour against anyone. I do not care about Mr. Merrier or Mr. Rathbone in Quebec city and I do not want to hurt them unjustly, but I think it is a shame when these fellows are taken into the army when they are sick like that.


Mr. McCANN:: Does not the fault lie with the local physicians in the communities in which these men lived? The fault cannot be placed upon the military authorities, as the hon. member is probably attempting to do. There may be some blame upon the military authorities for not discharging these men, but primarily the duty lay upon the family physicians who examined them when they were inducted.


Jean-François Pouliot: I agree with the hon. member for Renfrew South to a certain extent. As I said before, there are responsibilities in both quarters. There may be some responsibility upon the family doctor, but the fact is that these cases are on record. Here is one case where a man had been classified E by the family doctor and that classification was not considered at all by the army. He was kept in the army. Many of these men have been several months in the army.


John Horne Blackmore: Has the hon. member any evidence to show that these men applied to the military officers for reexamination and were refused?


Jean-François Pouliot: Yes, I have many cases. I have taken these files at random. I do not

War Appropriation-Army
wish to impose upon the committee, but I am sure hon. members will be interested when they hear the details. It will be a revelation. I have a case just like that, the one I referred to last night. This man had a curvature of the spine and he had to wear a belt to support the sacroiliac. I do not know whether my translation is correct. Besides that, he had broken his wrist. I wrote to headquarters about this matter, and just here I may tell the minister that the office of the deputy minister took good care of all these cases. I know they handle cases from coast to coast and have a lot to do and I desire to praise them sincerely for what they have done.


James Layton Ralston: I have no doubt that my hon. friend will be able to find cases in which the medical officers of the army and civilian doctors have gone wrong. Lawyers go wrong quite frequently. Most of the cases he has cited go back to 1940. But what I do object to is the broad statement of my hon. friend. Yesterday he said that a number of the medical officers of the army were incompetent and that with a few exceptions they were the dregs of the medical profession. That is what I object to most emphatically. To-day my hon. friend is quite fair in saying that it is not wholly the blame of the army officers, that some blame may be attached to civilian doctors who might not understand medical examinations and army procedure. But I consider that a statement like that by a member of the House of Commons with regard to the medical service of our armed forces is wholly unwarranted. At the proper time I shall give the committee the particulars of the qualifications of the men at the head of this service. A statement of that kind is calculated to do irreparable damage to the army and to morale, without doing any corresponding good. My hon. friend is indicating to-day that the cases to which he is referring have come up from time to time and that there may be some negligence or lack of knowledge on the part of the civilian doctors who examined these men, and also a lack of vigilance on the part of the army doctors in not turning them out. As I said before, most of these cases go back to 1940 and I submit that they do not justify a statement such as the one made by my hon. friend, especially when this service is headed by the type of men that are there at the present time.
These medical officers have been consultants and practising physicians. They are members of the Canadian Medical Association and the French-Canadian association of Quebec. Many of them gave up good practices, because at a time like this I should think it would be possible for every doctor to have a lucrative practice. Young men are coming out of the
medical schools and going into the army instead of taking up what might, under conditions as they are to-day, be most attractive professional prospects. It is unworthy of any hon. member to say that these men should be classed as the dregs of the medical profession, and I hope that at the proper time he will see fit to withdraw that statement because I do not think he believes it himself.


Jean-François Pouliot: Last night was a special
occasion, and sometimes words like that may be exaggerated. My idea in bringing these cases to the attention of the minister and the members of the committee was to give full details. I am ready to make concessions, but I think the minister will admit that there should be at least a little purge among some of those who are in the service, because of observations I made last night.


James Layton Ralston: The hon. member speaks of a purge. There have been changes. I am not going to say it is a purge. For the last eight months there has been at the head of the medical services Brigadier G. B. Chisholm, C.B.E., M.C. He won the military cross in the last war. He had post-graduate experience in clinical and psychological medicine and general medical practice, and for six years was a member of the teaching and clinical staff of Yale university. He was a lecturer in mental hygiene and psychotherapy at Yale medical school. He is a post-graduate of the medical school and Yale school of nursing. In addition, he took extensive post-graduate work overseas, and prior to the war carried on a special practice in psychotherapy and mental hygiene. He was a special lecturer in the department of social service, university of Toronto. It must be remembered that Brigadier Chisholm is not only a medical officer; he has been a senior combatant officer in the Canadian army and organized the department of personnel selection prior to his appointment as director general of medical services.
Associated with him as deputy director general of medical services is Brigadier J. C. Meakins. Brigadier Meakins was physician in chief to the Royal Victoria hospital, Montreal, and has an international reputation. In addition to many other appointments, he has been professor of therapeutics, university of Edinburgh; director of the department of medicine, McGill university; dean of the faculty of medicine, McGill university, and past president of the Royal College of Physicians of Canada. He could hardly be classed as being one of the dregs of the medical profession.
War Appropriation-Army

Then there is Colonel G. A. Winfield, who is also deputy director general of medical services. This officer proceeded overseas early in the war and held the appointment of assistant medical director, officer in charge of hospitalization, Canadian military headquarters. He became a member of the staff of Dalhousie university after five years post-graduate work in surgery and carried on an extensive practice in Halifax as a specialist.	'
Then there is Colonel A. E. Archibald, who is as widely known as a consultant as any surgeon in Canada. He has been a chief consultant surgeon for some time. Then there is Colonel W. P. Warner, who is chief consultant in medicine. He was associate professor of medicine, university of Toronto* and has been a specialist in internal medicine in Toronto for the past fifteen years. Then there is Lieutenant-Colonel C. S. Fahrni, who is a consultant surgeon. He is the immediate past president of the Canadian Medical association and was assistant professor of surgery, university of Manitoba. He has carried on a leading surgical practice in Winnipeg for the past twenty years.
The next is Lieutenant-Colonel J. D. Adamson, who is a consultant physician. He was professor of medicine, university of Manitoba and chief of the medical staff, Winnipeg general hospital. Next is Lieutenant-Colonel R. I. Harris, M.C., who is a surgical consultant. He was assistant professor of surgery, university of Toronto, as well as chief surgeon of the orthopaedic service, university of Toronto. He is past president of the American orthopaedic association and for the past twenty years has been a leading consultant in surgical practice in Toronto. These are the senior men at national defence headquarters. Along with them are eleven district medical officers throughout the districts. I will give their names:
Lieutenant-Colonel G. L. Jepson, Military Cross and VI), the district medical officer for military district No. 1, has been a specialist in anaesthesia for the past thirty-seven years and assistant professor of anaesthesia, Western university ; also chief anaesthetist, Victoria hospital, London, Ontario.
Colonel A. R. Hagerman, another Military Cross man, is the district medical officer of military district No. 2. He has specialized in internal medicine and cardiology for the past twenty years and is on the staff of the department of medicine, university of Toronto, as well as on the medical staff of St. Michael's hospital, Toronto.

Colonel A.. E. Lundon, whom I knew in the last war, is district medical officer, military district No. 3. He has had extensive post graduate work in ear, nose and throat in the United States and Europe. He has been, a specialist in ear, nose and throat, Montreal, for the past twenty years, having served on the staff of Montreal general hospital and McGill university in this capacity.
Colonel R. H. McGibbon is the district medical officer, military district No. 4. He has had post-graduate training in medicine for six years in Canada and the United States. He has had a large general _ practice in Montreal for the past sixteen years and is a member of the medical staff of the Montreal general hospital.
Lieutenant-Colonel J. P. A. J. Mercier, whom my hon. friend has mentioned, is district medical officer of military district No. 5. He has had post-graduate experience in mental and nervous diseases, and has had a general medical practice in the city of Quebec for the past eighteen years. These are not the dregs of the medical profession, Mr. Chairman.	_
Colonel G. R. Forbes, the district medical officer of military district No. 6, has had a large general and surgical .practice in Kent-ville, Nova Scotia, for the past eighteen years.
Lieutenant-Colonel A. A. James, the district medical officer of military district No. 7, became a member of the permanent force subsequent to relinquishing his appointment as assistant professor of biochemistry at the university of Western Ontario. This officer proceeded overseas in 1940, where he held the appointment of A.M.D. 1 at Canadian military headquarters.
Lieutenant-Colonel P. G. Bell, another officer whom I knew in the last war, is a D.S.O. and VP. He is district medical officer at military district No. 10. This officer has had three-and-a-half years post-graduate work in eye, ear, nose and throat and has specialized in eye, ear, nose and throat work in the city of Winnipeg for the last twenty-two years. He held the appointment of head of the department of ophthalmology at the university of Manitoba.
Colonel W. A. Wilson is the Command medical officer, Pacific Command. He took post-graduate work in internal medicine in London, England. This officer has carried on an extensive practice in internal medicine in Vancouver for the past twenty-two years. He holds the appointment of chief of the medical staff of Shaughnessy hospital, Vancouver.

War Appropriation-Army
Lieutenant-Colonel R. A. Hughes, district medical officer, military district No. 12, had four years post-graduate work in eye, ear, nose and throat in the United States. He has carried on an extensive practice in his specialty at Saint John, New Brunswick, for the past twenty years.
Lieutenant-Colonel J. A. Reid, the district medical officer for military district No. 13, has carried on a large general and surgical practice in Calgary, Alberta, for the 'past nineteen years.
Lieutenant-Colonel N. K. Wilson, Y.D., camp medical officer, Petawawa, has had two years post-graduate work in ear, nose and throat work in the United States. He has specialized in nose and throat work in the city of Toronto for the past twenty years and is a member of the ear, nose and throat staff of the Western hospital, Toronto.
I would say once more that it is men like that and the men who are serving all over Canada and overseas whom I object to being referred to as the "dregs" of the medical profession in Canada. I say to the hon. member and to the committee that there were errors in connection with medical examinations as well as everything else, particularly in the early days, and I brought that to the attention of the committee very frankly on previous occasions and told the committee of the steps taken to remedy the situation, of the instructions which went out and of the endeavours we were making to teach civilian doctors the job of making examinations from the military standpoint. It has not been easy. I have no doubt there have been slips. But I do say as regards the medical organization for the whole army I am exceedingly gratified that we have been able to get the services of the type of men we have. I say this further, that no body or service in Canada, bar none, has any more representative, any more skilful, any more proficient, any more devoted band of medical men than has the army, whose medical officers have come in from the profession to help us out in this time of need. I hope with that assurance and with that statement the hon. member will feel that the situation has been adequately taken care of in connection with these old cases in 1940 which he has reviewed. It is, of course, useful to have them brought to our attention so that we will not get complacent.


John Horne Blackmore: I can understand these cases getting into the army, but I cannot understand why in the world they were allowed to stay in the army after they appealed for an examination.


James Layton Ralston: I have not seen these files and I cannot deal with these cases. My hon.
friend says he is going to pass them over to me, and I will deal with them when the time comes. It must be remembered that we have 450,000 men in the army. I do not know how many cases my hon. friend has; he may have fifty.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: Mr. Chairman, what are we discussing? We are supposed to be discussing item 3, for travel, transportation and freight. But now we have got on to medical services again. That should be discussed under item 5, which reads: "Personnel supplies and services; food, medical and dental stores, clothing and personal equipment."


James Layton Ralston: The reason that came up was that when the hon. member for Temis-couata last night was discussing medical services on the item for pay and allowances, where it can be discussed, as a matter of fact, though not as properly as under item 5, I interrupted him and told him that if he would allow me to make a statement with regard to the case brought up by the member for New Westminster he could go on with his statement to-day. My hon. friend the member for Weyburn was not in perhaps at the time.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I was in.


James Layton Ralston: Perhaps he did not agree to it.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I can understand the hon. member for Temiscouata wishing to discuss the medical services, but I do not see how he cannot discuss them under item 5. If there was no other item on which to discuss them I could understand his discussing them now. But we are supposed now to be discussing travel, transportation and freight.


James Layton Ralston: I have my transportation and freight men here.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I myself was in error. I well remember now the minister asking the hon. member for Temiscouata to allow him to make a statement. A little later the leader of the opposition asked the minister if he would answer some questions after item 2 had been carried. I understood that practically unanimous consent was given by the committee at the time.


Clarence Gillis: Still on the point of order. Mr. Chairman, if this afternoon is going to be taken up entirely with a debate between the hon. member for Temiscouata and the minister, the rest of us might as well go up to our rooms and do some work. If the hon. member for Temiscouata is to go back to deal with cases in 1940 and iron them out with
War Appropriation-Army

the minister there is going to be no room for anybody else here this afternoon. If I were trying to discredit parliamentary government in Canada, what has been going on here the last two or three days is exactly the technique I would adopt.
Mr, POULIOT: Speaking to the point of order, Mr. Chairman, I protest strongly against what the . hon. member, for whom I have great respect, has just said. I will tell him that it is only by unanimous consent that we can divide up these so-called estimates, which. are not estimates, and discuss them one by one. We have a global amount of three and a half billion dollars which we have to consider as a whole. It is not divided up, here, and when this resolution passes, the whole amount will be voted and then a bill will be introduced. The items we have before us are just a lead. There is no rule that binds any hon. member to restrict his remarks to any particular item, because we are discussing the whole thing. I complained at the start that these were not presented as supplementary estimates. How can any member raise this point of order when what is before us is the whole amount of three and a half billion dollars? It is the entire amount we have to consider. It has been divided up merely for convenience to enable explanations to be made to members. But the discussion cannot be divided up except by unanimous consent.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: It was divided by unanimous consent.


Jean-François Pouliot: The hon. member for Lethbridge, leader of the New Democracy group, asked for some information. The minister rose, and I did not say anything. If an hon. member has anything to say, let him go on. I do not intend to monopolize the time of the house. How many times have we been sitting here when I did not rise, so as to give a chance to other members to put their questions and make their remarks? But here I have facts which I want to bring to the attention of the minister, and I will tell him also that I am sure all the learned men he has mentioned never had any knowledge of the questions I have with regard to what has happened at the citadel in Quebec, the camp at Kimouski, and the camp at Valcartier, which are three places where reforms should be made. I ask the minister in all kindliness not to take for granted that when a civilian talks about the way men are dealt with in the army, he does not know his business because he is neither a soldier nor a doctor. He has eyes to see and ears to listen. We know these men and 
respect them. What I am doing now is not easy; it is extremely hard for me to do it, but I do it because I find it is my duty; I do it for the information of the committee. And I am not afraid to speak in this way, because if there is any member who has conveyed information to his colleagues it is the humble member for Temiscouata. I am not stingy about the information I have; I am always glad to share it with my colleagues.
The file I have been referring to is not a file of 1940. The file of 1940 is a real novel; it would be incredible, if the records were not kept in the department. I was answering to the best of my ability the hon. member for Lethbridge, when the minister rose. I do not object at all to his remarks. He was right, in the main; but there are other fellows who cover themselves with the glory which belongs to others, and people suffer on this account; the army suffers from it. I am here to advocate the cause of the under-dog, the man who has no protection, the man who is afraid to talk to others at times and who comes to me in all confidence, being sure that he can trust me.
Now, sir, if I am permitted, I will say what this is. The trouble about this file, which is E554,8S6, H.Q. 869 L-1418, is that in the first place this man was suffering from a deviation of the spine, and he had other illnesses. It was written in a letter on June 1, and on July 8 I had this letter from the Quebec doctor-I translate it as best I can:
This man has been admitted on June 15 to the military hospital, Quebec, and went out four days after. We find light scoliosis of the spine, with shorter left inferior congenital member. However in his history we note that he has broken his left fist five years ago, and he said that that was not enough to change his category, which was A.
A man suffering from a deviation of the spine and being classified A!
I have another letter, from the department, dated August 17, to the same effect. He was attended by specialists, who admitted the same thing, according to a letter which I have received from the department, and which is to the same effect as the one of July 8 which I have read.- It was dated October 2, and it admits that the man was suffering as, I have stated and that he was kept in category A. Finally, thanks to his major, whose name I do not mention here, but the minister will see it when I transfer the files to him, a medical doctor at camp Valcartier, Dr. Demers, changed his category. This is a case which is clear. I complained of the physical inability of that man. The doctors concurred, yet they kept him in class

War Appropriation-Army
A until representations were made by his major to the local doctor at Valcartier camp.
I want the doctor who is responsible to be fired.
Here is another case, a classic case, from the citadel at Quebec. I do not know that the man concerned is still there. The man had rupture. He was on sick parade. The doctor asked, " What is the matter with you." He said, " I suffer from a rupture." The doctor answered, " Have a good rub." The man who rubbed him was a lumberjack with hands as long as I am indicating to you, and like sandpaper.


John Horne Blackmore: Is the hon. member really serious in what he says, that a doctor prescribed a rubbing for a rupture?


Jean-François Pouliot: Yes, sir, surely; it was
said there. They do not call such men doctors; they call them blacksmiths. That man had to do his drill, though he could hardly walk.
Here is another case, HQ 869-0-1367. It is that of a son of a farmer who asked for postponement but did not get it. He was in camp at Rimouski from March 16, 1942. In August, 1942, he was sick for several weeks and was at room 208, military hospital, Laurier avenue, Quebec. The doctors declared he could not make any cure. On August 17, headquarters at Quebec informed him that the mobilization commission had refused his postponement. On August 24 headquarters informed me that the young man was actually under observation at the Quebec military hospital. On August 26 Lieutenant-Colonel Mercier informed me that he had been classified C for a period of three months and that he will have to be reexamined to establish definitely his medical category. On September 4, Lieutenant-Colonel Mercier informed me that he was still under observation.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend says
" informed me." He is really reading a diary?


Jean-François Pouliot: Yes. On September 4 he was still under medical examination. On September 9 he was passed in category C-l. A minute examination was made; the man was transferred from Quebec military hospital to the hospital l'Enfant Jesus at Limoilou, and finally to the hospital of Saint Sacrement, Quebec. On January 8 information was given that he had been sent to the hospital for a complete medical examination. On March 4 he was released.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: If the hon. member
will allow me, the minister has stated to him that if he will give him this information he
will deal with it. Would it not shorten the debate if the hon. member would do so? I do not say this with any idea of trying to discipline the hon. member for Temiscouata; it is not in my power to do so; but I believe that if he would accept my suggestion the debate would be considerably shortened. I may remark that the reactions of the public to the discussions which have been going on during the past few days are not very favourable to the parliamentary system as it is operating at the present time. The minister has undertaken gladly and voluntarily and diligently to deal with matters which are placed before him. I offer this suggestion to the hon. member as a piece of advice.


Jean-François Pouliot: If I am allowed, I will
quote only one more memorandum, and afterwards I shall refer to a few matters which will take only five or ten minutes.
This file, which is numbered H.Q. 869-L-1251 (DM), relates to a man, classified A, who went to the camp at Rimouski on March 17, 1942. He had already suffered from pleurisy and abscess of the throat, and had lost seven pounds the first month he was in the camp; he was coughing to such an extent that he could hardly speak. Once his temperature rose to 102.3. He was excused from the obligation to drill, but he had to wash the floors of the camp for three hours. On April 1 two medical certificates were sent to Lieutenant-Colonel Mercier from the doctors stating what was wrong with the man. He suffered from arterial hypertension and also from pleurisy. On April 28 another letter was sent to Colonel Mercier, and on the 9th of May a reply came from Doctor Mercier stating that his pulmonary radiography was negative. There were, from a clinical point of view, it was stated, indications of acute sub-ague. And so on. On April 15 I received this letter from his mother:
Our son, whom we had succeeded in getting out of the army where he had been classed as A, has always been very ill since. He suffers with his back, which is sore, and they could not find the cause of it. Fifteen days ago he was operated on for appendicitis. The operation succeeded but as he still had a sore back the doctor took a radiography and found he had some vertebrae that were sore. We sent him immediately to Doctor Samson, a specialist at Cartierville. This doctor found an abscess on the spine and he will be operated on next week.
Here is a man who would have died if he had been kept there, and yet he was classified as A. There is something wrong somewhere. I do not deny the qualifications of the doctors whom the minister has mentioned. They may be the ablest men, but there are others who are not so competent. If you go to the Cha-
War Appropriation-Army

teau Laurier you will find a very good cook there, the chef, who looks after all the cooking for the establishment, but there are others who have not the skill that he has.
Here is another case, H.Q. 869-B-3452. This fellow had had pleurisy each year for three years previously, and he was transferred from Rimouski to Chicoutimi and kept in the "clink" as a deserter because his health was such that he could not leave his home and go to the camp. I could mention many others. Here is another young fellow on leave at home. He suffered from appendicitis and had an operation, and after fifteen days he had to report to Rimouski; otherwise he would have been considered a deserter. He went there in the dead of winter with the result that he caught cold and nearly died, not from appendicitis but from pleurisy contracted on the way down. I have his file here and I will pass over the full file to the minister. I would ask the minister to look through that file and return it to me afterwards because I should like to use it in connection with the estimates of national selective service.
I do not wish to take up much more of the time of the committee, and therefore I take the minister into my confidence and pass him my own file, as I am prepared to do with all the others. These boys are not afraid to enlist. Here is a young man who was found unfit, E-41997. What did he do? He enlisted again until it was discovered that he was too unhealthy to remain in the army. There is another case that is simply incredible. I will not mention it now, but I will give the minister a copy of the letter I wrote to the deputy minister. The doctor said in this case that they were not afraid of Jean Francois Pouliot and that the man would stay in the army.
I am ready to cooperate with the minister to the fullest extent, but I want to see these men dealt with fairly by the authorities. I am not raising any prejudice, racial or religious. The doctors I complain of are French Canadians in these camps. They are not all of the type mentioned. In the province of Quebec there are French-Canadian doctors for whom I have the greatest respect, but I do not want to see people who are kind to me looked after by blacksmiths when they are sick. At times the doctors actually forget to examine a man's heart. One man could not do anything without perspiring freely. He was weak and very delicate and I sent him to a doctor. I wanted him to pass the medical examination, and I trusted the army doctors enough to have him sent to the army for examination. The result was that he was declared unfit. I will give the

numbers of some of these cases: H.Q. S69-B-3452; H.Q. 869-0-1367; H.Q. 869-L-1261; H.Q. 869-C-2833; H.Q. S69-M-3011; H.Q. 869-P-1799; 83-802; F.3818; E-41997; H.Q. 869-0-406.
I am putting these cases on Hansard, and afterwards I should like the minister to look through the files. I know he will see that what I have said is borne out by the facts. I quite understand that the minister cannot see everything that goes on in the department, and it is precisely for that reason that he has a parliamentary assistant. If, therefore, the minister is too busy with the other business of his department, I would be delighted to take the matter up with his parliamentary assistant and discuss these various cases of young men who are indispensable on the farm but who are kept in the army.
What I complain of is that the idea seems to be that every man counts as one, even if he is sick. But surely a sick man does not count; he is not an asset but a liability. Some commanding officers will not allow any man to leave the regiment. They seem to regard it as a reflection on the army to have a sick man leave, because it would mean one man less. What a shame. So that they retain sick men and have them wash floors notwithstanding that they are suffering from pulmonary diseases. They force them to drill when they [DOT] should be in category E. It is absurd. That is where we need reform.
I thank hon. members for their patience in listening to me. They know quite well that I am acquainted with the facts and that if they were in my position they would .do the same. What I am doing for the boys from Temiscouata and from other counties who write to me I would do for all the boys who are in the army. I can assure the committee that what is done with reference to these cases that I have submitted to the minister will have their repercussion throughout the army and doctors will be more careful. I can tell the minister also that nothing is worse, from the point of view of the ill-treatment of these fellows, than the protection which is accorded to some. My remarks do not apply to all the doctors. If what I said yesterday were imputed to all it would be unfair because that is not my belief. I have a high regard for several of the doctors whom I consider real savants, scientists. But, I repeat, reform is urgently needed, and I could give the minister letters that I have received from these young men thanking me for what I have done for them. In some instances they were ready to work in depots. They were willing to serve in positions where they would not have to walk, and so on, because they were unable to

War Appropriation-Army
do so, but their request was refused. I fight for the under dog; the minister understands my point of view, and I hope he will bring reform where reform is needed.
Finally, I would ask the minister for some information which he may give me some other day if he wishes; at any rate I wish to bring the matter to his attention. In Quebec city Major E. Douglas Rathbone is in charge of the medical revision board at the armoury.


James Layton Ralston: That is not an army
board. The medical revision board comes under the Department of Labour.


Jean-François Pouliot: This is my last question,
and I will tell the minister why I ask it. I am told that this doctor comes from the west and does not speak a word of French. He has been acting commander of the 16th ambulance, which I understand is to go overseas.
I wonder how long this gentleman will stay in Quebec city, and who appointed him to the medical revision board there. I am told that in army medical circles in Quebec city it has been said that no eminent Quebec doctor would have accepted that post, but I find that hard to credit. I think that position could have been given to a French-Canadian doctor of Quebec city; I must say [DOT]that the French-Canadian doctors of Quebec have not been scorned except by one department, and there are eminent doctors there who I am sure would accept this position. So that I do not see why Major Rathbone should be there. I would ask the minister if he made that appointment, or if it was made by the Department of Labour.


James Layton Ralston: If it is the medical revision board, it is under the Department of Labour.


Jean-François Pouliot: Thank you.


James Layton Ralston: The hon. member has
sent me quite a number of these files, and he will have Hansard send me the others. Certainly I shall have the most careful examination made, and in connection with anything for which the army is responsible I shall see that action is taken, remedial or disciplinary or by way of any change in system which may be indicated. Though I could not follow all the cases cited by my hon. friend, apparently most of them resulted from examination by boards of civilian doctors, who I must admit were under the direction of the army, but I think a good many of them were in the days before the examinations were as carefully carried out as they are now. There were also some circumstances in connection with some of these cases, in regard to continuing disabilities and renewed disabilities after a man appeared to be well, which would justify examination, and that examination would be made.
There were three or four items of information I wanted to file with the committee in order that we might get right on with item No. 3, which is under consideration at the . present time.	.


Jean-François Pouliot: Would the minister have
any objection to my discussing these cases with his parliamentary assistant?


James Layton Ralston: None whatever.


Jean-François Pouliot: All the cases I have
mentioned have been settled, but I should like to speak to his parliamentary assistant about future cases.


James Layton Ralston: That will be quite satisfactory.
The hon. member for Lake Centre, as reported at page 3060 of Hansard, asked for the cost of recruiting for the army during the year. It is not possible to give actual expenditure figures for the cost of army recruiting for 1942-43 at the present time. Based on the best information available, the approximate cost of army recruiting is estimated at 81,290,000, broken down as follows: Pay and allowances of military personnel, $870,000, of which $510,000
is chargeable to recruiting	 $510,000
Salaries and wages of civilian personnel	 50,000
Advertising-newspaper, radio, billboards, etc	 375,000
Travelling expenses	 225,000
Miscellaneous - comprising rentals office expenses, etc., plus costs of special recruiting campaigns not included under above heads	 130,000
As I said before, the military personnel included in the figure of $510,000 are performing additional duties as well as recruiting.


Mr. SLAGHT:: That would cover all three armed services?


James Layton Ralston: No; this is just for army recruiting. Them, as reported at .page 3077 of Hansard for May 27, the hon. member for Lincoln asked about the additional officers, other ranks and personnel, and the cost, in connection with the authorization of the formation of the First Canadian Army. As I indicated to the hon. member, it would be very difficult to be exact, because an army is not a fixed establishment, but what I have had the officers try to do is prepare a statement with regard to what was regarded as the approximate numbers and amounts involved. This is the statement.
War Appropriation-Army

The formation of First Canadian Army did not entail a large number of additional ancillary units, because when the divisions were organized for service overseas we ,also formed a portion of corps, army and line of communication units to the extent necessary to serve those divisions. The formation of the First Canadian Army means the provision of an additional control headquarters in the' rear of the two corps headquarters, under which rear headquarters the previously provided portion of army, general headquarters and line of communication units would be grouped and would serve. Consequent upon the addition of an army headquarters, a relatively small number of additional units were added to the army, in order to provide additional headquarters defence, engineer, intercommunication and supply and medical services.
The total additional numbers involved in the formation, of units directly serving army would approximate 7,000, included in which
number there would be ten additional senior appointments of the rank of colonel and higher, namely, one lieutenant-general, four major-generals, three brigadiers, two colonels. The estimated cost for 1943-44 of the foregoing units including the army headquarters would be in the neighbourhood of $16,000,000.
Then on May 26, as reported at page 3058 of Hansard, the hon. member for Lake Centre asked if I would give the committee the information as to enlistment by districts for January, February, March and April; I had already given the totals for those four months. The statement which has been prepared shows the total male enlistments by districts of general service volunteers, according to telegraphic returns, from January to April, 1943, inclusive, and in order that we may have information as to the man-power intake during these months there has been added a table showing the number of National Resources Mobilization Act recruits enrolled during the same months. The table is as follows:
(a) Total Male Enlistments by Districts (G.S. Volunteers) (According to telegraphic returns)
January to April, 1943 (inclusive)
Military
district	Jan.	Feb.	March	April	Total1 	
765	655	542	443	2,4052 	
2,672	2,152	2,233	1,959	9,0163 	
853	514	564	424	2,3554 	
1,078	884	759	625	3,3465 	
384	319	269	188	1,1606 	
1,163	1,097	677	693	3,6307 	
719	487	381	317	1,90410 	
927	663	547	667	2,804Pacific command 	
1,000	809	647	531	2,98712 	
1,180	628	380	316	2,50413 	
875	703	526	269	2,373Petawawa 	
15	5	4	5	29Camp Borden	11	6	5	22Total	
11,631	8,927	7,535	6,442	34,535
(b) Number of N.R.M.A. Recruits Enrolled at District Depots and Training Centres During the months of January to April, 1943
(Based on telegraphic returns)
Military
district	Jan.	Feb.	March	April	Total1 	165	373	175	1,0712 	859	800	724	2,4983 	106	87	50	6324 	527	715	889	3,2655 	693	536	456	2,0126 	384	98	98	1,1887 	213	211	102	80610 	478	254	360	1,76511 	303	342	229	1,36012 	385	236	30	1,68013 	381	310	212	1,194Total	4,494	3,962	3,325	17,921

War Appropriation-Army


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Last year
when the minister gave a similar table I believe it also showed those enlistments on a per capita basis, and the number of trainees called out, also on a capita basis.


James Layton Ralston: This does not give that information; it is just for the first four months of this year. I could probably file a statement bringing that information up to date. I think my hon. friend refers to the statement that was given as of December 31, and I shall see if I cannot bring that up to date. I think that contains a percentage figure.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Yes, it does.


James Layton Ralston: I shall try to bring it up to Rate. I presume there is no need of reading this document.


Gordon Graydon: To what date is the statement?


James Layton Ralston: It is for the four months, to April 30.


Gordon Graydon: I understand the hon. member for Weyburn asks for the figures for the remainder of the period from that time until now.


James Layton Ralston: No; he was asking for the percentage per capita.


Gordon Graydon: That is your latest information?
, Mr. RALSTON: Yes, up to April 30; we get day to day telegraphic reports, of course, for current enlistments.


Mr. STIRLING:: Will the minister now answer the further question of the hon. member for Lake Centre with regard to the 91,000 Canadians in the United States, and the success which attended the recruiting stations? I believe the minister has answered only that portion which deals with the transfer of those who have enlisted in the United States army. I know the hon. member for Lake Centre is anxious to have the answer to the question whether we are missing potential recruits among those 91,000.


James Layton Ralston: I cannot answer that question now. I thought I had the statement with me, but it does not seem to be readily available.


Grote Stirling: Will the minister bring it down later?


James Layton Ralston: Yes; it will be here on Monday. I may possibly be able to find it before we adjourn.
May I answer one more question, namely, that asked on May 27, 1943, by the hon.
member for St. John-Albert (Mr. Hazen), as reported at page 3080 of Hansard. He asked about the pay for artillery signallers, pointing out that those in the signal corps were getting specialty pay, while artillery signallers were not. I say to him now that artillery signallers are now classified as tradesmen, and under authority of order 144, 1943, after January 1, 1943, they are eligible for extra pay.


Howard Charles Green: He had also asked a question about the cost of publicity. Has the minister that information?


James Layton Ralston: I have not obtained it yet, but I shall have it on Monday. If I remember correctly, the hon. member asked for a break-down of all the officers and of the civilian personnel.


Gordon Graydon: There may be one or two further questions which have not been answered. It may be that some hon. members who are away on a visit to the war plants may have further questions when they come back.


James Layton Ralston: I am not purporting to have answered all of them.


Clarence Gillis: I do hot wish to break the continuity of this discussion. I was going to say something about travel, transportation and freight; that is, if I am in order. And if I am, everybody else is out of order.


Mr. PERLEY:: There is one question I should like to ask now, and it would only require a moment to answer it.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: The hon. member may ask it.


Ernest Edward Perley: I did not say anything yesterday, although I had about twenty questions to ask. As I listened, however, I found that nearly all of those questions were answered. But I believe the one I shall now ask is worthy of consideration. Three or four cases have been brought to my attention where the mother of three or four boys finds herself in difficulty. I have in mind one case where the mother has three sons, two of whom are overseas, and a fourth who was called up only recently. She has found that she has had to desert her husband, if I may use that expression. We have heard some talk about desertion by husbands, but in this instance the wife is the deserter. She cannot persuade her husband to give her sufficient accommodation, food or clothing for the rest of the children.
War Appropriation-Army


James Layton Ralston: She has had to leave her husband?


Ernest Edward Perley: Yes. The two sons overseas are quite willing to make contributions to the mother from their pay. She thinks some allowance should be made by the department, by way of separation allowance. Could the minister inform the committee if he has heard of other cases similar to this one, and if there is any way whereby a woman in that position could receive some consideration, particularly when her sons overseas are willing to contribute a portion of their pay? I have in mind two or three cases which could be described as desperate, and which, I . believe, should have some consideration.


James Layton Ralston: From what the hon. member says I understand the husband is not a soldier.


Ernest Edward Perley: No. I regret to say he is a returned soldier of the last war, but he now refuses to maintain the wife.


James Layton Ralston: The investigation would be made to ascertain whether dependency could be established as between the mother and the sons; that is, if she is partly dependent upon the sons for support.


Ernest Edward Perley: She was.


James Layton Ralston: It sounds rather discouraging, from that point of view.


Ernest Edward Perley: She was dependent upon them to a certain extent, before they enlisted.


James Layton Ralston: And they are making
assignments of pay?


Ernest Edward Perley: Yes.


James Layton Ralston: And she wishes to see whether dependents' allowance can be paid in respect of them?


Ernest Edward Perley: Yes.


James Layton Ralston: The matter would be investigated from the point of view of dependency. The dependents' allowance board takes the position that in such cases they do not interfere in respect of rights between a wife and a husband. But the way my hon. friend puts it, it might be contended that she was deserting her husband. She voluntarily elects to leave him, and has elected to cut herself off from the support he would give her, provided they lived together. Is that correct?


Ernest Edward Perley: Yes; that is correct. He has refused to give support, and there are two other small children to be fed and clothed.


James Layton Ralston: But she does not have to leave them.


Ernest Edward Perley: The conditions have been such that she has had to.


James Layton Ralston: It sounds to me as though she could take legal action for separation.


Ernest Edward Perley: It has not gone that far.


James Layton Ralston: I am referring to legal action for separation, in view of the fact that she has not condoned his refusal to support her. I do not think the wife can simply pull out, and say, " I am not going to stay here any longer," if he provides her with a home.


Gordon Graydon: It would depend upon the provocation.


Ernest Edward Perley: The boys are willing to
assign part of their pay.


James Layton Ralston: The hon. member asked me if we have had any similar cases. My deputy tells me that he has not heard of a case of that kind. He was advising me on general principles, namely, that dependency has to be shown. If the hon. member has the case in mind, he might give me the name, and I could look into it.


Clarence Gillis: I wish to say something about travel, transportation and freight, but I shall not go into any specific cases. I am just a little bit disappointed with the functioning of parliament, as I have seen it since coming here. We talk about everything, except the matter before the Chair. If every hon. member took the position he was going to bring his files for the last four years down to the chamber, so that he might discuss individual cases, and then, after occupying a couple of hours of time, tucked his files under his arm and went away for two or three weeks-because that happens, there is no doubt about it-we would find ourselves in a peculiar position.


An hon. MEMBER:: I hope he does.


John Ritchie MacNicol: He does not go away that long.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Do not be too optimistic.


Clarence Gillis: I am both disappointed and disgusted.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Here he is now.


Clarence Gillis: If he has a quarrel with the Minister of National Defence or anyone in the minister's department, it should be a personal matter.
I bring to the minister's attention the matter of transportation as applied to different

War Appropriation-Army
branches of the service. My information while travelling, and from information received, is that there is considerable discrimination as between certain branches of the service, and as between branches of the service east and west.
There is another matter I should like to bring to the attention of the minister. When men of the air force are being transported from one point to another west of Toronto they are supplied with meal tickets and a berth. But east of Toronto they are not supplied with meals or a berth. When men in the army travel anywhere in Canada they have to sit in a second-class car, are provided only with a sandwich and must buy a bottle of coca-cola or something else to wash it down. This applies also to ratings in the navy. Berths are not provided in either- case. There is definite discrimination between the men in the air force and the men in the army and the navy, and further discrimination in the air force as between travel west of Toronto and travel east of Toronto. I have a specific complaint to make to the Minister of National Defence for Air, and I shall not bother the Minister of National Defence with it at this time. This matter should receive thorough examination.
Yesterday I brought up the question of free transportation for the men in the army on their furlough after six months service and embarkation leave. If a man is in a camp in central Canada and receives embarkation leave, as a general rule, it will cost him a good deal to go home. Just recently I wa*s on a train going to Montreal, and I met a group of boys who were en route from Petawawa. camp to Sydney, Nova Scotia, on their embarkation leave.


James Layton Ralston: Artillery men?


Clarence Gillis: Yes. When their leaves came through they had no money, and their chums in the camp took up a collection to buy their tickets. They had a placard nailed to the end of their seat, "Kindly help five starving soldiers."


James Layton Ralston: This was not a special train.


Clarence Gillis: No. They were depending upon other people in order to get their meals on the way down. That is not good enough for a man who has enlisted voluntarily and who must take his training at whatever point is decided on by the military authorities. When embarkation leave comes through a man should not have to travel under such circumstances in order to see his family, possibly for the last time. Free transportation
should have been provided a long time ago. Most of these boys in the service are assigning the greater part of their pay, and the few dollars they have left is hardly enough to buy the shaving materials and other little things they need.
I ask the minister to check up on this discrimination which seems to exist in the present regulations. As I say, there is even discrimination in the air force itself. When a' boy in western Canada enlists and is assigned to the manning pool at Toronto, he is given his meals and a berth, but the boy from Halifax does not receive this. I know of one case where some boys had to sit up all the way from Halifax to Montreal without any meals, and they could not even get seats from Montreal to Toronto; they had to stand.


Gordon Graydon: The minister will recall that almost from the beginning of the war a number of members of this party have been insisting upon free transportation being provided for members of the armed forces. The matter raised by the hon. member for Gape Breton South deserves the serious attention of the Minister of National Defence and the other two defence ministers. Many of these men are undergoing training thousands of miles away from their homes. This was not the situation in the last war. I know that practically every member of this committee will be able to recall boys from his constituency who are located almost at the other end of Canada, and have been there for some time.
When their furloughs come through, in most instances they find that they have not been able to save sufficient money to pay for their transportation. There are many things that must be paid for out of their limited pay. I for one make no apology for emphasizing the need of free transportation for the men in our armed forces. I think the minister should make an immediate decision, and I hope it will be favourable, in connection with providing free transportation at least on these two occasions, namely the furlough and the embarkation leave.
Perhaps I might go a little farther than the hon. member for Cape Breton South. This whole matter of furlough and embarkation leave is linked up with the man's service. It cannot be said that a man has an option with respect to these two matters. There may be an option so far as week-end leaves are concerned, but that is not so in connection with furloughs and embarkation leaves. I ask the minister to consider this in a different light than he has on previous occasions when war appropriation bills were before the com-
War Appropriation-Army

mittee. The situation is serious, and the minister should give some indication of governmental policy in this connection. If there is one section of our population which ought to have, not simply concessions, but equality, and that is all this means, it is the armed forces of our country, and I make this appeal to the minister this afternoon in the hope that he will provide for our armed forces in Canada that equality of treatment which cannot in any sense be regarded as a concession or as something extra. Rather it must be regarded as part and parcel of that which is rightfully due to the men in our armed forces who are prepared to give, not merely their money, not just material things, but what is infinitely more precious, life and limb itself.


Arthur Graeme Slaght: Mr. Chairman, I wish to support the requests made by the two last speakers with regard to leave and the granting of transportation and proper provision for eating and sleeping. I have addressed the committee on previous occasions on this subject, and therefore I shall not repeat myself this afternoon. But I endorse the requests that others have made and want to record myself as supporting them.


Joseph William Noseworthy: In supporting the suggestions that have been made by two or three hon. members, I would submit to the minister that there is at present a special reason why consideration should be given to granting free transportation on these leaves. The press has recorded that during the recent victory loan campaign no community in this country contributed more generously than did the members of the armed forces. I recall visiting, a little while ago, a camp at North Bay, an educational centre, where 700 men in the army had contributed over $35,000 to the victory loan. I saw their pay envelopes, and man after man at that camp, after the various deductions had been made from his two weeks' pay, had pledged himself for victory loan support to the point where he was leaving himself only two dollars a week to carry on. Under these circumstances many of these men cannot possibly afford to pay their way back home when they go on leave. I sincerely ask the minister to give the matter consideration. I am sure that the railways and the country can afford to do this on behalf of our men.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: I wish to endorse everything that the previous speakers have said. I should also like to bring to the attention of the minister the request which has come from the soldiers who are residents

of British Columbia. I think they are being unfairly treated in the length of time they are given when going home on leave. I understand that previously the air force got a longer time for leave than the army and the navy, but I am informed by the parliamentary secretary that that has been changed and that all branches of the armed forces are now on an equal footing with regard to the length of their leaves. I am entirely in accord with that. I think all branches of the armed forces should be treated equally in the matter of length of leave. But the soldiers of British Columbia should in addition be allowed travel time. I admit that this should apply equally to the soldiers who live in eastern Canada and are posted far away from home, on the west coast, let us say, but they have the advantage of passing through a beautiful part of Canada which they never saw before when they go home on leave, and that helps to make up for the shortness of their leave.
As the minister well remembers, during the last war, if you were in France and were going on leave and gave an address in Ireland, you got three days extra allowed for travel time, and if you were going to Scotland you got two days extra for travel time. I well remember that the minister and I were always getting ready to go to Ireland to get those three extra days, but we never got there. All the soldier associations in British Columbia have written, I presume, to all British Columbia members asking that they be granted travel time in addition to their leave. We are not asking for extra leave for our men.
It seems only reasonable that a man from British Columbia who has been trained on a corvette at Halifax or in the air force on the eastern coast of Canada should be granted ' travel time in addition to his leave, because it takes him four days to get home and four days to get back, and that leaves him only one or two days at home. I think every hon. member will agree that this is a reasonable request. We are not asking for extra leave for the men from British Columbia or from the far west, include Alberta if you like. We are simply asking for travel time, so that they may have an equal length of time to spend at home. I think it is a reasonable request.
I hope the minister will have something to say about it.


Mr. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: I should like to support what has been said by hon. members who have spoken with regard to the accommodation for soldiers travelling on the trains, and free transportation. I have particularly noticed travel conditions on the trains

War Appropriation-Army
for the armed forces, because I have travelled a great deal on the trains. I have spoken on this question before and have said, and I say now, that it is a wrong principle to distinguish between the branches of the armed forces, especially when social. distinctions are made.
I recall that not long ago there was a little difficulty in getting recruits for the army, and we went so far as to advertise that we would provide them with walking-out uniforms. A great deal of propaganda was put on at that time to get recruits and to raise the morale, shall I say, of those who were contemplating joining the army. Evidently it was felt by those who were thinking of enlisting in some branch of the armed forces that there were social distinctions and that the army was not as highly thought of as the other two services. That is wrong, and there should be no distinction, social or otherwise, between' the different branches of the armed forces, because the soldier has just as an important job to do as the man in the air force and the man in the navy. He is just as important as the other two. I am quite confident that there was a feeling in the armed forces that those in the army were not so good as those in the air force and that, therefore, it was all right for the men in the army to sit up in a day coach when going home on leave, while the other fellows had a sleeper. There is still- a great deal of hard feeling in that respect. I have talked to men in the air force and to men in the navy, and they are very much disappointed that this distinction is made. The air force fellows do not think they are a bit better than the men in the army, and they resent the conditions under which the army men have to travel. I am sure that the minister realizes this and probably has done what he could to rectify the situation. It is one that certainly must be rectified.
Mr. MeGARRY: When the question of free transportation for the soldiers was brought up in the house last year I expressed very sincerely my opinion that free transportation should be granted to them. I have not changed my opinion in that regard. Indeed, I feel more strongly about it than ever, and I just wish to take a moment to associate myself with the other hon. members who have spoken on behalf of this concession being granted to soldiers. In view of what they are accomplishing in a military way and their splendid contribution to the recent victory loan, I think all hon. members will agree that this is a concession which the men in the army certainly merit.


Gordon Graydon: It is a right rather than a concession.


John Ritchie MacNicol: A few days ago I came
from Montreal on 'the afternoon train and had the experience of seeing just what treatment is handed out to soldiers on the trains. I did not know that there were such trains running between Montreal and Ottawa. On the train, which consisted of quite a number of coaches, were 200 soldiers, perhaps more. I never before remember having ridden in such cars. I would call them cattle cars. When I went on the platform there was a trainman there- it was not his fault-who said "Ottawa passengers in here." I went in. It was one of these old-fashioned cars with brass fittings on the seats. The seats were back to back. The cars were packed full. That is not the way to treat soldiers, whether they are on their last trip or their first. I got off the train and asked an official on the platform, "Where are our passenger cars?" "Why," he said, "those are the passenger cars." I said, "I would call that a cattle car." I was put out at having to ride in a car like that, and although I had not intended to mention it here, now that the question has been raised, I think it is in order to do so. I wonder where the old second-class cars are; they were infinitely better than those which were used on that Montreal-Ottawa train. Where these cars came from, I do not know. I have never s,een cars like that one before. What I particularly objected to was the way in which the seats were placed, back to back. There was no one going through selling chocolates, soft drinks or other refreshments. I do not think such conditions are good enough for soldiers; in my judgment they are entitled to better treatment than we civilians are and as a civilian I very much objected to the train on which I had to ride that day from Montreal.
Some hon. member has spoken about free trips on the soldier's last leave. The hon. member for Broadview has raised this matter here frequently since war broke out. My leader to-day has strongly urged that on the last trip and on furlough such consideration be given to soldiers. I think every hon. member is in accord with having the last trip made a free trip. I have seen soldiers on trains who had not a cent in their pockets.. How could they have saved anything out of $1.30 a day, when one considers all the expenses they are up against? I join my appeal with those of other hon. members, particularly the hon. member for Peel, that the minister consider providing the soldier with free transportation to and from his home when he is on embarkation leave.


Mr. ADAMSON:: I merely want to go on record as supporting the proposal of free trans-
War Appropriation-Army


Agar Rodney Adamson: What happened is this, the two pounds very soon finds itself translated into beer or into-


Charles Gavan Power: -a poker game.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes, through a regrettable inability to hold the better hands at cards, or some other common mishap. At any, rate, by the time the soldier arrives on this side he has no money. I suggest that the grant be still given; but instead of two pounds give him ten dollars, Canadian currency, which he cannot spend in England, so that when he arrives in Montreal or wherever he does arrive, he will have some cash.


Charles Gavan Power: What will he do on the boat? Can't you play poker with Canadian money?


Agar Rodney Adamson: Well, it is a little more difficult. The same facilities and space are not present, and there is little or no beer.


Mrs. CASSELMAN:: I think Alberta has a special interest in this matter of transportation, because we feel that we are in the centre of things, and our men, particularly sailors, are frequently transferred from one coast to another. The railway fares from either coast to points in Alberta are very high. I wonder, if it is impossible to give free transportation, whether a ceiling could not be put on railway fares, so that, where a man's railway fare is above a certain amount, the- authorities would step in and assist him by paying some part of it. That, I think, would help to overcome the difficulties of embarkation leaves for our Alberta men.


James Layton Ralston: I think I had better speak first of the toughest proposition, namely, the suggestion which has been supported by all speakers this afternoon with regard to free transportation. I certainly wish that I could gratify my own personal inclination to make the situation just as favourable as possible in this respect.
I am not in a position to give the committee any assurance in this connection just at present. Two years ago we got this arrangement with the railways which we thought was a substantial concession. We thought it would be of real assistance to the soldiers and it has worked very well. I realize that distances are long and that even a one-third fare on a return trip is a considerable tax on a soldier's purse. But, although it may not be very striking in any one item the committee will recall that there has been a very large addition to this item due to increases made this year in connection with soldiers' pay, dependents' allowance and subsistence allowance. As a matter of fact there is between $46,000,000 and $50,000,000 of an increase in this year's appropriation, due entirely to the changes which were recently made in pay, dependents' allowance and subsistence allowance.
I cannot give the committee any assurance at the present time with regard to free transportation for embarkation leave and furlough. There have been two alternatives or two lesser measures suggested. One is free transportation on embarkation leave and the other suggestion, made by the hon. member for Edmon-

War Appropriation-Army
ton East, was that at least there should be a ceiling on all transportation. I shall talk this matter over with the Minister of National Defence for Air and the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services.
Mr. MacNICOL-. Does the minister mean that the ceiling would be uniform to the soldier no matter where he went?


James Layton Ralston: I take it that what the
hon. member for Edmonton East meant was that the longest trip would not exceed a certain fixed maximum. I think the hon. member is referring to a zone system, so that say from any place between Winnipeg and the coast the rate would be the same.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I felt that a soldier returning from Halifax to Quebec, a soldier returning from Halifax to Toronto and a soldier returning from Halifax to Winnipeg or any other point west on his last leave should all be given the same rate.


James Layton Ralston: The only rate that would be fair in that event would be the shortest distance. That would mean that the fellow living in Halifax and going to Truro would govern the rate from Halifax to Winnipeg. The idea of the hon. member for Edmonton East was a maximum, that no rate should exceed some fixed figure. I shall discuss the matter with the Minister of National Defence for Air and the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services. I do not hesitate to say that our personal inclinations are all one way. But we have to balance different considerations and give the very best study and attention we can to the question. I cannot say more than that.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Would that apply
tc length of leave as well?


James Layton Ralston: With reference to length
of leave, as I remember there are two forms in which leave is granted. There is the two-week leave every year. There is one two weeks after the first six months and there is another two weeks once each year after that. You cut into that leave very easily on a long trip. As a matter of fact-this is not in the book-I have reason to believe that commanding officers in cases of soldiers going long distances try to take account of that to some extent in allowing leave. Somehow or another they have a way of providing that the leave shall begin at such and such a date, although the soldier may not be in camp for perhaps a day before that actual date.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Where they
are given forty-eight hour leave at each end.


James Layton Ralston: On embarkation leave
there is provision that travelling time is out. The intention with regard to embarkation leave is that they shall have forty-eight hours at home, and necessary travelling time is given to provide for that. It is not the same with furlough. I understand the point and we shall discuss it.	.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: Would the minister
give some possible reasons that are advanced against giving soldiers, sailors or airmen free transportation on embarkation leave?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot give my hon. friend any reasons from the point of view of public policy. There might be one reason, namely, traffic accommodation. There would be a great deal more use of the railways if free transportation were given, and the congestion which has been referred to would be increased. I do not believe that is really a reason against giving free transportation. I say that frankly, because I feel that the congestion which the hon. member for Davenport found-I say this with all due respect to him -was due to civilian travel just as much as to service travel. My feeling is, and I have said as much to the railways, that the armed services have done pretty well in the regulation of the flow of traffic by the men in the three forces and that civilians have not done any more than their fair share in the way of curtailing travel. That will be borne out by what one sees on the trains from day to day and on week-ends. The week-end rate has been cut out. I have only to go to the railways to see how many civilians are still taking advantage of week-ends to do travelling. I do not believe that we shall ever come to a situation in this country, so that this terrific jamming will not occur until we have passenger travel rationed and until a man has to show a certificate of near necessity before he buys a railway ticket. That is what is causing the trouble about which my hon. friend is talking. The railways have not got the cars. I know the kind of cars they are running out and the railways themselves will admit that they are not fit for soldiers or civilians as modern railway vehicles. But that is all they have.
With regard to the matter raised by the hon. member for Cape Breton South-he started this discussion-with reference to discrimination betwen the services, I have done everything I can and so have my colleagues to canvass these questions common to the service in order to see to it that conditions are exactly uniform with regard to travel and allowances. In connection with travel I have

War Appropriation-Army
here the Canadian army routine order No. 3035, which I am advised is in exact terms the order for the air force and the navy, changing the names and ranks in order to suit the particular service which may be referred to. The rule is:
i Army personnel below the rank of sergeant, if required to spend two (2) consecutive nights or more on a continuous journey, may be provided with a berth in a tourist car, if available.
This means that a man coming the first night from Halifax to Montreal would not be provided with a berth, and it applies I am told, to the air force just as to the army and the navy. If there are two nights of travel, then as a matter of fact the man leaving Halifax or Sydney gets tourist accommodation on both nights, and if the class of accommodation provided is not available, then he gets the next higher class if that is. The joker in the thing, if there is one, is that this accommodation often is not available; I think that is the real difficulty. I do not think there is any trouble about the regulations.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Is there not this further difficulty, that very often airmen are moved in small groups of probably three or four, being posted somewhere, while soldiers are moved as a unit or company?


James Layton Ralston: There should not be any difference under the regulations:
Army personnel below the rank of sergeant, if required to spend two (2) consecutive nights or more on a continuous journey, may be provided with a berth in a tourist car, if available.
This still deals with privates, lance corporals and corporals.
Army personnel below the rank of sergeant proceeding on a special duty which requires them to report for duty immediately on arrival at destination, if travelling overnight, may be provided with a tourist berth. If a tourist car is not operated, first-class transportation and standard berth may be provided.
I am informed that this would apply to a motor or tractor driver, for instance, going to meet a convoy at some particular spot. He should be fresh in the morning, so that he is given a tourist berth. The change that was made, the last nail that was driven in order to make these regulations uniform, I think was regulation 3C which I have just read providing that sergeants are to be given a tourist berth when the journey involves night travel. If tourist accommodation is not available, first class transportation in a standard berth may be provided. There was a difference between the air force, the army

and the navy in that respect. Up to that time army sergeants were given the same accommodation as other ranks. As I remember it, that particular item was changed several months ago. This order is actually dated March of this year, but the changes that were made in the order, which made it necessary to react it in March, were changes with regard to officers.
I must now say a word with regard to meal tickets. I cannot understand the situation to which my hon. friend refers, if the regulations are as they tell me. It would appear to be a case of bad administration if the hon. member found five men travelling from Petawawa to Halifax, as I understood him to say, having nothing to eat and no means of getting it. I am told that when the warrant for the railway transportation is issued at Petawawa, it includes the meals; and the ticket agent gives the man not only the railway ticket but also tickets for meals. If the orderly room sends down for the tickets, it gets the railway ticket and the meal tickets as well, and gives them to the men. I am told further that if men are travelling and for some reason or another have not been given meal tickets, they are entitled to put in charges for their expenses on the train. The answer to that may be that they may have no money to buy meals with; that may have been the situation with these boys. I am told, however, that without exception the meal ticket is issuable east of Ottawa as well as west of Ottawa. I should like very much if my hon. friend would give me that case, because we would like to run it down. Perhaps the hon. member can tell me the train he was on.


Clarence Gillis: These boys are now overseas.


James Layton Ralston: AVould the hon. member tell me the name of one of the boys?


Clarence Gillis: Yes, I will.


Gordon Graydon: Why is a differentiation made as between one night and two nights? It seems to me that if we are to do the right thing by these boys, we ought to provide them with some reasonable kind of accommodation for sleeping, even if they are on the train for only one night. I imagine the minister and members of the house-who ride on trains often find it difficult enough to obtain decent accommodation. Surely we should not ask these men to travel even for one night without proper accommodation. I cannot see the reason for making any difference between one night and two nights. The travel time is longer, but the principle is the same, and I do not think we should have that difference.

War Appropriation-Army
I do not wish to put this in any cheap way, but I do feel that our armed forces are entitled to everything a civilian would get in ordinary travel. As civilians, what are we actually contributing, as compared with these men? If there is any question of differentiation it should be in favour of the soldier.


James Layton Ralston: I can only say to my hon. friend that the answer is very trite; that is to say. it has always been the practice that the first night is without sleeping accommodation. I thoroughly agree with everything my hon. friend has said and I appreciate the spirit in which he has said it. I know it is not any cheap appeal at all; I believe my hon. friend feels genuinely about it, and so do I. He mentioned that this was not the sort of accommodation that would be provided for civilians. As he knows, however, it has become a regular routine now to run these cheap trips for civilians, on which they sit up all night. I know that trips from Halifax to Montreal are put on in that way, with the trains composed entirely of first-class coaches, and everyone sits up all night. I quite agree that if the rolling stock is available it would be better to have berths provided, but I do not think you would get the rolling stock at the present time; that is my own feeling.


Howard Charles Green: There is just one other matter I should like the minister to discuss with his colleagues, namely, the possibility of granting extra time to men who are going on sick leave, to enable them to get to their homes. For example, men from British Columbia stationed in Toronto become sick. When they get sick leave it means that their time is very badly cut down.


James Layton Ralston: Does my hon. friend mean men who get sick after they have gone on leave?


Howard Charles Green: No; I mean a man who
becomes sick in Toronto, who goes to hospital for a time and is then given sick leave. I understand he is not given any extra time if he happens to be a resident of Vancouver or Halifax; he gets just the same time as though he lived in Ottawa. I may be wrong in that, but I have had some cases of that kind and I - think the situation should be remedied.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Could the
minister tell us on Monday how this sum of $54,453,570 is divided between the two railways, and what basis is used by the army authorities in determining the railway over which these men will travel? I have had men of all three services tell me that if they are
travelling say from Halifax to say some point in the west, they may come as far as Montreal by Canadian National and then for some reason or other may be compelled to switch over to the Canadian Pacific, even though the Canadian National could take them right on to Winnipeg or Vancouver or wherever they might be going. What is the determining factor in deciding how the business is divided, and how has it been divided in regard to this amount of money?


James Layton Ralston: I am informed that the only rule that governs is efficiency, of routing. I cannot understand the change from Canadian National to Canadian Pacific west of Montreal, unless a man was coming north shore or in case it might be possible to get a through train on one railway and not on the other. Has my hon. friend a case in mind?


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I have had a number of men on the trains tell me they were compelled to switch from one railway to the other going perhaps to Winnipeg, where the Canadian National could take them very easily.


James Layton Ralston: Is the hon. member talking about a party of ten or twenty, or a troop train?	.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I am talking about a small group travelling on a passenger train. Has the minister the figures showing how this money is divided between the railways?


James Layton Ralston: We w'ould have to get the figures from the treasury department and break them down. We have not them here, though I could get them.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I should like this question of travel time to British Columbia clarified a little. I understood the minister to say the commanding officer has authority, though it is not in the book-


James Layton Ralston: I did not say he had authority; I said I had an idea that quite often the commanding officer made leaves date a little later than the time the men actually left.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Then I put it in another way, because I think we have a very just case in British Columbia. So far in this war with respect to embarkation- now, just a moment, do not shake your head, because this is important to British Columbia -all embarkations have been from the eastern coast. That affects British Columbia.
War Appropriation-Army

On that ground I ask the minister to give consideration to a further extension of leave for our boys who are on embarkation leave.


James Layton Ralston: Sick leave.


Gordon Graydon: That sounds reasonable.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Crerar the house adjourned at 6:05 p-m.
Monday, May 31, 1943