1943-06-01

[Stage Direction]
Mr. J. J. McCANN (Renfrew South) presented the first report of special committee on radio broadcasting, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. JE AST-FRANQOIS POULIOT (Temiscouata) : Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. I hold in my hand the five o'clock 
edition of the Ottawa Journal of' yesterday, on the front page of which the member for Temiscouata is given equal precedence with the united nations. Of course the article is with regard to the exercise of his unquestionable right as a member of this house to express his views and also those of his constituents. Some calculations have been laboriously made by the skunk kittens of the Journal's tycoons with petrifying hearts and softening brains, and they are all wrong. For instance, they say that I have been speaking for 20 pages in the first place, then 30 pages before the Easter recess, and then 64 pages more, which makes a total, they say, of 94 pages, and they repeat that total three times. Now 20 plus 30 is 50, and 50 plus 64 is 114. Not only is their calculation wrong, but they also say that "it takes 34 other members to equal Mr. Pouliot's wordage." Here again they are wrong, because I have noticed that in the present discussion some members have spoken four lines, and I do not know how many times four lines is more than silence, more than naught. It is pretty hard to make that calculation.
I do not contend, sir, that I have spoken for an average of 34 members. I have expressed my views. As one member from Montreal said not long ago, the members from Quebec province who were elected at the last election were expressing in this house the views of the province. I have been speaking, not for 34 other members, but for 160 members who have not uttered a word since the beginning of the session, and1 if other members were exercising their rights as I do I would certainly not take so much time. But I deny anyone the right to say what the Journal said.
A great writer, Homer, in his " Iliad," said-
Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: Get on the wheat committee.


Mr. POULIOT:: That is a book which the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruick-shank) ought to read. It is a classic. Homer said of one of his heroes: Palletai itor ana ta stoma or " My heart leaps to my lips." The Journal editors or correspondents take so much space for the member for Temiscouata that they cannot express the deep feelings they have for those members who say nothing. They are not fair to the members whom they admire for their silence. They should take less time on me and devote more time to the members they admire for saying nothing in this house, thereby fulfilling their duty in a way that is approved by the Journal, the board of censors, the wartime information board and the press liaison officers of all the war departments.

Feed Grains



FEED GRAINS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. C. SENN (Haldimand):: Just before coining into the house my attention was drawn to an article in the Globe and Mail regarding the movement of western grain east. It is a comprehensive statement. One matter to which it refers is, I think, the crux of the whole situation, and that is the price of feed grains. Before seeing the article I had a question framed and I am going to put it to the Minister of Agriculture. It is as follows: Owing to unfavourable seeding conditions throughout Ontario and the consequent certainty of a shortage of feed grains, resulting in high prices therefor, farmers are disposing of their brood sows in alarming numbers. Will the minister take into consideration the advisability of issuing a statement giving assurance that feed grains may be obtained at prices which will encourage producers to keep their breeding stock?


Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture):: The present intention of the government and, I think, the policy for the year is that the same assistance will be given as was given last year, and there is under consideration at the moment some plan by which it is hoped we shall be able to encourage the storing of grain during this summer by feed merchants and others in order to have it available next winter.


Mr. ROWE:: What about the price?


James Garfield Gardiner: The price, of course, will be maintained on the same basis as it now is; that is, the price as established under arrangements which have already been made by the Minister of Trade and Commerce and, I think, have already been announced to the house. That is, the price-the ceiling price-as it was last year is maintained.


Mark Cecil Senn: I do not want to pursue the matter too far, but the difficulty is that farmers are disposing of their breeding stock in very large numbers, and in view of the need to keep up our hog production, some assurance should be given to agriculture.


James Garfield Gardiner: We will see that a statement is put out in the press indicating just what are the facts with regard to the feed situation.



QUESTION AS TO REQUEST FOR INCREASED INITIAL PAYMENT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. E. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle):: I desire to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Has the minister received in the last two or three days a request from the central board of Canadian Cooperative Wheat Producers in the form of a brief, requesting that the initial price paid by the wheat board be increased by ten cents a bushel in order to bring it to one dollar per bushel basis Fort William? If so, has he given serious consideration to the matter, and will he have a statement to make within a few days?


Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: The answer to the first question is, no. I think that answers also the second question.


Ernest Edward Perley: The minister has not received any such request?


James Angus MacKinnon: No such request.



PERMITS FOR EXPORT OF COARSE GRAINS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. C. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: Will the Minister of Trade and Commerce inform the house why no permits are required by those exporting feed wheat? The minister will remember that he told the house that permits were being required for the export of coarse grains. According to an answer he made yesterday, no permits are demanded for the export of feed wheat, thus enabling those who export it to make quite a profit out of the differential between Canadian and United States prices.


James Angus MacKinnon: I do not think that the inference the hon. member draws is correct. I shall look into the matter and bring down an answer.



SEED POTATOES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):: I desire to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. He indicated, I understood, the other day that he would give the house a statement pertaining to the prices of seed potatoes in various parts of Canada. Yesterday he did not do so, perhaps because he did not under-
Wheat

stand that the request was urgent. Is he able to give the house to-day an account of the prices of seed potatoes prevailing in various centres throughout Canada?


Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):: I took that matter up with the wartime prices and trade board and they agreed to wire the various cities to try to get the information. They cannot get it immediately; it will take a few days to obtain it, but when it is procured I will give such information as I get.


John Horne Blackmore: May I ask the minister one or two more questions bearing on this very important matter of the price of seed potatoes? Can the minister tell the house how many potatoes are in storage in Canada? What I wish to know is whether the wartime prices and trade board or any food supply board or other agency that has this matter in charge, have any idea how many seed potatoes or potatoes of any kind are in storage. It is important that we should know how large a quantity of potatoes is available or can be made available to people who may plant potatoes.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I believe the agricultural statistics branch have some record monthly of the quantities of potatoes in the country. Beyond that I do not know what statistics are available.


John Horne Blackmore: May I ask the minister one more question. Has the government gathered any information which would indicate the number of acres of potatoes that are planted in Canada? The parliamentary assistant to the minister issued a statement the other day in which he told us how many they planned to plant. I wonder if they know how many are reported to have been planted.


An hon. MEMBER:: It is too early.


James Garfield Gardiner: The information with regard to these matters is gathered for the Department of Agriculture, and the latest reports I have received are that the acreage going into potatoes this year is considerably higher than last year, and higher than we anticipated at the time the conference was held, in December. I am not able to give the exact figures; I can bring them down to-morrow or at a later date.



EXPORT BY CANADIAN BREWERS FOR BRITISH TROOPS IN WAR THEATRES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):: I should like to direct a question to the
EMr. Blackmore.]
Minister of Trade and Commerce. It arises out of statements made by the Rev. Andrew Roddan, of First United church of Vancouver, that SOO.OOO cases of beer were being exported every month by the brewers of eastern Canada to North Africa, and that valuable shipping space was likewise being used for this purpose. My question is, first, what shipments of beer have been made each month, and whether any such shipments made are for the Canadian government, or for the British government; second, who provides the shipping space?


James Angus MacKinnon: The hon. member informed me that he was going to ask this question to-day and I am prepared to give an answer. I just briefly repeat the main points of the statement I made several months ago dealing with this matter.
First, what beer is purchased is bought by the United Kingdom government through the British Navy, Army and Air Force Institute. Second, the beer has been shipped to war theatres on vessels wholly under the control of the United Kingdom government. Third, the Canadian government has nothing whatsoever to do with this transaction, in regard either to purchasing or to shipping, except that, on the request of the United1 Kingdom government to ship beer to desert battle fronts and elsewhere, my department, through the export control permit branch, automatically grants export permits.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Monday, May 31, 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. Usley-Mr. Bradette in the chair.
B-Sundry services.
Dependents supplementary grants fund, $1,285,000.
Mr. GREEN:: Has the minister the answers to the questions I asked him?


Mr. RALSTON:: As soon as this item is
disposed of I shall put on the record what answers there are.


Mr. GILLIS:: When the committee rose
last night I was making some inquiries with respect to the dependents' board of trustees. I should be glad if the minister would indicate just what the machinery of the board consists of. What is the administrative body that functions in Ottawa? How many of the com-

War Appropriation-Army
mittees are set up across the country, and what machinery is provided to make contact with these committees? In Nova Scotia there is only one committee functioning under the dependents' board of trustees. That committee sits in Halifax and there is no one in the province that I know of, apart from a few social service workers, who has any idea to whom to appeal under a given set of circumstances. If this body is to function efficiently there should be at least a representative of it in all the large centres.
Another thing. The secretaries of the veterans' organizations . in their respective towns and communities could very well be utilized in making the necessary investigation where an application is made for a grant under the dependents' board of trustees. They are familiar with the line of work and are well known in the communities, and they can be depended upon to make a fair recommendation. If this particular grant serves any purpose at all, there is one class of people that should be brought under it, and that is the women in Canada with families whose husbands go absent without leave, either in this country or overseas. Regulations have been extended to cover the matter up to a certain point. While a man is under apprehension the allowance is carried on for three months, but there are a large number of women in Canada who have been faced with the necessity of having their allowance discontinued. This particular class does not come under the dependents' board of trustees, because I understand that the object is simply to augment the allowance where there are extenuating circumstances, and when the allowance is not applicable the dependent will not be brought under the board of trustees. I should be pleased if the minister could make a statement as to the machinery and what the possibilities are of utilizing the secretaries of the veterans' organizations throughout Canada, in their respective communities, to carry out investigations. If an application is made from Sydney, someone has to come from Halifax to look into the situation and weeks arg lost in investigation; whereas, if the veterans' branch secretaries were utilized, a telegram or a telephone call would clear the matter up in twenty-four hours.


James Layton Ralston: I have endeavoured to put on the record the general outline of the organization. I did so early in the discussion, but on this occasion I may repeat that the dependents' board of trustees itself consists of nine persons seleoted across Canada who, I think, are fairly representative and form a cross-section of those who take an interest in
the welfare of dependents. The Canadian Legion is represented, the Department of Pensions and National Health is represented, there are French-speaking and English-speaking representatives on the board, and so on, and there has been no complaint of any kind with regard to the constitution of the board itself. The board functions through committees in different centres. I have here a list of the centres in which the committees in each province are located: Charlottetown; Saint John; Moncton; Halifax; Quebec; Montreal; Kingston; Ottawa; Toronto; Hamilton; Peterborough; London; Windsor; Sudbury; Port Arthur; Winnipeg; Regina; Saskatoon; Calgary; Edmonton; Vancouver; Victoria. Each committee covers a specific territory. In some cases it is the province, in some cases the military district and in some cases a smaller area. The membership of the committee is not confined to residents of the city in which the office is located, but wherever it is appropriate it includes members from outside points.
My hon. friend, I believe, is interested in the procedure which is followed and the opportunity which a particular dependent has for making application and having that application considered. As I understand it, the procedure is this. In the first place a notice has been sent to every person receiving dependents' allowance in Canada advising of the existence of the dependents' board of trustees and, as well, of the location of the offices of the board, and advising further as to the procedure which they shall adopt should a situation arise in which they feel that the services of the board can be of benefit. In addition to that the Canadian Legion and the welfare agencies in each province and in every community know of the operations of the dependents' board of trustees and are prepared to help to forward the applications and the investigation of any case, with a statement of the circumstances. I noted my hon. friend's suggestion with regard to investigations. Naturally-and I think he will agree with me-one does not want to multiply the number of investigating agencies. There is nothing worse than that from the point of view of morale, because it might easily give a wrong impression to a prospective recipient as to the attitude of those who are dealing with his or her case. Emphasis is put on the fact that these agencies, whatever they are, are not for the purpose of doling out charity, but to help applicants to show their right to assistance under the regulations which the board administers. I have reason to feel that there has been a general measure of approval of the method and general acceptance of the fact that the board is sincerely trying not to chisel on dependents, but, on the contrary, is endeavouring to
War Appropriation-Army

approach their cases in the spirit of assistance which the order in council intended. I have asked the chairman of the board, who is before me, with regard to Sydney, from which my hon. friend comes. There the dependent would have learned from the notice she received that her nearest local committee was located in Halifax; however, if he or she went to the Canadian Legion or to a welfare agency, they would be immediately put in touch with the committee. In this particular case there is a member of the provincial committee living in Sydney. Mr. Muggah is a member of that committee. I must say that I do not feel that we want to multiply organization too much. We want to be sure to get the meritorious cases, or those which are thought to be meritorious, presented to the board. The best test is that it has worked. It has not worked in the case my hon. friend speaks of, but as he realizes, that is not because of the organization of the board, it is because of the regulations to which he refers.
The provision is that if a man overseas is struck off strength because of being absent without leave, the absence having continued for three months, his pay is stopped and the dependents' allowance is suspended by the dependents' allowance board. The function of the dependents' board of trustees is to make supplementary grants, and there would be nothing to supplement where the dependents' allowance was suspended. Otherwise we would be giving a dependents' allowance to the dependent of someone who was not a member of the forces. The provision is that a man is struck off strength when he has been absent without leave for twenty-one days and his pay stops. But notwithstanding the suspension of the allowance, the dependents' allowance board considered that there should be some relief from the sudden suspension and they have adopted the procedure in overseas cases of making a new award to cover a period of three months to assist the type of case to which my hon. friend has referred.
I think what the hon. member has in mind is the possibility of the dependents' board of trustees considering the merits of a case like that. I do not think you can make a hard and fast rule. There might be a case in which you would say, "No, the dependents' allowance should not be continued any further even though the man has been absent only one month." There may be another case in which there were meritorious circumstances, where the character of the man was known and it was doubtful whether or not he had really intentionally deserted or gone absent without 
leave. Different situations might also exist in connection with the circumstances of the dependents. There might be a case of extreme hardship and another case where, although there had been a considerable reduction in the income, the situation was not such as to justify the payment of a grant.
All I can say to my hon. friend is that it is only by bringing up these cases that they are called to our attention. Perhaps the existence of a type of case is established. I will study the matter with the chairman of the board and my colleagues to see if there is any possibility of making a rule which [DOT]would fit the particular type of case to which my hon. friend refers. I am always afraid of trying to fit an individual case, because very often hard cases make bad law. If there is a type of case which has merit, I shall endeavour to see if it is possible to meet it.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: We are
particularly interested in those who are entitled to assistance from the dependents' board of trustees. The board should be in position to grant this assistance as quickly as possible. The case was mentioned the other day of a member of the forces who was seriously ill in a hospital and whose dependent made application to the office of the^ board to secure transportation. In the agricultural areas particularly this would be a slow process to be followed by a woman who had received a telegram that someone belonging to her was seriously ill. By the time she made application to the office of the dependents' board of trustees and obtained her transportation, it might be [DOT] too late. Some time ago I sent to the minister a copy of a resolution which had been passed by a farm women's organization in Saskatchewan and which I thought was worthy of consideration by the minister and his department. The suggestion was that where a man was seriously ill and word was being sent to his dependent, a transportation warrant should be sent along with the telegram. One can almost take it for granted that if the dependent is a long distance away she is not going to have the necessary money from her dependents' allowance and assigned pay to meet these transportation costs. If she has to make application to the dependents' board of trustees it may take too long. She will either have to borrow the money to go, or not go at all. I wonder if the minister has given any consideration to the possibility of having the transportation warrant accompany the telegram that goes out to a dependent informing her that a soldier is seriously ill?

War Appropriation-Army


James Layton Ralston: I think that case is covered by the procedure which has been adopted. I am informed that when a hospital informs a dependent by wire that she is required because of the illness of a soldier, a duplicate telegram is sent at the same time to the dependents' board of trustees. The dependents' board of trustees, by wire again, immediately gets in touch with the local committee and has the committee get in touch with the dependent to ascertain just what is the situation with regard to transportation. The railway companies will accept a telegram from the dependents' board of trustees, or from the local committee as authorization for transportation. The only difference in this procedure from that suggested by my hon. friend is that he suggests that the provision of free transportation should be automatic. I am not prepared to go that far at the moment. I can conceive of quite a number of cases where there would be no need of providing free transportation to dependents. My hon. friend is assuming that all dependents are in the same financial position, but that is not so. I am sure that if the meritorious cases are taken care of, it will meet my hon. friend's suggestion. I did not know of this procedure when I spoke the other day about this matter.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weybum):: The procedure outlined by the minister would work fairly satisfactorily in the more heavily settled areas, but in a great scattered province like Saskatchewan some considerable time might elapse between the sending of the wire by the board in Ottawa to the committee in Regina or Saskatchewan and their getting in touch with the dependent. The dependent might be three hundred miles away from either one of these centres. She might be living on a farm where there- was no telephone; she might be in a community where there was not even a branch of the legion. It would be a very complicated procedure and would take a great deal of time.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend is portraying Saskatchewan as a lot more primitive than it really is. I know there are great distances, but I do not think there are many places which are not within reach of a telephone. The railway station could be got in touch with, because the station from which the dependent would leave would be known to the committee. But my hon. friend is right in this: if the system does not work, it must be made to work. That is the principle that has been adopted. I have just inquired whether or not there have been any cases in which complaints have been made, and I find there have not.


James Lester Douglas: They may not have been made to the minister, but the fact is that at a farm women's convention-this was not a convention of soldiers' dependents -the matter was brought up so frequently that they took the trouble to pass a resolution and I believe sent a copy to the minister. They sent a copy to me and I forwarded it to the minister. They thought that it was a serious problem. I was not emphasizing the distances in Saskatchewan, but it is a scattered province. Merely sending a telegram to the railway station does not mean that you will get in touch with the dependent who may be on a farm fifteen .or twenty miles away. Furthermore the committee at Regina or Saskatchewan may not know anyone in the particular community who could give them information as to whether the dependent required transportation, and it might take some time to get in touch with the dependent.


James Layton Ralston: The chairman of the board tells me thht they use the postmaster or the clergyman or the priest or whoever may be able to get in touch with the dependent without delay. However, my hon. friend and I are at one in the matter of principle, and it is up to us to see that the details are worked out.


Mr. McCANN:: When a new dependent arrives I think there might be a simplification of the procedure which is followed at the present time. It appears that the father of the new-born child has to make application to the board to have this member of the family added to the list of dependents. I know of instances where the fathers are overseas-


James Layton Ralston: Overjoyed.


James Joseph McCann: -overjoyed and overseas, and of course at a time like that there is a good deal of extra expense. I suggest to the dependents' allowance board that they accept the certificate of the attending physician or a copy of the registration of birth, and that the child be given the dependents' allowance the same as the other children. That would do away with the long delay which must ensue when the application has to be made by the father, who may be overseas.


James Layton Ralston: I will certainly note what my hon. friend has said. It sounds to me as though the evidence he suggests should be quite ample for the purpose.
War Appropriation-Army


Mr. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: Am I right in understanding that the minister says arrangements will be made whereby the dependents of soldiers who have been away without leave for more than twenty-one days will be looked after?


James Layton Ralston: I went as far as I could in that regard. I cannot go further than to say that I have made a note of the case; that I realize it is not covered by the regulations now; that I shall see what the merits are in regard to making any general regulation about it and, having seen that, having received recommendations and having consulted my colleagues, I will decide what should be done. That is all I can tell my hon. friend.


Charles Edward Johnston: I understand that the dependents' board of trustees has to do only with the dependents of soldiers, that it does not deal with the dependents of officers at all. I think some consideration should be given the dependents of officers. I have in mind one such dependent in the city of Calgary who made application to the dependents' board of trustees and was turned down, I am informed, on the ground that she was the wife of an officer. It seems to me that where the dependents, even of officers, are in need they should be considered by this board, but I understand that is not the case. Would the minister explain that situation?


James Layton Ralston: That is so. Of course the dependents of officers receive allowances at rates higher than are paid the dependents of other ranks. These regulations do not apply to the dependents of those above the rank of warrant officer class 2. They apply to those up to and including warrant officer class 2, one reason being the different rate of dependents' allowance above that rank.


Charles Edward Johnston: Take the case of a captain's wife, for instance, who is in dire need, not receiving sufficient to properly maintain herself. Would that be given consideration by the board as a special case, or would it be automatically thrown out because the dependent happened to be the wife of a captain?


James Layton Ralston: There are more difficulties in this connection than perhaps my hon. friend realizes, and I can mention one offhand: Hospital standards, for instance, and things of the kind which are constantly coming up. It is considered, generally speaking, that the higher dependents' allowance, plus the differ-
ence in pay received by the officer, create a situation in which the special provisions concerning the dependents' board of trustees are not required. My hon. friend will say that there is the odd case, and perhaps more than the odd case, of this kind. I can only tell him that I will look into it. As a matter of fact I remember one case of which I heard, but it was the case of a man who had been promoted from the ranks and I think the claim was with regard to an indebtedness incurred while his wife was receiving the lower dependents' allowance. I can only say to my hon. friend that I will examine the situation and see if there are any other grounds than those which I have mentioned for not including the dependents of officers within the provisions of these regulations.


Mr. MacNICOL:: If a soldier is reported missing in action is the dependents' allowance continued without interruption, or is there an interval until the department finds out whether the man is alive or dead?


James Layton Ralston: It is carried on for at least six months.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Without interruption?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: I have a case of a soldier who just returned from overseas. Some four or five months ago his wife was taken ill and had to be rushed to the hospital. Her bills were paid partly by her friends and partly from her dependents' allowance. Is there any chance of that soldier getting any of that money back, or is there a time limit within which application must be made to the dependents' board of trustees?


James Layton Ralston: I think the only limitation as far as time is concerned is the proviso that the man must be still in the service. I believe that is a case which would be considered by the board on the particular circumstances; I cannot go further than that. Cases of that kind have come before the board and assistance has been given.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Would it be covered if the soldier was in the service during the time his wife was in the hospital?


James Layton Ralston: No. As I remember the regulations the person who makes the application must be the dependent of a soldier at the time the application is before the committee or the board.


Clarence Gillis: I wonder if the minister could give us the number of applications received, and the number granted, by provinces.

War Appropriation-Army


James Layton Ralston: I have the figures here, but at the moment they are not in the form in which my hon. friend wants them.


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: I should like to direct a suggestion to the minister in regard to article 102, subsection (g) of the regulations. I have always found the dependents' allowance board very fair in its administration, but of course it cannot go beyond the provisions of the law. This section provides that no allowance shall be paid or granted to the wife of a non-commissioned officer or man who subsequent to enlistment marries without obtaining the permission of his commanding officer. Having regard to the instances that have been brought to my attention I think this section is rather unfair in its general operation. I have in mindi the case of a man who enlisted on June 22, 1940. At the time of his enlistment he said that he had been married on June 17, 1940. In Saskatchewan it is necessary to give notice of your intention to marry; then you must wait for a period fixed by statute before the marriage can take place. Apparently this man had given notice of intention on June 17 but did not get married until June 27, 1940. As soon as this fact was ascertained the wife's allowance was taken away, and she has not been in receipt of it since that time.


James Layton Ralston: What was the date of
the notice?


John George Diefenbaker: I shall send the
minister the file, in full detail. I am just pointing out the circumstances. I received a letter the other day, dated May 20, 1943, which stated that if permission to marry is granted the woman in question, dependents' allowance may be reinstated. But until such permission is granted, no allowance may be paid to her. I submit that after a lapse of almost three years some provision should be made for removal of the penalization of the woman for having married the soldier without his first having secured his commanding officer's consent. Considering the other side of the question, if this soldier had what is commonly known as a common law wife, under certain circumstances she would be entitled to the allowance.


James Layton Ralston: He must have lived with a so-called common law wife for at least two years before enlistment. That is the difference.


John George Diefenbaker: But, regardless of
the period, there are circumstances under which a common law wife can receive an allowance. Here is a woman who is being penalized1 because of the infraction by her husband of military rules. This section could and should
be amended so as to make provision that after a reasonable time, say a matter of three or six months at the outside, an allowance could be granted. That would seem to be proper, if we must penalize soldiers for marrying without the permission of their commanding officers. I make this suggestion to the minister. In my opinion a change in this connection is very necessary to cover what must be a considerable number of cases coming within the purview of this regulation.


James Layton Ralston: If the hon. member will
send the particulars to me, I shall make a note of them: as indicating a type rather than an individual case.


Clarence Gillis: Is it possible for the minister to obtain those figures by military districts?


James Layton Ralston: I have just had the figures prepared. The total applications and reapplications are 42,017. The completed applications number 33,734-and when I refer to completed applications I refer to those in connection with which evidence is completed and a decision reached. Uncompleted applications, those in connection with which further details are being obtained or decision has not yet been reached, number 8,143. I have not the total number of cases in which the allowances were granted, but the total amount of grants stands at $694,214.63. Then, giving the hon. member some local information, I would point out that through the committee in Halifax city there have been 1,158 applications, 851 of which have been completed and 307 incomplete. The grants have amounted to about $13,000. Those are single grants. In addition there have been some recurrent or regular monthly payments.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Has the minister the figures for the other military districts?


James Layton Ralston: If we have not the figures for the districts, we have them for each city or town in which a local committee is situated.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The information by local committees would be satisfactory. What does the minister mean by a completed case? Is that a case in which an allowance has been granted?


James Layton Ralston: No, not necessarily. It
means an application which has been dealt with-that is, a grant has been made or refused, or the application withdrawn.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: What number of those applying were granted allowances?
War Appropriation-Army


James Layton Ralston: I have not the number of cases. The chairman of the board has given me an approximate estimate of over seventy-five per cent.	.


James Lester Douglas: That are
granted?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Mr. HANSELL:: I am a little confused as to what is meant by the term "supplementary grants." I know the meaning of the word "supplementary," used in its ordinary sense; but if the minister will look at number 2 on the list he will find it deals with pay and allowances. Are dependents' allowances included in the first amount of 8539,730,211?


James Layton Ralston: Yes; the item for dependents' allowances has already been passed. The amount paid as dependents' allowances is included in item No. 2, pay and allowances. The hon. member will find a subsequent item for the dependents' allowance board: that is an administrative item, covering the cost of administration of the board. That item has also been passed. The item we are now discussing is the supplementary grants fund, a fund administered by the dependents' board' of trustees.
Mr. DOUiGLAS (Weyburn): Has the minister put on record the number of cases handled by each committee?


James Layton Ralston: The number for Regina is 1,337, of which 1,187 were completed; and for Saskatoon, 1,766, of which 1,285 have been completed. The cash paid in Regina is $21,736.52 and in Saskatoon $30,821.60. That is for single grants, not including recurrent payments. There would probably be additional recurrent grants to dependents filing applications through these committees.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: If the minister had a list of the number of cases handled by the other committees we would have some idea of the comparative service rendered. Perhaps he would put that information on Hansard.


James Layton Ralston: I shall be glad to do so. The following is a list showing the total applications, and the completed ones, that is, those which have been dealt with:
Charlottetown ...
Saint John	
Halifax	
Quebec	
Montreal	
Kingston	
Ottawa	
Toronto	

Total	Comple
347	336
1,332	1,127
1,158	851
7,652	6,967
3.782	2,566
708.	529
1,887	1,616
6,850	6,035
	Total	Complete
Hamilton			1,617
Peterborough			 685	607
London 			992
Windsor	
571	374Sudbury 	
719	491Port Arthur	
269	207Winnipeg	
2,829	2,530Regina	1,187Saskatoon	
1,766	1,285Calgary	1,090Edmonton	
1,439	1,088Vancouver ...:	
2,618	1,510Victoria	
1,154	729Total	
42,017	33,734


Mr. GRAHAM:: I know that the minister will not have this information but I think he will agree that there will be a tendency for dependents who reside in centres where the boards have representation to make greater use of and secure greater benefits from the dependents' board of trustees because they know where the board is located and their access to the board is very easy. With reference to the different points which have been named by the minister, how many of these applications arose in the city in which the board committee resides and how many in the surrounding district? It would be well if the chairman were requested to make a survey of one or two points to see whether the benefits are penetrating the countryside and whether the board's purpose is being fulfilled of distributing the benefits fairly among , all dependents, not only in the larger centres but in the rural areas and small villages and towns.


James Layton Ralston: The statistics asked for by my hon. friend are not available here but they are kept and they can be produced either in the form of a return or in some other way which would be convenient to the members Notwithstanding the fact that the boards are located in the cities I am informed that there is a \ ery heavy number of rural applications.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
B-Sundry services.
Inspection board of the United Kingdom and Canada, $10,600,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Has Canada full control over the inspection board of the United Kingdom and Canada?


James Layton Ralston: No, it is a joint United Kingdom and Canada inspection board. The sponsorship of the board is joint with the High Commissioner of the United Kingdom and the Minister of National Defence of Canada. The Minister of National Defence in turn derives his powers in regard to the Canadian end from the governor in council.

War Appropriation-Army


John Ritchie MacNicol: I would like to bring to
the minister's attention a ease I have had with the board. A gentleman in Toronto made application to the board in 1941 and sent to the board some carefully prepared testimonials which were important to him because they had been given to him by responsible persons and companies. He has never been able to have these testimonials returned to him. He was informed a little while ago that they were lost. To-day in conversation with an office? of the board I was informed that they cannot be found. It is gross carelessness to have such an inefficient filing system in the board, and I should be pleased if the minister would give this matter his attention and make inquiries about it. I will send him the correspondence I have.


James Layton Ralston: I appreciate my hon. friend's bringing the matter to my attention. I have just spoken to the officer who is in charge of the administration of the board and he will have a check made, but I should like to get in touch with my hon. friend or with his correspondent to get a little more information as to the date.


Mr. GRAYDON:: Is this sum of $10,600,000 contributed on an equal basis by Canada and the United Kingdom?


James Layton Ralston: Roughly it is in proportion to the value of the material inspected on behalf of each of the two countries.


Mr. ROSS (Souris):: I should like to ask a question with regard to the use of horses or cavalry in the army. I realize that the universal carrier is probably the best crosscountry vehicle that we have in the armed forces, but I have seen articles in the press that the army council in Canada has considered the use of horses in this war. Some pictures have been shown to the members of the house at the instance of the government which indicate the recent extensive use of cavalry by the Russians to be feasible and effective. We have places in Canada, some on the Pacific coast and in Alberta, where it would be difficult for mechanized equipment to operate, and in view of what has been accomplished by the Russians with cavalry and horses in this war I should like to know what has been the decision of the army council regarding the use of horses in this war. Is there any possible use for them in the future, or has the day of the horse entirely passed? If there is use for them, it must be remembered that it takes time to collect and train horses. Many people are interested in this question.


Gordon Graydon: There is no rationing of oats and hay.


James Layton Ralston: I was jokingly going to suggest that we are dealing with the inspection board of the United Kingdom and Canada, and that what my hon. friend has referred to is a horse of another colour. But since he has referred to it I would say that we have a small horse-driven unit at Petawawa and a limited organization in connection with that unit. The matter has been carefully considered from the point of view primarily, as my hon. friend will understand, of the saving in gasoline. I have pot the figures here but it was found from that point of view the use of horse-drawn vehicles to any large extent except in camps where short turns could be made was not justified. I do not think I can say more. My hon. friend did not say it but I know it is in the back of his head that he has, as I have, the greatest respect for our old friend the mule. I do not think that in the last war there was any better transportation or traction facility than that particular animal.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: Would the minister give us the number of men employed by the board, where they are stationed and a summary of their activities? Is this $10,600,000 Canada's share, and if so what is the United Kingdom's share?
_ Mr. RALSTON: This estimate of S10,600,000 is Canada's share.


George Hugh Castleden: Is it on a fifty-fifty basis?	, '


James Layton Ralston: No, it is in the rough proportions of the value of the material inspected for Canadian account and United Kingdom account. The number of employees on the board as of May 1 was 18,946. In Canada the total number of male employees is 5,839, and female, 12,547. That includes the administrative officers. In the United States there are 560 employees. The rest are in Canada. The service which the employees of the board give is to inspect all war materials of Canadian manufacture and some in the United States which are made for Canadian or British account except aircraft, ships and ship repairs, naval ammunitions, ordnance, naval equipment, naval electrical equipment, foodstuffs, medical and dental stores, fuel, and a few other odd items. I do not think I should occupy the time of the committee by going into detail. I assume hon. members have seen all over this country in the various plants the inspection staff of the joint board operating. They have served, it seems to me, as ably and as efficiently as any body in connection with the war effort. They are
War Appropriation-Army

not very much heard of; they are somewhat like the veterans guard of whom an hon. member spoke last evening; nobody knows very much of their activities; but I think Canada and the United Kingdom have reason to be very much satisfied with the effectiveness of the work they have done. Having regard to the terrific amount of munitions and supplies which have come off the lines in this country and also in the United States in the way of components, and the comparatively few instances of failures, it seems to me that the inspection board is entitled to a word of tribute and of appreciation.
It was in January, 1941, that the joint board began, although some of the inspection staff from the United Kingdom were over here considerably before that time. They had to build from the ground up, and build under conditions in which technical personnel were being required in the various industries just as much as they were for purposes of inspection. They have had the job of creating that organization, not only administratively, but technically, and of installing it and seeing that it worked in the various industries cooperatively with, and not combatively with, industry. I believe the results which 'have come from their work have been highly gratifying.
As members of one of the house committees know, manufacturers have themselves to a certain extent put in their own inspectors as well, I assume in order to preserve their own reputations and save time and labour by catching defects at an early stage. Duplication of inspection has lessened, I understand, to some extent as time has gone on, and in view of the mutual confidence Which has developed in the inspectors of the board, and those of the manufacturers.
I do not think there is anything I can add to the discussion. The financial arrangements generally are satisfactory. The administration is carried on by the officers of the board without any interference on the part of the United Kingdom government or ourselves except in connection with matters of policy through Major-General Lock, the chairman, or Brigadier Howard, who is on the floor this afternoon. There has been a certain amount of capital expenditure, for instance, for proof ranges built in order to conduct tests, but the great bulk of expense is in connection with the operating departments.


Mr. ADAMSON:: They operate the range at Burlington?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That is completely under the United Kingdom?


James Layton Ralston: Under the joint board.


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: I have had two general criticisms from the management of plants I have visited regarding employees of this board. I do not know whether they are general or just local, or whether they have come to the minister's attention. First, managers have told me that in- their particular plants employees of this board usually stop work and begin to prepare to leave the plant ten or fifteen minutes before quitting time, and that that has had an effect upon the regular employees of the plant, who are expected in the interests of production to stay at their machines until the last minute of their time. Second, several employees have pointed out to me or have shown the difference in the numbers of employees employed by this board for inspection as compared with the number of company inspectors in the same plant, and have intimated that in many instances there were more personnel than were required for the job. Are these just local conditions? Have they come to the minister's attention?


James Layton Ralston: With regard to employees of the board getting ready to leave ahead of time, I am satisfied that that is a local situation, but it is one which of course cannot be permitted to exist, and, knowing the management of the board, I am sure they would not have it go on if it were brought to their attention. The policy is that the inspection staff shall stay till ithe last minute, the same as anybody else. If my hon. friend .would care to give me the name of the plant to which the complaint refers I will see that it is transmitted to the board and investigated.


Gordon Graydon: Do the hours of these employees parallel in each case those of the plant?
Mr. 'RALSTON: Generally speaking that is the rule, that they work parallel hours. The administrative officer states that there are exceptions, and the exceptions he speaks of are where a plant may be working three shifts and the inspection employees may work only one, because it is obvious that they might inspect in eight hours what would take three eight-hour shifts to manufacture. But I can say this, for I know, that the strict policy of the board is that their inspections must keep up with the outturn so that there shall be no slowing down of production on account of inefficient inspection facilities.
In reference to the number of factory inspectors, there again I think that may be a local situation, and it must be owing to the fact that the particular manufacturer is not inspecting and does not purport to inspect and does not have to inspect with as much com-

War Appropriation-Army
pleteness as the employees of the inspection board. That is to say, he might make a more general inspection of materials, castings, components, and things of the kind, and- quite properly-leave it to the inspection board employees to do the final inspections. There again it would be appreciated if the name of the plant, without the name of the informant, could be brought to my attention, and I will see that it is dealt with.


Joseph William Noseworthy: As regards the
minister's comment that it may be a local condition, I have visited several plants in different places where that situation has been brought to my attention.


James Layton Ralston: About employment, or numbers?


Joseph William Noseworthy: Regarding the
number of employees. On one occasion the employer of several thousands of factory workers, when I asked him why he did not report that situation, replied that if he were to do so the percentage of rejections in his plant would immediately increase.


James Layton Ralston: I do not think that is quite fair. The board has no interest of any kind in rejecting material; what it wants to do is to get the material out and to get it to the troops. I know all the board well enough, from General Lock down, to be satisfied that that is their primary consideration.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: There has been dissatisfaction among men and women working in different munitions plants in regard to the inspectors being able to take rest periods during the day, whenever they cared to do it, whereas the workers had to stay on the job. That is the case not only in one place but right across the country.


James Layton Ralston: I am informed that they do try to conform to the work rules and the hours laid down by the plant itself. I have an idea that I know the plant which my hon. friend is talking about, and I can only surmise that there might be a chance for a lay-off until some piece comes through, and, instead of standing around the machines, they go away and sit down. I realize, of course, that morale might not be particularly enhanced by that action on the part of the inspection staff.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I should like to have some information with regard to the findings of the inspection board. Has the minister any data on the number of rejections; whether the percentage of rejections tends to increase or decrease; what arrangements are made with the firms manufacturing war materials, and, where those firms are responsible for these rejections, whether they are charged back to the firms or whether they are allowed a certain percentage of rejections and charged anything above that? As the minister no doubt knows, two trials have taken place in the United States in recent months, one three months ago and one now in process, in which two large firms have been charged by the United States government with the production of defective material knowing it to be defective. What has been the experience of the board in Canada wth regard to such rejections? Are they increasing or diminishing, and in the event of rejections being on the increase, what steps are taken by the board and the government to see that the firms in question are made to pay for mistakes which are attributable to their own carelessness or negligence? Further, what material has been accepted and later found to be defective or faulty when put into actual use? An answer to this question would show to what extent the work done by the inspection board has been useful.


James Layton Ralston: As to the percentages of rejections, the committee realizes of course that it depends altogether on the particular piece of equipment under discussion. It depends also on the length of time during which the manufacture has been going on, because the longer a piece of equipment has been in production the more efficient the operation will become. In reference to the question of payment, that is to say as to what is done about rejections, a report is made to the Department of Munitions and Supply and payment depends entirely upon the contract which is made with the particular concern. It may be that they are operating on a cost-plus contract or on a contract which entitles them to a certain allowance on development, or it may be that they are operating on the straight basis of being paid for the actual usable machine which is delivered off the line. I am told that definitely the percentage of rejections is decreasing. I do not know that we should particularly pride ourselves upon that fact, because they ought to be decreasing the longer manufacturing has been going on. My advice is, however, that quality in Canada has not been surpassed in any part of the world, and that goes both for material and for workmanship. Manufacture and industrial experience have been extremely satisfactory compared to other countries, particularly where" Canada has taken on such a variety of lines which were entirely new to Canadian industry.
War Appropriation-Army

Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn)1: Has the Department of National Defence found cases in which there have been acceptances of material which later has proved faulty or defective?


James Layton Ralston: I was trying to recall anything of the kind, but I could not. I am reminded, however, of the Pickering plant, where there were defective cartridge cases, but those did not get to the Department of National Defence. I am told, though it has not come to my personal attention before, that there have been individual instances of a piece of equipment or perhaps a series of equipments reaching the national defence de-parment and not standing up properly, but I am sure there have been no outstanding instances, because they would have come to my knowledge. I must say that the Department of National Defence and the officers have come to feel that they can pretty well take for granted, that a particular machine is up to specifications, and that if it has been designed to do a particular piece of -work they need not fear that either the materials or the workmanship will fail to answer the purpose intended.


Mr. JACKMAN:: Is there any difference in the set-up of the inspection board in the case of a privately-owned plant and in the case of a government-owned plant? It might be difficult to believe that some of the large arsenals which operate in the United States, in peace as well as in war, would have an additional inspection board belonging to the army or the navy pass upon the product of these plants. It seems to me that if the Department of Munitions and Supply turn out articles in one of their own plants in Canada their inspection should be sufficient without having a duplication by the Department of National Defence when the article is accepted. Why can you not rely on the Department of Munitions and Supply to turn out a product adequate to meet the requirements without having the national defence department carry out a duplication of inspection services in connection with the same article?


James Layton Ralston: I think my hon. friend is under a misapprehension as to the position of the Department of Munitions and Supply in this regard. The Department of Munitions and Supply makes the contract and arranges to have the article manufactured; then the inspection board comes in, not for the Department of Munitions and Supply, but for the user, that is to say, the Department of National Defence, and' makes the inspection. We have great confidence in the Department

of Munitions and Supply, but naturally the user would prefer to have his own inspection, or at any rate an inspection more directly under his control than the inspection that would be provided by an intervening department; and the Department of Munitions and Supply has never suggested that it should do the inspecting, but rather that it should be done by what I might call their customer- because we are the customers and the Department of Munitions and Supply are our agents in procuring a particular article.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I do not know whether there are any government arsenals as such operating now.


James Layton Ralston: They are government arsenals in the sense that the Department of Munitions and Supply operate them. There are two government arsenals, one at Lindsay and the other at Quebec.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: That is, government-owned; and you adopt the very same method of inspection of their output as in the case of a private contract?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I was thinking of a case like the Bren gun plant in Toronto which is financed by public money. If I understand correctly, the gun end of it is owned by the government. While you might have private management operating the plant and turning out the product, it is virtually a government job with a management fee attached to the operation. You have government employees who are doing inspection work, and on top of that you have the inspection board which is operating for another department of government.


James Layton Ralston: I do not follow my hon. friend. I thought this was the most logical set-up that one could have, .namely, that the party who is to use the article should be the one to control the inspecting. You will find that in the government arsenal at Quebec and in the arsenal at Lindsay. There are inspectors there who are paid by the management and who inspect components and production processes and things of . the kind. But the joint inspection board also have inspectors who act eut the request of the Department of National Defence in order to see that the specifications are complied with.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: The question arises only where the manufacturer and the user are the same, namely, the government.


James Layton Ralston: The Department of Munitions and Supply is not responsible for seeing

War Appropriation-Army
that a gun operates properly or that a proper type of gun is being supplied. The blame would be on the Department of National Defence for accepting an improper design or for not ensuring by inspection that the gun delivered was in accordance with the design.


Gordon Graydon: They both have responsibility.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I do not wish to labour the point, but in the case of the government arsenals at Lindsay and Quebec the government is entirely responsible, yet you have another department of government spending a lot of money to carry on inspection work. The government is putting up the money to carry on the arsenals at Lindsay and at Quebec; they are both directly under government supervision, yet when the product is finished the government spends a considerable amount of money to make sure that the article is all right. In other words, it inspects its own article of manufacture. It is the government in both cases; there is a duplication. I am not protesting against the government doing this; I am simply asking the minister whether he feels it is necessary to have a duplication of inspection in these places.


James Layton Ralston: There is really no duplication of inspection. There is the necessary inspection for the user of any goods or article which he has ordered, and that is made by the board as representative of the user. The production inspectors I have spoken of are there to inspect components and to see that they are proper to go into the particular article. I cannot conceive of this thing called " government " being responsible just in a general way. Even if munitions and supply did the inspecting, there would be no saving, because they would have to have the same number of people as the board acting for national defence has now. They could not get along with the staff they have in the plants to expedite production; they would have to have additional personnel as inspectors to inspect the finished article and see that it conforms to the specifications and is suitable for the purpose for which it is made.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: Naturally I accept the minister's answer, but at one time I was an inspector myself, so that I know something of the inspection that goes on in these plants. Sometimes it is done by government inspectors, and perhaps it is necessary to check up the operations. Yesterday the hon. member for Peterborough West asked the following question to which the minister made the following reply:
Does the army buy from the Department of Munitions and Supply, or direct from the plants?
Mr. Ralston:	Sometimes. There is an
arrangement with the British under which ammunition is bought by the British. Since it is anticipated we shall be serving with the British, when we serve with them we will be furnished by them with ammunition.
What are the financial arrangements in connection with the use of ammunition by our troops in Great Britain or on any other fighting front?


James Layton Ralston: There will be a capitation rate applying to the supply of ammunition and the supply of certain other consumable stores. It would not be possible for each component of a force to have its own supply of ammunition. There must be some central source of supply, and the amount used is based upon the guns to be served.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I am interested only in the financial arrangements, not the physical.


James Layton Ralston: I couldt not give my hon. friend the capitation.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: Do we pay for the
ammunition we use?


James Layton Ralston: Oh, yes; we pay for the ammunition that is used. It is paid for at an arbitrary or approximate rate. No attempt is made by us or by the British to count the rounds which are used. If we have so many guns in the line, we pay so much for the ammunition.


Ernest George Hansell: Is the work of this inspection board confined to the inspection of munitions and equipment, or does it also carry on the inspection of construction work? If not, how is that handled? I have had no complaints with respect to munitions and equipment, but I have had one or two in respect to construction work.


James Layton Ralston: Speaking for the army, construction work is inspected by the engineers under the quartermaster general's branch.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
John George Diefenbaker: Perhaps I could
take advantage of this opportunity to make a suggestion with respect to the need of establishing in Canada at this time a system of life insurance for the men and women in the armed forces.


James Layton Ralston: I do not wish to shut
off my hon. friend, but I have the answers to about a dozen questions which were asked and which I should like to put on record1.

War Appropriation-Army

There will be an opportunity for my hon. friend to deal with this matter when the bill is before the house or in committee. I do not know whether he was in the committee or not, but this matter was pretty thoroughly discussed the other night.


John George Diefenbaker: What I had in
mind was to place before the minister and the committee the need there is at this time for the establishment in this country of a system of national service life insurance similar to that in effect in the United States.


James Layton Ralston: That was discussed1 the
other night.


John George Diefenbaker: The matter discussed the other night had to do with policies that might be lapsed by reason of a man being in the service.


James Layton Ralston: And also insurance. The Sparkman Act was discussed.


John George Diefenbaker: This has nothing
to do with the Sparkman act; this is the national service insurance which is in effect in the United States.


James Layton Ralston: That was also brought up.


John George Diefenbaker: I was here all
through the discussion.


James Layton Ralston: I think it was the hon.
member for York West (Mr. Adamson) who raised the question. I do not want to be understood as shutting off my hon. friend, but if he could bring up this matter again I would appreciate it. As I said, there were several questions asked which I promised to answer so far as I could at an early day. I think it was the hon. member for Lake Centre who asked a question with regard to the procedure respecting men in the United States who might opt to serve in the armed forces of Canada rather than be inducted into the United States army.


John George Diefenbaker: And also what was being done to secure the enlistment of these men in the United States.


James Layton Ralston: By agreement with the
United States we are not permitted to recruit actively in that country. We are permitted to place before the men called up by selective service their right to opt for service in the Canadian forces. That is done through the Canadian enlistment centres, the list of which already has been given. It is not a very long list now; I think they are in St. Paul, Boston, Detroit and Seattle. It would obviously be impossible to have a Canadian

officer or other rank at every draft board in the United States, but the rights of Canadian nationals are publicized through the enlistment centres. In addition to that our officers have visited many of the draft boards; there are at least 6,500 draft boards, so that of course they have not visited them all, by any means, but a great deal of publicity has been given in the newspapers, and in addition of course there has been much publicity through letters to these men from their friends in Canada.
When an individual presents himself at an induction centre or before the draft board m the United States, he has an opportunity to decide whether he will serve in the armed forces of the United States or exercise his right to serve with the Canadian forces. A plan recently has been under discussion whereby United States national selective service authorities would communicate by form letter with all non-declarants, to inform them of their right to opt. Under the plan it is proposed to supply copies of these letters in each case to the appropriate Canadian authorities, who then would be able to get in touch with these men, either directly or by letter. In addition to that a memorandum was issued by selective service headquarters in the United States to all local boards, just last month, giving instructions that for all co-belligerent nations, who have made agreements with the United States -and Canada is one of them-posters pointing out the right of electing service in the forces of one's own nation would be distributed to local draft boards and would be displayed in their offices, and literature concerning service ini one's own national forces would be kept on hand at those offices. That is the extent to which notice is given to Canadians in the United States respecting their right to serve in Canada.


John George Diefenbaker: When was that
notice sent out by the United States government?


James Layton Ralston: Local board memorandum No. 129, as amended May 2, 1942.


John George Diefenbaker: What is the total enlistment to date in the Canadian army of Canadian citizens resident in the United States?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot give that to my hon. friend, though perhaps I have something here that may help. No, I have not North America separate from South America, though I think I could break that down. The total there, I may say, for both North

War Appropriation-Army
and South America is 14,163. I am sorry; that is not correct, either; this is not the information my hon. friend wants. This is the number who have enlisted in the army who were born in North and South America, not in Canada.
The hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Green) asked regarding the matter of remedial treatment and the announcement made not long ago with respect to a change in that procedure. This proposal has been in force only for about a month or a month and a half; I think the announcement was made in March. As first announced, that policy was not general; it dealt particularly with cases of hernia. In February we announced that hernia in general would not be regarded as a ground for rejection if the recruit was otherwise in good condition. It was provided that the recruit might be accepted and might be categorized provisionally A(R)-that is, A-remedial-or B(R), which is B-remedial, with a view to an operation and probable grading up to A or B. New regulations are just being issued whereby varicose veins and some other similar ailments will be included in these regulations, and I anticipate that conditions such as non-toxic goitres and similar disabilities will be included. Whether those remedial disabilities will preclude enlistment will be decided upon in each case by the consultants at the reception centres which are now being organized. In other words, instead of sending men to Pensions and National Health before enlistment to have their disabilities remedied by comparatively minor operations, they will be enlisted and put in this category, and of course it will depend upon the result of the operation whether or not they will remain in the army. The object is to deal with cases in which there is every likelihood that remedial treatment will be effective.


Howard Charles Green: Have many men taken advantage of that?


James Layton Ralston: There is no experience in that connection at all as yet; sufficient time has not elapsed to give us any experience.


Howard Charles Green: Have any men taken advantage of that provision?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot tell my hon. friend, but I should think there would be quite a number.


Howard Charles Green: Is there a very wide field there? Is it expected many men can be recruited under that provision?


James Layton Ralston: Well, I would think so; quite a number have varicose veins, goitre and hernia.
Then the hon. member for Weyburn (Mr. Douglas) asked with regard to the cost of telephones and telegrams, and I have a breakdown here. I cannot give it by districts, but this is the total cost for each item of expenditure, I think for the fiscal year: telephones, $742,903; telegrams and cables, $278,987; teletype, $25,841; making a grand total of $1,047,731.
The hon. member for Peterborough West (Mr. Fraser) asked last night with regard to the practice concerning gasoline and the procedure which the drivers follow in getting gasoline on the road. The procedure is that normally drivers obtain gasoline from the supply pumps at the army station. There is not a purchase frorti a commercial station except in case of what they call a local emergency, which means that a man has travelled farther than he has expected and finds himself without a sufficient supply of gasoline, and is not able to reach an army station. I am told that the amount of gasoline purchased under these circumstances, that is, in the opinion of the officers-they had not any exact figures before them-would be considerably under one per cent of the amount of gasoline used; they felt quite sure of that estimate. There are no directions given to the drivers as to what commercial stations to patronize. This ought to be noted, that even though a commercial pump were owned by a contractor-that is to say, suppose a commercial pump were owned by a contractor such as Imperial Oil or the Canadian Oil company-a purchase at that pump by the driver would be regarded as a local emergency purchase, because the gasoline that is bought from the contractor is bought for delivery at the army station, not for delivery at a local tank. There would be an exception to this general rule in the case of some centre where there might be a number of army cars-perhaps two or three-but not sufficient to justify the installation of a pump. In that case Munitions and Supply would be asked to make a contract for the supply of gasoline by one of the local service stations, and that contract would be made on a competitive basis.
The hon. member for Vancouver South asked as to the annual cost of food per man. This is a rough estimate which has been made up, and I think it is approximately correct; $153.30 per man per year.


Howard Charles Green: Is it the same overseas as in Canada?


James Layton Ralston: I am told so. I am told that it is an average over-all figure.
The hon. member for Yorkton (Mr. Castle-den) asked the percentage of illiterates who enlisted. In June, 1942, the estimate for
War Appropriation-Army

England was 1-6 per cent of the enlisted personnel. That estimate was based on a survey of approximately 70,000 troops. Of those who enlisted in Canada in the first three months of 1943 about one per cent were illiterate.
The hon. member for Vancouver South asked a question respecting aliens in the army. It is very difficult to give figures which really mean any thing, because our figures are by country of origin. The total number in the Canadian army whose country of origin is other than British is less than 25,000.


Howard Charles Green: I think the minister did not get the idea of my question. Those, I presume, are British subjects now?


James Layton Ralston: Some of them are, and some are not. Those from enemy countries -and in this I ami getting a little nearer to what my hon. friend wants-whose country of origin are enemy countries are less than 2,500. With regard to those I would point out that investigations are constantly in progress. Such investigations as have been made show that between 65 and 70 per cent are actually naturalized prior to enlistment.


Howard Charles Green: The minister has not yet touched the point. About a year ago the Prime Minister announced that we were to call up aliens, under the provisions of the National Resources Mobilization Act. Formerly only British subjects could be called. In the return I mentioned yesterday it was shown that 751 aliens had been called up under the National Resources Mobilization Act, but that only three had got so far as to be taken into the army. What I want to know is how many have now been taken into the army; if there have been very few, why has there been such a long delay? I was dealing with the aliens called up under the National Resources Mobilization Act.


James Layton Ralston: I have not that information. I am afraid what the hon. member wants would require securing a return, first, from each of the boards-and from my colleague the Minister of Labour, because some of them would have been called up there- and, second, a return from induction centres of those who have got past the board and have been sent for medical examination. This is an involved investigation. However, the number is not large and I shall see what I can do about it.


Howard Charles Green: Perhaps the minister could bring the information down in a return. I want to find out how many have got into the army.


Agar Rodney Adamson: How many of those 2,500 are serving overseas?


James Layton Ralston: I have not the information here, and I am always afraid to guess. I had in mind saying there might be 500, or something like that.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Serving overseas?


James Layton Ralston: Yes. The hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley) asked a question respecting rentals paid. The rentals paid in Saskatchewan, on a quick calculation, show in round figures, an amount of $104,000. Those paid in Regina were $44,000 and in Saskatoon,
836,000.
The hon. member for Weyburn asked with regard to treatment for venereal disease, namely, v.d.g. and v.ds. I am not able to give complete information, but I shall give what I have to the committee. Overseas in 1940-41 there were 2,458 cases of v.d.g. treated and cured, and 656 cases of v.d.s. treated. I am unable to state how many of these men were retained in the army, or the number of cures obtained by treatment of v.ds. Presumably all soldiers cured of v.d.g. were retained in the army or, if discharged, were discharged for other reasons. In Canada up to March 31, 1943, there were 2,873 cases of v.d.s. and 18,191 cases of v.d.g. treated. Up to April 1, 1942, there were 416 discharged on account of venereal disease, the most of which, presumably, were cases of v.ds.
The hon. member for Lake Centre asked for the total amount expended for Debert camp. It will take several days to get that information together, and I shall furnish it at some convenient time. He asked about the International Water Supply company; that question also is still outstanding.


Howard Charles Green: The hon. member for St. John-Albert (Mr. Hazen) asked a question respecting the public relations branch.


James Layton Ralston: I told the hon. member the return was nearly ready, and I shall see that it is brought down and laid on the table. It will be ready shortly, and it can be laid on the table when the estimates of the Minister of National Defence for Air are under discussion.


John George Diefenbaker: I asked the minister a question with regard to the proportion of active men called up for service in the three Canadian divisions.

War Appropriation-Army


James Layton Ralston: I feel I am justified in giving the number of N.R.M.A. men in Canada, but I do not think I am in a position to give the percentage of home defence men and general service men in the operating formations.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I asked a question concerning reasons for discharge or nonacceptance.


James Layton Ralston: Rejections?


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes. It would be of value to have this information.


James Layton Ralston: I believe I gave it
roughly last night. The hon. member is referring to physical disabilities?


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes, that is correct. I have one further question, following that of the hon. member for Lake Centre. First, are Canadian citizens in the United States subject to call under the United States draft regulations, if they have not taken out their first papers? Secondly, if they opt to serve in the Canadian Army do they opt to serve on the home defence personnel, or must they opt to serve under the same conditions as they are called up for, under the United States service?


James Layton Ralston: The hon. member has asked two questions involving a very lengthy agreement which has been entered into. I have no objection to giving the information as soon as possible. However, it is a matter of a lengthy agreement following negotiations between our officers and the Department of External Affairs and officials of the United States.


John George Diefenbaker: I regret the answer by the minister regarding the proportions of men who were active and who were called up for service in the three Canadian divisions. The minister has said he does not feel as though he can give that information. Mr. Chairman, this is one of the most important matters with which we are faced, and one about which the people of this country want to know. We want to know whether the men who are actually going to defend Canada are, in fact, men who have been trained and who
have received the necessary training of active service men. I do not wish to press for information, that could be valuable to the enemy, but I fail to understand in what way information as to the proportions of the three Canadian divisions as between active service men and men for service only in Canada could be regarded as being in that category. This is a matter of information which would be most helpful to the Canadian people in determining whether or not there are reinforcements in Canada available for the army overseas. I am going to ask the minister to give this information, but I will not press for it; if he takes the stand that it is not in the public interest to give it, that is the end of it. But I should like the minister to explain how such information can by any stretch of the imagination be detrimental to this country.


James Layton Ralston: I say to my hon. friend that I consider it against the public interest to give it. That is all I can say about it. I think my hon. friend,, upon consideration, will realize just why. It would be just as if when we were overseas in the last war we had given out information as to how many men in a battalion had been called up and how many had volunteered. I do not think anybody, least of all a member of parliament, would suggest that we give that information. On the matter of training I am perfectly willing to give the fullest information. That does not touch at all the question whether the men are volunteers or called up under the National Resources Mobilization Act. I have given the whole situation with regard to reinforcements, and I have given the number of the N.R.MA. men in Canada.



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE FOR AIR

Hon. C. G. POWER (Minister of National Defence for Air):: Mr. Chairman, I should like to table certain information which I think would be useful to the committee. It is a comparison of the 1943-44 cash requirements with the cash requirements for 1942-43 for all votes combined. I am laying on the table a certain number of copies for distribution to the members, and I request that this table be printed in Hansard to-morrow. It is as follows:

War Appropriation-Air Services
Department of National Defence for Air
Comparison of 1943-1944 Cash Requirements with 1942-1943 for All Votes Combined
Objects of expenditure	Probable expenditure	Estimated expenditure	Differences	by groups	1942-1943	1943-1944	Increase	Decrease1. Civil salaries and wages	$ 16,260,000	$ 18,620,637	$ 2,360,637	2. Pay and allowances	148,700,000	238,023,232	89,323,232	3. Travel, transportation and freight.	18,190,000	20,838,068	2,648,068	4. Construction, purchases, repairs and operating expenses of properties: (a) Capital expenditure	110,000,000	93,421,100	$16,578,900(b) Repairs, operating expenses	9,417,000 55,566,600 13,060,000 12,000,000	13,482,925 50,451,918 26,838,773 23,990,000	4,065,925	5. Personnel supplies and services: food, medical supplies and services, clothing and personal	5,114,6826. Communications: signal and wireless equipment, line construe-	13,778,773 11,990,000	7. Ammunition and bombs	8. M.T. vehicles and marine craft: capital cost and repairs	6,117,000	10,508,405	4,391,405	9. Fuel costs for aircraft, M.T. and marine craft	15,460,238	29,368,636	13,908,398	10. Aircraft, engines and spares including overhauls	148,550,000	231,846,296	83,296,296	11. Miscellaneous stores and equipment: including machine guns and other armament	16,524,000	26,623,160	10,099,160	12. Flying training contracts	21,000,000	33,805,829	12,805,829	13. Overseas squadrons and ancillary units	7,605,000	303,783,729	296,178,729	14. Sundries: including printing, stationery and other costs not included in the above items	4,670,000	7,818,706	3,148,706	Totals	$603,119,838	$1,129,421,414	$547,995,158	$21,693,582


Mr. McIVOR:: Mr. Chairman, before the anti-aircraft battery from Toronto, Vancouver and Temiscouata go into action against the "Power" machine, I wish to say a word. Those of us who were in the house the other day and heard the Minister of National Defence for Air make his statement will, I am sure, agree that the eulogistic editorials that have been written in the press across this country from the Atlantic to the Pacific were well merited. We got an earful that day.
There are three reasons why I should like to sound a note of appreciation of the minister for air and those associated with him, from the boys and girls right up to the minister himself. First, a word as to the training centres. I am fairly familiar with the airfield training centre at the head of the lakes. This field was owned by the city of Fort William, and when the war broke out, the Department of National Defence for Air took it Over, or rather they allowed a committee of citizens of

Fort William who put up their money, to manage the field. They chose a keen, honest, successful businessman to manage that field and I can assure the committee that it has been well managed, for this group were determined to contribute something to the cause for which we are fighting at this time. The officers in the training centre from the squadron leader right on down have been men of very high character, efficient men who knew their work and would, allow no sham work to get by. I found complete harmony between the officers and every student in the air school. I found also that the accommodation was the very best possible, and the food suited those who were there. No one can overestimate the value of the air training scheme, scattered as it is all across Canada from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and perhaps nobody can have a greater respect for it than the enemy, whether he be in Italy, Germany or Japan.

War Appropriation-Air Services
Second, I should like to sound a note of appreciation of the character of the students and the men. I know one boy intimately. Nearly two years before the war he was determined to fly, and he thought he could learn more rapidly if he made his own plane. Accordingly he got his blueprint and his tools and started to work. However, just as he had his plane ready for the fabric, a recruiting officer for the air force came along and the boy fell for it at once, just as quick as a snap. Within the year he was made a sergeant, but he was not satisfied because he had been promised a course in flying. So that he reverted, and a little later in the city of Ottawa he received his wings. Since then, he has been just like a boy going out to play a big rugby game. He delights in his work and is extremely proud of his officers. I have never heard from any one of the Fort William boys, the pilots, pilot officers or any of them, one word of criticism of their senior officers that they did not get a square deal. I think our minister should also be told this, that they respect him for his driving force-I did not call it "Power". More than that, they respect him on account of his courtesy, his thoroughness, his ability to get things done.
Our air force pilots have given a splendid account of themselves. They feel they have a job to do. I have told the story once before in this house of the young lad who left his training centre where he was in training for an officer and fought his way to get overseas. Finally he got ^overseas, but just before he left he said, "Mother, don't worry. The cause is bigger than I am".
The third thing I wish to mention about the air force is the casualty lists, and this is a tender subject with anybody who knows something about it. There have been, I believe, more casualties in the air force than in any other branch of the service. Look at the losses! The material loss is great, yes. Those giant bombers cannot be made in a short time out of nothing, but their loss is as nothing compared1 with the loss of the young pilots who give their lives for a cause they deem worthy. One thing about the casualty lists which has pleased me immensely when I have been allowed to call at a home to try to bring a steadying influence upon those who perhaps were beginning to doubt whether good would come out of it all or not, was the letters that I was able to read from those in the chaplain service and especially letters from squadron leaders. I must say that I was surprised. The character of these officers
showed itself in the letters they wrote. Sympathy, kindness, courage and helpfulness came from them to the men and women who had lost their boys.
I should like to make the same request of the minister for air that I made of the Minister of National Defence. I think that when a boy has lost his mother, when the boy had not the joy and happiness of a young wife, his stepmother or his aunt or his sister or his father, should have the honour, and the little bit of comfort that goes with it, of having the silver cross bestowed1 upon them. I pay my tribute in a feeble way, though to the best of my ability, to the efficiency of the air force. We all through Canada from the Atlantic to the Pacific say to the minister for air, "Well done; carry on, and God bless you."


The CHAIRMAN:: Before we proceed any further with this summary, I should like to receive a direction from the minister and the committee as to the procedure we should adopt in order to proceed with efficiency and diligence. On the previous estimates, namely, those of the Minister of National Defence (Army), we followed the summary item by item, and I wish to know if it is the wish of the committee and the minister to do the same with respect to these estimates.


Charles Gavan Power: I understood, before the
war appropriation estimates came on that it was intended to proceed by way of discussing them item by item. Personally, of course, I would very much prefer that we discuss them in three separate items, corresponding to the three separate organizations which go to make up the air force. It would be much simpler for me. That is to say, we could discuss at one time the joint empire training establishment; when that has been thoroughly discussed, go on to overseas, and when that has been fully dealt with, proceed to western hemisphere operations or home war. It would make for much less confusion. But I am entirely in the hands of the committee, and since we have started in the army estimates by following the items as they are listed, I am quite willing to proceed in that way.


Mr. STIRLING:: Since the break-down has been placed before us in this form, it seems to me that it would be better to adhere to it, in spite of the minister's desire to consider the whole large question under three heads.. I think if we were to attempt to do that now, having had the experience of the army estimates, and with this before us, it would make confusion.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Charles Gavan Power: If my suggestion, were
followed it would make thirty-three items instead of eleven, so that it would not be to my advantage, but at the same time it would save a great deal of confusion if we discussed it subject by subject: the training scheme, until it was finally exhausted; then, operations in Canada, until they were thoroughly exhausted; and then overseas. I fear that otherwise we shall get confused in spots. But that is part of the job; I do not mind.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Mr. Chairman,-


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Is the hon. member speaking on the point I have brought before the committee?


Agar Rodney Adamson: I had rather intended to make a general statement, but I can see the advantages of the minister's suggestion, of dividing the operation of the air force into its three main component parts. If the committee will allow me, I will endeavour to confine my remarks to the joint air training scheme, but if I digress or transgress a little I hope the Chairman will not be too strict.


Clarence Gillis: I do not wish to interrupt
the hon. member, but the Chairman asked a question, and the minister has made a suggestion. I think that, so that we shall not get into the tangle which we had with the national defence estimates (army), we should have some idea as to how we are to proceed. Personally, it seems to me that if the sheet which is before us now is followed item by item, that is the most expeditious way you can get the business done. If you adopt the suggestion of the minister, you open up the field of discussion on different branches of the service, and you will, I think, just ramble around until further orders without being on anything specific. In my opinion, if we take this and discuss it as it is set out, we shall not go far astray.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: It seems to me, then, the opinion of the committee is that we should proceed item by item.


James Lester Douglas: That does not solve the minister's problem.


Charles Gavan Power: The minister is quite willing. I merely threw out the suggestion, thinking it might be helpful to the committee, but I am quite willing to go ahead with the items as they are laid down here; I have no objection.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: It is agreed, then, that we follow these fourteen items, and it will be understood that each of them

has three divisions; that is, for instance, "1. Civil salaries and wages". That has to do with three things: commonwealth training, overseas, and western hemisphere defence; and that will apply to each item as we go down.
I. Civil salaries and wages, $18,620,637.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I will endeavour to confine my remarks as much as possible to certain basic questions. Before we go into the air estimates we should get ourselves orientated, as to how we wish to discuss the problem. I believe the proper way would be to regard oneself, as to what one would like to do, how one could improve the air training or the Royal Canadian Air Force, as though one were in the position of minister. I believe the minister's position is that what he would like to learn from any discussion is, how can what is admittedly an excellent show be made even better? That seems to me to be the basis upon which discussion of these estimates should be made.
I suggest that it has not been sufficiently emphasized what air power has done for the united nations. As time goes on, we shall see that the date of August 15, 1940, was the turning point of the war, the day on which the war could have been lost, and the day when the air power of Great Britain prevented the war from being lost. The war was not won then; it was prevented then from being lost. In any discussion of air power, sufficient credit cannot possibly be given to the fighting services of the Royal Air Force during the battle of Britain.
The Royal Canadian Air Force is in a particularly happy position, because it is an entirely volunteer and voluntary organization. It has none of the difficulties of two classifications of fighting men; it has no air men who serve only in Canada. Admittedly there are ground crew and aircrew; but the ground crew are, I believe-and this is the first question I would ask the minister- composed as far as possible of men who are not fit for aircrew. Of that I am not sure, but I understand that an attempt is being made to get ground crew who, on account of either age or other disability, are unable to act as aircrew.
It is rather peculiar, but the army started off as a definite unit and the air force started off as merely a part of the whole scheme of united empire or, at that time, British air power and we now hear talk of the army being divided and of the air force becoming more and more a Royal Canadian Air Force with thirty-eight operational squadrons, or

War Appropriation-Air Services
there are to be thirty-eight operational squadrons. I see the minister has said that for every Canadian in a Canadian squadron there are eleven Canadians in the Royal Air Force.


Charles Gavan Power: Aircrew only.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes, aircrew only. I was speaking of overseas aircrew. The question of the establishment of a separate Royal Canadian Air Force has been dealt with by as good a compromise as could be achieved under the system. There were definite opponents of purely Canadian squadrons. Some of the pilots were very happy in the United Kingdom, or English squadrons, the esprit de corps of which was very high, and the Canadian aircrew in many instances objected to being transferred to a purely Canadian air force. On the other hand, there were some squadrons where perhaps the commanding officer was not quite as understanding, from the Canadian point of view, and where Canadians longed to become part of a Canadian squadron. So that the compromise of thirty-eight squadrons is probably a good one.
Before we go on to consider the whole plan, we must remember that any talk about sovereignty in war is dangerous. We must not forget that the formation of the joint air training plan was delayed a whole year because the government of Canada objected, and objected strongly-in fact it was a prohibition-to the United Kingdom having their own air squadrons or air training operations in Canada. That shows a point of view which I hope we in Canada have got over for all time. It shows the colonial mind at work. I suggest that had we established the joint air training plan when it was first mentioned, we would have had a year or six months in hand.
There is one other point with regard to the training of aircrew in Canada. I suggest that more emphasis where possible be put on the training of South American pilots in Canada. There are a number of Mexican and South American nationals who would make excellent aircrew. Some of them have been trained in Canada, but I believe that, for the future, the training of aircrews in Canada, particularly South American aircrew, would be a step in the right direction for hemispheric solidarity. The South American republics look to the United States for all their air training and as the leader in North America. I believe a great deal of good could be done if we took a number of these South American citizens for
training; that is, of course, if there is space in the schools to train them. I mention that for this reason. It has been found that a great many of our new Canadians, particularly of Slav descent, have shown a flair for the air which was absolutely unbelievable. A good many Czechoslovakians and men of central European descent have proved amazingly efficient pilots and aircrew, and I believe an extension of this air training plan to include some of the South American nationals would be a step in the right direction. It would show South America that Canada also was a power in the air in her own right.
We now come to the hardy annual, the question of commissions for aircrew. It has been brought up before. The minister has given it consideration, but nothing has as yet been done. We still have the distinction, slight though it may be; nevertheless it exists on the ground, of the sergeant-pilot and the commissioned aircrew. I suggest to the minister that aircrew should all be considered in the light either of ensigns or of cadets, call them what you will, until they have made a certain number of operational flights, either operational bombing flights or, if they are army cooperation squadrons, a number of sorties against the enemy, and that then they all be automatically commissioned. I realize that these barriers of officer and non-commissioned officer are being broken down, and I know the difficulty exists because we have our squadrons and personnel training or fighting with the Royal Air Force. But I believe that if we made that suggestion strongly enough, the whole air force of the empire would and could be put on that basis.
I should like to say a word with regard to prisoners of war. When a man falls into enemy hands and a commission or promotion subsequently goes through, is that promotion recognized by the enemy? I understand that it is in Germany, but that so far Italy has refused to recognize promotions, whether granted at the time of the operation or subsequently thereto. I understand that the air force has recommended the use of cracked high octane gasoline for training purposes in Canada, and I should like to know if this is the fact.
What percentage of the training received by members of aircrews is given in Canada. Do these men fly combat planes in Canada, or is that training given only in the United Kingdom? It is quite likely that we shall be engaged in air operations against Japan which will require long overseas operational flights over the Pacific ocean. What steps are being taken in Canada to train air-sea rescue crews?



War Appropriation-Air Services
With the probable shift of operations to the Pacific, this matter should receive a great deal of serious consideration. What form of training do the aircrews receive in air-sea rescue work? Are they trained on this continent, or do they receive their training on the other side?
This may be a post-war matter, but I wish to recommend the establishment of a Royal Canadian Air Force college. We have the Royal Military College at Kingston and. the Royal Naval College at Esquimalt, and I should like to see established a Royal Air Force college which would operate along the same lines. AVe realize that after the war there will be a great reduction in our air force, but at all times we shall have to have a large and powerful air force. So far as I can see, no country will be safe in the future without adequate air defence, particularly a country so rich and as sparsely populated as Canada. The work being carried on by our air cadets is a step in the right direction, and their work in making this country air-minded deserves the highest praise.
The question has been raised whether air power will defeat the enemy. Every day that passes shows us that air power will do more to defeat the enemy than we thought was possible, even last month. In Coventry and Liverpool, which cities received heavy bombings, the destruction to industry was extremely great. The complete cessation of the production of certain items took place for a considerable time, and it is admitted freely in the United Kingdom that the bombing of the industrial centres of England was a serious matter indeed. But what happened in England is as nothing to what is happening to-day in the Ruhr and throughout Germany. Every day air power is bringing the war closer to a conclusion. Nothing that we can do to support the Royal Canadian Air Force is too much. The devastation and softening up of Germany by air pow'er constitute an essential prerequisite to invasion. Air power alone is insufficient, but once the- central channels of Europe have been destroyed by air power, the job of our land forces will be made infinitely easier. The degree that bomber command is contributing to the defeat of Germany and Italy is increasing daily. Air power is expensive, but it is infinitely cheaper than attempting to carry out an unprepared operation. Before we can consider landing an army on the shores of Europe, the devastation that must be brought about-and Dieppe showed this as well as anything else- must be immense. Consider the raid on Wuppertal the other evening, when we lost thirty-three bombers; consider what it would

have cost in men and material to have done that job by artillery. I think the committee will see how important air power has become.
I had some questions to ask the minister, but in view of his suggestion I shall wait until the items are taken up one by one. However, I should like, to congratulate the minister upon his statement and to express my pride in what has been done by the Royal Canadian Air Force so far, and what will be done in future, to bring about the defeat of the axis.


Mr. ROSS (Calgary East):: Before the outbreak of war, a number of young men from, all parts of Canada enlisted in the Royal Air Force; at that time there was no place for them in the Royal Canadian Air Force. These young men took courses in aeronautics at their own expense; after completing those courses they went to Great Britain, at their own expense, and joined the Royal Air Force. Many of them would now like to transfer to the Royal Canadian Air Force, because they find themselves in this position. They see their friends from Canada drawing higher pay than they are drawing. The dependents of their friends from Canada are receiving much better allowances than their dependents receive. They are very much alarmed at what may happen when the war is over and they try to reestablish themselves in civil life; they consider that they will be handicapped because it may be held that at the time-of their enlistment they were not ordinarily domiciled or resident in Canada, which might preclude them from many of the benefits that will accrue to those who were domiciled in Canada at the time of their enlistment.
I submit that for the duration of the war these boys should have the benefit of the higher pay which is given members of our air force; that their dependents should receive the higher allowances which are given in Canada, and that when the war is over, they should have an equal chance to rehabilitate themselves in civil life. I should like to ask the minister if anything is being done in the wray of working out some plan to help these boys to transfer from the Royal Air Force to the Royal Canadian Air Force.


Charles Gavan Power: That question requires a very long and somewhat involved statement. I would be willing to make that statement at any time, but I know many other hon. members are intensely interested in this matter, and I should prefer to have as many as possible state their views. Then I shall be only too glad to make a statement.

War Appropriation-Air Services


George Hugh Castleden: I believe the recent
achievements of our airmen, particularly in the European war zone, reveal the importance of the striking (power of our air forces. The ability of this arm of the service to reach over the fortifications, the armies and the navies of the enemy and strike at the nerve centres of a nation's production and distribution, and paralyze them, is rapidly changing the technique of war. To-day the immense value of the air force in saving man-power and the wastage which ordinary land fighting involves is becoming realized as never before. It is quite possible that the role of the army will be changed very largely to the essential work of carrying out occupational duties. The deep striking power of the allied adr force has made it one of the major arms of allied forces, and I know 'Canadians generally are justly proud of the part our men have played in the air on every front where the united nations are fighting.
The British commonwealth air training plan in Canada has done a good job; it has turned out men who have maintained' the high standards which Canadians set in the first war. These men are carrying on and winning new laurels for this dominion. When we realize that the boys who to-day are standing the brunt of this attack and carrying on this work only a few years ago were lads in our high schools and. universities, playing hockey and football, carrying on their studies in technical schools and so on, we marvel at the ability of a training scheme to turn them into fighting men with the nerve, the will and the natural ability to adapt themselves to changing circumstances so that they get through, do their job and come back. I do not think Canada will ever be able to repay these men for the sacrifices they are making. I wish to pay tribute also to those thousands of brave mothers and fathers of these men who month after month stand the strain of worry and anxiety and who so bravely take the news, when it comes, that their boys are missing after air operations. Some interesting figures were published recently in the press showing how the casualties were distributed among the empire troops. These figures show that the United Kingdom has suffered 275,000 casualties; Canada, 10,400, Australia, 53,000; New Zealand, 19,000; South Africa, 22,000; India, 101,000 and the colonies, 30,000. Those are the rough figures. In the break-down of Canada's casualties I find that the Royal Canadian Air Force has suffered the loss of 3,957 men killed, 1,899 missing, 565 wounded and 629 prisoners, making a total of over
7,000.
72537-205J


Charles Gavan Power: I do not wish to interrupt
my hon. friend, but those figures do not quite coincide. He will notice that the figures of total empire casualties are given as of three years of war. That would be September of 1942. As a matter of fact, the casualties list I placed on Hansard was as of May 14, or of very recent date. Most of the Royal Canadian Air Force casualties have occurred within the last several months. So that a comparison is not quite exact.


George Hugh Castleden: It states that the
Canadian army figures are for to-day, whereas the air force figures are as of April 30. The minister is correct in that. The total for Canada at the present time is over 13,000.
We all are interested in making the air force the most efficient weapon possible. There are some little matters, such as the granting of commissions, which very often alter a man's attitude. It seems to me it is only right and fair that any man actually engaged in aircrew, flying over enemy territory, should be qualified for commission. It is an incongruous state of affairs when we find1, we will say, a sergeant-pilot who is piloting the bomber, and having under him during operations a commissioned man as one of his gunners. Then, it may be that the pilot of the next machine is a commissioned officer. These men are assuming the same responsibilities, but one is a pilot officer and the other a sergeant.
If these men were forced down or had to bail out over enemy territory, and be taken prisoner, they find that in the prison camps there is a difference between the treatment handed out to a commissioned man and that given non-commissioned men. I am not saying that every man who graduates from an air training school should necessarily receive a commission. But if he completes his training successfully, and engages in operational duties over enemy territory, surely he has won his right to a commission.
When a ship returns safely, the sergeant-pilot, who has been in command of the craft, leaves it, followed by his gunner, who may be a commissioned officer. From then on, the commissioned man receives recognition of his rank, and the sergeant must salute him. One goes to the officers' mess and the other to the sergeants' mess. The sergeant is not allowed in the officers' mess.
It would be good for the morale of these fighting men to grant the recognition I suggest. I know that in Canada commissions are granted to men doing clerical work, or to others who are doing technical or intelligence


Charles Gavan Power: Whom did he ask? I would say it would be useless to make it to the air force, but there is a board of pension commissioners to which he could apply at any time. We have nothing to do with that.


George Hugh Castleden: When he spoke about it, that was the reply he got.
My second point is, I believe, a reflection of a similar condition in the army. The women in the women's divisions of the air force, army and navy are surely entitled to equal pay for equal work. I think the minister would have the support of everyone if he were to see that that was brought about.
Then, dependents' allowance should be payable to those who are entitled to it, even if they are in the women's division. In many instances these women have been supporting parents, or other dependents. They are rendering a valuable service, and I believe the minister would agree that in performing some phases of the work they are even superior to the men. In my opinion, they are entitled to the same pay and allowances as are granted men in the army.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. HOBLITZELL:: Mr. Chairman, as one of those who have taken up very little time of the committee, I should like to say a few words in connection with the operation and leadership of the Royal Canadian Air Force. I have for various reasons been very much interested in this branch of the service, no doubt due to the faet that I know so many young men of the force who have paid the supreme sacrifice and many others who also are ready to give everything they have to defend our country in this fight for freedom and justice.
Let me pause for just one moment to offer my hearty congratulations to the minister of National Defence for Air upon his splendid speech on the floor of this house, as reported at pages 3723 and 3724 of Hansard of June 26, 1942. With such leadership the Royal Canadian Air Force is bound to fly at a very high altitude.
The Royal Canadian Air Force is one of Canada's chief sources of pride in our whole war effort. It is composed of young men who are among the finest in the land. In many theatres of war its members have brought glory to themselves and to their country and will continue to do so in even greater measure

War Appropriation-Air Services
as the war becomes more intense in the final struggle on the continent of Europe and elsewhere.
I was very much interested in receiving information that I asked for with regard to the number of decorations awarded to men in the Royal Canadian Air Force who were enlisted or appointed in Toronto, and I should like to put the numbers of these decorations on Hansard so that they may be on record. Decorations have been awarded to men enlisted or appointed in Toronto as follows:
Order of the British Empire	 1
Distinguished Service Order	 1
Distinguished Flying Cross	 44
Air Force Cross	 4
Distinguished Flying Medal	 16
Air Force Medal	 2
British Empire Medal	 1
"Mention"	 13
"Commendation"	 6
Knowing a number of these young men who have won such honourable distinction, is it any wonder, Mr. Chairman, that I should give high praise to the service? I am sure that all hon. members will agree with me that there is very little criticism that can be applied to this branch of our armed forces. Everywhere you go you hear nothing but the highest praise of the Royal Canadian Air Force, and what has been said along that line by speakers who have preceded) me is a good example for the rest of us to follow.
May I make one or two suggestions to the minister which I believe will meet with widespread approval? It is hard to say that all young men in the aircrews are of officer material, but what I should like to see is that all members of the aircrews be placed together in the use of a common mess as is the custom in the far and middle east.
I should also like to offer a suggestion in connection with the rehabilitation of the Royal Canadian Air Force personnel. This would, I believe, be a fitting conclusion to a glorious incident in Canada's air history. With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I will read what I have prepared in this connection.



REHABILITATION OP R.C.A.P. PERSONNEL

[Stage Direction]
1.	The question of rehabilitation of R.C.A.F. personnel is a matter which deserves not only the best thought that is possible on the particular question, but also that this thought should be initiated immediately. The success of any rehabiliation measures will depend on having them determined in all their different aspects before rehabilitation, on any large scale, becomes necessary.
2.	The rehabilitation of air force personnel, more particularly aircrew, has certain special features, namely:
(i)	Air force personnel, more particularly aircrew, are men and women of a high level of educational standing.
(ii)	Aircrew will have been through emotional experiences which will have given them a maturity beyond their years.
(iii)	The majority of aircrew personnel will be young men in their early twenties who have a good educational background but no special vocational experience.
(iv)	The rehabilitation of women personnel will be a particular problem in so far as there will be many young women of good educational background who have interrupted their educational and vocational training to enter the air force.
3.	There is at present within the air force an organization for the repatriation of air force personnel. It is submitted, however, that this organization must of necessity be confined entirely to the routine of arrangements for discharge of personnel. There must be a separate organization for the rehabilitation of air force personnel.
4.	It is suggested that there should be established within the air force some kind of organization to provide facilities for air force personnel who are to be repatriated or discharged' to enable them to do some serious thinking about their future vocation.
5.	It is suggested further that the educational directorate of the air force should be so organized as to undertake immediately the whole question of rehabilitation, whereby facilities could be provided to give air force personnel who are to be repatriated or' discharged, vocational guidance and an opportunity to pursue the necessary educational courses required for their future vocations. Aircrew personnel, who are to be repatriated or discharged, will require this vocational guidance during the period (in the service) in which they are being emotionally restored towards future civilian life. It will be the responsibility of the Royal Canadian Air Force to give this vocational guidance. Furthermore, it is submitted that there will be no better therapeutic measures for these young men than to stimulate in them healthy thoughts about their future vocations.
6.	The answer to rehabilitation is a job, and it should be the responsibility of the air force to provide any necessary educational training to enable air force personnel to get this job. Also it is realized that there will be in the air force personnel who return many
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation-Air Services
of the best brains of Canada. The majority of these brilliant young men will have interrupted their education. It is the responsibility of the air force to direct the thoughts of these boys to the furtherance of their higher education and to dissuade them, as will be necessary in many cases, from breaking away from their early pre-war intentions of a university career.
Mr. Chairman, I believe that this job of rehabilitation can best be done by those in charge of the building of the Royal Canadian Air Force. In conclusion, may I say: Carry on, Royal Canadian Air Force.
Harry Rutherford Jackman: Mr. Chairman, it would be almost redundant for me to add a humble tribute to the administration of the Department of National Defence for Air, but I am very glad to do so because I believe that the minister has given it his very best attention; he has accepted criticism where it was due, and he has never paraded the Royal Canadian Air Force or the British commonwealth air training plan as a perfect model, but has endeavoured at every turn to improve it where improvement was required. I hope that any suggestions which may come from this side he will take in that spirit as he has done in the past, for he is assured in his heart, and he knows it without anyone saying it, that there is nothing which any member of this house and any member of the Canadian public will not do to further the interests of these men over whom he has charge.
I do not think the people of Canada fully realize the debt of gratitude which they owe to the men who serve in the aircrew of the Royal Canadian Air Force, to say nothing of the men who served with the Royal Air Force and fought in the battle of Britain and in all the battles which have been waged since that time. I shall not say that the failure to realize exactly what the air force has done for us is because of poor publicity; it may be due to the fact that the air raids are now so constant, and the air battles in the past were of such frequency, that we do not realize the significance of each of these air raids which takes place.
Let us consider for a moment what is meant to Canada when an air raid of 600 planes takes place on any one of these evenings which we are now passing through. With an average crew of say eight to a plane, that means 4,800 men. Every night we have, in the number of aircrew going over Germany, a force equivalent to that which took part in the raid on Dieppe. That is something we do not realize on account of the great frequency of these air raids. And, so that we may realize how large
[Mr. Hoblitzell.J
a share is Canada's in these air raids, no less than a quarter of the aircrews that take part in the raids are R.C.A.F. personnel, serving with the Royal Canadian Air Force and Royal Air Force, and for good measure we can add another five per cent of Canadians who enlisted in Royal Air Force units. Only a few nights ago, fifty-seven of the casualties reported were boys of our own country, our own brothers and sons.
Whether anything can be done to bring the realization of this great contribution more vividly to the general public apart from those whose actual relations are engaged in it I do not know, but I feel that if it is possible to give greater publicity to the individual exploits, as well as the exploits of the corps, it should be done. I believe that the minister, if he is of the same opinion as he was last year, will agree that we must give all the personal tribute that we can, because we on this side of the Atlantic at least are used to having heroes, and it is a great inspiration to the young men serving in the force and to those who are likely to enlist to know that they have a chance of getting this glory personally, as well as serving in the common cause.
I am also glad to know the minister feels that we may make very considerable progress in the winning of this war through bombing operations alone. He shares, I think, the view of the Prime Minister of Great Britain when he says that it is something well worth trying, as long as we do not forget the other arms of the service.
One point which has been mentioned already and which will find, I believe approval among all parties of this house, is in connection with the granting of commissions and the withholding of the same to aircrew. It is an invidious distinction which grew out of the tail-end of the last war. I remember it very well, because at that time I was a boy of seventeen and I was in the Royal Air Force, as it was called then. I can remember lining up with the other young recruits, and a young lieutenant there simply picked some of us to be cadets for pilots, which meant a commission, and others to be sergeant-pilots, without any preliminaries at all. It did seem an unfair way, because those who had special influence might be able to change their position afterwards. But the distinction between commissioned officers and non-commissioned sergeants, all of whom were to serve as aircrew, grew out of the end of the last war and apparently was carried over into this war. I do not see that

War Appropriation-Air Services
it has any relation at all to Canadian soil; it may have something to do with other countries, but certainly it is entirely foreign to Canada, and I do not think we want to see any of it here.
It is quite true, on the other hand, that if the only consideration in granting a commission is grades in the courses, those who do better than others are perhaps entitled to rewards, as in other walks of life. Nevertheless, when the men are serving together in the same aircraft there is an invidious distinction, which I think should be done away with. It was suggested by one of my colleagues that it might be better to adopt the United States system of appointment of aircrew to become flight officers with the equivalent of warrant officer's rank, and subsequently they could earn their commissions. I am not positive on that point, but I have heard it said that that is the way in which the matter is handled there. Certainly, the man who graduates as a member of an aircrew is entitled to some rank which, I think, should be at least that of warrant officer; and upon proof of service, not necessarily operations over Europe but including good service in the corps, he should be entitled to rank for his commission.
As I understand it, the system in practice works that only the top third of the graduating classes are granted commissions and the remainder become sergeant pilots. Now that Canada has a larger number of R.C.A.F. establishments and is paying for the same, the old reason of being influenced by joint costs, because Great Britain was paying a good part of the shot of the increased remuneration which officers would get, has to a large extent gone. We are running our own show to a considerable extent, and we should be able to call our own tune with regard to creating officers or not. I understand that a sergeant-pilot or an aircrew sergeant must be recommended by his commanding officer for a commission, or he may apply, under certain rules, for a commission. I should like to trespass on the privilege of the house and read from the agreement in connection with the air training plan dated at Ottawa, June 5, 1942, which I think is the last agreement. This is "Conditions of service of air crews, R.C.A.F. pupils."
1. Commissioning- . . .
(a)	All pilots, observers, navigators and air bombers who are considered suitable according to the standards of the government of Canada and who are recommended for commissions will be commissioned.
I do not see any limitation in the clause to one-third, which I understand is the practice.


Charles Gavan Power: It does not exist any longer.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: There is no limitation; you are perfectly free to create any officer or sergeant?


Charles Gavan Power: It does not exist any longer.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: On graduation, of course.
(b)	The percentages of commisisons given at the date of this agreement to wireless operator-air gunners, namely twenty per cent of total graduates, divided ten per cent on graduation and ten per cent after service, and air gunners, namely twenty per cent of total graduates, divided five per cent on graduation and fifteen per cent after service, will be maintained.
I might ask the committee to bear in mind, with regard) to these percentages after service, that from what information I have it does not appear that the chances of being promoted afterwards are very much better than theoretical. Actually the total who have been promoted after failing to get their commissions upon graduation has not been very great.
Then:
Some flexibility will, however, be permitted to ensure that airmen in these categories who have the necessary qualifications are not excluded from commissions on account of the quota.
Well, according to the minister the quota has gone except perhaps as to the air gunners, et cetera.


Charles Gavan Power: I am speaking of the P.N.B.S only-pilots, navigators, bombers.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: The next clause has to do with procedure in getting a commission, and I think hon. members will be interested if I read it at length.
(c)	Normally, the initiative in recommending an airman for a commission will rest with his commanding officer, but an airman may apply to be recommended, and, if his application is endorsed and forwarded by his commanding officer, it will receive the same consideration as if it had been initiated by the latter.
Namely, the commanding officer.
An application for a commission by an airman of the Royal Canadian Air Force, even if it is not endorsed, will be forwarded through the usual channels to R.C.A.F. overseas headquarters. The headquarters will be provided with all relevant documents and will arrange for the candidate to appear before a selection board convened by the air officer-in-chief, R.C.A.F. overseas.
In regard to that clause, I would ask the minister if what is there indicated exists anywhere at all except om paper-


Charles Gavan Power: You bet.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Harry Rutherford Jackman: -and if it does, I should like to know whether there is any substantial number of men, and how many, who have actually received1 commissions in that way.


Charles Gavan Power: What clause is it?


Harry Rutherford Jackman: 
Charles Gavan Power: Would the hon. member be good enough to repeat that? I want to get it more accurately.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I understand that there are some members of the Royal Canadian Air Force ground crew who would be fit as fighting men in the army, and at the same time the army has among its ranks those who are not fit for combatant service, low category men who would be good material for ground crew. Could an exchange be made? The suggestion has been made that the minister might not care for that idea, but there is nothing wrong with some of these men, and, after all, valuable as the services of the ground crew are,

War Appropriation-Air Services
such service is not quite as irreplaceable as that of front-line fighting men. I think the minister appreciates the point.


Charles Gavan Power: Does the hon. member think the ground crew in North Africa, in Ceylon and in the middle east are not fighting men?


Harry Rutherford Jackman: The other day I understood the minister to say that the ground crew overseas is relatively small-


Charles Gavan Power: I rather object to the hon. member saying that the ground crew are not fighting men. We have in North Africa, in Ceylon and in the middle east men who are as much fighters as the men in any other service.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I confine myself to the ground crew within Canada.


Charles Gavan Power: Or in Great Britain?


Harry Rutherford Jackman: We are bound to have a very great number of ground crew men who must be kept here to look after training requirements of the joint plan.


Charles Gavan Power: I tell my hon. friend I am not going to have an organization of cripples.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I am not suggesting that the minister should.


Charles Gavan Power: I tell you that right now.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I do not suppose the minister imagines for a moment that I would press the matter so far.
May I ask the minister also if there was anything in the suggestion that was made in a newspaper about a fleet of air arm being formed? Surely that is not due to any suggestion of inability or inefficiency on the part of his colleagues, or otherwise, or that the Royal Canadian Air Force cannot look after patrol. It was a news item that appeared once and perhaps it was not official; nevertheless it was there. I understand that the fleet air arm in Britain is confined to aircraft carriers, and so far as I know, we have no aircraft carriers here.
The minister might also throw some light on the stores and equipment depots. I often wonder, when I see the tremendous equipment depot at the foot of Yonge street in Toronto, which has been filled for years with parts, what becomes of outmoded material. Have the old materials been moved out for replacement and their places taken by new materials so that the equipment in the various depots is fairly modern, or has any substantial part of these materials become entirely outmoded? I should not blame the minister if it has, because there have been great and rapid changes in connection with aircraft.
Then a question with regard to the Cana-d'ianization of the Royal Canadian Air Force. As we have seen from agreements which the minister has tabled, this Canadianization has gone on somewhat apace during the last year.
I think the minister stated that in order to have sufficient ground crew to service our aircrew we should require something over 200,000 men. Obviously that would be impossible. Therefore we cannot hope to complete the total Canadianization of our air crew in the near future or perhaps during this war. It might not be practicable. However, as the hon. member for Calgary East mentioned, there are still some Canadians in the R.A.F who enlisted prior to or at the outbreak of the war. These men went over to Great Britain after, in some instances, taking some preliminary training here, and enlisted with the R.A.F. I do not know how numerous they are, but from time to time I have met Canadians in this category. The minister will probably have fairly exact figures.
Have these men been given an opportunity to re-muster into the R.C.A.F.? I think it was stated last year that some of these men had become so attached to the R.A.F. service that they did not want to change over, but I think they should be given an opportunity to re-muster, not only because they would be with their fellow-Canadians, but for other very practical reasons. There is not only the difference in pay between the English and the Canadian rates, but a Canadian in the R.A.F. is obliged to pay the British income tax. I was told by a Canadian squadron leader serving with the R.A.F. that after deductions his pay was equivalent to that received by a pilot officer in the R.CA.F. who was serving in the same squadron in England. On the surface this seems to be an absurd situation.
In connection with pensions our government has seen fit to give Canadians serving in the Royal Air Force the Canadian rate of pension. So far as I can discover from the agreements, the primary responsibility for this pension is still upon the United Kingdom government rather than the Canadian government.


Charles Gavan Power: Those men are not covered by any agreement we have made with the United Kingdom. They have nothing to do with it at all.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I shall quote from this letter to the Department of Pensions and National Health, as follows:
Group 3 consists of a very much smaller number of personnel who, under certain recruiting offers which were made in Canada by the R.A.F. prior to the war, enlisted . . .

War Appropriation^Air Services


Charles Gavan Power: I am sorry, but I understood my hon. friend to be speaking of the air training agreement made in Junev of last year. The men who enlisted with the Royal Air Force before the war have not been covered by any agreement made by National Defence for Air of Canada with the air ministry. We have had nothing to do with them in so far as pensions are concerned.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: They are covered by the Pension Act. It was probably the minister's colleague who handled that. We have undertaken to see that those Canadians who enlisted with the Royal Air Force before the war shall get the same treatment, and I wish to make sure that this is not just a privilege which is being given to them, but a right.


Charles Gavan Power: It was granted by this parliament, so that I take it to be a right.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: It would be so under the Pension Act.
There are one or two matters upon which I hope the minister can throw some light. One is in connection with the appropriation of $93,000,000 this year for works and buildings. As the minister suggested in his opening speech, less building is being done this year. The whole air training plan has been set up, and it is now simply a matter of turning the wheels and getting production. Yet the overhead in connection with works and buildings appears to be maintained. I should like to ask the minister, when the time comes-it must be the same in this department as in many others-for a specific reduction to take place, just how the reduction will come about. There is always a reluctance to disturb a situation which is functioning.
Another word in regard to organization. I think one reason why the Royal Canadian Air Force has made such tremendous strides and achievements is the fact that it was a new service. At the beginning of the war the number of personnel in the permanent force was not sufficiently large to clutter up the machinery, nor was it sufficiently large to stop the wheels of progress, as some of us think has taken place in some of the older services. Adequate recognition has been given to personnel which did not see any great future in the air force in peace time, but did see a future in business, to which they applied their abilities. These abilities have been transferred to the air force and they have received the appropriate recognition. I think the minister has been wise to make sure of any contribution, no matter where it comes from, whether from new blood or from the old Royal Military College type if you like, and to give it due recognition.

Nevertheless, as your organization matures, things tend to become static, and you find new jobs for people who are simply performing functions which were performed by some of the old personnel. For instance, I understand that at one of the training centres the personnel is about double what it was in 1941, whereas the output of pilots has not changed at all. This tendency to increase overhead is common to all organizations, as the minister knows, and I believe he would1 want to check any growth along this line.


Charles Gavan Power: Would my hon. friend mind giving me privately the name of that particular station, so that I may check this matter?


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I shall be glad to do so.
There are a few smaller matters I should like to mention, but perhaps they can be raised more appropriately on the various items. I only hope that the minister will continue to make the progress and achieve the success with the R.C.A.F. that he has in the past, and that our boys overseas will continue the glorious work they have been carrying oni in the past.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I shall not take the time of the committee to assure the minister of what he knows already, that all Canada is very proud of his boys in the air force and that by now I judge Germany and the countries under German domination have learned to fear them. I have a personal interest in the men in the air force, because more than three hundred boys from' my classes and fifteen of the teachers with whom I worked before coming to the house are now in this force.
There are three matters I should like to call to the minister's attention. While the first may not be within the scope of these estimates, it has been referred to already and I am sure it will interest the minister. I wish to speak, as the hon. member for Calgary East and others have done, for our Canadian boys who are in the Royal Air Force. I know some of those boys who went to England on cattle-boats during the depression years, when they could find' no employment in this country; who signed six-year contracts with the Royal Air Force and who were among the first Canadian boys to see active service in the air when war broke out. Practically all our legislation with regard to returned men and their rehabilitation provides that Canadians in the Royal Air Force or other branches of the services of the allied nations shall receive the same treatment as those in the Canadian forces, subject to the provision that

War Appropriation-Air Services
they must have been domiciled in Canada at the time of enlistment. Those boys, probably together with others in other branches of the service, were not domiciled in Canada at the time of their enlistment. Some of them are writing home now asking what their status will be when the war is over. I have been in communication with the Minister of Pensions and National Health on this question, and he assures me it is the intention of his department to see that those boys are brought within the scope of the legislation providing for rehabilitation. But unless this matter can be cleared up now, before those boys come home, it is quite possible that when the war is over, grounds may be found for excluding them from some of the benefits to which the boys in the Canadian forces will be entitled. Therefore I would suggest to the Minister of National Defence for Air and to the ministers of the other service departments that steps be taken now, before those boys come back, to see that their position after the war is clarified, so that there may be no doubt that they are entitled to whatever rehabilitation benefits are provided for the boys in the Canadian forces.
There is one other point of a similar nature to which I wish to direct the minister's attention; I imagine later on it will probably come under the administration of the Department of Labour. I refer to the matter of education interrupted by the war. A number of boys have written me wanting to know just what is meant by education interrupted by the war. I should like to impress upon the minister the fact that the training and educational advantages that have been given the boys in the air force, and the training that has been given the boys in the other branches of the service, have given many of them a new realization of the value of education. A great many of the boys who will return from overseas, who had very little interest in education before going into the armed forces, will be desirous of continuing their education, regardless of the point at which that education was interrupted. We shall find that many boys who did not finish their high-school education, who probably never gave any indication of any intention to enter university, will, in all probability, when they return, want to complete their high school education and to be given the privilege of entering a university. I have discussed this matter with the educational officers of the air force and army, and the consensus among them is that any boy who returns from the war should be given
the privilege of taking up his education where he left off, without being asked to show that before he enlisted he intended to go through high school or on to a university or some other educational institution. I think in the interests of the future of this country we should provide for the boys who return from overseas any educational opportunities which they desire and of which they can make use. It will be of benefit to the boys now in the forces if some statement can be made clarifying just what is meant by that term, the continuation of education interrupted by the war.
I have one other matter which comes within the scope of the first item, which deals with civil salaries and wages. A year ago I was in communication with the minister concerning the wages paid to civilian employees at some of the air force camps.
I understood then that steps were being or had been taken to improve this condition, and I have received information to the effect that the condition which prevailed a year ago has been considerably improved. But there are some of those camps in which veterans of the great war are employed as civilians at what I still consider very low wages.


Charles Gavan Power: If I may ask my hon. friend a question in connection with the class of labour to which he refers, are not those men employed at the prevailing rates in the different localities, as fixed by the Department of Labour? That was my impression, and I should like to know if that is the situation.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Here is one concrete example. A great war veteran employed at I.T.S. No. 5 near Belleville tells me that he receives $50 a month plus $1 a day subsistence allowance, giving him less than an average of $20 a week in all. The camp is situated at some distance from the city, and transportation costs most of the men going to that camp sixty cents a week. I do not know what the minister thinks, but to me that is a pretty low wage. I gather from the letter of this man that he has a fairly responsible position in the camp.


Charles Gavan Power: Unless the hon. gentleman has some other information I can only suggest that this rate of wages must be fixed either by the Department of Labour or by the civil service commission. I am quite sure that must be the situation, because we do not fix the rates of wages for this work.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Joseph William Noseworthy: I do not know who fixes it, but I would say that wage is too low for a man of that calibre.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think it is very high.


Joseph William Noseworthy: This may not be the responsibility of the minister, but it is a matter which does affect men employed in his organization, and if he has any responsibility in the matter I would suggest that some adjustment should be made.


Mr. WARREN:: I do not rise on this occasion to condemn or even to advise, but I do not wish this opportunity to pass without paying, on behalf of my riding of Renfrew North, a tribute to the Royal Canadian Air Force and the commonwealth air training plan. Sometimes I think we are inclined to forget the great background of the air training plan. We are inclined to forget the enormous amount of work that went into the setting up of the plan, before it finally got under way. We are told that originally the plan called for seventy-four air training schools dotted1 here andi there across Canada, and that it was later enlarged to 154. Can anyone imagine the amount of work that went into the locating of those air training fields, right across the country? Can we properly understand the work involved in finding the right locations, and in surveying them? That work was done by the Department of Transport. It was a work which must have involved a great deal of effort and organization on the part of the officials of that department.
Then the Department of Munitions and Supply was called in to get the fields in order, to let contracts for the grading of land', the erection of buildings, the laying of pipelines, the supplying of water, the disposal of sewage and the installation of plumbing. All this involved a tremendous effort, one we are apt to forget about. It was accomplished, not only by the officials of that department but also with the aid of a great army of civilian labourers. They accomplished a magnificent amount of work in the preparation of these air training schools.
I believe the minister said that approximately 50,000 airmen who go aloft have been trained under the plan. That is surely an accomplishment of which we may be proud. A great amount of education is involved in the training of a pilot, an observer, an air gunner or any of the personnel who fly.
Sometimes I stop to think why those boys wanted to get into the air force. In the early days of the war the boys who complained to me were those who wanted to join the air force, and who did- not know why they should

not be accepted at once. They were clamouring to join, knowing all the time that a pilot, observer or air gunner must be trained to a high degree of perfection. They knew, too, that they had to be almost perfect physically and mentally, and that the educational standards were high.
I believe I heard the minister say on one occasion that possibly he had spoiled our young men who entered the air force. But he said he deliberately set out to do that, because he wanted the cream of the country. He set out to pay them well, to feed them well and to treat them well. He stated further that his plan worked, and that he got what he wanted. Even to-day boys from my constituency are still on the waiting list, and still clamouring to join the air force.
I presume one reason why they prefer the air service is that they know they will see action, and that the air force has been in the front line during a time when the army has had to wait. When a civilian decides to go to war he prefers to go at once, get the fighting over and be done with it. They want action, and our boys knew that if they were taken into the air force they would find plenty of action. They have covered themselves with glory in all parts of the world. I pick at random clippings from my home town of Pembroke, and I find that they record the deeds of many of our boys in all parts of the world'-Egypt, Africa, Tunisia. They are here and there across the world. They are fighting, winning medals for their valour, doing splendid work and bringing glory to their country and to themselves.
There is another reason, however, why the boys want to see action. This was put beautifully in a letter written by a North Bay boy to his mother. It is contained in a newspaper article bearing the North Bay dateline of April 17, as follows:
Mr. and Mrs. Arthur Boyer have just received a letter written by their son, Fit. Sgt. A. B. Boyer, R.C.A.F., who was killed in action overseas, last October.
The letter was written last July and handed to a chaplain to forward in event of his death. It says: "I am writing this week in ease I get killed, because if I did get killed I would want you to know why. It's because I have always loved you very much and I came over here, as all other Canadian did, to stop Hitler from going to Canada and doing harm to you."
That is very touching, and just the language a boy would use. I think he is right in saying that the motive in the minds and hearts of our young men, when they offered themselves to perform this dangerous task, was that they were thinking of their loved ones. They felt they had a duty to perform, a job to do, and they did not hesitate to do it.

War Appropriation-Air Services
I pay tribute to those boys of ours who have gone in that spirit to do their work, a work they are doing so magnificently and so well.
While I am on my feet may I pay tribute to the mothers who have given those splendid boys to this task. Some of the boys will not return to the mothers who gave them to their country. In those cases the mothers' hearts will be terribly broken. In other cases boys may learn in foreign lands that during their absence their mothers have gone to a better land. But they should not worry unduly. While the mothers are here, they pray unceasingly for the welfare of their boys. Their thoughts go with them; they live with them. But if they are taken, they go to a better land, and then I feel the mothers may be in an even better position to stay close to those boys to protect and care for them. I am going to put on.record a poem written by Edna Jaques of Toronto which I think sums up the feeling of the mothers of the boys of the air force in most beautiful language:
"Son's Going Away"
Nobody mourns them as mothers do Nobody watches and waits and weeps,
Love forgets and the world goes by But mothers sorrow and pray and keep Little bits of him treasured up His old school sweater-his hockey cup.
Never a day goes by or a night
But she visions him in a hundred ways
He lives in the night, in the wind and stars,
He is part of her, and the weary days Go empty save for her dreams of him Brave as a lion, stalwart, slim.
She rides with him in his shining plane Over the channel upon a raid Sharing the cockpit, charting trails,
Flying his Spitfire, unafraid.
Prays for his safety, day and night _ Upholding him by her love's sheer might.
Nobody mourns him as mothers do Horning-evening-sunset and dawn Love forgets and the world goes by But mothers keep faith when hope is gone, Steady and true as the stars above Nothing can touch it-a mother's love.


Charles Edward Johnston: Mr. Chairman, I do not think there is anyone in the house or outside it who does not appreciate the work the air force is doing, and certainly no one underestimates the responsibility which these young fellows will have to assume in the very near future, to say nothing of the splendid work they have been doing up to the present. As time goes on, I think we shall realize that the air force is bound to become more important than perhaps any other branch of the armed forces. But there is one thing I would point out to the minister. In view of the fact that the air force will be called upon to render greater service as time
goes on, and there will be a greater number of air force casualties too, we have not in my opinion expanded the air force as much as we should have done in Canada. From my experience in travelling over the country I believe that the air force is not being expanded as rapidly as it could and should be.
We have in Canada at the present time more training aircraft than the air force can use. I remember talking to an officer in one of the air force training centres, and I asked him if that was a fact. He told me that they wyere training men just as fast as they could with the facilities they had at hand. I said, "What do you mean? Have you not enough space here for landing fields, or buildings?" He said, "That is not necessarily the cause of our not training more men. The point is, we really have not enough planes." I drew his attention to the fact that we had in storage in Canada large numbers of training planes which were not being used. It seems to me that this condition of affairs should not exist. I know we should keep a sufficient number of planes in reserve in case of smashes or crashes and a sufficient supply of parts for repairs. But when this officer told me that they were not training any more men because they did not have the aircraft, that did not just jibe with what I knew to be the fact. My information is that we have more training planes available than the air force is using, and that as fast as the air force wants to expand the Minister of Munitions and Supply can supply the planes required if they would only order them. But I think the practice is that the Department of Munitions and Supply makes no move in regard to supplying planes unless the air force orders them.
That brings me to another point. I would ask the minister how it is possible for a man in the army to transfer to the air force. I believe that is being done. I recall that over a year ago a young fellow who was in the army in England wrote to me and wanted to know how he could get into the air force. That had been his goal ever since he enlisted, about six months after the war started. He was eager to get into the fighting forces and his choice was the air force, but he was advised at that time to join the army and that he would then have no difficulty in transferring over to the air force. He spent all his training time with the army here in Canada; then was sent over to England and was there for a year when he wrote me asking how he could get into the air force. I took the question up with the Department of National Defence and was informed by the department what steps he

War Appropriation-Air Services
should take. I accordingly wrote and told him what he should do. He did that, and then about two months ago I received another letter from him saying that he had not got into the air force but still had hopes of getting there. I would ask the minister how that can be done.
I also wish to bring to the minister's attention a case that came before me about three weeks ago. I would ask the minister, is a young fellow in the air force on the day he is sworn in? My information is that this young fellow was sworn into the air force on July 16. Then he was sent home on leave without pay. Was he in the air force on the day he was sworn in, or was he in the air force after he was called back from being on leave without pay? I should like the minister to settle that point, because it so happens that later on this boy developed a sickness and upon his discharge the question arose as to when he was in the air force.


Charles Gavan Power: I will look into the matter. Roughly I would say this. If he developed a sickness while on leave without pay and had not participated in any way in the work of the air force, I would hate to say that I would be responsible for him.


Charles Edward Johnston: He did1 not develop the sickness while on leave without pay. He came back from leave and was in the air force for four or five months.


Charles Gavan Power: My hon. friend will have to discuss that with the department of pensions. He certainly was in the air force if he served in the air force and was actually a member of the air force. But the question of responsibility for pension or compensation or what have you, is one for the board1 of pension commissioners and is not for the decision of the Royal Canadian Air Force.


Charles Edward Johnston: Would he be considered on strength the day he was sworn in on July 16?


Charles Gavan Power: I do not see how that question would arise if the beginning of the illness or disability occurred when he was a member of the air force. If my hon. friend would send1 me particulars-


Charles Edward Johnston: I think the whole thing hinges on whether he was on the strength the day he was sworn in.


Charles Gavan Power: If my hon. friend will let
me have the particulars I shall be only too glad to hand the case over to pensions to get an opinion.


Charles Edward Johnston: I have
already taken the case up with some of their officials but have not got very far. The whole case hinges on whether the man was on the strength the day he was sworn in.


Charles Gavan Power: I am quite certain the hon. member cannot get very far with me to-night because I would have to see all the particulars.


Charles Edward Johnston: Surely the minister could say whether a person-


Charles Gavan Power: The minister will not give
a decision on a pension case. He never did it even when he was Minister of Pensions, and he is not going to start it now, when he is out of the job.


Charles Edward Johnston: I am not asking the minister to decide on a pension case. All I am asking is, was the man on the strength when he was sworn in?


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know.


Charles Edward Johnston: That is
the whole point of the case.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know whether he
was on the strength for the purposes of getting a pension for disability or not.. I would have to look into the matter. It is a legal question.


Charles Edward Johnston: Then there is a difference between being on the strength for pension purposes and being on the strength for service, I suppose?


Charles Gavan Power: I shall be only too glad
to get the legal officers of my department to give my hon. friend the best legal reply which can be given.


Gordon Graydon: The minister should do
better than that.


Clarence Gillis: I am not going to take this opportunity to make a speech. The Minister of National Defence for Air made a comprehensive statement to the committee, and I do not think there is any doubt in the mind of anyone who listened to him about the job which the air force has performed since its inception; we also have some idea of the task which lies ahead for that particular branch of the service. The only observation I would make in this connection is that it is not good policy to take the position of eulogizing one branch of the service. I believe that if and when the opportunity comes, the army will acquit itself just as creditably as the air force. The same remark applies to our navy. It is merely that the air force has had the first opportunity.
To-night we are dealing particularly with the estimates as tabled by the minister, and,

War Appropriation-Air Services
in accordance with the understanding that we were to take them item by item and discuss them specifically, I shall take up the first item and make a few observations dealing with civil salaries and wages.
I believe the minister is aware that there has been some controversy across the country arising out of complaints, by civilian personnel employed by the air force, as to the cost of living bonus. I have had some correspondence, and I understand that national selective service, unemployment insurance, have made a decision to the effect that civilian personnel employed by the air force in the various camps across the country come under the air force direct in the matter of interpretation as to whether they come under the regular order 5963 or the supplementary order applying directly to this particular branch.
I have a complaint specifically from the airport at Sydney, Nova Scotia. It was handled by the regional war labour board and also by the unemployment insurance commission. The complaint is that the civilian personnel employed at that port were engaged with the understanding at the time they were employed that they were to receive forty-three and a half cents an hour, plus cost of living bonus amounting to something over $18-I believe $18.18-a month. The cost of living bonus has not been provided. The unemployment insurance commission, under date of May 19, 1943, observe that they are unable to determine the exact status from the information submitted and suggest that the question of rate should be taken up direct by the employees concerned with the officer commanding the Royal Canadian Air Force. Quite a number of people are affected, and I rise at this time to bring this point to the minister's attention so that he may make some examination with respect to that particular situation.


Charles Gavan Power: May I ask, did they take it up with the officer in charge?


Clarence Gillis: I understand they did.


Charles Gavan Power: What happened?


Clarence Gillis: There has not been any decision arrived at. It has been a matter of controversy for some months.


Charles Gavan Power: Has my hon. friend any
correspondence which he can send over to me? I shall be only too glad to look into it.


Clarence Gillis: Yes; I will do that.


Mr. KNOWLES:: There are two matters
under the item before us, namely, that relating to civil salaries and wages, about which I should like to make a few remarks. Before
I do so, may I join in the tributes which have been paid by all hon. members who have spoken to the work which has been done in connection with the organization of the Royal Canadian Air Force, to the men and women in the force, to the families of those who have already made the supreme sacrifice, and to those for whom the present is a very anxious time as they listen to the news from day to day.
The cases to which I would direct the attention of the minister come out of equipment depot No. 7, at Winnipeg. The first case has to do with some forty-two employees who in June of last year were informed that trade tests would shortly be available to them in order that they might seek promotion as civil servants working in that depot. I understand that trade tests were conducted on August 17, and that the employees concerned had been advised in daily routine order 165, which had been issued on July 9, that those who were successful at these examinations would have their promotions made retroactive to July 1, 1942. After a considerable time it turned out that, although the tests were 'held in sufficient time for the increase to be made retroactive to July 1; although the employees had done everything that they were expected to do; although they were assured in daily routine orders that July 1 would be the effective date, still there was delay somewhere along the line, with the result that this matter did not receive the approval of the treasury board until some time after October 1. Accordingly, when the increase was granted it was made retroactive only to October 1 of last year, and the employees were so advised in daily routine order 307 of December 22, 1942. The employees, of course, were rather disappointed, particularly after they had been advised frequently that the effective date would be July 1. Immediately they got in touch with the officers on the station to seek an explanation and to see what should, be done. I shall not take the time of the committee to go into all the details, either as to the explanation or as to what was done, but I may say that these employees 'have been in constant touch with the officers on t'he station and have endeavoured to work through them. In fact, the employees are quite satisfied that the officers in Winnipeg are with them in this matter and that they have done everything in their power to have the increase made effective at the date at which it was promised.
Some time after getting the news that the promise was not to be implemented, the employees were able to have one of their number visit Ottawa during the course of a

War Appropriation-Air Services
trip to the east and take up this matter with the authorities. At that time I was brought in contact with this particular situation, and I have been in quite close touch with it ever since. It was, I believe, in February or March that this representative of these forty-two employees was here. He was in touch with both the civil service commission and the Department of National Defence for Air. The whole story was gone into, and he was assured, both by the chairman of the civil service commission and by the officer in the Department of National Defence for Air, that the matter would be reconsidered. Accordingly, on March 29 of this year, the civil service commission approved an order for making these payments retroactive to July 1 of last year. On the same day, March 29, the approval of the civil service commission was sent to the treasury board. On March 30 the treasury board sent it back to the civil service commission with a request for further information which it felt it should have. The minister will realize what is happening when I give these dates, which are so close to the end of the last fiscal year. The result was that it was April 2 before the civil service commission was able to get back to the treasury board the information asked for on March 30. I emphasize that on March 30 the treasury board acknowledged that it had this matter in hand, because it was on that date that it requested this further information. Matters dragged on until April 22, when the treasury board sent the matter back to the civil service commission again, at this time advising that the change of effective date called for the signature of the Minister of National Defence for Air. I was in touch with the minister as well as with the civil service commission at that time; within a few days the matter was before the minister, and I understand that he signed it. On April 27 the formal application, with the joint approval of the civil service commission and the Minister of National Defence for Air, was again sent to the treasury board. I emphasize the fact that on March 30 the treasury board had had the matter sent back for further information, and that later it asked for the minister's signature. But on May 11, having secured these things the treasury board had asked for, it rejected the application that these payments be made retroactive to July 1.
I must say to the credit of the department that after that date, May 11, I discussed the matter quite fully with one of the officers and that as a result of that discussion the officer agreed with me that the case was one that merited an attempt to have it reconsidered, because the treasury board was apparently rejecting the application on the ground that

it related to the last fiscal year whereas we were now over the line into the new fiscal year. I pointed out that the treasury board had the application for reconsideration on March 30, and that the matter had been hanging fire since last June, July, August and on through the year. I understand, in fact I have a communication to this effect from the department dated May 20, that the matter has again gone to the treasury board, with a request that they reconsider it.
I realize that the minister is familiar with the story, and if he reviews it he will find two or three points, on the basis of which he can say that the responsibility rests upon other shoulders. He can point out that last summer his department was in favour of the effective date being July 1, and that throughout the whole story he has been, or at least his department has been, in favour of the request of the employees. But the problem is still with us.
I do not know how to get at the treasury board; I have not been in the' house long enough to find out. But in view of the fact that this is a matter relating to the civilian employees of the Royal Canadian Air Force* and that the item of money we are now voting is the money that goes to pay civilian em->
ployees, it seems to me that this is the place to raise the question, and I hope the minister will be able to give some statement at least indicating that he and his department are doing their very best to implement this definite promise which was made to this group of employees as indicated by certain daily routine orders that were issued. These employees were amazed on January 22, 1943, when they read in D.R.O. No. 17 of that day that one of their number had had the effective date of her increase changed from October 1, 1942, to July 1, 1942. They did not regret the fact that she was given what they were all asking for, but they found it difficult to understand why it was impossible to do for the rest of the group what had been done for her.


Charles Gavan Power: I wish the hon. member would tell me how she worked it. I would do it for the rest.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am glad to have that statement on the record. I will communicate it to the rest of the group and try to find out. I will give the minister by correspondence the name of the person who was more fortunate than the rest.
There is another matter I should like to discuss with the minister, but perhaps he might like to make a statement first in connection with what I have just brought to his attention.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know what statement to make. I should like to know how they beat the treasury board. If anyone can tell me, I will throw up both hands and cheer.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister at least confirm my statement that he and his department agree that the promise made these employees ought to be implemented1 and that he and his department are doing everything possible to that end.


Charles Gavan Power: I would have to look over the correspondence again, but I take it that my hon. friend's statement is accurate, and if we made a promise we will fight to have it fulfilled. Rut I will not promise that we can beat the treasury board.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The other case to which I wish to refer arises likewise out of No. 7 equipment depot in the city of Winnipeg. This time it relates to a group of more than 200 employees, and I hope that in our discussion we do not have any passing of responsibility such as we had a moment ago in response to some of the remarks of the hon. member for York South. In this case we have a group of more than 200 men who are known as general duty men. They are not classified as civil servants, but they are employees of the Department of National Defence for Air, and I take it that their wages come out of the item which is now under discussion. The matter affecting these employees has its origin at least two years ago, and it is still hanging fire and causing a great deal of discontent and dissatisfaction among these men. There has been some change since they were first hired, but not a great deal. When they were first hired the desire of the department was to engage ' them at forty cents an hour, but it was discovered that the minimum wage or the fair wage provisions in the Manitoba act made it necessary to pay forty-five cents an hour, and that rate was paid. However, when the question of a cost of living bonus came into the picture and it was agreed that the men should get this bonus-let me make this clear -it was added to the forty-five cents which they were then receiving. In other words, they were paid forty-five cents, plus the bonus, for a matter of two or three months; I just forget how long it was. It was then discovered that it was possible to tell these men that before the bonus was paid they were getting forty-five cents an hour only because the provincial law required that they should be paid this rate, but since the cost
of living bonus on top of the lower rate of forty cents would give them a total in excess of the rate demanded by the provincial law-
I notice the minister is laughing, and perhaps it is amusing, if it were not so serious to the men concerned-


Charles Gavan Power: It is getting pretty complicated for me to follow.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is complicated, and amusing to some, but it is a serious matter.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know who thought up the reason to keep these men from getting the bonus. He must have been trying very hard.


Stanley Howard Knowles: He must have been a second cousin to the treasury board. Let me go back and line it up again. They were hired at forty-five cents an hour. They were paid this rate not because their employers, the minister's department, wanted to pay it, but because the provincial law required that it should be paid. Then when the bonus was paid-whoever thought up this scheme apparently did not think it up quickly enough, because they got the bonus for two or three months on top of the forty-five cent rate- these men were told that they would have to go back to the forty cent rate as a basic rate, because that rate plus the bonus would give them a little more than forty-five cents and the provincial regulations would thus be met. This happened perhaps two or three years ago and, while there has been considerable change in the personnel, these men have never got over what they felt-


Charles Gavan Power: May I ask what is the situation now?


Stanley Howard Knowles: I was leading up to that point. The situation has been improved in the sense that the basic rate has been increased to forty-five or fifty cents, and the bonus is paid in addition. In a sense the situation has been corrected, but the injustice of the experience has stuck with them and they feel quite discontented and unhappy about the whole thing.


Charles Gavan Power: Was that the equipment
depot at Winnipeg?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Yes, No. 7 equipment
depot. At that time I had not become a member of this house, but I was in contact with this situation. These men asked me to see what could be done, and I wrote to one of the members of this group, the hon. member for Mackenzie (Mr. Nicholson), who endeavoured to take it up with the' Minister
War Appropriation-Air Services

of National Defence for Air. I shall not take the time to put the letters on the record, but the minister replied suggesting that the hon. member should get in touch with the Minister of Labour. He did so, and the Minister of Labour replied suggesting that it was really the responsibility of the Minister of National Defence for Air. These men kept after me to give them such information as I was getting, and when I showed them these letters it did not help matters a great deal. After I came to this house I made further inquiries about how these governmental boards were set up, for whom government employees work, who pays them, who decides how much they will be paid and so on.


An hon. MEMBER:: Have you found out yet?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Not altogether, but I
know	a	lot more	than	I did before I camehere.	However, I	still	have a great deal tolearn. The minister will correct me if I am wrong, but I did learn that these men are employed by his department and that the money paid them comes out of his estimates. That	is	the item	we	are now considering.So long	as these	men	are not classified as
civil servants but are considered to be general duty or common labourers, the rates paid to them are fixed, not by the minister or his department but by the regulations of the Department of Labour. These men do not think very kindly of the Department of Labour, largely as a result of the experience they had which I have outlined in some detail.
I found out also that if these men could be classified as civil servants, they would still be employees of the Department of National Defence for Air and would receive their pay out of this item, but their rates of pay and working conditions would be set by the civil service commission rather than by the Department of Labour. That cleared up a point in my mind which had not been clear before. I understood that these men were trying to get connected with the civil service commission. They pointed out to me that the work they are doing could hardly be called general duty or common labour. They have a great deal to do with storing and looking after quite valuable equipment. Some of the men have been there for a considerable time, and a large percentage of them are veterans of the last war. They are keenly interested in what they are doing, and they feel they ought to have a higher rating. They have become interested in the possibility of being classified as civil servants.

I took the matter up with the civil service commission. I have admitted already that there is a great deal I have to learn, and I may have made a mistake in going to the civil service commission before I went to the Department of National Defence for Air. I did not consider it to be a terrible mistake, but I have been told that it might have been better if I had made my representations first of all to the Department of National Defence for Air.


Charles Gavan Power: The Department of National Defence for Air would have sent them to the civil service commission, so that I thank my hon. friend for taking the short-cut.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I thank the minister for absolving me of having made a serious mistake. The civil service commission explained the rigmarole which I have outlined and indicated that they were prepared to consider this application. Then we went through more rigmarole. The civil service commission has been in touch with the men, and they have been asked to fill out statement of duty forms as to what they are doing so that the civil service commission might draw up a statement showing whether the men would be better off in the civil service or under the Department of Labour, although they are actually in the minister's department. For a time it looked as though we were making pretty good headway, and the men were hopeful that a civil service classification would be granted and their rates would be higher. They would thus be able to forget the unfortunate experience they had when their rates and conditions were under the direction of the Department of Labour.
The upshot of this was that during the Easter recess an official of the civil service commission and an officer of the Department of National Defence for Air visited Winnipeg, I had quite a lengthy interview with them, and they went out and had interviews with the men. I should like to have gone with them at the time, but they advised against it, and whether or not I should have done so, I accepted their advice in the matter. Now I am told that the men were given a hypothetical choice to make. On the one hand they were asked if they would like to continue as unclassified, general duty men at the hourly rate and be given holidays with pay, one week or two weeks, or if they would prefer to become classified as civil servants with a possible reduction' in their total income.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know anything about this, but my impression is that if they were civil servants they would get holidays with pay and that if they were on the prevailing

War Appropriation-Air Services
rate they would not get holidays with pay. Perhaps my hon. friend has reversed the situation. If they became civil servants they would get holidays with pay. If they were not civil servants they would get the prevailing daily rate and would not get any pay while they were not working. Am I not right in that?


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister is making the very criticism of this proposal that was made to these men that I was about to make.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know anything about this particular case, but for twenty-five years I have been fighting to get similar privileges for people in my constituency and have not succeeded. I understood that if one remained on prevailing rates one was not paid for holidays, whereas if one became a civil servant payment went on for the period of the holidays, one week or two weeks. If there is any change in that rule I do not know about it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That was exactly my understanding of it, and it was the understanding of the men to whom the proposition was put. I am quite sure the proposition was made in the way I have stated; as a matter of fact it was discussed with me in the interview 1 had with the two officials.


Charles Gavan Power: How could they pay people on prevailing rates if they did not work, if they were on holidays?


Stanley Howard Knowles: That was my question.


Charles Gavan Power: This is a new one on me.
I do not understand it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: But that is what the
men were asked, if they would like to continue on the hourly rate and have a concession which they could not possibly realize, or if they would prefer to become civil servants at a rate which was indicated by the officers as lower than actually it might be. The men feel that the proposition which was put to them was deliberately distorted in order to get them to say that they would prefer to remain on the hourly rate.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know anything
about it, but I hardly think a responsible officer of the civil service commission would make an offer that was not bona fide, at any rate. I should be surprised if he did, and1 I would draw it to the attention of the civil service commission if that were done.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If the minister will look into the matter I think he will find that he should draw it to the attention of an officer of his own department. If my information is
correct, and I have reason to believe it is, it was the air force officer who made the proposal with the official of the civil service commission standing by. If I may try to state their case, these men feel that the department does not want them to be classified, that the choice was deliberately distorted so that they would choose the alternative the department wanted them to choose.


Charles Gavan Power: I can assure my hon. friend that I do not care; I am all in favour of their getting increased rates. We are not trying to distort anything, so far as the department is concerned.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I say further that
if the statement just made by the minister inr dicates his view on the matter-


Charles Gavan Power: I am afraid that will not
help my hon. friend. I have been fighting the civil service commission and treasury board ever since I have been a member of this house, and I have been here since 1917, but it has not done me any good.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am still of the opinion that if the minister or the department would like to have these men classified, the civil service commission is ready to classify them, but that actually the officers in the minister's department are not sympathetic. They have given me their reasons for not being sympathetic, though I need not take time to give those reasons.


Charles Gavan Power: I should like to know them.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Since the minister has
asked for them, they feel that there will be problems related to getting overtime work out of the men if they are classified as civil servants instead of being on an hourly rate. That is the principal objection that was raised.


Charles Gavan Power: I was under the impression
that it was just the opposite, that when you are in the civil service you do overtime work, but that if you are on a prevailing rate of pay you get time and a half for overtime.


Stanley Howard Knowles: At least one officer in
the minister's department feels that there would be difficulty in persuading the men to work, even though civil service regulations say they may have to, after having been paid for it. He also felt that there would be difficulty as between these civilians and the service personnel. I am glad to hear the minister's statement, despite his feeling that it will not do any good. I am glad he is for a civil service classification in a case like this; and if

War Appropriation-Air Services
he will go ahead and battle this thing through, from, my talks with the officials of the civil service commission. I have reason to believe that something can be done. Let me make this comparison. In the other case about which I was talking, the case of the forty-two whose promotion was made effective on the wrong date, the department was on the side of the employees, while the civil service commission did not stand up for them at first, although later it agreed with their request. In this case, however, the civil service commission has already indicated to me its willingness to go ahead and classify these men, certainly if the department asks for it. I may repeat that it was at a fairly late stage of the proceedings that I was told that the attitude of the Department of National Defence for Air toward this whole matter might have been more sympathetic if it had come about either through my going to the department or through the men making that approach, but that my having gone to t'he civil service commission-


Charles Gavan Power: I hope my hon. friend will
disabuse his mind of that idea. I have not the slightest objection to his going over my head to the civil service commission at any time.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am glad to have that statement from the minister. Now it is on record, and I should be able to use it if ever I am told that sort of thing again.


Charles Gavan Power: You bet.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am now told that conditions are getting a little worse. For a considerable length of time the personnel of this group of over two hundred did not change a great deal, but lately the personnel has begun to change quite considerably. I am told that every day men are resigning or are being discharged and are being replaced the next day with other men sent over in response to applications made to selective service; in fact, the selective service office at Winnipeg is now beginning to wonder at the turnover at this place. The men themselves are wondering whether this rapid change in personnel, which occurs partly because the men are getting fed up and leaving and partly because some are being discharged, is an attempt to break up this group which has been struggling in this matter for about two yearn. They wonder what is happening, and are becoming quite discouraged. As I have already indicated, I have been in touch with this matter for at least a year and a half; and these men have been in touch with the Department of National
iMr. Knowles. 1
Defence for Air and the Department of Labour for about two years. And yet through all this time this matter has never before been brought up in the house or in committee. An attempt has been made to deal with the matter direcly with the department. That has been my aim right along. But I feel the thing has reached the stage where it is necessary to say something about it in a more public way, and to express here the hope that the minister will do what he can to fight this case. I do not share the sense of futility he seems to have as to the effectiveness of his activities in the matter. I. believe that if I can enlist his support on behalf of these men, despite what he says some good will come of it.


Charles Gavan Power: I shall be glad to help all
I can against the civil service commission at any time. I moved for its abolition on three occasions in this house.


Stanley Howard Knowles: This is a serious matter.


Ernest George Hansell: Reverting to the discussion raised a little while ago by the hon. member for Bow River, may I point out that the minister seemed to focus his attention on the point as to whether or not that particular case was one for the pension board. I am not going to discuss the case, but I believe that a principle worthy of some clarification is involved.
As an illustration I shall present a set of circumstances to the minister. The young man in question is, we will say, around the age of nineteen years. Recognizing that he may be called into the services, he enlists in the air force. But he does not wish to be called immediately. The fact is that he is not called, but enlists and obtains his number. Them- and I do not know whether I am using the proper term-his file is put back, and there is a general understanding between him and the recruiting officer that he will not be called until a certain date. After that, should he be checked by the mounted police-and that is not likely-he has in his pocket documents showing that he has enlisted. Then the time arrives when the air force calls him to the service. Five or six months may have elapsed between his date of enlistment and the date he is called up and sent to the manning depot, or to the training centre. Is this young man considered to be in the air force at the time of his original enlistment?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Ernest George Hansell: I will leave the case mentioned by the hon. member for Bow River in the hands of the minister and the hon. member. The statement is, however, that this young man is now enlisted, and on strength.

War Appropriation-Air Services
Would the minister make a statement with respect to decorations, awards, medals and the like given to members of the air force who have rendered outstanding service? I ask the question because I am under the impression that usually awards are given to those men in the air force who have commissions, or who are in higher ranks, and may have better opportunities to distinguish themselves. The mere fact that they are in positions of authority may win them awards, whereas those who serve under the officers-wireless air gunners, air gunners or men of lower rank, but serving in aircrew - do not seem to receive the same distinctions. The country would like to have a statement from the minister. I was asked about this matter by a man well known in public life. How are these awards granted? On what basis are they given, and what process is followed in giving them?


Charles Gavan Power: The question of awards is a difficult and complex one. I cannot answer the hon. member offhand as to how awards are given. I suppose he is aware that overseas awards for gallantry are usually granted on the recommendations of a commanding officer. Then, through a routine process the recommendation reaches the higher authorities. Awards other than awards for specific acts of gallantry-these are periodic awards-but for service over an extended period, and not necessarily including acts of gallantry, are usually given upon recommendation of the commanding officer of the command, group, unit or whatever the formation may be. Beyond that I am afraid I cannot go into detail, because I have never looked into the matter carefully. However, I shall do so, and I shall be glad to give the hon. member all the information I can to-morrow.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: There are several points I should like to mention, but first may I say that as I look across the floor of the chamber I see my old friend who is commonly known as "Chubby" Power.


Charles Gavan Power: Tut, tut!


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I think "Chubby" Power is well named. We all have the greatest respect for him. As a matter of fact the country wishes it had three "Chubby" Powers in the House of Commons, instead of one, and that they could be in charge of the three defence departments. The minister, as a matter of fact, is more or less human-and that is something not peculiar to ministers. Most ministers I have known have not been human at all, except, of course, the Minister of Pensions and National Health. Sometimes he is human, too. But they are the only
two in the cabinet who are any good, anyway. You could wash all the rest out-and that is what the public thinks, too. The rest of the cabinet are just a wash-out; but these two are pretty good. I have not had enough experience with the parliamentary assistants to express any opinion, but we shall get to know them, just the same as we know the ministers.
I have one or two observations to make which may be worth while. First of all, I take off my hat to these gallant boys of the air force. But in all our armed forces we have the youth of Canada who are equally impressed with a sense of their duty and each of them will do his duty when the opportunity comes. Canada's air force has done a marvellous job for Canada but it has had more opportunity. I am sure that when the army gets its opportunity it will give just as good account of itself as all our other forces. I do not think it is quite right for us to eulogize one force and not pay tribute to the other branches of the service as well. Of course, we all realize that when our air force is on a bombing raid over Europe the sacrifice of one of our pilots might mean the saving of possibly ten thousand lives. I want the minister to listen to me for a moment.


Charles Gavan Power: I am listening.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I did not catch the minister's eye. These boys of the air force are all young. You have picked out the best of the whole crowd.-


Charles Gavan Power: Hear, hear.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Well, you have just picked them out, that is all, but equally fine young men have been picked for the army and navy, too. They are all young, and what I wish to know is this. After the war is over, what do you propose to do about giving these young men the university training .they otherwise might have had. What opportunities will you give them to carry on and make their way in life?
I should also like some information about transfers from the Royal Air Force to the Royal Canadian Air Force. A great many lads who were turned down by the Royal Canadian Air Force in the early days went over to England and joined the Royal Air Force. Some of them now want to transfer to the Royal Canadian Air Force. I hope the minister will give some information on that question. Another question that arises is that of seniority. What positions are they to have? How is seniority to be worked for them in so far as the permanent force is concerned and so far as the temporary force or whatever you like to call it is concerned?
War Appropriation-Air Services

The Minister of Agriculture the other day said that rumours had come to his ears of extravagance on messes. I must say that I, too, heard something about extravagances and so on. But when you look into it you find that where there is a fairly nice mess, whether in the air force, the army or the navy, somebody donated all this stuff. No question like the extravagances we heard about in connection with rugs enters into the matter at all. Some people when they see a nice mess get the idea that there is extravagance and that everything is cockeyed. But the truth is that very often the equipment has been donated.
I should like to know what we are doing about gliders in Canada. Are we doing anything in connection with gliders?
I think the people of Canada would also like to know something about our activities in connection with the United States air force in Alaska.
I should like to know something about air defence in the St. Lawrence. I do not know whether the minister is free to tell us anything about that, but it is a subject in which the public is interested.
Do we propose to have a fleet air arm in Canada? Can the minister tell us something about that?
What about the standards for enlistment at the present time? What are the requirements?


Charles Gavan Power: The physical standards?


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The physical standards, the educational standards, qualifications as to age and so forth. What enlistments do we require in the air force to-day? Do we need any more ground crew, repair men, and so forth? The minister knows what I mean. -
I should be glad if the minister would tell us something about equipment depots. What personnel is required for an equipment depot? Where are our equipment depots? What do they do?
There is also the question of financial responsibility for the Royal Air Force in Canada and the Royal Canadian Air Force overseas. Are the pay and allowances for the Royal Air Force in Canada on the same basis in Canada as for the Royal Canadian Air Force in Canada?


Charles Gavan Power: The answer to that is yes right away.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The pay and allowances are the same? O.K. I think I

have now all my questions off my chest except the question of commissions for our air force. The minister has already been asked several questions about that. I do see an incongruity, and this happens in certain cases, in having a sergeant-pilot taking a bomber over Germany with a pilot officer or a flying officer as part of his crew. I do not know how that works out, but I do know that it has happened on many occasions. My personal opinion is that all these men who go into the air, after they have had a certain number of flights, should automatically become officers if they qualify. Perhaps the minister would make a statement on that.
One last word. I wish to pay tribute to all those men of Canada in the Royal Canadian Air Force who are doing such a magnificent job and to all those who unfortunately have lost their lives in the service of their country. Their names will live forever. Too much cannot be said for what they have done for Canada.
Perhaps when the minister makes his statement he would tell us the number of Canadians in the Royal Air Force and in the Royal Canadian Air Force who have lost their lives or been wounded or made prisoners of war. I congratulate the minister, not for himself, but for all those fine men in the Royal Canadian Air Force who have such a wonderful sense of duty and are doing such a marvellous job so far as Canada is concerned.


Ernest Edward Perley: I have only two questions, and I shall be quite brief. I ask them now, although I do not see any item in this break-down of the minister's estimates which they come under.
First, may I join with many other hon. members who have spoken this evening in expressing appreciation of the valour and self-sacrifice of the splendid young men and women whom we have in the Canadian air force. Had I the time I would tell of the splendid type of enlistments in that part of the province of Saskatchewan which I represent. Not only are they qualified from the point of view of education, but physically they are splendid men. I regret to have to say that many from our own community have already made the supreme sacrifice. No doubt the Royal Canadian Air Force will play a very important part in the months to come in the winning of the war.
We have listened this evening, as we did while the estimates of the Minister of National Defence (Army) were before the

War Appropriation-Air Services
committee, to various hon. members bringing individual cases before the minister. I think a great deal of time could be saved if, instead of putting these cases before the minister while he is sitting in committee, hon. members would bring them to the attention of the proper officers of his department. Rules and regulations have been adopted for the guidance of each branch of the armed services, and if hon. members will acquaint themselves with the conditions governing promotions, salaries, salary increases and pensions, and then will carry on their inquiries in the correct way, by going to the proper authorities, they could save us a lot of time. I will say this for the minister who is before us this evening, that they will get action. I have taken three or four cases to him. In one case we got action so fast that the man concerned obtained his postponement and was out of the air force before he realized it. I appreciate that the air force must be governed by rules and regulations, and I repeat that if hon. members will study them and follow the right procedure they will soon obtain the information they require and will be able to advise those who write such letters as we have heard so much about to-night.
I have two questions to ask the minister. One of the young men in my locality is a prisoner of war. He was in England when the war broke out, joined the Royal Air Force, and was taken prisoner. He would now like to transfer to the Royal Canadian Air Force, and I wish to know from the minister how he can go about having a transfer made. He has made representations through certain authorities, but without getting satisfaction, and he would like to have the application definitely dealt with.
Another subject to which I would invite the minister's attention relates to cases of men-I have two particularly in mind-who were killed while serving in the air force. They were industrious chaps and had opened a savings account in a bank in England. Their parents are unable to get any action with respect to the transfer of these accounts. One of the cases is of six months' standing, and one family which is concerned with this question has three sons in the air force, one of whom has already paid with his life.


Charles Gavan Power: That is the estate of a
deceased?


Ernest Edward Perley: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: I must say that earlier in the war there was a great deal of confusion and it took months and months to get estates settled. But only two or three days ago I
inquired as to the progress in settling estates, and I am informed that over two thousand had been already settled and another fourteen or fifteen hundred are well on the way to settlement. I will get these figures for my hon. friend. If he will let me know the particulars to which he refers we will cable to England.


Ernest Edward Perley: I do not think the parents are so anxious for an immediate settlement that that is necessary.


Charles Gavan Power: As I say, there was a great deal of delay at the start, but I know things are being hastened.
The other question, regarding the transfer of a prisoner of war to the Royal Canadian Air Force, is really a poser. I never contemplated that, and I do not think I can do much about it.


Mr. GERSHAW:: I wish to bring to the attention of the committee and the minister the matter of getting compassionate leave for some members of aircrews. It seems to be settled policy that a member of an aircrew cannot get leave or be released from the service under any circumstances whatever. It happens that conditions in the homes of some of these people-I have farm homes particularly in mind'-change rapidly, and I have learned of some very unfortunate cases. One I have in mind is that of a young man, an only son, who enlisted in goodi faith. His father has been taken seriously ill; yet it is quite impossible for the young man to obtain a long enough leave to go back to the farm and carry on until the farm and the stock can be sold or some other arrangement made.
I quite realize that it costs a good deal of money to educate a man in an aircrew. I realize, too, that these boys are doing wonderful work and are badly needed at the present time. But it is most discouraging for some to find that farm help cannot be obtained and that although their families are suffering very severe financial loss they cannot get leave to go home. It seems to me that often the commanding officers to whom applications are made are not very sympathetic. Sometimes the file is missing; weeks and months go by, and the lads become discouraged and feel that the sacrifices which they are asked to undertake are out of all proportion. Could the minister not suggest some way whereby leave could be granted for at least a number of months, or the boy be allowed to get out of the service altogether where desperate conditions have arisen in the family which would make compassionate release seem justified.


Mr. STOKES:: In connection with this item we are discussing, I wish to ask the minister
War Appropriation-Air Services

a question somewhat along the lines of those of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. I speak with some trepidation after the remarks of the member for Qu'Appelle, who advised us not to ask the minister questions and then asked a few himself. My question is with regard to the variation in the rates of pay for ordinary service men at Trenton air station. The men whose case I am discussing are not receiving cost of living bonus.


Charles Gavan Power: Civilians?


George Henry Stokes: Yes. They advise me that there are men on the staff who do receive cost of living bonus. The men in particular to whom I refer work long hours, as high as ninety a week, and they have not been able to get a satisfactory disposition of their claims. That is the question I wish to put to the minister with regard to civilian employees.


Charles Gavan Power: I will look into it.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Following what the hon. member for Qu'Appelle has said, I have had a number of cases in regard to airmen who have been killed and whose estates it has taken months to settle.


Charles Gavan Power: I agree with my hon. friend, but I made inquiries only a few days ago and they said the situation was better.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Have they a new system of checking, or is it due to the fact that the officers in charge have not been reporting these cases properly or sending them here? I have received letters-


Charles Gavan Power: I imagine it is better
organized, and the fact that we are having a hand in it might account for the improvement.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: If you had a hand in it, it would be better.


Charles Gavan Power: I mean, the Royal Canadian Air Force having a hand in it overseas, which they did not have at that time.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: This
is also in regard1 to Newfoundland. I am thinking of the fire there. In Peterborough we had a man who was burnt to death.


Charles Gavan Power: We cannot blame it on
anyone but the R.C.A.F., but if there is anything wrong we want to know.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: This case has not been settled, and it was said1 that the facts had not been sent to Ottawa.


Charles Gavan Power: Will the hon. member send me the details?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes.


Mr. HAZEN:: There is some information
under this item and the next which I should like to obtain. Will the minister furnish the number of civilian personnel and the number of air personnel employed by his director of public information, or publicity department, during the past fiscal year or up to any subsequent date, and will he let us know how this personnel is distributed by provinces or by military districts, also the number in Great Britain, if any, and the number in the United States? Will the minister furnish us also with the total wages and salaries paid to civilian personnel and air personnel who are employed in his publicity department or by the director of public relations? Will he give also the total travelling expenses and all other costs and expenses that were paid to these civilian personnel and service personnel during the past fiscal year or up to any subsequent date? Will he let us know also how many of the personnel, both civilian and service, in this branch of his department receive salaries over $5,000, if any; how many receive salaries of $4,000 or more; how many receive salaries of $3,000-


Charles Gavan Power: I will give all the salaries.
Why ask for $4,000 or $5,000? We will give them all from nothing up. I was under the impression that these questions had been made an order for return already. I am not sure.


Douglas King Hazen: If they have, I have not seen them.


Charles Gavan Power: Anyway, I will give them.


Gordon Graydon: Under civil salaries and wages, may I ask the minister whether or not the bomber command comes within the purview of the operations of the Royal Canadian Air Force? My understanding at the moment is that it does not, but I was wondering whether in the civil salaries and wages here the bomber command actually came within the purview of the department.


Charles Gavan Power: The ferry command?


Gordon Graydon: That is what I mean.


Charles Gavan Power: We have nothing to do with that.


Gordon Graydon: As a matter of information, under whose jurisdiction is it? I should not say the bomber comand, nor is ferry command the right term; transport command is the actual designation in the income tax act. Who is it that provides the salaries for these men, and under whose jurisdiction does the transport command operate?


Charles Gavan Power: It is absolutely independent of the R.C.A.F. We have no control or juris-

War Appropriation-Air Services
diction; we have nothing to do with pay or anything else. It is the government of Great Britain.


Gordon Graydon: When the minister says the government of Great Britain, does he mean that the Royal Air Force of Great Britain has control?


Charles Gavan Power: I cannot give my hon. friend all the details. The ferry command started as the B.O.A.C., the British Overseas Aircraft Corporation. I do not remember what the name was, but it got mixed up with the Canadian Pacific Railway, who furnished pilots and a great number of personnel, and after that it was taken over by the R.A.F. ferry command under Sir Frederick Bowhill in the last two or three months. They formed it into the transport command, with different branches, and it is controlled1 by the British government. We have nothing to do with it except that frequently we furnish personnel to the ferry command and they ferry bombers overseas to do work for them.


Gordon Graydon: Supplementary to what the minister says, when the Royal Canadian Air Force provides personnel for the transport command, are these particular personnel under the rates of pay of the Royal Canadian Air Force, or do they participate in the higher rate of pay of civilians in connection with the transport command?


Charles Gavan Power: So far as I know they are still under R.C.A.F. rates of pay. I do not think they get a higher rate of pay.


Gordon Graydon: If that is the case-


Charles Gavan Power: We do not pay them.


Gordon Graydon: -what you have, then, is some men ferrying bombers across at Royal Canadian Air Force rates of pay which are proportionately a good deal lower than those of the transport command?


Charles Gavan Power: I believe that was one of the reasons why the Canadian Pacific came into the business. They employed a great many Americans and were paying them $2,000 a month, as against Royal Air Force or Royal Canadian Air Force men who were getting $150 a month. They figured they had to get these men to perform that job of work. We have had nothing to do with that. That was entirely a responsibility of the British government, and I must say that a great many of the boys who were taking the same risk and doing the same job did not like to get ordinary rates of pay. I understand that now the rates of pay for civilian ferry pilots who work
alongside Royal Air Force or Royal Canadian Air Force men are a great deal less than they were originally.


Mr. HARRIS (Danforth):: In reference to another subject matter, the minister will recall that two years ago he, as minister, and his department conceived the idea that probably like services in the Department of National Defence for the army and navy, and even for pensions and national health, might coordinate their efforts by convening all the heads of such services as medical services and hospitalization where the type of work was much the same. I will admit that they did not have much success or did not carry out the idea originated by the Minister of National Defence for Air. No one was placed at the head of this coordination committee. Perhaps between now and to-morrow when the minister is to make his reply he will look into the matter and see what has been done to appoint a head of this coordination committee and have it called at the proper time. I am also anxious to know if a secretariat has been set up for this committee so that minutes and records may be kept of what they are able to do. If this committee is not functioning or cannot function for some reason or another, I should like to know. I realize that sometimes it is difficult for men in blue to associate with men in khaki; one service finds it is hard to attend on the other. I was hoping that something would develop from the minister's original idea which 1 thought was sound and which I felt would save this country many thousands of dollars. He will recall that the plan covered not only the three armed services but also certain branches of the Department of Pensions and National Health. A short statement as to where the matter stands would, I am sure, be appreciated by the committee.


Charles Gavan Power: The committee on hospitalization is functioning, and functioning extremely well. At present all four medical services are represented, the armed services, and pensions and national health. It is headed up by Colonel Currie, of the Department of National Defence. There is no hospitalization scheme or anything connected with hospitalization that goes through the treasury board or privy council, or is submitted to the ministers without being submitted to this committee. It is one committee that is working extremely well and it sits almost every day.


Joseph Henry Harris: Does its work cover the medical services?


Charles Gavan Power: So far as I know, the committee has nothing to do with medical services.



BEV1SED EDITION COMMONS

[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation-Air Services
It was really constituted to see that hospital facilities across the country were not duplicated.
Howard Charles Green: How long has it been
functioning?


Charles Gavan Power: It was started about two
years ago. I do not know when it really struck its stride, but it is in its stride now.


Joseph Henry Harris: Following the
matter of medical services is the question of medical supplies. As the Minister of Pensions and National Health knows, there is a duplication in connection with those responsible for providing supplies for the different hospital units. The Minister of Pensions and National Health is fortunate in having a service which has been built up over two or three decades and is in good working order. However, the department which has to do with medical supplies for the air defence and the department that has to do with supplies for the army have been in a deplorable tangle. I was hoping that the tangle might have been straightened out by coordinating the different branches which are handling the same supplies.
If the minister feels so disposed, perhaps he will enlarge upon his statement and place a deposition on the record in connection with medical supplies. The supplies run into many millions of dollars, particularly when you get into X-ray equipment and equipment of other types. Undoubtedly there has been considerable duplication. I hesitate to say it, but the supplies branch of the Department of Pensions and National Health apparently are not aware of the working of the supplies branch of the army. One is situated across from the Chateau Laurier, the other being on Kent street, and there does not seem to be any cooperation between these particular units. The department for air was not organized with regard to supplies.


Charles Gavan Power: The army purchases all our supplies with the exception of special equipment, such as X-ray equipment.


Joseph Henry Harris: The view is
taken in England, and perhaps it is quite sound, that air should handle hospitalization connected with the physical endurance which must be undergone by members of the air force. These men face particular hazards, quite different from those faced by men in the army. In that view I concur. I agree with the extent of the hospitalization which has to do with the peculiar operations of the Department of National Defence for Air, but when it comes to dealing with the ordinary

sicknesses to which we are all subject I think there should be the maximum cooperation to provide the maximum service at a minimum cost.
For the information of the minister I would say that there seems to be a tendency on the part of his department to set up an organization to deal with all phases of this work, quite apart from the special hazards of his branch of the service. As I say, there could be considerably more cooperation, and those in the minister's department who are charged with this responsibility should be encouraged to cooperate to the fullest and enlarge their activities only in connection with the special hazards of their particular service rather than to try to enlarge them to cover the entire field of hospitalization.
Many of these men find themselves located in small communities. While up Goderich way, I had the pleasure of the company of half a dozen of the young men from the field there over the week-end. They tell me that they have to get hospital treatment and medical supplies in a small community in Huron county. I suggest to the minister that he encourage his medical officers and those charged with this responsibility to use, where-ever possible, the local facilities instead of setting up too many expensive units here and there across the country.


Gordon Graydon: Would the people employed at the privately-owned training schools come within this item of civilian salaries and wages?


Charles Gavan Power: They would come under
civilian schools.


Gordon Graydon: The item in the army
estimates covering civilian salaries and wages for this year amounted to a little over $9,000,000, whereas the similar item for the air force comes to some $18,500,000. I think by way of clarification the minister ought to indicate the main items that would be responsible for such an increase, having regard to the difference in size as between the two forces.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know just how
many civilians the army have in their employ, but we have somewhere between fifteen and sixteen thousand. I will say to my hon. friend that very early in my career as a minister I insisted that as far as possible where one could get a civilian to do the work, one should do so rather than get a service man. I preferred that. As time went on, it became impossible to get civilians and I have had to

War Appropriation-Air Services
use more service men, so that probably we have proportionately more civilians in our employ than they have in the army.


Gordon Graydon: Then is it fair to assume that the average rates of pay of those engaged as civilian personnel are higher than the rates of those in the service generally?


Charles Gavan Power: The average civilian rate is
$1,210 per annum. So far as civilians are concerned, if they are casual labour or what we call exempt positions from the civil service commission; they are employed at the rates prevailing in the locality. Otherwise they are under civil service rates, whatever they may be, for that particular class of work. There is no difference between our rates of pay for civil servants and those of any other department. Perhaps seventy-five out of the whole fifteen thousand were appointed directly by order in council. The remainder are under the civil service or in a class which is exempt as casual labour.


Gordon Graydon: Has the minister adopted this policy largely as an economic measure, or was there any other reason?


Charles Gavan Power: Early in the game I felt
that sooner or later there would be criticism in this house and in the country if a very large number of people in uniform were doing work that could be done just as well by civil servants. I held to that theory until such time as we could no longer get civilians; then it was necessary to use service personnel. It was really from a political point of view as much as any other; I do not think the question of saving money entered into it, because I do not believe there is very much difference.


Howard Charles Green: What is the practice with
regard to the civilians who are employed at the different air stations? Do they take an oath of allegiance, or what is the provision in that regard?


Charles Gavan Power: I am told that they do
take an oath of allegiance.


Howard Charles Green: I suppose they come and go a great deal?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: I understand, for example,
that at some of the stations many civilian waitresses are employed.
Mr. POWER; I would not think so, at any of our service stations. There may be some at the civilian training schools; I would not know about that. At nearly all our service stations the waitresses are members of the women's division of the air force.


Howard Charles Green: What about the training
stations?


Charles Gavan Power: They are all under contract with the department; they look after the food and everything else.
Mr. Green:	But they have civilian
waitresses at the training stations?


Charles Gavan Power: I would not know whether
or not they have civilian waitresses, but I would suspect so.


Howard Charles Green: Is it the intention to replace those waitresses by members of the women's division?


Charles Gavan Power: No, not at contract schools. These civilian training schools are operated on a contract basis; we just pay them the contract fee of so much.


Howard Charles Green: I do not mean the civilian training schools; I mean the training stations operated by the air force.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think we have any civilian waitresses; I cannot think of any at our own service schools. We would have a great many of the women's division of the R.C.A.F. They are in the service; they are enlisted.


Howard Charles Green: But no civilian waitresses?


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think we have any; I should be very much surprised if we had.


Gordon Graydon: Then may I ask whether under this item covering civil salaries and wages will come the provision for the new R.C.A.F. cafeterias in Ottawa, about which we see so much in the newspapers from time to time? Perhaps in view of the minister's keen interest in this matter and his desire to give the committee information on these points, he would not mind saying a word to the committee now with respect to the position in which the air force now finds itself.


Charles Gavan Power: I really do not know just what I can tell the committee that they have not read over and1 over again, rightly or wrongly, accurately or inaccurately, in the Ottawa newspapers.


Gordon Graydon: Perhaps we should have an accurate account.


Charles Gavan Power: Perhaps you had better get it from the newspapers; they seem to know far more about it than the minister does. We were operating a cafeteria for our employees, both civilian and service, in the Lisgar building.


Gordon Graydon: That is the building out near the farm?
3250

War Appropriation-Air Services


Charles Gavan Power: No; the one in the Lisgar building; the other one was not to be taken over until to-day, I think, or to-morrow. In the Lisgar building, where headquarters is located, the service was performed by service personnel, and for that reason the cost was comparatively low in comparison with that of similar meals outside. Then it happened that trouble developed at No. 5 temporary budding, near the farm, and I understood we were asked' to care for our nine hundred employees there. We undertook to do so in the same way that we were operating the cafeteria in the Lisgar building.


Gordon Graydon: In other words, by air force personnel?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes. After some discussion as to the prices to be charged it was decided that in order to be fair to everyone and so that there would be no discrimination later on, when the government policy with respect to cafeterias generally in Ottawa is developed, for the time being the same prices would prevail at the farm and at the Lisgar building as had prevailed hitherto; that is, comparatively low prices at the Lisgar building and prices somewhat higher at the farm. These will remain in force until about June 20 or June 21, at which time comparisons will be made, and it will be our endeavour to see whether the prices cannot coincide, to some extent, and to ascertain the real costs of carrying on these operations.


Gordon Graydon: You do not know yet whether you are losing or making money?


Charles Gavan Power: I think on the straight cost of the food alone I am not losing much in the Lisgar building; I do not know whether I am making much either. At the other building, with all services furnished free, so to speak, by the R.C.A.F., I rather imagine some money would be made. I am not sure, though;
I am not very familiar with this matter. I learned most of it from the newspapers.


Gordon Graydon: A moment ago the minister mentioned a general policy on the part of the government with respeot to cafeterias.


Charles Gavan Power: It is being developed now.


Gordon Graydon: Did I understand the minister to say that this policy has already been defined?


Charles Gavan Power: It is under very serious consideration, and I imagine the results of these two experiments will foe taken into consideration before a policy is defined.


Gordon Graydon: Does this mean that the government has in mind eventually providing a cafeteria service for its employees in Ottawa generally?


Charles Gavan Power: I think they have in mind some attempt to solve the difficulty of obtaining meals at the present time, under my hon. friend the Minister of Pensions and National Health, who will endeavour to obtain the best kind of nutrition at the lowest possible cost to civil servants generally, and particularly the low paid civil servants. I am speaking only in broad terms, because I know it has been a matter of consideration by the government for some time, but I do not know that any policy has been defined. The experiments now being carded on in these two locations will, I imagine, have some bearing on the solution.


Gordon Graydon: Some move has been made to meet the housing problem here, but I do not want to give the government too much commendation because I fancy there is still a great deal to be done. Having in mind the problem connected with workers in Ottawa, and in view of the terrific overcrowding in this capital city, it seems to me the next logical move would be one in connection with feeding of employees. I think everyone is pretty well agreed that the conditions under which most people in Ottawa have to take their meals in the downtown area are not very satisfactory. All one needs to do is to walk along the streets of Ottawa and see the situation for himself. Those who suffer most are the ones who have only a limited noon hour. It is all right for the person who has a long time to spend at an eating house, but for those who have only a short time between the time they leave their work and the time they must come back it seems to me there is a crying need for some relief. Every hon. member sees them attempting as best they can to line up, grab a sandwich and a cup of coffee. They are lucky if they can get that much before it is time to go back to work.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Would the minister
bring down additional information regarding these civilian employees? I believe he has already been asked to give information respecting their salaries and wages, and possibly as to the number.


Charles Gavan Power: I can give the number right away.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What I want-possibly the minister can give it, and possibly not- is a break-down showing how many of them are in civil service classifications and how many are exempt.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Charles Gavan Power: I think I have that information, too.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That will be fine.


Charles Gavan Power: We have 15,324. The average rate, including bonus, is $1,210. Appointments to all positions which might, in the opinion of the civil service commission, be classified under the Civil Service Act are legalized by the civil service commission. Positions exempt from the Civil Service Act; that is, exempt by law-


Gordon Graydon: If it is exempt by the act, it is exempt by law.


Charles Gavan Power: Civilians are employed in prevailing rate positions at Royal Canadian Air Force units to conduct maintenance work. This class of employee is utilized as firemen, mechanics, skilled and unskilled labourers, and so on, who are paid wages in accordance with the minimum wage schedule issued by the national war labour board. The department is authorized by order in council P.C.48-2105, dated March 16, 1943, to engage such personnel as may be required for the building, renovating, remodelling and maintenance of buildings and landing fields at Royal Canadian Air Force projects, such personnel to exclude professional, technical and clerical employees.
The selection of personnel is made through the national selective service offices in the various localities and, prior to the inception of national selective service, the provincial employment bureaus.
In appointment of specialist services for technical and administrative duties, selection is made from private industry, appointment effected by individual order in council, which is referred in each case to the civil service commission for consideration.
Since the inception of the department in 1940, a total of seventy-five appointments by individual orders in council have been effected; forty-two of the personnel were 'seconded to the department from private industry; thirteen construction personnel for employment in Newfoundland; seven stenographers for appointment in Washington, and thirteen direct appointments. Fourteen of the seventy-five personnel have completed their respective assignment, and the employment has been discontinued, leaving the net appointments by orders in council still on the strength of the department at sixty-one.
I think I have a list of the different types of employees, and that list could be put on Hansard. I have the information with respect to civilian personnel employed at headquar-

ters, although I have not that information with me. I can place on Hansard, for my hon. friend's information, a full list of civilian employees, and the number in each category or class.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minimum I should like to have from the minister-and if he wishes to give more I should be glad to get it -would be to break that 15,000 into three groups-those appointed by orders in council-


Charles Gavan Power: That is seventy-five.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Sixty-one, net. Then, I would want those who are classified as civil servants, and those who are exempt. And then would he give the average wage of each of those three groups? The minister has already given the average for the 15,000. Let us have the average for each of the three groups I have indicated.


Charles Gavan Power: Perhaps I can get together the wages paid to each particular trade in each group. Would that be what the hon. member wishes-carpenters, and so on?


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to have
that, but I have hesitated to ask for it.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know whether I could get that information, but that is what the hon. member wants.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to get it.


Charles Gavan Power: I will see whether it can be obtained.


John Horne Blackmore: Reverting to the question of cafeterias, may I congratulate the minister upon any effort which he might have put forth to render available at reasonable prices good and substantial meals to the people concerned? I believe much more attention must be paid by the government to the matter of giving employees, who are working for incomes far too small, and who are being [DOT] taxed far too much, substantial meals at rates as low as possible, so that they may be able to save a dollar or two.


Charles Edward Johnston: Are the civil employees at the air training stations given the cost of living bonus, the same as private industry would pay in that locality?


Charles Gavan Power: Just the same as any other civilian employees.


Charles Edward Johnston: Whether they are employed by the government or not, they are given the same bonus as private industry would pay in that locality?
The King's Birthday


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know just what the civil service bonus is, as compared with the bonus paid by the individual employers, outside. I cannot give information on that point, but I can have it checked. That is a matter for the civil service commission and the treasury board. But I understand there is a rate of bonuses given to civil servants throughout the country, and I do not think they vary much.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The civil service would affect only those who are civil service appointees.


Charles Gavan Power: Those under the control of the civil service commission. And those who are performing work which exempts them from the Civil Service Act get the same bonus as those who are employed by individual employers, I assume.
If hon. members would be prepared to have the item pass, I shall be only too glad to make replies to questions as to civilian employees.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Wednesday, June 2, 1943