1944-03-06

PRIVILEGE


Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):: Before the business of the house is proceeded with may I say that in the Ottawa Citizen of Saturday, March 4, there appears on page 9 a report of a meeting of the Saskatchewan legislature. In the course of that report Mr. Carl Stewart, member for Yorkton, Saskatchewan, is reported to have said:
I make the charge that Mr. Coldwell, Mr. Castleden and Mr. Feeley have improperly interfered with the board to keep men out of uniform.
Mr. Feeley is a member of the Saskatchewan legislature, and the board referred to is the moboiization board. I wish to say that the charge is wholly false, and comes from a person of whom the present chairman of the mobilization board, Mr. Justice Anderson, said on December 4, 1943, that "people who know Mr. Stewart would not take his criticism too seriously."


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.
Awards for Gallantry


Major James William Coldwell: I think it is my right to say that if Mr. Stewart has any charge to lay against any member of parliament for improper conduct the place to lay it is with the responsible minister in order that the matter may be reported to this house and dealt with in a proper manner.


Mr. G. H. CASTLEDEN (Yorkton):: On a
question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, arising out of the same dispatch, my name was mentioned as having improperly interfered with the operations of the same board in the province of Saskatchewan. I also wish to state that this charge is absolutely false. Evidence produced at different times in this house proves fairly conclusively that the Saskatchewan board is completely out of line in its attitude towards potsponements with the other boards across Canada. As an instance I refer to the statement of the Minister of National War Services, which is found on page 4306 of Hansard of November 12, 1941, which reveals that during the training periods-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Mr. SPEAKER:: The hon. member is now going far beyond any question of privilege.


George Hugh Castleden: On a question of privilege have I not the right to state that in the absence of any evidence to support this charge we are asking for the tabling of all correspondence with respect to the dealings of this board, and we repeat that this statement is absolutely false.



CANADIAN ARMY


Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):: On February 28 I told the house that the list of the members of the Canadian army who have received decorations for gallantry in this war would be tabled just as soon as a number of recent operational awards had been gazetted. Those latest awards have now been gazetted and appear in the special edition of the Canada Gazette published today.
I now have the privilege of submitting to the house the names of almost five hundred members of the Canadian army to whom honours have been awarded by His Majesty for deeds of gallantry and devotion to duty in this war. With the unanimous permission of the house I would ask that these names be given a permanent record on Hansard.
_ With the exception of the Victoria Cross, it is not the practice to publish the citations showing the detailed circumstances under which

the awards were earned. In the case of the award of the Victoria Cross the practice is to publish not only the name but the citation as well. That decoration, as the house knows, is the highest award for valour and devotion to duty that can be conferred on a member of the fighting forces by his king.
There are two awards of the Victoria Cross in the list which I am submitting to-day. One has already been published. It is the award to Lieutenant-Colonel Cecil Merritt for heroic and inspiring leadership at Dieppe. The citation appeared in the Canada Gazette of October 10, 1942. I shall read it, Mr. Speaker, in order that it may be on Hansard'.
The King has been graciously pleased to approve the award of the Victoria Cross to:
Lieutenant-Colonel Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt, the South Saskatchewan Regiment.
For matchless gallantry and inspiring leadership whilst commanding his battalion during the Dieppe raid on the 19th August, 1942.
From the point of landing, his unit's advance had to be made across a bridge in Pourville which was swept by very heavy machine-gun, mortar and artillery fire; the first parties were mostly destroyed and the bridge thickly covered by their bodies. A daring lead was required; waving his helmet, Lieutenant-Colonel Merritt rushed forward shouting "Come on over! There's nothing to worry about here."
He thus personally led the survivors of at least four parties in turn across the bridge. Quickly organizing these, he led them forward and when held up by enemy pill-boxes he again headed rushes which succeeded in clearing them. In one case he himself destroyed the occupants of the post by throwing grenades into it. After several of his runners became casualties, he himself kept contact with his different positions.
Although twice wounded Lieutenant-Colonel Merritt continued to direct the unit's operations with great vigour and determination and while organizing the withdrawal he stalked a sniper with a Bren gun and silenced him. He then coolly gave orders for the departure and announced his intention to hold off and "get even with" the enemy. When last seen he was collecting Bren and tommy guns and preparing a defensive position which successfully covered the withdrawal from the beach.
Lieutenant-Colonel Merritt is now reported to be a prisoner of war.
To this commanding officer's personal daring the success of his unit's operations and the safe reembarkation of a large portion of it were chiefly due.


Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: If the minister would allow me to do so I should like to add that this man is also a great grandson of a former prime minister of this country, Sir Charles Tupper, one of the greatest of Canadians.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: And he comes from Vancouver city.

Awards for Gallantry


James Layton Ralston: Captain (A/Major) M. E. P. Garneau, Canadian Infantry Corps, 2174 Lincoln Avenue, Montreal, P.Q.
Captain W. D. Whitaker, Canadian Infantry Corps, 5 Montclair Avenue, Toronto, Ontario.
Captain G. A. Browne, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 55 Delaware Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario.
Maj.-Gen. G. G. Simonds, C.B.E.. DeBary Apartments, Wardlaw Avenue, Winnipeg, Man.
Brigadier H. D. Graham, E.D., Trenton, Ontario.
Brigadier C. Vokes, 433 Besserer Street, Ottawa, Ontario.
Lt.-Col. E. L. Booth, Canadian Armoured Corps, Penetanguishene, Ontario.
Lt.-Col. J. C. Jefferson, E.D., Canadian Infantry Corps, 11319-79th Street, Edmonton, Alta.
Lt.-Col. B. A. Sutcliffe, E.D., Canadian Infantry Corps, R.R. No. 2, Trenton, Ontario.
Lt.-Col. G. Walsh, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, Oakville, Ontario.
Major H. P. Bell-Irving, Canadian Infantry Corps, Vancouver, B.C.
Major K. J. Southern, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 584 Red River Road, Port Arthur, Ont.
Major G. A. Welsh, The Royal Canadian Artillery, Sunderland, Ont.
Brigadier A. B. Matthews, 3 Clarendon Crescent, Toronto, Ont.
Lt.-Col. B. M. Hoffmeister, Canadian Infantry Corps, 4749 Belmont Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
Lt.-Col. G. Kitehing, Canadian Infantry Corps. Shorehain-by-Sea, Sussex, England.
Lt.-Col. H. M. Hague, E.D., The Royal Canadian Artillery, 4477 Montrose Ave., West-mount, Que.
Major W. G. Bury, E.D.. Canadian Infantry Corps, 10933-80th Ave., Edmonton, Alta.
Major A. S. Donald, Canadian Infantry Corps, 9S42-i 12th St., Edmonton, Alta.
Brigadier R. A. Wyman, E.D., 11214-67th St., Edmonton, Alta.
Lt.-Col. J. P. E. Bernatchez, O.B.E., Canadian Infantry Corps, Montmagny. Que.
Lt.-Col. M. P. Bogert, Canadian Infantry Corps, 1227 Sherbrooke St. W., Montreal, Que.
Lt.-Col. I. S. Johnston, Canadian Infantry Corps. 81 Binsearth Roard. Toronto. Ont.
, %Col. J. N. Lane. The Royal Canadian Artillery, Halifax. N.S.
Lt.-Col. C. H. NeroutsOs, Canadian Armoured Corps. 1757 Allison Road, University Hill, Vancouver, B.C.
Major (A/Lt.-Col.) C. B. Ware. Canadian Infantry Corps, G6 Forest Hill Road, Toronto, Ont.
Major R. B. Fraser, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 312 Lonsdale Road. Toronto, Ont.
Bar to the Military Cross (M.C.)
Captain P. Lieven, M.C., The Royal Canadian Artillery. Montreal. Que.
Captain X. B. Buchanan. M.C. The Royal Canadian Artillery, St. Stephen, N.B.
The Military Cross (M.C.)
Capt. L. G. Alexander. The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, 1306 Scotland St., Calgary. Alta.
Capt. H. B. Carswell. The Royal Canadian Artillery, Ottawa. Ontario.
Capt. F. W. Hayter, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, Alameda, Sask.

Capt. H. J. Kennedy, Canadian Infantry Corps. 1100 Ouellette Ave., Windsor, Ont.
Capt. R. H. Lajoie, Canadian Infantry Corps, 360 Redfern Ave., Westmount, Que.
Cap. D. F. MacRae, Canadian Infantry Corps, 214 Pitt St., Cornwall, Ont.
Capt. R. J. Wilkinson, Canadian Infantry Corps, 18 Clappertor St., Barrie, Ont.
H/Capt. J. P. Browne, Canadian Chaplain Services, Dauphin, Man.
Lieut. J. C. H. Anderson, Canadian Infantry Corps, 65 Burnaby Blvd., Toronto, Ont.
Lieut. P. Benoit, Canadian Infantry Corps, Montreal. Que.
Lieut. J. G. Counsell, Canadian Infantry Corps, 5226 Cote St. Antoine Rd., Montreal, Que.
Lieut. W. A. Ewener, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 494 Wellington St., Sarnia, Ont.
Lieut. J. B. Gartshore, Canadian Infantry Corps, R.K. No. 3, Dundas, Ont.
Lieut. A. C. Kavanagh, Canadian Infantry Corps, 571 Home St., Winnipeg, Man.
Lieut. P. P. Loranger, Canadian Infantry Corps, Montreal. Que.
Lieut. J. E. E. McManus, Canadian Infantry Corps, 554 Driveway, Ottawa, Ont.
Capt. J. Runcie, Canadian Infantry Corps, Mayfair Apts., Winnipeg, Man.
Lieut. A. A. Masson, Canadian Infantry Corps, 5978 Durocher, Outremont. Que.
Capt. A. F. Graham, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, 112 St.Clair Ave. West, Toronto. Ont.
Capt. W. H. V. Matthews, Canadian Infantry Corps, e/o Milnes Landing, .Sooke, Vancouver Island B.C.
Capt. X. B. Buchanan. The Royal Canadian Artillery. St. Stephen. N.B.
Capt. P. Lieven, The Royal Canadian Artillery, Montreal. Que.
Capt. R. C. Coleman, Canadian Infantry Corps, Montreal. Que.
Capt. W. K. MacDonald, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, 220 Kent St., Charlottetown. P.E.I.
Capt. H. D. P. Tighe, Canadian Infantry Corps, 8 St. George's Cresc., Edmonton, Alta.
Capt. N. R. Waugh, Canadian Infantry Corps, 224A Pitt St.. Cornwall. Ont.
Lieut. (A/Capt.) L. Bouchard, Canadian Infantry Corps. Riviere du Loup, Quebec.
Lieut. (A/Capt.) M. J. A. Trudeau, Canadian Infantry Corps, 613 Rue St. Jean, Quebec, Que.
Lieut. G. E. Atkinson, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, Port Rowan, Ont.
Lieut. R. Carey, Canadian Infantry Corps, Davie Street, Vancouver, B.C.
Lieut. H. T. Carson, Canadian Armoured Corps, 127 Second Avenue, Ottawa, Ont.
Lieut. X. W. Dickson. The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 519 Burnell Street, Winnipeg, Man.
Lieut. G. C. Evans, The Royal Canadian Artillery, MeAdam Junction, N.B.
Lieut. W. K. Heron, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, Asbestos, Que.
Lieut. E. St. J. C. Murdoch, The Royal Canadian Artillery, MacLeod, Alta.
Lieut. P. F. P.otvin, Canadian Infantry Corps, 85 Rue Claire-Fontaine, Quebec, Que.
Lieut. O. L. Roberts, Canadian Armoured Corps, 269 Dufferin Avenue, London, Ont.
Lieut. R. W. Ryckman, Canadian Armoured Corps, LeRoy Avenue, Darian, Conn., U.S.A.

Awards for Gallantry
Capt. G. L. F. McNeil, Canadian Infantry Corps, Grand Narrows, N.S.
Capt. D. J. Watson. The Royal Canadian Artillery, Pincher, Creek, Alta.
Lieut. E. W. S. O'Toole, Canadian Armoured Corps, 2156 Sherbrooke St. W., Montreal, Que.
Lieut. G. Robitaille, Canadian Infantry Corps, 5 Ste. Catherine St., Lauzon, Levis, P.Q.
Capt. (A/Major) D. W. McLean, Canadian Infantry Corps, 4299 Montrose Ave., Montreal, Que.
H/Capt. (A/H/Major) R. O. Wilkes, Canadian Chaplain Services, 627 Young Street, Winnipeg. Man.
H/Capt. J. L. Wilhelm, Canadian Chaplain Services. Walkerton, Ont.
Capt. R. M. Dillon, Canadian Infantry Corps, 25 Marfey Place, London, Out.
Capt. G. M. C. Sprung, Canadian Intelligence Corps. 260 Metcalfe Street, Ottawa, Ont.
Lieut. M. C. D. Bowman, Canadian Infantry Corps, 362 Walmer Road, Toronto, Ont.
Lieut. J. A. Dougan, Canadian Infantry Corps. Barrie. Ont.
Lieut. G. R. Guy, Canadian Infantry Corps, 217 Cobourg Road, Halifax. N.S.
Capt. H. W. Chestnut, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps. Moosomin. Sask.
Ca.pt. G. D. Mitchell, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 661 Grosvenor Avenue, Westmount, P.Q.
Capt. (A/Major) E. A. C. Amy, Canadian Armoured Corps, Kentville. King's Co., N.S.
Capt. (A/Major) J. P. Fletcher, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, 19 Tranby Avenue, Toronto. Ont.
Capt. (A/Major) F. J. Hammond, Canadian Infantry Corps, 336 Christie Street, Pembroke, Ont.
Capt. (A/Major) H. A. Smith, Canadian Armoured Corps, Dauphin, Man.
Capt. (A/Major) J. R. Walker, Canadian Armoured Corps, 1183 Gauthier Street, Three Rivers, Que.
Capt. (A/Major) S. W. Thomson, Canadian Infantry Corps, Salmon Arm, B.C.
Capt. P. L. Cadegan, The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals. 6 Blackett Street, Glace Bay, N.S.
Capt. L. I. Knowles. Canadian Armoured Corps. 180 Lisgar St.. Ottawa, Ont.
H/Capt. J. F. Goforth. Canadian Chaplain Services. 55 Belmont Street, Toronto, Ont.
Lieut. (A/Capt.) J. H. Jones, Canadian Infantry Corps, 23 Elliott Street, Dartmouth. N.S.
Lieut. (A/Capt.) .T. C. MacNeil, Canadian Infantry Corps, 140 Mountain Road, New Glas gow. N.S.
Lieut. (A/Capt.) H. A. R. Martin, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 3459 Peel Street, Montreal, P.Q.
Lieut. J. L. K. Buchan, Canadian Armoured Corps. 48 High Park Blvd., Toronto. Ont.
Lieut. A. J. Charbonneau, Canadian Armoured Corps. 554 Lisgar Street. Ottawa. Ont.
Lieut. F. W. Hamilton. The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, Baldur, Man.
Lieut. S. C. Kenyon. The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers. 36 Longwood Rd. S., Hamilton. Ont.
Lieut. D. R. Sharpe, Canadian Infantry Corps. 150 St. John St., Woodstock, Carleton Co.. N.B.
Lieut. J. F. Wallace. Canadian Armoured Corps. 48 Mary Street, Barrie. Ontario.
The Distinguished Conduct Medal (D.C.M.)
D61000 W.O.l (RSM) R. Levesque, Canadian Infantry Corps, 974 Amherst Street, Montreal, P.Q.
II19266 W.0.2 (CSM) G. Gouk, Canadian Infantry Corps, 844 Ingersoll Street, Winnipeg, Man.
B36973 W.0.2 (CSM) J. Stewmrt, Canadian Infantry Corps, 175 George Street. Hamilton, Ont.
H19814 Sergeant E. E. Gordon, Canadian Infantry Corps, Wapella, Sask.
A19407 L/'Sergeant G. A. Hickson, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 36 Herlan Avenue. Kitchener. Ont.
H19715 Corporal A. Brygider, Canadian Infantry Corps, 32 Maple Street, Winnipeg, Man.
L13504 L/Corporal G. B. Berthelot, Canadian Infantry Corps, 1827 Osier Street, Regina, Sask.
B66984 L/Corporal L. G. Ellis. Canadian Infantry Corps, 86 Elder Avenue, Long Branch, Ont.
A20191 L/Oorporal M. D. Sinasac, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers. Windsor, Ont.
B37087 Private T. W. Graham, Canadian Infantry Corps, Guelph, Ont.
L13282 Private W. A. Haggard, Canadian Infantry Corps. Tisdale. Sask.
A21509 Private J. Maier, Canadian Infantry Corps. 785 Partington Avenue. Windsor, Ont.
B37767	Private	H.	Wichtacz.	Canadian
Infantry Corps. R.R. No. 1. Galt. Ont.
U1853	Corporal	W.	F. Kay.	Canadian
Infantry Corps, 109 Bedford Hill, Balham S.W. 12. London. Eng.
G21012	Private	M.	Brisson,	Canadian
Infantry Corps. 37 Sacre Coeur, St. Joseph D'Alma. Lake St. John Co.. Que.
D105811 Private J. Grigas. Canadian Infantry Corps. 3 Clapp Street. Worcester. Mass.. U.S.A.
M37034 Private (A/Cpl.) D. Hadden, Canadian Infantry Corps. Vancouver, B.C.
F40151 Private T. K. Martell, Canadian Infantry Corns. Stellarton. N.S.
D51078 Sergeant (A/CSM) L. R. Drapean, Canadian Infantry Corps. 1867 Wolfe Street, Montreal. Que.
C6078 Sergeant W. J. R. McKnight. Canadian Infantry Corps. Bowmanville. Ont.
M17017 Corporal (A/Sgt.l A. G. Cheshire, Canadian Infantry Corps, Ashmont. Alta.
M57061 Private J. Low. Canadian Infantry Corns. Rochfort Bridge, Alta.
Ml6370 Sergeant (A/W.O.2) (CSM! W. L.
Bober. Canadian Infantry Corps. Derwent, Alta.
M16475 Sergeant R. B. Whiteside, Canadian Infantry Corps. Red Deer. Alta.
The Military Medal
F91544 Sapper F. P. Hutchinson, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 24 Wentworth Street. Dartmouth. N.S.
B36765 W.O.2 (CSM! W. J. Dean, Canadian Infantry Corps. Hamilton. Ont.
D02050 Sergeant P. Dubuc, Canadian Infantry Corps. Montreal, Que.
D61690 Sergeant W. Gagne. Canadian Infantry Corps. Montreal North. Que.
D24017 Sergeant D. L. Hart. The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, 4849 Hutchison St., Montreal, Que.
A21508 Sergeant W. E. Hussey, Canadian Infantry Corps, Riverside, Ont.
Awards for Gallantry

Mentioned in Despatches
C19 Gunner G. R. Cooper, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 24 Clergy St. West, Kingston, Ontario.
Lt.-Col. K. A. Hunter, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, 502 Waterloo St., London, Ontario.
Lt.-Col. G. L. M. Smith, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, 33 Butternut Terrace, Ottawa, Ontario.
Major F. E. Bell, The Royal Canadian Ordnance Corps, 38 Langside Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Major N. H. Ross, Canadian Infantry Corps, Biltmore Apartments, River Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Major R. Thompson, Canadian Infantry Corps, 291 Eugenie Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Major F. S. Wilkinson, Canadian Infantry Corps, 29 Spruceside Avenue. Hamilton, Ontario.
Major J. A. Willis, Canadian Infantry Corps, 709 Victoria Avenue, Windsor, Ontario.
Capt. B. Brachman, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, Nesbitt Apartments, Regina, Sask.
Capt. R. M. Campbell, Canadian Infantry Corps, Locarno Apartments. Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Capt. J. A. Catto. Canadian Infantry Corps, 21 Roxborough St. E.. Toronto, Ontario.
Capt. W. H. Finch. The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, 629 Johnston Street, Kingston, Ontario.
Capt. 0. M. Ilertzberg, Canadian Infantry Corps. 29 Bernard Avenue, Toronto, Ontario.
Capt. A. L. MacLaurin, Canadian Infantry Corps. Montreal, P.Q.
H/Capt. J. A. Sabourin, Canadian Chaplain Services, 1057 Berri Street. Montreal. P.Q.
Capt. D. B. de C. Warner, The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, Ottawa, Ontario.
Lieut. G. fi. Buchanan, Canadian Infantry Corps. Medicine Hat. Alberta.
Lieut. W. Dick. Canadian Infantry Corps, 1526 Mount Pleasant Rd., Toronto. Ontario.
Lieut. L. L. Dickin, Canadian Infantry Corps, 303 Fifth Avenue N. Saskatoon, Sask.
Lieut. J. B. Hallady, Canadian Infantry Corps. Hamilton, Ontario.
Lieut. I,. R. Mcllveen, Canadian Infantry Corps, Gull Lake, Sask.
Lieut. A. J. Morrall. The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, 261 Ashdale Avenue, Toronto, Ontario.
Lieut. J. C. Palms. Canadian Infantry Corps. Elizabeth & Woodward Ave., Detroit, Michigan,
Lieut. G. Stiles. Canadian Infantry Corps. 411 East 48th Avenue., Vancouver, B.C.
H19005 R.S.M. J. W. Dumma. Canadian Infantry Corps, 418 Cairnsmore Street, Winnipeg. Manitoba.
II19324 C.S.M. C. McLellan, Canadian Infantry Corps. Winnipeg. Manitoba.
B7G086 A/C.S.M, W. F. A. Robinson, Canadian Infantry Corps. Meaford. Ontario.
B36801 S/Sergeant D. A. Shenstone, Canadian Infantry- Corps, 212 Hess St. North, Hamilton. Ontario.
A21881 Sergeant J. B. Campbell. Canadian Infantry Corps. 63 Setterington Street, Lea- [DOT] mington. Ontario.
B67269 Sergeant J. M. Carroll, Canadian Infantry Corps, 214 Queen St. South, Kitchener, Ontario.
L12064 Sergeant L. P. Coderre, Canadian Infantry Corps, Coderre, Sask.

M15968 Sergeant R. Hawkins, Canadian Infantry Corps, Waterways, Alberta.
M11342 Sergeant W. L. Lyster, Canadian Infantry Corps, Empress, Alberta.
M10762	Sergeant	B.	Pittaway,	Canadian
Infantry Corps, Waterton Park, Alta.
L12016	Sergeant	B.	H. Smith,	Canadian
Infantry Corps, Halibrite, Sask.
B36722 Sergeant S. H. Whitaker, Canadian Infantry Corps, Barriefield Village, Ont.
B37232	Corporal	E.	D. Boles,	Canadian
Infantry Corps, 708 Manning Avenue, Toronto, Ontario.
D61461	Corporal	A.	Brisebois,	Canadian
Infantry Corps, 2324 Chapleau Street, Montreal. Quebec.
A21624	Corporal	J.	Donaldson.	Canadian
Infantry Corps, Detroit, Mich.. U.S.A.
A21243	Corporal	R.	M. Jones.	Canadian
Infantry Corps. 1588 Central Avenue. Windsor, Ontario.
A3175 Corporal E. N. Mellott, Canadian Infantry Corps, Comber, Ontario.
D82389 Corporal M. E. Morgan, Canadian Infantry Corps, Fredericton. N.B.
D61252 Corporal A. Nesbitt, Canadian Infantry Corps. 116 St. Norbert Street, Montreal. P.Q.
B31077 Corporal M. H. G. Reekie, The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, 98 Dixon Avenue, Toronto. Ontario.
B37133 Corporal G. A. Stewart. Canadian Infantry Corps. 163 Robinson St., Hamilton, Ontario.
B37278 Corporal F. R. Young, Canadian Infantry Corps. Oshawa. Ontario.
B6G858 J./Corporal L. G. Green, Canadian Infantry Corps, 466 Tweedsmuir Ave., West-boro. Ontario.
P40293 L/Corporal A. R. Kryzanowski, Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, Kingston, Ontario.
B36674 L/Corporal B. V. Lisson. Canadian Infantry Corps, 78 Tuxedo Ave. N., Hamilton, Ontario.
A20374 L/Corporal F. G. Tallent. The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, Alice Street, Essex. Ontario.
L12502 L/Corporal C. Ward. Canadian Infantry Corps. Gainsborough. Sask.
H19990 Private K. A. Baran, Canadian Infantry Corps, 477 Kavanagh Ave.. St. Boniface, Man.
D82480 Private J. Barclay. Canadian Infantry Corps. 674 Argvle Ave.. Verdun, Quebec.
B36951 Private G. W. A. Booker, Canadian Tnfantry Corps, 90 Haddon Ave. S.. Hamilton, Ontario.
A23000 Private G. D. Brown. Canadian Infantry Corps. Oak St. East. Leamington. Ont.
A21634 Private S. Carley. Canadian Infantry Corps. Windsor. Ontario.
H19098 Private W. Carson. Canadian Infantry Corps. St. James. Manitoba.
A21156 Private E. R. Cousineau, Canadian Tnfantry Corps, 129 McDougall St.. Windsor, Ontario.
A21122 Private J. E. Crockett, Canadian Infantry Corps, 789 Elliott St. E., Windsor, Ontario.
D61866 Private N. Daudelin. Canadian Infantry Corps, 12 Rue Du Depot, Farnham, Quebec.
L12634 Private G. Davies, Canadian Infantry Corps. Coronach, Sask.
D61432 Private J. Dufresne. Canadian Infantry Corps, 2078 Harbour Street, Montreal, Quebec.

Awards for Gallantry
H33086 Private C. G. Erickson, Canadian Infantry Corps, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
A22278 Private R. W. Ferrari, Canadian Infantry Corps, 852 St. Lukes Road, Windsor, Ontario.
H19411 Private R. L. Flett, Canadian Infantry Corps, 527 Lipton Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
L12202 Private F. P. Forness, Canadian Infantry Corps, Assiniboia, Sask.	_
B83370 Private S. Germain, Canadian Infantry Corps, 198 Worthington St. W., North Bay, Ont.
D619G6 Private F. Goyer, Canadian Infantry Corps. 7245 Nancy St., Cote-des-Neiges, Montreal, P.Q.
B76437 Private J. Hackett, Canadian Infantry Corps, 6 Norvale Avenue, Toronto, Ont.
L13269 Private R. R. Harcus, Canadian Infantry Corps, Garrick, Sask.
H19769 Private E. Hebert, Canadian Infantry Corps. St. Pierre, Man.
H20083 Private H. G. L. Hutton, Canadian Infantry Corps, Minnedosa, Man.
B67766 Private R. G. Jones, Canadian Infantry Corps, 439 Ossington Avenue, Toronto, Ont.
F26378 Signalman L. W. Lacusta, The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, 52 Henry Street, Halifax, N.S.
DG2964 Private G. Languirand, Canadian Infantry Corps, 616 Jarry Street, Montreal, Que.
A35020 Sapper L. W. Laur, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, London, Ont.
A19161 Sapper L. L. Lauzon. The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 162 Queen Street East. Toronto, Ont.
B75970 Private H. A. Lyons, Canadian Infantry Corps, 142 Rhodes Avenue, Toronto, Ont.
H19337 Sapper S. J. MacLeod, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, Winnipeg. Man.
B37783 Private A. C. Mullin, Canadian Infantry Corps, Lower Kings Highway, Newcastle, N.B.'
B32973 Signalman W. J. Ness, Canadian Infantry Corps, 92 Lawlor Avenue, Toronto, Ont.
D61936 Private J. Noel, Canadian Infantry Corps, 416 Oherrier Street, Montreal, Que.
L12408 Private II. A. O'Hare, Canadian Infantry Corps, Swift Current, Sask.
H20266 Private E. Ovens, Canadian Infantry Corps, 446 Agnes Street, Winnipeg, Man.
B37662 Private R. Pettifer, Canadian Infantry Corps, R.R. 3, Welland, Ont.
B25252 Sapper W. Price, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, Sussex. N.B.
HI9946 Private S. E. Ryne, Canadian Infantry Corps, 809-6th N.W., Moose Jaw, Sask.
B67814 Private H. M. Seaton, Canadian Infantry Corps, 2152 Cadham Street, Niagara Falls, Ont.
B36529 Private J. H. Shuart, Canadian Infantry Corps, 116 Market Street, Hamilton, Ont.
B75891 Private A. M. Sinclair, Canadian Infantry Corps, 80 Chudleigh Avenue, Toronto, Ont.
A20214 Sapper S. B. Thompson, The Corps of Roval Canadian Engineers, New Rochelle, New York, U.S.A.
B67834 Private H. E. Wright, Canadian Infantry Corps, Gilford, Ont.
Major P. R. Savoy, Canadian Infantry Corps, 1501 Chomedy Street, Montreal, P.Q.
D61181 Private G. Cloutier, Canadian Infantry Corps, 4555 Marquette St., Montreal, P.Q.
Capt. G. D. Skerrett, Canadian Infantry Corps, 373 Queen Street S., Hamilton, Ont.
Lieut. J. W. Sharp, Canadian Infantry Corps, 1321 Sherbrooke St. W., Montreal, P.Q.
D36139 Sergeant T. Olsen, Canadian Armoured Corps, 7 Honore Street, La Tuque, P.Q.
Major (A/Lt.-Col.) C. B. Ware, Canadian Infantry Corps, 66 Forest Hill Road, Toronto, Ont.
B13102 Sergeant R. Hillcoat, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 405 Dundas Street, Galt, Ont.
G37029 Bombardier R. M. Ritchie, The Royal Canadian Artillery, Lewisville, N.B.
United States Operational Gallantry Awards Distinguished Service Cross
Lieutenant F. B. Atto, Canadian Infantry Corps, 274 Trenton Avenue, Montreal, P.Q.
Silver Star
Lieutenant J. D. Mitchell, Canadian Infantry Corps, Dartmouth, N.S.
11205057 S/Sergeant L. H. Rudolph, Canadian Infantry Corps, 99 Cobourg Avenue, Winnipeg, Man.
D158509 Sergeant C. Gagnon, Canadian Infantry Corps, 2115 Rosemont Blvd., Montreal, P.Q.
M31330 Sergeant J. A. Parfett, Canadian Infantry Corps, Bruce, Alberta.
M102270 Sergeant R. A. Stirling, Canadian Infantry Corps, Fertile, Saskatchewan.
D109795 Private R. B. Aitken, Canadian Infantry Corps, 1205 Crescent Street, Montreal, P.Q.
M11122 S/Sergeant W. E. Brotherton Canadian Infantry Corps, i78-8th Street, N.E., Medicine Hat, Alta.
G60658 Sergeant J. E. Keleher, Canadian Infantry Corps, 15 Lowel Street, Saint John, N.B.
Foreign Gallantry Awards Croix de Guerre avec Etoile de Bronze
Major A. J. MacLaurin, Canadian Infantry Corps, Montreal, P.Q.
Major C. R. Ostrander, The Canadian Artillery, Ostrander, Ontario.
B67269 Sergeant J. M. Carroll, Canadian Infantry Corps, 214 Queen St. South, Kitchener, Ontario.
Croix de Guerre avec Etoile de Vermeil
A22062 Sergeant L. E. Scobie, Canadian Infantry Corps, 145 Ferris Avenue, Highland Park, Michigan, U.S.A.
L12502 A/L/Sergeant C. Ward, Canadian Infantry Corps, Gainsborough, Sask.
Croix de Guerre avec Etoile d'argent
D61461 Sergeant A. Brisebois, Canadian Infantry Corps, 2324 Chapleau Street, Montreal, P.Q.	.
L13393 Private G. P. Buchanan, Canadian Infantry Corps, 705-7th St. East, Prince Albert, Sask.
Awards for Gallantry

A21634 Private S. Carley, Canadian Infantry Corps, Windsor, Ontario.
B67814 Private H. M. Seaton, Canadian Infantry Corps, 2152 Cadhara Street, Niagara Falls, Ont.
D61936 Private J. Noel, Canadian Infantry
Corps, 416 Cherrier Street, Montreal, P.Q.
Croix de Guerre avee Palme de Bronze
Lt.-Col. J. D. MaeBeth, The Koyal Canadian Corps of Signals, Ottawa, Ontario.
Capt. G. B. Buchanan, Canadian Infantry Corps, Medicine Hat, Alta.
Capt. (a/Major) R. M. Campbell, Canadian Infantry Corps, Locarno Apts., Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Capt. 0. M. Hertzberg, Canadian Infantry Corps, 29 Bernard Avenue, Toronto, Ontario.
B67045 Sergeant A. J. Suchard, Canadian Infantry Corps, R.R. No. 6, St. Mary's, Ontario.
Major F. St. C. Wilkinson, Canadian Infantry Corps, 29 Spruceside, Hamilton, Ontario.
Croix de Guerre avec Palme de Vermeil
Lt.-Col. G. S. N. Gostling, Canadian Infantry Corps, 161 Vaughan Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Capt. T. R. McCoy, Canadian Infantry Corps, II Hilda Avenue, Hamilton, Ontario.
B76852 Private C. J. Hyland, Canadian Infantry Corps, 66 Ossington Avenue, Toronto, Ontario.



APPENDIX &quot;B&quot;

[Stage Direction]
Non-Operational Gallantry Awards
George Cross (G.C.)
George Medal (G.M.)
Member of the Order of the British Empire (M.B.E.)
British Empire Medal (B.E.M.) ' Commendations
Non-Operational Gallantry Awards The George Cross (G.C.)
Rank and Name-Corps-Address
Lieut. J. M. S. Patton, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 241 Queen Street, Kingston, Ontario.
B28593 Corporal J. Hendry, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, Little Long Lae, Ontario.
The George Medal (G.M.)
Capt. D. W. Cunnington, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, Calgary, Alberta.
C1014 Gunner J. Chambers, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 271 Brock Street, Kingston, Ontario.
Capt. (a/Major) D. C. Heggie, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, 73 Main St. South, Brampton, Ontario.
Lieut. E. T. Galway, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 324 Glen Road, Toronto, Ontario.
Major D. S. Harkness, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 722 Riverdale Ave., Calgary, Alberta.

Member of the Order of the British Empire (M.B.E.)
Major D. J. MeDougall, Canadian Armoured Corps, 1312-3rd St. N.E., Calgary, Alta.
Lieutenant J. R. Dickinson, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 661 Hochelaga St. W., Moose Jaw, Sask.
Captain C. F. Egan, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, 450 Johnson St., Kingston, Ont.
Lieutenant T. L. Alexander, Canadian Infantry Corps, 400 Glenayr Road, Toronto, Ont.
Lieutenant G. G. Charron, Canadian Infantry Corps, St. Vincent de Paul, Quebec. [DOT]
Lieutenant M. Masse, Canadian Infantry Corps, 753 Arehambault, Joliette, P.Q.
Lieutenant L. C. Thornton-Prehn, General List, Ottawa, Ont.
Captain W. G. Wells, Canadian Infantry Corps, Chicoutimi, Chicoutimi Co., Quebec.
B94203 Armt. Q.M.S. D. S. Milne, The Royal Canadian Ordnance Corps, 2794A Dundas St. W., Toronto, Ont.
British Empire Medal (B.E.M.)
P15367, Sergeant A. Condy, Canadian Infantry Corps, 7 Pavillion Bks., Halifax, N.S.
B73357, Lance-Corporal A. E. Groves, Canadian Armoured Corps, George St., Orillia, Ont.
U1514, Staff Sergeant G. L. Ayre, Canadian Provost Corps, 432 Glasgow St., Winnipeg, Man.
Cl 1538, Staff Sergeant J. F. Samson, The Royal Canadian Army Service Corps, 576 Bronson Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
L9072, Armt. S/Sgt. W. N. Tripp, The Royal Canadian Ordnance Corps, Yorkton, Sask.
B6316, W.O. 2 (BSM) T. W. Brand, The Royal .Canadian Artillery, 22 Gates Ave., Toronto, Ont.
A21537, Corporal (A/Sgt) J. T. Coughlin, Canadian Infantry Corps, 436 Logan St., Windsor, Ont.
C53319, Sergeant A. T. Dainton, Canadian Infantry Corps, 864 Water St., Peterborough, Ont.
D56267, Sergeant A. Doucette, Canadian Infantry Corps, 6439 St. Andre St., Montreal, Que.
L9050, Sergeant R. R. Graham, The Royal Canadian Ordnance Corps, Regina, Sask.
B3041, Sergeant R. Hole, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 6 Park Ave., Toronto, Ont.
C4588 Sergeant F. J. Turner, Canadian Infantry Corps, 73 Queens St., Kingston, Ont.
A56800, Private (A/Cpl) W. H. Fries, Canadian Infantry Corps, 104 Ontario St. N., Kitchener, Ont.
H40939, Private (A/Cpl) J. LeClair, Canadian Infantry Corps, 622 Selkirk Ave., Winnipeg, Man.
A3654, Corporal A. R. Randall, Canadian Provost Corps, 193 Glasgow St. N., Guelph, Ont.
K29272, Corporal J. P. Stallard, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 222 North Garden Drive, Vancouver, B.C.
F49875, Corporal F. E. Blakeney, Canadian Infantry Corps, 109 King St., Truro, N.S.
W2093, Lance-Corporal M. Entwistle, Canadian Women's Army Corps, 369 Ferguson Ave. N., Hamilton, Ont.
M40843, Sergeant A. S. Findlater, The Royal Canadian Ordnance Corps, 727 - 12th Ave. W., Calgary, Alta.

Awards for Gallantry
D62564, Private A. Arteau, Canadian Infantary Corps, 1826 Iberville St., Montreal, Que.
A99247, Private A. J. Bender, The Royal Canadian Army Service Corps, 107 Nile St., Stratford, Ont.
A99308, Private R. A. Carey, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, 648 O'Connor St.. Ottawa, Ont.
C51521, Private C. C. Chambers, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, Rockland East, Ont.
F91408, Sapper F. A. Dougherty, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 2030 McGill College Ave., Montreal, Que.
F41595, Private O. S. Foster. Canadian Infantry Corps, Karsdale, Granville Ferry P.O., Annapolis Co., N.S.
B21144, Gunner T. Gardner, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 1 Homewood Ave., Toronto, Ont.
B72834, Private J. R. Garvie, Canadian Infantry Corps, 43 Glenmore Road, Toronto, Ont.
B73494, Private J. M. Gibb, Canadian Infantry Corps, Kilworthy, Muskoka Co., Ont.
H26731, Trooper A. J. Lalonde, Canadian Armoured Corps, 412 McGee St., Winnipeg, Man.
B66966, Private G. P. Legros, Canadian Infantry Corps, 121 Woodlawn Ave. W., Toronto, Ont.
H16558, Private C. A. W. Lowen, Canadian Infantry Corps, 40 Teeumseh St., Toronto, Ont.
A29464, Private T. F. Mitchell, The Royal Canadian Ordnance Corps, 953 Queens Ave., London, Ont.
E5090, Private L. Roy, Canadian Infantry Corps, Petit Rocher Nord, N.B.
M24217, Private D. C. Smith, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, Cardston, Alta.
K73977, Private H. Tarasenko, The Royal Canadian Army Service Corps, Steinbaeh, Man.
D3229, Trooper R. D. B. Wright, Canadian Armoured Corps, 2127 Dubois St., Yille Emard, Que.
C2358, Sapper J. Lorrain, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 834 Gladstone Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
G16510, Sergeant R. A. Craft, The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, 185 Carmarthen St., Saint John, N.B.
M42643, Sergeant J. W. Gillespie, No. 13 Voc. Trg. School, 828 - 3rd Ave. W., Calgary, Alta.
D56918 Sergeant T. Labonte, Canadian Infantry Corps, Plaisance, Papineau Co., Que.
E4421 Sergeant E. Peloquin, Canadian Infantry Corps, Ste. Victoire, Co. Richelieu, Que.
M16150 Corporal (A/Sgt.) G. D. Hamel, Canadian Infantry Corps, 920 Drake St., Vancouver, B.C.
D125307 Corporal U. Belisle, Canadian Provost Corps, Coteau Rouge, Longueuil, Que.
D116516 Lance-Corporal J. F. Laliberte, Canadian Infantry Corps, 44 Roland St., Ville St. Pierre, Que.
G3665 Gunner (A/Cpl.) W. F. Byrne, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 42 St. George St., Moncton, N.B.
F40718 Private B. E. Avery, Canadian Infantry Corps, Berwick, Kings Co., N.S.
M7272 Sapper C. A. Cavil, The Corps of Royal Canadian Engineers, 11936-81st St., Edmonton, Alta.
B76914 Gunner A. R. Fielding, The Royal Canadian Artillery, 21 Bartlett Ave., Toronto, Ont.
W10710 Private E. M. Kerridge, Canadian Women's Army Corps, Morden, Man.
B5333 Private W. C. McGowan, Canadian Dental Corps, 56 Ritchie Ave., Toronto, Ont.
G19317 Private A. Muzerolle, Canadian Infantry Corps, Eel River Bridge, Northumberland Co., N.B.
M20951 Private W. R. Owens, The Royal Canadian Army Service Corps, 130-15th Ave. E., Calgary, Alta.
F44828 Private F. Smith, Canadian Infantry Corps, Alma, Pictou Co., N.S.
K600662 Private M. D. Summers, The Royal Canadian Army Service Corps, 1741W 3rd Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
D615141 Sergeant J. Iannuceilli, Canadian Infantry Corps, 7050 Alexandra St., Montreal, Que.
A88 Sergeant R. G. Lilley, Canadian Armoured Corps, 8573 Boyce St., Montreal, Que.
E620643 Sergeant J. B. Paquet, Canadian Infantry Corps, St. Octave de L'Avenir, Co. Gaspe, Que.
D3197 Sergeant W. G. Travers, Canadian Armoured Corps, 3161 Wellington St., Verdun, Que.
K70844 Lance-Corporal H. H. Edwards, Canadian Provost Corps, 3779 W. 8th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
E620005 Private B. Bernard, Canadian Infantry Corps, St. Alphonse de Caplan, Bona-venture Co.. Que.
B70052 Trooper R. A. Johnston, Canadian Armoured Corps, Burketown, Ont.
H100574 Gunner J. Kustra, The Royal Canadian Artillery, Dauphin, Man.
D3204 Trooper C. F. Philp, Canadian Armoured Corps, 202 Devonshire Road, Greenfield Park, Que.
B60844 Trooper C. E. Smith, Canadian Armoured Corps, Englehart, Ont.
B32457 Signalman W. L. Earle, The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, 736 St. Clair Ave. W., Toronto, Ont.
B113114 Signalman D. G. Keith, The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, Wilkie, Sask.
D24131 Signalman D. Smith, The Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, 5718 Charlemagne, Montreal, Que.
Commendations
D105511 Private D. Cumming, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, 5355 Lasalle Blvd., Verdun, Que.
Lieut. L. O. R. Tucker, Canadian Infantry Corps, Genrose, Capilano Co., B.C.
P/2/Lieut. F. K. Trites, Canadian Infantry Corps, 2426 W. 2nd Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
P/2/Lieut. V. H. Zala, Canadian Infantry Corps, 941 McDonald St., Duncan, Victoria Isl., B.C.
K71360 Corporal J. Carlson, The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps, Bellevue, Alta.
Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):: Following the tabling of the
names of those who have been decorated for gallantry I should like to compliment the minister for his references to the two gallant gentlemen, Lieutenant Colonel Merritt and Captain Triquet, who by their heroism have shown that Canada is playing a part in this
1163	COMMONS
Questions and Returns-Time and Cost
global war which excites the enthusiasm of us all and merits our undying gratitude. Last session I suggested to the Prime Minister that these awards should be mentioned in the house from time to time, and I want to thank the government for having done so.
I rose particularly to make a personal reference in connection with this matter, for which I hope I may be pardoned. Before war broke out a young man, William Manley, went from my own town of Brampton and became a private in the British army. In the early battles in Libya, in 1941, he died at his post after displaying such gallantry that he was posthumously awarded the Victoria Cross. I think he was the first man from Canada to win this highest of all decorations, though at the time he was not a member of the Canadian army. We are very proud of this young man, and I thought that pride should be shared by this parliament and this nation.



RETURN TABLED


Hon. T. A. CRERAR (Minister of Mines and Resources):: I wish to table return No. 435, moved for by the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair), in respect to soldier settlers who signed quit claim deeds or who were served with repossession notices, and so on, asking the dates of the original purchase in each case, and similar questions. For the information of my hon. friend, and by way of apology and perhaps explanation, I want to say that this motion first appeared on the order paper last June in the form of a question. On July 1, 1943, it was passed as an order for return, so that considerable time has elapsed since the order was passed. I may say, by way of apology to my hon. friend for the delay, that the return did involve a considerable amount of work. I asked the treasury official in the department to give me a summary of the time spent in preparing the reply, and the value of the time so required. I find that two senior members of the accounting staff, Mr. Woolsey and Mr. Little, were employed for two months, on an average salary of $230 per month. Then, four of the clerical staff were employed for two months in assembling detail, and their average salary was $125 a month. In addition, three typists were employed for a week in typing and checking the final return, and for that time their salaries aggregated $60. In addition to these I find that one senior clerk was employed for one month reviewing files and records of acreage development over an average of twenty-three years, and also looking up values at dates of rescission. This service cost $200. I give 
this information to my hon. friend in explanation of the delay. The full value of time employed in preparing the answer to the return was $2,180.


Mr. ROBERT FAIR (Battle River):: I thank the minister for bringing down this information. I had a specific reason for getting it. I believe if the minister would compare some of the hardships endured by those settlers about whom I have inquired he would agree the amount he has mentioned is infinitesimal indeed. I thank him however for bringing down the return.



FORM OF QUESTIONS AND MOTIONS FOR PAPERS- TIME AND COST INVOLVED

['-I shall ask nothing further in connection with this matter.']
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: Mr. Speaker,
this might be an opportune time to draw the attention of hon. members to the amount of investigation required in the departments in answering some of the questions and bringing down some of the returns.
As hon. members will have heard, the return just tabled has cost the country $2,180. I doubt very much if that particular expenditure will be approved by the country. Many orders are passed calling for more information than should be asked from the administration, and this particularly at a time when war expenditures are very heavy. In addition there is the time members of the public service require to get information of the kind asked. I believe it is only right to suggest to hon. members that in asking questions, and particularly in respect of motions for orders for returns, they consider the most compact or concise form in which these questions and motions might best be put.


Gordon Graydon: I agree with the Prime
Minister that there is no special reason why either individual departments or the government should be subjected to an undue amount of work, or, in particular, be put to undue expense, in preparing answers to returns and questions. But I believe the Prime Minister will be the first to agree that the value of answers to questions and of returns to orders of the house cannot be measured fully from the point of view of the work involved, or from that of dollars and cents. Often these questions and returns are founded on a principle which, in the days that lie ahead, will save large amounts of money, because the information. brought down brings to the attention of the government and the house the urgent need for reforms. I believe we must judge each question upon its merits, rather than accept a broad or general statement

Questions
covering all returns and questions in respect of different matters which might be the subject of inquiry.


Robert Fair: I am not sure whether I am
expected to make an apology for the expense, but if that is the case I have no intention of doing so-I believe the soldier settlers have been wronged and if the government will give them clear titles to their lands


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Robert Fair: -I shall ask nothing further in connection with this matter.



[Stage Direction]
Hon. L. R. LaFLECHE (Minister of National War Services):	Mr. Speaker, 1
should like to answer a question put the other day by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell). He asked whether the regulations governing the broadcasting of addresses before political meetings and organizations over private radio stations had been changed. The last directives are to be found in the censorship directives handbook I laid on the table on January 28, 1944.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. S. H. KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 9, to amend the Judges Act (salaries of judges).
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Mr. KNOWLES:: Mr. Speaker, this bill would add a new subsection to section 28 of the Judges Act, which is chapter 105 of the revised statutes of Canada, 1927. The authority for legislation such as that proposed in this bill is to be found in section 100 of the British North America Act.
The purpose of the proposed addition is to provide that any judge of a superior court of any province or of the Yukon territory who continues or is continued in office after attaining the age of seventy shall have his salary reduced to an amount equal to that which he would receive by way of retiring allowance if he were retired at seventy, less any sum which he may receive from a provincial government by way of other remuneration. The new salary rate will commence 100-74
when the judge attains the age of seventy years, or on the 1st day of September, 1944, whichever is the later date. In the case of a judge, appointed prior to the passing of this bill, who would not be entitled to a retiring allowance if he were to retire at the age of seventy, the operation of the act will be postponed until he is eligible for a retiring allowance.
This bill is similar to one which was passed by the House of Commons on the 10th of May, 1933, but which was rejected by the senate. Apart from the effective date, the bill is exactly the same as the one passed by this house in 1933, but for two differences. In the first place the former bill stipulated seventy-five as the age at which the provisions of that bill were to apply, whereas this bill stipulates the age of seventy. Secondly, the former bill made an exception in the case of judges not eligible for retiring allowance at the stipulated age, whether appointed before or after the passing of the bill. In this bill the same exception is provided, but only in the case of judges appointed -prior to the passing of this bill.
This bill is in line with the points made in the house by the governments of the day, both in 1927 and in 1933, relating to the judiciary. I submit that it offers a reasonable way of effecting a desirable change, pending amendment of the British North America Act,
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS


Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	What was the estimated production of children's garments for the year 1943, and how many of these garments had been delivered for sale in Canada by January 1, 1944?
2.	What is the estimated annual production of men's overalls for civilian use during, (a) 1935 to 1939; (b) 1941; (e) 1942; (d) 1943, and how many of the overalls produced during 1943 were available in stores by January 1 1944?
3.	What was the estimated annual production of white flannelette during, (a) 1935 to 1930; (b) 1941; (c) 1942; (d) 1943, and how much of the flannelette produced in 1943 was available in stores by January 1. 1944?
4.	What is the estimated quantity of towelling manufactured for civilian use during, (a) 1935 to 1939; (b) 1941; (c) 1942; (d) 1943, and how much of the towelling produced for civilian use in 1943 was available in stores by-January 1, 1944?

Questions


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	The estimated production of children's garments for the year 1943 was 2,453,273 dozen; consisting of:-
Dozen
Woven fabric garments for children
up to 14 years	 950,412
Woven fabric garments for infants... 267,051 Knitted outer wear for children up to
14 years	 343,636
Knitted outerwear for infants	145,347
Infants' and children's underwear

 746,827
Total	2,453,273
There was in addition, estimated production
of 92,949 dozen hats and 1,500,000 dozen pairs of socks and stockings. It is estimated that practically all of this production had been delivered for sale in Canada by January 1, 1944; that there was no aecumulaton of inventories in manufacturers' hands. Nominal numbers of some of these garments were procured for export to countries dependent on Canada for supplies and small numbers were procured by relief organizations for the bombed out children of the United Kingdom.
2.	The estimated production of men's over-als for civilian use in the years 1935 to 1943 inclusive was as follows:
1935		 2,903,580
1936		 2,891,952
1937		 3,303,536
1938		 2,741,580
1939		 3,175,764
1940		 3,219,520
1941		 3,834,019
1942		 3,245,862
1943		 3,025,971
The above production data included in all years a number of overall coat%, The comments in respect of the quantities delivered for sale by January 1, 1944, given in 1 above apply in this connection as well. It is not known how much had been moved into retail stores by that date. A small number of overalls was supplied to Alaska highway and other international construction projects in 1943, and to countries dependent on Canada for some part of their requirements.
3.	There are no statistical data on the production of flannelette for the years 1935-1941 inclusive. It is estimated that the production of the year 1942 was about 24,000,000 yards and of the year 1943 it was 24,263,060 yards, as determined by questionnaire of the wartime prices and trade board. Of this latter production, it is estimated that 12,600,000 yards were of the Saxon}' type, including white, blue and pink. Production was moved from the mills as rapidly as possible and practically

the whole of it had been put in manufacturing and distribution channels by January 1, 1944. It is not known how much had been moved into retail stores by that date. Substantial yardages of this fabric were procured in retail and wholesale outlets by Canadian Red Cross and other organizations furnishing comforts to the bombed out victims in the United Kingdom and to relief projects elsewhere.
4.	There are no authentic data on the allinclusive production of towelling and towels for the years 1935 to 1942 inclusive. Supply for the civilian economy then consisted of domestic production and imports of towels and towelling. An effort is being made to develop comparative data from the statistics available in the Cotton Institute and the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. Report of these researches will be made in due course.


MOBILIZATION ACT-ATTESTATIONS FOB OVERSEAS SERVICE
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	Have any men who have been conscripted into the Canadian army for home defence and have not volunteered for overseas service been sent overseas?
2.	Were men who had been conscripted into the Canadian army for home defence sent to Borden, England, instead of Borden, Ontario?
3.	If so, how many were sent, when did they arrive in England, and what was done with them after their arrival there?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: 1.	Men enrolled into the Canadian army through the provisions of National Resources Mobilization Act who have not volunteered for general service have been sent to Newfoundland (including Labrador), British West Indies, Bermuda, Alaska (including Kiska) but not elsewhere overseas.
2.	No.
3.	Answered by No. 2.


OPTIONAL PURCHASE PROVISIONS IN AGREEMENTS WITH PRIVATE CORPORATIONS
Mr. COLD WELL:: 1.	(a) Are _ there any optional purchase clauses contained in government agreements with private corporations in connection with government investments in any industry, plant or machinery since May 28, 1943, the date of sessional paper No. 369; (b) if so, with what companies, and in respect to what plant or facilities, has the government made such optional agreements; (c) -what are the terms of all such agreements that have been made by the government?
2.	(a) Are there any clauses contained in government agreements with private corporations requiring the government, on notice, to remove from any site government-owned plant or facilities; (b) if so, with what companies, and in respect to what government-owned plant

Questions
or facilities has the government made such agreements; (c) what are the terms of all such agreements that have been made by the government?
1	3. (a) Are there any clauses contained in
government agreements with private corporations restricting in any way the use, or uses, to which government-owned plant or facilities can he devoted after the cessation of hostilities; (b) if so, with what companies and in respect to what plant or facilities has the government made such agreements; (c) what are the terms of all such agreements that have been made by the government?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	There are no options to purchase contained in government agreements with private corporations in connection with government investments in any industry, plant or machinery since May 28, 194-3.
2.	(a) Yes. The general conditions form M & S 1307 (capital expenditures) which are annexed as schedule "B" to order in council P C. 6284 dated July 20, 1942, contain the following provisions:
Under part II-dealing with additional equipment:
"7. Removal of additional equipment
The contractor may at any time after the lapse of twelve months from the termination of the war in which His Majesty is presently engaged, give notice in writing to the minister requiring His Majesty to remove the additional equipment from any building which is the property of the contractor or which the contractor occupies as tenant by virtue of a lease made with a lessor other than His Majesty, and upon receipt by the minister of any such notice, His Majesty shall, provided that the additional equipment in the opinion of the minister is not required for the manufacture of munitions of war or supplies in any such building, cause such additional equipment to be removed therefrom within a period of thirty days following the receipt of such notice, or within such extended period as may be reasonably required for such removal. The right herein conferred shall mutatis mu-tandis be exercisable by the contractor on behalf of any of its sub-contractors in any case where any additional equipment has been installed with the consent of His Majesty in any building which is the property of any such subcontractor or which any such sub-contractor occupies as tenant by virtue of a lease made with a lessor other than His Majesty."
Under part III-dealing with plant additions:
"10. Title to vest in His Majesty
Subject to the provisions of the agreement the plant addition, both during construction 100-74i
and after completion, shall be the property of His Majesty, provided that if the plant addition is constructed upon lands owned by the contractor, such lands shall remain the property of the contractor but if so required by His Majesty, shall be made available to His Majesty, free of charge, until five years after the cessation of hostilities in the present waT and His Majesty shall have an irrevocable option, exercisable until but not after five years after the cessation of the present war in which His Majesty is engaged, to purchase such lands at a fair and reasonable price to be determined by mutual agreement or, in default of agreement, by the exchequer court."
In cases where the extensions and additions have been built within the contractor's plant for war purposes and which are likely to interfere with the operation of the plant for civilian business, it has been agreed that within a reasonable period after the cessation of hostilities the government and the contractor will review the matter and if no satisfactory arrangement can be arrived at with respect to the disposal of the extensions and additions, the same will be removed by the government.
(b)	To answer this question it would be necessary to examine each capital assistance contract entered into by the government and to list all the items acquired by each contractor. It is impossible at the present time to divert the necessary staff required for this purpose.
(c)	Answered by (a).
3.	The answer to this question is contained in the schedule forming part of sessional paper No. 369, tabled on May 28, 1943.
veterans' land act


Mr. CASSELMAN:: 1.	Has the Veterans' Land Act yet become operative?
2.	If so, how many loans have been made to discharged service men to February 15, 1944?
3.	What is the total value of these loans?
4.	Have the officers of the Veterans' Land Act purchased any farms or other property?
5.	If so, from whom did they purchase the farms or property?
6.	Where are they located?
7.	What was the purchase price of each piece of land?
8.	Do the officers inspect each piece of land offered to them for sale?
9.	If not, how do they determine where they are going to purchase land?
10.	What are the names and addresses of the officers engaged in purchasing these lands?
11.	What are the salaries of each?
12.	What experience has each had in farming or in buying farm lands?

Questions


Mr. CASSELMAN:: As a result of a conference some days ago with the director of the Veterans' Land Act, certain requests were made to me with respect to changing the form of this question. With some of these I am prepared to concur, but I am not with regard to others. I would ask that the question be dropped so that I may frame a new question.
Question dropped.


SOLDIER SETTLEMENT
Mr. FAIR:: 1.	How many returned veterans held land under contract with the soldier settlement board as at, (a) September 1, 1939; (b) December 31, 1943?
2.	During the period September 1, 1939. to December 31, 1943, how many of those veterans,
(a)	obtained title deeds to their lands; (b) signed quit claim deeds; (c) were served with 30-day notices to vacate; (d) enlisted for service in any of the forces; (e) had a portion of their dependents' allowance deducted and applied on their debt to the soldier settlement board; (f) applied for extension of time under order in council No. P.C. 10472?
3.	What is the total indebtedness to the board of those veterans whose contracts were still in effect at December 31, 1943?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	(a) 8,608; (b) 6,190.
2.	(a) 1,404; (b) 466; (c) 342; (d) 966; (e) 234;-voluntary, 200; under order in council, 34; (f) 288.
3.	$8,684,553.70.


BEEF SUBSIDIES OR SUBVENTIONS
Mr. TUSTIN:: 1.	Does the government of Canada pay a subsidy or any other form of subvention for the movement of beef cattle from western Canada to the central Canada market?
2.	If so, from what date has such subsidy or subvention been in force, and what are the terms and conditions?
3.	To whom is the subsidy or subvention actually paid, (a) to the producer; (b) to the packer; or (c) to the commission man?
4.	What is the total amount paid out of the federal treasury on such subsidies or subventions to date, and to what firms or persons?
5.	Is any of the beef upon which subsidies or subventions have been paid by the government purchased for use by the government purchasing agencies for the armed forces or British account, or any other government account?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	The government does not pay a subsidy on the transportation of beef cattle but does pay a subsidy on the movement of beef from zones in the prairie provinces to the eastern
provinces. Through the commodity prices stabilization corporation, limited, shippers of beef are reimbursed to the extent that transportation charges per pound exceed the difference between the maximum price in the zone of destination and the maximum price in the zone of shipment.
2.	Provision for payment of this subsidy came into effect on February 8, 1943, and was suspended as of October 31, 1943. The subsidy was again brought into effect on shipments made on and after January' 1, 1944.
The terms and conditions are as follows: "Only the shipper of beef may apply for this subsidy to commodity prices stabilization corporation limited, 60 Rideau street, Ottawa. Such applications must be accompanied by shippers' signed invoice in triplicate, addressed to said corporation, setting forth full particulars of the amount claimed, made up in the following form:
(a)	Initial icing charge
1.	Done by shipper	
2.	Done by railway or other second
party	
(b)	Rail freight at carload rate	
(c)	Icing charges en route	
Less differential between price of dressed
beef in shipping zone and price of dressed in delivery zone	
3.	To the shipper of beef.
4.	Total amount paid $286,022.96. Shippers who have received subsidy' are: Burns & Co., Ltd., at Regina, Winnipeg, Prince Albert and Calgary; Canada Packers, at St. Boniface, Edmonton; Gainors Ltd., at Edmonton; W. C. Johnson & Co.; Katchen Bros., at Calgary; Modem Packers Ltd., at Calgary and St. Boniface; Morantz Beef Co., at Montreal;
O.K. Packing Co., at St. Boniface; Public Abattoir, at St. Boniface; H. & I. Rosenfeld, at St. Boniface; Rosenfeld & Pinsky, at St. Boniface; Swift Can. Co., at St. Boniface, Moose Jaw and Edmonton; St. Boniface Abattoir, St. Boniface; Wilsil, Limited, at Montreal.
5.	Yes, for Eastern Canadian Camps.


RURAL MAIL ROUTES
Mr. NEILL:: 1.	What is the total number of rural mail routes (on land only) in each of the different provinces, each province shown separately?
2.	Since the passage of order in council 4960. how many applications in each province have been received from or on behalf of rural mail carriers to have their rate of remuneration increased under the operation of that order in council ?

Questions
3.	How many were granted an increase in each province?
4.	In each province, what percentage of the applications were granted increases?
5.	How many rural routes (on land only) are there in the electoral district of Comox-Alberni?
6.	How many applications, as above, were received in that district?
7.	What percentage of applications were granted ?


Mr. NEILL:: In deference to the remarks of the Prime Minister with regard to curtailing expense, I ask that this question be dropped. I think I can get the information in a different way.
Question dropped.



WHEAT BOARD


Mr. PERLEY:: How much in brokerage fees, commission or any other fees was paid by the Canadian wheat board to the following export firms since August
1.	1943:	Alberta Pacific Grain Company
Limited. Bunge North American Grain Corporation (Canadian Agency Limited). Cargill Grain Company Limited. Continental Grain Company Limited, Laval and Company Incorporated. McCabe Brothers Grain Company Limited, Searle Grain Company Limited. K. B Stoddart & Company Limited?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: The information asked for by the hon member for Qu'Appelle in this question is not available in the form in which it is asked and it would involve a considerable amount of expense and time in its preparation. In any event, the answer to the question would disclose the competitive position of individual companies, and, moreover, would have an adverse effect on the board's future operations through these companies. I would therefore recommend that the question be dropped.


Ernest Edward Perley: Before the question is dropped I should like to have an opportunity of conferring with the minister. To say that these accounts cannot be separated is all bunk. If the minister will permit me an opportunity to discuss the matter with him and get certain information, it will be all right.


James Angus MacKinnon: I shall be glad to confer with the hon. member for Qu'Appelle. In the meantime the question can be dropped.


Gordon Graydon: The minister has set up several lines of defence, first second and third; in case the one is no good, he intends .to rely upon the others. I do not think the minister should ask to have this question dropped. Perhaps it could be allowed to stand, because there is no special reason why the hon. member
should not be able to frame another question. I think the minister should be courteous enough to allow the matter to stand for one day anyway.	[DOT]


Thomas Vien: Stand.



STORAGE FEES ON GRAIN IN TERMINAL ELEVATORS

Mr. PERLEY:: 1.	What was the total amount of storage fees paid on grain in terminal elevators at Fort William and Port Arthur for the crop year 1942-43?
2.	How much was paid to each individual terminal company?


James Angus MacKinnon: The hon. member for Qu'Appelle has asked for the total amount of storage fees paid on grain in the lakehead terminals for the crop year 1942-43. In reply I would say that the terminal elevator companies are not required to report such earnings, and I regret that there is no information available.


Ernest Edward Perley: Here again, if we had the report of the operations of the wheat board as we should have, this question perhaps would not be necessary. I ask that it stand until I have an opportunity to discuss it with the minister.


Mr. HOWE:: It has been answered.



WARTIME INDUSTRIAL TRANSIT AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE-BRITISH COLUMBIA

Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	What amount has been collected in the. province of British Columbia by the wartime industrial transit automobile insurance from its inception to date?
2.	What amount has been paid out in claims since its inception to date?
3.	What has been the cost of operation fct the same period?
4.	What risk or risks is the policy designed to cover?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	The wartime industrial transit plan is not operated by the government. The government does not collect premiums, pay claims or bear the cost of operation. For this reason the information asked for is not available. See also the answer to question No. 4.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Answered by No. 1.
4.	The insurance coverage was developed in discussion with the provincial superintendents of insurance who were the executive of the provincial superintendents' conference. The policy settled and approved by the provincial superintendents covered
Questions

only the legal liability of the drivers to their passengers carried under the plan. The companies, however, undertook by the policies not to . raise any guest laws, and high policy limits eliminated the possibility of guest laws being raised against passengers by drivers. At the same time, the transit controller through the provincial superintendents and the representatives of the insurance companies procured from all insurers in Canada an undertaking that "ride-sharing" involving contributions from passengers would not be treated as invalidating automobile insurance coverage. This undertaking extended to all automobile insureds but it had particular application to the W.I.T. plan insurance where contributions among workmen are common. While the policy written was technically a liability policy, the pool has found it possible and desirable to pay compensation to every passenger workman injured while carried under the plan regardless of the quantity or in fact the existence of negligence on the part of the driver. In addition, the policy which strictly only covered claims of passengers approved for carriage byr a particular driver, has in practice been treated as covering in respect of any passenger workmen of the same plant or any other plant operated under the plan. The provincial superintendents later settled and approved an endorsement which adds accident coverage on each driver including an indemnity provision of up to $30 per week for 100 weeks. If reserves set up against unpaid losses are adequate, the pool has established a surplus to date, but drivers are frequently injured and occasionally killed while driving under the plan and it is expected that the combination policy may exceed a safe loss ratio. The premium, which was experimentally set at SI per car per month, remains unchanged. The expressed object of the pool is to operate as closely as possible to a five per cent margin basis with any balance of premiums allocated to a pool fund to maintain the rate level against the increased losses anticipated. The pool also intends that the experience and rate level will be reviewed again at June 30, 1944.
\



WHEAT-STREET AND CASH PRICES

Mr. DONNELLY:: 1.	What	was	the	cash	price	for	No.	1
Northern wheat at Tort William on September
27,	1943?
2.	' What	was	the	street	price	for	No.	1Northern wheat	at	stations taking a	25-eent
[DOT] reight rate in western Canada on September 27, 1943?
3.	What	was	the	cash	price	for	No.	1
Northern wheat at Fort William on September
28,	1943?
EMr. Howe.]
4.	What was the street price for No. 1 Northern wheat at stations taking a 25-cent freight rate in western Canada on September 28, 1943?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 
Mr. TURNER:: 1.	Is the cost-of-living bonus paid to members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police?
2.	If not, will consideration be given to paying such bonus to the members of this force?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:	As there has been
expressed in the house at times such a high appreciation of the services of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police I think hon. members will be more than ordinarily interested in the answer to this question. For this reason perhaps I may be permitted to give the answer orally.
The answer to the first question is no. The members of this force were not included in the terms of the order in council of August 26, 1941, being P.C. 6702.
With regard to the second question, consideration has been given to the proper recognition of the work being done by the membere of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police at this time because of the added war duties that have been placed upon them. In recognition of that, His Excellency in council approved on March 3 a recommendation of the treasury board that extra war duties pay to all members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police be authorized for a period of one year from February 1, 1944. This is to recompense the

Questions
members for the extra duties they have been called upon to perform on account of the war. The rates are as follows:
Per diem
Officers	 $1.25
Non-commissioned	officers	 1.00
Constables	75
Special constable guards employed in guarding vulnerable points, public utilities, public buildings, et cetera and ordinary special constables, as approved by the commissioner	50
The numbers to whom this scale of extra war duties pay will apply are as follows:
Officers	 95
Non-commissioned officers	 893
Constables	  1,900
Special constable guards and ordinary
special constables	 1,934
Total	 4,822


Gordon Graydon: Is the total of 4,822 the total strength of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Yes.


Gordon Graydon: In changing its policy is the government going to make the cost of living bonus retroactive to the time when the bonus was introduced as a policy?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: There is no cost of living bonus involved. This is a special war duties pay to apply as from February 1, 1944, for a period of twelve months, and to be subject to review and modification as circumstances may warrant at the end of that time.


Gordon Graydon: In other words, it is not retroactive?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: No. It is from February 1, 1944.


Gordon Graydon: I think it should have been retroactive.


Mr. LOCKHART:: Will this include the special guards who are brought in by the Department of National Defence and attached to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Yes, special constable guards and ordinary special constables.



ELEMENTARY FLYING TRAINING SCHOOLS

Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: 1.	Wb&t is the cost per pupil graduate in each elementary flying training school?
2.	Which instructors are paid by the government at each of these schools, (a) R.C.A.F. personnel; (b) civilian instructors? _
3.	Which are paid by private companies?
4.	What was the average cost per pupil graduate in each of these schools prior to July 1, 1942?


Mr. McLARTY:: 1.		From Inception	
		To	To
		July/42	Jan./44
No.	2-Fort William, Ont.. !	S 967.46	$842.97No.	3 London, Ont	972.58	-No.	4-Windsor Mills, Que.	1,102.84	992.02No.	5-High River, Alta...	848.36	670.78No.	6-Prince Albert, Sask.	957.98	767.79No.	7 Windsor, Ont	877.12	763.74No.	9-St. Catharines, Ont.	978.46	767.25No.	10-Pendleton, Ont	980.68	888.44No.	11-Cap de la Made-	leine, P.Q	906.98	755.17No.	12-Goderich, Ont	872.24	672.27No.	13-St. Eugene, Ont-	996.72	783.45No.	15-Regina, Saskatche-	Wian 	866.77	714.76No.	17-Stanley, N.S	1,116.49	957.27No.	19-Virden, Manitoba..	937.66	692.09No.	20-Oshawa, Ont	1,140.56	832.67No.	22-Ancienne Lorette,	Que	1,221.73	No.	24-Abbotsford, B.C....	623.64	703.54No.	25-Assiniboia, Sask....	931.55	687.76No.	26-Neepawa, Manitoba	1,131.44	628.25No.	31-De Winton, Alta...	835.41	671.07No.	32-Bowden, Alta	843.84	690.39No.	33-Caron, Sask	859.61	613.61Note:-	
No. 1-Malton was transferred to No. 31, De Winton.
No. 3-London closed 3rd July, 1942.
No. 8-Vancouver was transferred to No. 24, Abbotsford.
No. 14-Portage la Prairie transferred to No. 25, Assiniboia.
No. 16-Edmonton transferred to No. 32, Bowden.
No. 18-Boundary Bay transferred to No. 33, Caron.
No. 21-Chatham transferred to No. 26, Neepawa.
No. 22-Ancienne Lorette (Quebec) closed 3rd July, 1942.
2.	All R.C.A.F. personnel at E.F.T.S. are paid by the government; all civilian instructors are paid by the operating companies.
3.	Civilian instructors are paid by private (the operating) companies.
4.	See (1) above.



R.C.A.F.-OFFICERS RETIRED

Mr. SINCLAIR:: How many officers of the R.C.A.F. of air rank have been retired since September 10, 1939. (a) of the permanent force; (b) of the auxiliary force; (c) of the special reserve?
Questions


Mr. MACMILLAN:: 1.	(a) (i) One officer of the permanent force.
(ii)	Three permanent force officers presently on retirement leave-two retirements effective in June and one in July, of this year.
(iii)	Five permanent force officers whose retirements have been authorized but not yet promulgated.
(b)	Nil.
(c)	Nil.



UNEMPLOYMENT

Mr. MacINNIS:: What was the average number of persons unemployed in Canada for each of the years 1938 to 1943 inclusive?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1938-39: The dominion bureau of statistics has estimated (in "Annual review of the employment situation in Canada", fc^r 1938-1939) that the average unemployment among wage and salary workers was as follows:	1938,
401,000; 1939, 388,000.
It should be noted that these figures do not include an estimate of unemployment among young persons who had never worked and who were seeking work, which was substantial in these years.
1940: No figures available. The estimates of unemployment prepared by the dominion bureau of statistics were discontinued in 1939.
1941: According to the population census, there were 124,165 wage and salary workers unemployed on June 2, 1941.
1942-43: According to the_ records of the unemployment insurance commission, the average number of unplaced applicants was as follows: 1942, 65,666; 1943, 73,677.



REDEMPTION OF WORN AND MUTILATED COINAGE

Mr. ISNOR:: What action, if any, has been taken to redeem smooth and mutilated Canadian coinage?


Mr. ABBOTT:: _ Silver, nickel and bronze coin of the Dominion of Canada, which is worn smooth by natural abrasion, is redeemed by the Bank of Canada at face value. Silver, nickel and bronze coin which has been appreciably reduced in weight by any means except natural abrasion is redeemed by the Bank of Canada at a discount of 25 per cent of its face value.
The withdrawal of smooth and mutilated coinage from circulation is, in the first instance, a responsibility of the commercial banks. The procedure is to have the coins forwarded for redemption to one of the various agencies of the Bank of Canada.
It is possible that due to the shortage of subsidiary coinage caused by unprecedented demands arising out of the war, some branches [Mr. Sinclair.)
of the commercial banks have found it necessary, in order to meet public demand, to keep in circulation smooth or mutilated coins instead of withdrawing them as rapidly as prior to the outbreak of war.



TRENTON, N.S., SHELL PLANT

Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	How much money did the government put into the shell plant at Trenton, Nova Scotia?
2.	What was the cost per shell in this plant?
3.	How many plants in Canada are manufacturing naval shells, and where are thev located?
4.	What is the cost per shell at the other plants?
5.	Did the orders previously filled at the Trenton plant go to the plant located in Toronto, Ontario?
6.	What specifically was the reason for closing the plant at Trenton, Nova Scotia?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Capital expenditure, $576,249.29, for facilities created for war production at the Trenton steel works, title to which is vested in the
crown.
Buildings	$ 31,108 00
Machinery	
428.409	91Equipment	
45,445	38Installation	
60,675	00Jigs, Tools, Dies	
6,642	00Gauges	
3,969	00

2.	H. E. Shell, $5.60; H. A. & L. A. Shell, $5.41.
3.	One other plant only is manufacturing for naval requirements and this plant is producing^ practice and- proof shot only. The plant is located in New Brunswick and was in operation before the closing of the Trenton plant.
4.	This shell is not being made at any other plant,
5.	No. See also answer to 4. The Toronto plant is producing 40 M/M shell.
6.	Contracts were completed and there are, up to the present, no further requirements.



THREE RIVERS-STE. ANGELE DE LAVAL BRIDGE

Mr. DUBOIS:: 1.	Has the government given effect to a resolution passed by the House of Commons on March 9, 1936, concerning the examination of a project for the construction of a bridge between Three Rivers and Ste. Angele de Laval, county of Nicolet-Yamaska?
2.	Will the government consider the advisability of including this project in its programme of public works reconstruction after the war?

Questions


Mr. MICHAUD:: 1.	No.
2.	Consideration will be given to its inclusion in post-war programme when the magnitude of the problem is known.



WAR PENSIONS

Mr. HANSON (Skeena):: 1.	Of pensions in force with regard to the great war, (a) how many are related to death or disability of members of the forces who served in a theatre of war; (b) how many with regard to persons who did not serve in a theatre of war?
2.	Of pensions in force with regard to the present war, (a) how many are related to death or disability of members of the forces who served in a theatre of war; (b) how many with regard to persons who did not serve in a theatre of war?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Return as of December 31, 1943:
	Number	Percentage
1. (a)	82.378	88-6(b)	10,597	11-492,975	100-0
Return as of December 31, 1943, and including members of R.C.A.F. attached to the
R.A.F.:	Number	Percentage2. (a)	7,844	76-2(b)	2,448	23-810,292	100-0



AIR OBSERVER AND ELEMENTARY FLYING SCHOOLS -COST OF LIVING BONUS

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	Are the employees of air observer schools and elementary flying training schools entitled to cost-of-living bonus?
2.	If the answer is yes, do all schools pay it? If not, which schools do not?


Mr. MACMILLAN:: 1.	Yes, in accordance with regulations laid down by national war labour board.
2.	Yes.



PERMITS TO EXPORT CHARCOAL

Mr. POULIOT:: What persons have been granted permits to export charcoal to the United States since the beginning of the war?


James Angus MacKinnon: With reference to this question, may I say that the information contained on an application for an export permit is given to the government in confidence. The tabling of this information would disclose to competitors the details of business carried on by individual firms and in accordance with usual government practice we are unable to disclose these details. In the public interest, therefore, I suggest that this question be dropped.
Question dropped.


Mr. BLAIR:: 



PRICES-BEEF, EGGS, ETC.

[Stage Direction]
What was the lowest price during each of the years 1929, 1932 and 1943, on, (a) beef; (b) eggs;
(c)	cheese; (d) butter?
James Angus MacKinnon: Lowest prices listed below have been taken from the following records:
(a)	Beef, good cows-Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, Vancouver.
(b)	Eggs, fresh seconds or Grade B's-Halifax, Saint John, Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Calgary, Vancouver.
(c)	Cheese, new large-Montreal, Toronto.
(d)	Butter, creamery prints-Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, Regina, Calgary, Vancouver.
Lowest* wholesale price-
(a)	Beef, good cow, lb...
(b)	Eggs, fresh 2nds, doz.
(c)	Cheese, new large, lb.
(d)	Butter, creamery
prints, lb	
Winnipeg $0-135 Calgary. $0-220 Montreal $0-195
Calgary $0-380
Winnipeg $0-048 Saskatoon $0-082 Toronto 10-093
Regina $0-160
Winnipeg $0-145 Saskatoon $0-266, gr. B Montreal $0-200
Regina $0-330

Questions



PRICES-MILK

Mr. McNEVIN:: What was the price paid at the farms, to producers, for whole milk for the Toronto market, during the months of December and June of the years, 1929, 1932 and 1943, including bonus.
Mr. MacIvINNON (Edmonton West):
1929	1932	1943June Dec.	June Dec.	June Dec.
Price to producers for Toronto market. Price at farm not available. Whole milk (8 gal.
can at dairy)	 $1-950 $2-393	$1-195 $1-195	$2-268* $2-474*
* Calculated from per cwt. prices of $2.75 for June and $3.00 for December.



SHEEP, STEERS AND CALVES

Thomas Bruce McNevin: What was the price of, (a) choice sheep and lambs; (b) butcher steers; (c) veal calves, on the Toronto live stock market on December 15, and July 15, in each of the years, 1929, 1932 and 1943?


James Angus MacKinnon: 1929	1932
July Dec.	July Dec.
Live stock, Toronto stockyards Lambs, good handyweight,
cwt	 $15-100	$12-410	$7-390	$5-180
Good	Good and Choice
1,000-1,200 lbs.	over 1,050 lbs.
Steers, cwt	
$11-150	$ 9-630	$6-140	$4-100Calves, good veal,	cwt	14-850	15-760	5-460	6-030
July Dec.

Good
up to 1,050 lbs. $12-530 $11-680 14-800	15-450



PRICES-NO. 1 ONTARIO FALL MILLING WHEAT

Thomas Bruce McNevin: What was the market price of No. 1 Ontario fall wheat (milling) on December 16, 1929,
1932, 1943?


James Angus MacKinnon: December	December	DecemberNo. 1 Ontario wheat (milling) f.o.b. shipping point, monthly average, bushel	
$1-210	$0-403	$1-130



QUEBEC CONFERENCE, 1943

Mr. RAYMOND:: 1.	Was Churchill-Roosevelt conference held in Quebec city in August and September, 1943, convened at that place upon the invitation of the Canadian government?
2.	Out of the sums expended by the Canadian government for the holding of such conference, what amount was paid for liquor to the Quebec liquor commission?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	Yes.
2.	The representatives attending the historic conference were the guests of Canada, It is

not the practice of countries which have the honour of entertaining heads of states and distinguished representatives of other nations to make public such details.



PRICES-STEERS, CALVES, ETC.

Robert Fair: On December 16, 1919, what was the price on the Winnipeg stock market for, (a) No. 1 choice butcher steers; (b) calves, good and choice veal; (c) lambs, good handyweights;
(d)	sheep, good handyweights; (e) hogs, grade A dressed basis, delivered off the trucks at yards and plants?
Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West);

Questions as Orders for Returns
Wholesale Prices of Certain Specified Live stock on the Winnipeg Market
Item	Description	Unit	December 3 * $Steers	choice, heavy, 1,100-1,200 lbs.	cwt.	9 50-10 50Calves	veal	cwt.	7 50- 9 50Lambs	fat	cwt.	10 00-12 25Sheep	-	cwt.	7 00- 8 50Hogs	selects, fed and watered	cwt.	14 50
*Priees on December 16, 1919 not available. The above are the only descriptions for which records are available at Winnipeg.



CANCER RESEARCH

Mr. LEADER:: 1.	Is anything being done by the Department of Pensions and National Health to investigate the cancer research work conducted by Dr. J. R. Davidson, of Winnipeg?
2.	If so, of what nature is such investigation, and what person or persons are conducting same?
3.	When the investigation is completed, will the findings be made public?


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: 1.	An application for financial assistance in continuing his cancer research work has been made by Dr. J. R. Davidson to the national research council. The application will, it is expected, be considered soon by the associate committee on medical research of the council, on which committee the Department of Pensions and National Health has representation.
The function of the committee is to consider any information which an applicant may submit, and it is within the competence of the council to make expenditures from public funds to assist in forwarding research work recommended by the committee.
2.	No investigation, other than the procedure mentioned in the answer to No. 1, is made.
3.	Answered by No. 2.



SHACKLING OF CANADIAN PRISONERS OF WAR

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Has the government received any additional information this session as to the shackling of Canadian prisoners by Germany?
2.	Has all the information available been secured from the protecting power in Switzerland, or through the international Red Cross, and do the government agencies also protect them ?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	Yes. The government is regularly receiving information about the treatment of Canadian prisoners of war in Germany.
2.	Information on conditions in prisoner of war camps in Germany is received through the Swiss government, which is the protecting
100-75*
power for Canadian interests, and through the International Red Cross. The Canadian government itself can only act to protect Canadian prisoners of war through the protecting power and, in matters affecting general welfare and camp conditions through the International Red Cross.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. ROY:: 1.	What is the total strength of the Royal Canadian Air Force?
2.	How many Canadians are now serving in the Royal Air Force?
3.	What are the casualties to date, giving names and addresses, (a) in the Royal Canadian Air Force; (b) among Canadians in the Royal Air Force?


BRITISH COLUMBIA FISHERIES-DRAGGER TYPE BOATS
Mr. HANSON (Skeena):: 1.	Has the government contributed towards the construction of a seiner dragger type of boat on the Pacific coast? If so, from what source did the request for the assistance towards the construction of this type of boat come?
2.	What official or officials of the government visited the Pacific coast and arranged for assistance towards the construction of these boats?
3.	What was the minimum length and tonnage of the boats to be?
4.	On whose suggestion was the length or tonnage arrived at?
5.	What was the reason for setting the minimum length and tonnage arrived at?
6.	How many boats have been constructed on the Pacific coast under government , assistance? What are their names, and by whom is each boat owned?
7.	What number of boats, and who are the owners of same, that are not yet completed?
8.	Have any of these boats been transferred from the original owners?
9.	W'hat was the cost of each boat when completed?
10.	What amount has the government, by way of direct subsidy and depreciation, obligated themselves to contribute?
11.	Is the original owner required to retain the ownership of this boat for a set period? If so, what is that period?
Questions as Orders jor Returns

12.	Has the government assisted in the construction of these boats by reason of having taken boats for defence purposes? If so, why did they not construct them themselves and turn baek to the owners the boats they had taken for naval purposes?
13.	Was there, at or before the war, submitted to the Department of Naval Services Snd the Department of Fisheries a plan for the construction of a halibut packer type of boat? If so, why was not this type of boat constructed Instead or as well as the type that was agreed upon? Are such boats to be used by the government for defence purposes during the war, then sold to fishermen?
14.	What is, or was, the length and tonnage of the dragger type of boat, to the building of which the government has contributed on the Atlantic coast? Why ivas this minimum set?
15.	What assistance has been given towards the building and converting of vessels on the Atlantic?
16.	What person or persons have availed themselves of this opportunity?
17.	How many vessels or boats have been converted or built and what are the names of the owners?



PERMITS UNDER ORDER IN COUNCIL P.C. 9440- IMMIGRATION STATUS OF REFUGEES

Mr. DORION:: What are the names, the previous residences and the racial origin of the persons to whom permits have been issued by the Minister of Mines and Resources, under order in council P.C. 9440, December 10, 1943?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: This question should stand as an order for return. It will take considerable time to get the information requested.



PUBLIC SERVICE-UNITED STATES NATIONALS

Mr. BLACKMORE:: 1.	Since September, 1939, and up until March 1, 1944, how many people of United States citizenship have been employed by the civil service of Canada or put on the federal government payroll in any capacity at salaries of $1,200 and higher per annum?
2.	What are their names, salary, and what position is held by each of them?



RETIREMENT ANNUITY PLANS

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What was the number of retirement annuity plans for employees in force under the annuities branch of the Department of Labour in 1923, 1928, 1933, 1938, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, in each of the following classifications,
(a)	government bodies such as federal, provincial or municipal; (b) private companies and other non-governmental employers?
2.	What was the total valuation of retirement annuity plans for employees in force under the annuities branch of the Department of Labour for each of the above years in each of the above classifications?



CANADIAN FORCES-STOVES FOR BUILDINGS

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1. How many stoves were bought by any department of the government for the purpose of heating buildings used by the armed forces?
(Mr. O. Hanson.]
2.	What was the make, and the unit cost of these stoves?
3.	How many of these stoves have been discarded or replaced?
4.	If any, how many of these have been sold, and at what price?
5.	Have any of the discarded stoves been broken up and sold as scrap?
6.	If so, how many, and how much per pound was received for the scrap?



REPRINTS OF MEMBERS' SPEECHES

Mr. PURDY:: 1.	Did the printing bureau prepare any pamphlets containing more than one speech of members of parliament during the year 1943?
2.	If so, (a) how many different pamphlets were prepared, what were the titles of same, and whose speeches did they contain; (b) how many of each issue were prepared, and what was the price received for each issue; (c) what was the cost to the bureau of each issue, and did such cost include allowance for overhead, depreciation and a reasonable profit; (d) during the time such pamphlets were in preparation, did the bureau place orders for government printing with private firms, which could have been handled by their plant had the pamphlets not been on order?
3.	What is the estimated average percentage added to costs by private printing firms for overhead, depreciation and profit?



BOOKLET BY MORLEY CALLAGHAN-&quot;CANADA THINKS OF THE FUTURE&quot;

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	How many copies of a booklet of Canadian affairs entitled "Canada Thinks of the Future", Vol. 1, No. 14, by Morley Callaghan (the Marsh report), were published, and who authorized it?
2.	Where was it circulated, and at what cost?
3.	Why -was this contentious booklet circulated among troops overseas, and for what purpose?
4.	What has been the total cost of all these publications, how many were issued, and where were they circulated overseas?
5.	Will issues like these be discontinued in future?



HOUSING-TORONTO

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What has been done since last session to relieve the very serious need of small houses and the housing situation in Toronto, (a) for civilian citizens; (b) soldiers and their families; (c) soldiers from overseas returning home?
2.	Who is in charge of it at Toronto?
3.	What has been spent there on houses for war workers?
4.	What has been spent on dwelling conversions there, and at what cost each year since the present war began?



CANADIAN FORCES-SPORTING EQUIPMENT

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What amount of money has been spent each year by the government in supplying sporting equipment goods of all kinds to soldiers, (a) the forces in Great Britain; (b) Italy, Africa and other fronts; (c) camps of the various forces in Canada; (d) prisoners of war overseas;
(e)	all other theatres of war overseas?
2.	Is this work under government control, and is there any duplication?

Motions for Papers



MAPLE PRODUCTS

Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	For the year 1943, what was the total value of maple products in Canada, (a) in sugar; (b) in maple syrup?
2.	What was the domestic consumption of these products in Canada?
3.	What was, in pounds, the quantity of our exports in maple sugar during the same year?
4.	What was, in gallons, for the same period, the quantity of our exports in maple syrup?
5.	Are those products now rationed in Canada?
6.	If so, why?
7.	Has the price of these products been fixed?
8.	If so, what is the ceiling for sugar and for syrup?
9.	Has the government, in establishing a ceiling fob the price of these products, taken into account the increase in the cost of labour and production ?
10.	Has consideration also been given, in fixing the price of maple products, to the very high price of firewood required for such production?



MOBILIZATION ACT-TRAINEES RECEIVED AT BRANDON

Mr. MATTHEWS:: How many trainees have been received at each of the following centres since the outbreak of war,-No. 2 manning depot, Brandon, No. 12
S.F.T.S., Brandon, No. 4 artillery training centre, Brandon?



CANADIAN FORCES OVERSEAS-CURRENCY USED IN PAY AND ALLOWANCES

Mr. DORION:: 1.	Are the members of the armed services stationed overseas paid in the currency of the different countries in which they are stationed?
2.	If so, (a) what is the amount of their pay-in local currency; (b) what is the actual value of these currencies on the Canadian market; (c) by what means are Canadian funds transferred to these countries for the purpose of paying the members of the armed services?



MOBILIZATION ACT-LOCATION OF INDIVIDUALS WHOSE ADDRESSES ARE UNKNOWN

Mr. DORION:: 1.	Following order in council P.C. 2278, dated March 22, 1943, how many cases have been referred to the Hooper-Holmes bureau, Toronto, to locate the whereabouts of individuals whom the divisional registrars have been unable to locate?
2.	How many such individuals have been located by this organization?
3.	What have been the amounts claimed by this bureau for this special work?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: For a copy of regulations issued under the authority of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940, and including P.C. 3581, May 23, 1941,
and P.C. 2587, of April 1, 1943, together with copies of all orders in council or regulation* amending, altering or extending same and passed between May 23, 1941, and January 31, 1944.



STEEL CONTROL-LICENCES

Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: For a return showing,-1. The number of licences issued under authority of order No.
S.C. 25, steel controller, dated March 5, 1943, from the date of the order to January 31, 1944.
2.	A list of the names of the firms or persons so licensed in the cities of Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg and Vancouver.
3.	A list of the names of firms or persons who have applied for but who have been refused licences in each of the aforementioned cities.



POST-WAR EMPLOYMENT

Stanley Howard Knowles: For a copy of the questionnaire (or questionnaires) sent out by Dr. G. M. Weir in connection with the preparation of his report on post-war employment opportunities.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Return tabled.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-TRAINING CENTRES-SPUR LINES AND SIDINGS

[Stage Direction]
Mr. SHAW;
For a copy of each agreement entered into between the government, or any government department, or any official thereof, and the Canadian National Railway relative to the extension of spur lines into air training centres or the construction of sidings adjacent to such training centres.
Mr. POWER; Return tabled.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. NICHOLSON;
For a copy of all letters, telegrams, memoranda and other documents in possession of the wartime prices and trade board and the Department of Munitions and Supply in connection with the loss of tires at the time of the Emerson garage fire at Wynyard, February, 1942.
Mr. NICHOLSON:: Mr. Speaker, I would ask that this motion be dropped.
Motion dropped.



NORTHWEST FIELD FORCES-PENSIONS

Mr. CHURCH:: For a return showing-1. How many members, by provinces, _ of_ the Northwest field forces (1885) are still living, according to the records of the Department of Pensions and National Health?
2.	How many have been given any form of aid?
3.	How many of such force are known to he in necessitous circumstances?
Motions for Papers

4.	What is being done, if anything, towards granting them $40 a mouth pension, or some grant or living allowance in lieu of pension, including hospitalization and other reasonable allowances?
5.	A copy of all correspondence received by the department since November 1, 1943, to the end of January, 1944, in relation to this matter.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Return tabled.


Gordon Graydon: I hope the minister is
going to grant to members of these forces the war veterans' allowance.



CANADIAN WHEAT CROP, 1942-43 AND 1943-44

Ernest Edward Perley: For a copy of the agreements between the Canadian wheat board and, (a) interior elevator companies; (b) terminal elevator companies; (c) export grain companies; (d) brokers, in connection with the handling and exporting of Canadian wheat for the crop year 1942-43 and to date for the crop year 1943-44.


James Angus MacKinnon: Return tabled.



UNITED KINGDOM CAPITAL INVESTMENTS


Gordon Knapman Fraser: For a copy of order in council P.C. 1/3233. April 19, 1943, together with a statement describing the "capital investments" of the government of the United Kingdom acquired by the government of Canada and referred to in the above order; also for a statement giving amounts of refunds of duties and/or taxes granted to contractors, as referred to in paragraph (1) of the said order; and for a statement of what government-owned plants or incorporated crown companies received the benefit of remission of customs duties and/or taxes, referred to in paragraph (4) of said order; also amount of refunds or remission of duties and/or taxes paid to or granted to contractors, or increases in contract prices made under paragraph (7) of the said order.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It will be very difficult to
bring down a reply to this motion in its present form. My hon. friend is mistaken about the measures adopted to which this order in council refers. I wonder whether he would have the motion dropped and see me before rewording it? I think we can give him the information he desires if the motion is properly worded.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: That will be all right. I will reword the motion after seeing the minister.
Motion dropped.


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



DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

[Stage Direction]
SS. Departmental administration, $410,189.
Item stands.

[Stage Direction]
88. Departmental administration, $105,975.
Item stands.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, March 2, consideration in committee of a resolution to grant to His Majesty certain sums of money for the carrying out of measures consequent upon the existence of a state of war-Mr. Ilsley -Mr. Bradette in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
2. Pay and allowances, $323,315,744.
The CHAIRMAN:: Shall the item carry?


Mr. BENCE:: I had thought that the minister was going to answer some more of the questions before we went into these items.


Mr. POWER:: We are now on item 2, and we have answers to a number of questions.


Mr. MACMILLAN:: The hon. member
for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) asked several questions with regard to the wartime bureau of technical personnel. The questions and answers are as follows:
1.	Does the wartime bureau of technical personnel cooperate with the R.C.A.F. in the enlistment of technical personnel?
Answer:	Yes. The wartime bureau of
technical personnel cooperates fully with the R.C.A.F. In the past the bureau has supplied the R.C.A.F. with a considerable number of technical personnel for technical appointments and also, since the inception of the science student regulations, December 1, 1942, the bureau has given its consent to the enlistment as aircrew of a large number of undergraduates who have applied for consent.
2.	Are such personnel prohibited from enlisting as aircrew?
Answer:	No. Science graduates may enlist as aircrew provided they obtain the consent of the wartime bureau of technical personnel. The bureau, however, is reluctant to give its consent to a science graduate if there is an unfilled demand at the time, from the

War Appropriation-Air Services
armed forces or essential civilian employers, for men with the training or experience possessed by that graduate.
The present regulations with regard to science students apply only to those students who have graduated subsequent to December 1, 1942; neither do they apply to undergraduate science students who leave university prior to graduation. These men may enlist in any branch of the armed forces.
3.	Are they prevented from enlisting in any capacity?
Answer: No, but the conditions which apply in paragraph 2 which I have just read, are applicable in that regard also.
The hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) asked a question with regard to the application of the order in council to Canadians serving in the R.A.F. The Minister of Pensions and National Health (Mr. Mackenzie) on June 23, 1943, made the following [DOT] statement, which I think answers the hon. member:
Inquiries have been made as to whether Canadian boys, who left Canada a few years before the war to enlist in the Royal Air Force, subsequently saw active service and returned to Canada, at the time of their discharge, are eligible for benefits under the post-discharge reestablishment order (P.C. 7633).
This is the order in council which provides several of the most important measures of government assistance to ex-service men in their reestablishment problem, including vocational training, out-of-work benefit, and educational assistance.
It is the intention of the department to grant the benefits of this order in council to Canadians who serve in the R.A.F. as just described, and no additional legislation or order in council is considered necessary.
The post-discharge order provides, -with respect to members of His Majesty's forces other than Canadian forces, that they must have been domiciled in Canada at the time of their enlistment therein in the present war.
Domicile is a question of intention and of fact that cannot be divided by an arbitrary date line. Any regulation stating that those who enlisted subsequent to a particular date shall be deemed eligible might have the effect of excluding somebody who, under the present legal position, would be eligible.
The department has taken the view that any Canadian boy who left Canada two or three or even four years prior to the outbreak of war for the purpose of enlisting in His Majesty's imperial forces and who returns to Canada upon his discharge would not have forfeited his domicile for the purposes of the order.
I wish to state, therefore, that Canadian boys who left Canada a few years before the war to join H.M. imperial forces to serve in the present war, and who return to Canada upon their discharge, have not necessarily by so doing lost their domicile, and will be regarded as eligible under the order unless there be some circumstance in the individual case indicating that the applicant has actually transferred his domicile permanently out of Canada.
The hon. member for York South also asked this question: Are R.C.A.F. personnel attached to the R.A.F. and serving in India required to stay there for four years?
Present arrangements with respect to (i) aircrew personnel, (ii) R.D.F. personnel, (iii) ground crew personnel are as follows:
Aircrew personnel:	Upon completion of
each operational and non-operational or instructional tour future employment will be decided upon by the Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, R.C.A.F. Overseas, in consultation with the appropriate R.A.F. authority. The number of such tours to be served in India before return to the United Kingdom in any particular case will depend upon the availability of replacements and operational expediencies.
Such tours of duty for aircrew personnel are as follows:
(a)	Operational: A tour of operational duty presently expressed either as a number of sorties or as a number of operational hours flown will, irrespective of the theatre of war in which the tour is served, remain as at present constituted, subject to the overriding time limitation of eighteen months or such shorter period as may be in effect in the command concerned.
(b)	Non-operational or instructional tour for ex-operational personnel: The duration of the instructional tour will be twelve months or such shorter period as may be in effect in the command concerned.
(c)	General: The tour of duty outside of Canada for R.C.A.F. aircrew personnel will not exceed three years reckoned from the date of departure from Canada until embarkation upon relief.
R.D.F. personnel: The normal tour of duty outside of Canada, including India, for R.D.F. personnel of the R.CA.F. serving with the R.A.F. shall be three years computed from the date of departure from Canada. Priority in repatriation where possible will be given to those R.D.F. personnel serving outside the United Kingdom.
Ground crew personnel: The tour of duty of R.C.A.F. ground crew attached to the R.A.F. and serving in India is indefinite, depending upon the availability of replacements and operational expediencies as may be determined from time to time by the Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, R.C.A.F. Overseas.
The hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Isnor) asked why it was necessary to transfer the "Y" depot to Lachine.
Owing to the extreme shortage of civilian accommodation in Halifax, Nova Scotia, it was

War Appropriation-Air Services
necessary that as many service personnel as possible, living in civilian accommodation, be moved into government quarters. Personnel of the Royal Canadian Navy made up the majority of service personnel living in civilian accommodation and there was no naval accommodation available to house these personnel. Therefore, it was decided to turn over the buildings occupied by the R.C.A.F. "Y" depot to the navy and move the R.C.A.F. "Y" depot personnel to a new location. Priority was given to naval personnel in this regard as it was esential that they remain in Halifax, whereas the R.C.A.F. "Y" depot could be accommodated elsewhere with no loss in efficiency.
He also asked, was the transfer justified in view of extra cost in transportation to R.C.A.F. and personnel of the R.C.A.F. The answer is: The transfer of the R.C.A.F. "Y" depot to Lachine was justified inasmuch as Lachine, P.Q., was a more strategic location for an embarkation depot, permitting the overseas shipment of personnel from the American north Atlantic ports as well as the Canadian north Atlantic ports without increasing the travelling distance of the overseas drafts. The utilization of American north Atlantic ports was, of course, impossible prior to December 7, 1941, and hence Halifax, the largest Canadian north Atlantic port, was the most suitable location when R.C.A.F. "Y" depot was first formed prior to the entry of the United States of America into the war.
The hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Isnor) asked: Are facilities through New York as good as or better than through Halifax?
Answer: With the numerous rail lines converging on the port of New York and the extensive terminal facilities available there, that port is considered equal to Halifax for embarkation purposes.
(2)	Is New York embarkation as efficient as Halifax?
Answer: Yes; embarkations of air force personnel at New York are supervised by air force embarkation staffs and are as efficient as Halifax embarkations.
The following question was asked of the minister: Can Canadian nationals now serving in the R.A.F. as groundcrew be transferred to the Royal Canadian Air Force?
Answer: Yes, under the conditions and subject to the restrictions laid down and agreed upon by the governments of the United Kingdom and Canada as tabled in the house.
The hon. member for North Battleford (Mrs. Nielson) and the hon. leader of the opposition 
(Mr. Graydon) asked a question with regard to the pay and allowances of the members of the women's division.
Answer: (1) Responsible officers of the three services have given very full consideration to this question and they are of opinion that the principle of equal pay for equal duties is fully recognized in the present pay arrangement.
(2)	Men and women may be equally useful in the trades sphere, and indeed we recognize that they are by granting the same additional and trades pay.
(3)	It is only in the basic rates of pay that women receive four-fifths of the rate of pay for men. Service authorities do not consider that women can perform the same duties as men, because in event of enemy attack the men must man guns and meet the enemy in combat. Wherever there has been possibility ef enemy attack, the male ground personnel have been instructed in combat duties and detailed to defence posts.
(4)	In the United Kingdom, the women's forces receive approximately two-thirds of the rate of pay for men, including trades pay. We have placed our women comparatively on a much higher level of pay.
The following questions were asked with regard to aircrew messes:
(1)	Why do they eat separately?
(2)	What is ration scale compared to ground?
(3)	Size (capacity).
The answers are as follows:
(1)	Accommodation for aircrew messes, where all aircrews, regardless of rank, take certain meals together during periods of operational duty, has been established at the following units in Canada and Newfoundland (in many cases this accommodation is arranged for in existing messes): Yarmouth, Sydney, Gander, Dartmouth, Torbay, Goose Bay.
(2)	These special messes are provided for crews of squadrons that are engaged in long operational patrols. Crews of these squadrons are, by the nature of their duties, required to be absent from the units for long periods and therefore some special arrangement regarding their meals is essential. As a rule these crews, officers and other ranks, have a very early breakfast together at the unit. This provides arrangements for all personnel entitled to special rations to be messed together and centralizes the preparation of foods to be consumed aboard aircraft, as these crews take with them food for frequent light meals during the day, such as hot drinks, soups, fruit juices, sandwiches, et cetera. Frequent feedings are

War Appropriation-Air Services
recommended to delay the onset of fatigue and maintain efficiency. On their return late in the evening, after the normal supper hour at the unit is over, these crews are fatigued and hungry and are given a hearty evening meal.
(3)	Special rations have been provided for aircrew on operational duty for consumption during flight when absent from their unit during meal hours and also to provide for meals served at irregular hours in the aircrew mess. These rations include the ordinary ration normally supplied to groundcrew with the addition of increases of such items as fresh milk, fresh meat, fruit juices, sugar, tea, coffee, butter, and also includes other foods, such as canned soup, canned beef stew, cooked meats, canned vegetables and canned fruits.
(4)	Size and capacity of such messes is determined by the number of squadrons engaged in operational duties from the unit.
(5)	These messing arrangements apply only to operational units. At training stations three messes (airmen's, N.C.O.'s and officers) are in use.
The following questions were asked with regard to transportation:
(1)	Has any change occurred in the situation regarding free transportation for troops on leave?
(2)	What is the present situation?
The answers are as follows:
(1)	Yes, since the last session of parliament, arrangements have been made whereby repatriated casualties and ex-prisoners of war are provided with free transportation to their homes.
(2)	(i) Repatriated casualties and exprisoners of war are provided with free transportation to their homes.
(ii) Other personnel may purchase a round-trip ticket for one-third of the cost of a single fare on the following occasions:
(a)	On anual leave-limited to one such purchase per leave year.
(b)	On embarkation leave.
(c)	On disembarkation leave.
(General): The cost of special leave warrant issued to personnel under the circumstances referred to in (a) (b) and (c) of paragraph (ii) answer 2 above, is proportioned as follows:
One-third of the cost is borne by the government; one-third of the cost is borne by the railway company concerned; one-third of the cost is borne by the personnel.
Under these arrangements, the annual cost of the government is estimated to be as follows:
In the case of
(a)		 $1,454,500
(b)		 415,200
(c)		 26,000
Total	 $1,897,700
If the government absorbed that portion at present borne by personnel and the railway company continued to absorb one-third of the
cost, it is estimated that the government would be as follows:	cost to the
In case of	
(a) 		$2,909,000
(b) 		830,400
(c) 		56,000
Total	 $3,795,400
The additional cost, therefore, would be $1,897,700.
The hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair) asked a question with regard to R.A.F. warrant officers serving with R.CA.F. overseas stations. The answer is as follows:
R.A.F. personnel serving with R.C.A.F. overseas stations or units are paid from air ministry funds on the basis of R.A.F. regulations. It is considered that the R.A.F. would have very strong objections to personnel of their service in the United Kingdom being paid at other than R.A.F. rates, particularly in view of the invidious comparison which would arise between such personnel and other R.A.F. personnel serving at R.A.F. units in the surrounding area.
The hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) asked a question with regard to educational service in the units. The answer is lengthy. I think hon. members would like to have it on Hansard, and I shall therefore, read it:
The provision of opportunities for service personnel to continue their formal education was made in the early days of the war. The Caandian Legion educational services provided correspondence courses at high school and university level for service personnel. Tutorial classes and lectures in any subject for which there was a demand were also arranged. It was gradually realized, however, that the educational needs of service personnel could be met most adequately only if there was organized within the R.C.A.F. an educational branch. Therefore, in March, 1942, the R.C.A.F. undertook to provide education officers throughout the service. Appoint-

War Appropriation-Air Services
ment of education officers was accordingly made at all R.C.A.F. units and stations whose size warranted such action.
The R.C.A.F. educational branch now offers the following services:
Unit education officers. Almost all units of any size now have an education officer. At others there is an officer who devotes part of his time to educational duties. This applies in the case of elementary flying training schools.
The education officer on a unit or station has many duties. Among them are the following :
(a)	To advise the commanding officer on all matters relating to educational services.
(b)	To ascertain the educational needs of all personnel on the unit and advise such personnel with regard to educational facilities.
(c)	To make appropriate recommendations regarding the educational qualifications of all personnel who desire to remuster to aircrew. To administer the necessary classification tests in this connection.
(d)	To organize educational courses, trade improvement classes, progress of war study and tutorial classes as may be necessary.
(e)	To advise personnel with regard to educational facilities available through the Canadian Legion educational services and to supervise all examinations in connection with educational activities on a unit.
(f)	To give progress of war lectures to aircrew trainees in accordance with the syllabi of training.
(g)	To organize the station library.
(h)	To assist the commanding officer in organizing discussion and study groups in current affairs and progress of war.
Pre-aircrew education. At most units where there is an education officer, ground personnel who desire to remuster to aircrew and who lack the required educational qualifications are given the necessary courses organized on the unit by the education officer. To date nearly 11,000 airmen have remustered to aircrew.
A large number of personnel who enlist for aircrew duties are qualified in all respects except education. Pre-aircrew training schools have therefore been organized under the war emergency training plan at fifteen points across the dominion for these aircrew trainees. These schools are operated by the dominion Department of Labour and the educational services of the R.C.A.F. have complete responsibility for direction and supervision of training. The schools give courses ranging from six to sixteen weeks and give preliminary training to prospective air gunners, wireless air gunners,

pilots, navigators, flight engineers, air observers, air bombers. The subjects studied are science, mathematics, English, signals, aircraft recognition, drill and P.T. and progress of war.
In addition to these fifteen pre-aircrew W.E.T.P. schools there are eight university R.C.A.F. detachments across the dominion. The courses offered vary from six to sixteen weeks in length according to the aircrew category of the trainee. The subjects studied are the same as in W.E.T.P. schools.
To date 22,604 aircrew trainees have graduated from W.E.T.P. schools and pre-aircrew education detachments.
Progress of war. It is recognized nowadays that modern mechanized warfare requires not only technical training and skill but also a high standard of general information and intelligence. The strains of modern warfare can best be endured by men who know actually what they are fighting for and what they are fighting against. To meet this need the R.C.A.F. has organized a progress of war programme which consists of two main types of activities:
(a)	There is a programme of progress of war lectures and discussion for pre-aircrew and aircrew trainees. Definite training time is allotted and the programme to be followed1 is outlined in the various training syllabi. Progress of war lectures in training time are included in the syllabi for pre-aircrew, I.T.S., E.F.T.S., S.F.T.S., air gunner and navigation schools.
(b)	Discussion groups and lectures are organized for all personnel. The organization of discussion groups for all officers, airmen and airwomen at all R.C.A.F. units and stations is the responsibility of commanding officers.
(c)	Basic material for discussion groups is provided in the publication Canadian Affairs which is published twice monthly by the wartime information board1 in cooperation with the directors of education of the three armed services. It is distributed in Canada and overseas. The aim of Canadian Affairs is to keep service personnel informed with regard to significant social and economic developments in Canada with special attention to the effects of the war. Questions for discussion and comment have been included and a resume of news of the home front has been given in each issue.
In connection with progress of war activities, every effort is made to employ films to the best advantage. Film libraries are established and all commands and the command education officer is responsible for organizing film circuits for all units. The selection of suitable films dealing with the background

War Appropriation-Air Services
of progress of war is made at air force headquarters.
The object of the discussion groups scheme is to make all ranks of the R.C.A.F. better acquainted with the high ideals for which the war is being fought; with the important and responsible part which they must play in order to hasten the day of victory and with the possibilities whicn the post-war work holds for the ordinary man and woman; in a word, to make them more effective members of the air force community to-day and better citizens of the world to-morrow. The scheme should thus contribute materially to the general keenness and efficiency of the service and should counteract any tendency towards slackness or apathy which there may be, particularly among those whose duties are monotonous or seemingly unconnected with active operations against the enemy.
Trade improvement. The technical efficiency of all personnel in ground trades is a matter of vital concern to the service. For this reason trade tests are given at regular intervals, to facilitate advancement and correct grouping of members of the service. It is the duty of the education officer on the station to organize classes for ground crew personnel who have not reached their maximum trade proficiency. The educational services of the R.C.A.F. have provided manuals for students and instructors covering various trades in order that trade improvement classes may be organized in the most effective manner. The best teaching techniques are carefully outlined and every effort is made to organize instruction and material in such a manner that the student and instructor may derive the most benefit. Manuals have already been issued in such trades as aero-engine mechanics, airframe mechanics, equipment assistant, clerks, wireless mechanics and wireless operator, motor mechanics (mechanical transport), i manual for seamen, welders and metal workers, and machinists.
Additional manuals are prepared in other trades as the need for them becomes apparent. Trade improvement classes have contributed materially to the high efficiency of R.C.A.F. ground personnel.
Self-improvement classes. This term covers a great variety of educational activities. There are' service personnel who wish to use their spare time for the improvement of their academic standing. Such personnel may enroll for matriculation or university, classes in nearby educational institutions. The latest educational reports from stations indicate that personnel are studying such subjects as mathematics, history, French, Spanish, German,
Russian, economics, psychology, chemistry and bacteriology. This work is carried out under the necessary arrangements with the educational institutions. In many cases he also gives tutorial assistance and organizes station classes in academic subjects.
Other personnel are interested in the following commercial courses such as typing, shorthand, and bookkeeping. Here again the classes may be organized on the station or the personnel may enroll at nearby commercial schools.
Still others are interested in improving their technical knowledge and ability. Arrangements have been made for these to enroll in technical schools in the vicinity of their units in order to follow courses in such subjects as welding, carpentry, electricity, motor mechanics, plastics, diesel engineering, mechanical drawing and so on.
Unit education officers are giving particular attention to the provision of worth-while educational activities for W.D. personnel and at many stations throughout Canada W.D. personnel are taking part in courses such as the following: Cooking and home making) clothing and home management; art; dramatics; music and singing; current events group; language groups.
In addition to the more formal courses outlined above various handicraft groups are being organized on the stations. This programme has been particularly valuable from the point of view of morale and of selfimprovement.
At present there are well over 7,000 personnel who are making constructive use of their spare time in academic, business or technical courses or in participating in handicraft work or in some other similar line of activity.	.
Correspondence courses. Unit education officers have enrolled over 10,000 personnel in correspondence courses at high school and university level who desire to continue their formal education. The correspondence course work of these personnel is often supplemented by the organization of tutorial classes at units.
Libraries. Station libraries are proving to be a very necessary supplement to the various educational activities of the units. The unit education officer is chiefly responsible for the organization of station libraries.
The educational services of the R.C.A.F. are endeavouring to meet the following objectives:
(a) To advance the skill and raise the technical efficiency of those who are aiready engaged in a particular trade in the service.

War Appropriation-Air Services
(b)	to assist those who wish to learn a new trade, or fit themselves for a better post-war vocation.
(c)	to assist those who wish to continue their general or professional education.
(d)	To promote intelligent interest in the war.
To the extent that the above objectives are met, R.C.A.F. personnel will be the better equipped to carry out their duties, in the service, and as citizens in time of peace.
A course in English, twelve to sixteen weeks duration, is provided at No. 1 manning depot, Toronto, for French-Canadian trainees, to give them greater facility in the use of the English language and thus enable them to take the subsequent service courses of training. In the course of English emphasis is placed on the technical vocabulary of the various ground and aircrew trades. The school of English also provides the trainees with a course in progress of war and current events.
To date over 7,000 French-Canadian trainees have graduated from the school of English.
No. 1 ground instructor's school was organized in August, 1943, for the training of ground instructors in classroom techniques. Over 300 ground school instructors have already taken the course, which is of three weeks' duration, and it is considered that this school has contributed materially to the efficiency of ground school instruction at training schools.


John Ewen Sinclair: I do not think that is a satisfactory answer to my question about R.A.F. personnel. I asked whether the government had given consideration to paying R.A.F. personnel who are serving with R.C.A.F. squadrons at R.C.A.F. rates of pay. The answer I got was that it was considered that the R.A.F. would think it invidious to have R.A.F. personnel in Canadian squadrons drawing more than their personnel with RA.F. squadrons. I suggest it is not as invidious a position as that of the R.A.F. squadron leader who commands a Canadian squadron and who has to learn tnat tne commander of the squadron receives less than the flight-lieutenant, less than the flying officer, less than the pilot officer, less than the flight-sergeant pilot, and just a little more than the sergeant pilot. The Royal Navy does not think it invidious to let the Royal Canadian Navy pay Royal Navy personnel on Canadian ships at Canadian rates. Has the R.C.A.F. suggested directly to the R.A.F. that, since they are taking the full cost of R.C.A.F. squadrons, they are willing to pay these R.A.F. personnel at R.C.A.F. rates of pay?


Charles Gavan Power: I did not suggest it directly. I did mention it in the course of conversations, but I would not be particularly keen to do it at the present time.


John Ewen Sinclair: The question is not very important so far as Canadians in the R.A.F. are concerned, because they are going to be transferred. But my appeal, made a few days ago, was one for the airmen. We are using these airmen. We are taking them on, because they are good key men. Why should these two warrant officers in the squadron about which I spoke lead that crew at the pay of a corporal? I do not like to hold up the other services as a model for my own service, but in this instance I believe the Royal Canadian Navy is to be commended upon accepting these chaps as Canadians.


Charles Gavan Power: My hon. friend will remember that practically all the R.A.F. men serving in Canada are paid at R.C.A.F. rates of pay.


John Ewen Sinclair: I understand that.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Before the war a number of our boys went overseas and joined the R.A.F. At the present time they are not considered eligible for the Canadian volunteer medal. They feel they are slighted in that regard, and that they should be entitled to it. Has the minister considered the point?


Charles Gavan Power: This is the first time I have heard of it, but I shall be glad to look into it.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I
have talked with a number of those boys, and have received a number of letters. This is a paragraph from one:
It seems very unfair to me that fellows like myself who went overseas before the war to join the British service are not considered as Canadians and volunteers and are therefore not eligible for the Canadian volunteer medal.
He goes on to say:
I hope you will urge for some similar medal for Canadians. And there are many who volunteered for service before the war when things looked very black at the time of Munich. In our town alone there were-
A number of boys-[DOT]
-who joined the RA.F. before the war.
He states also that those who joined the Royal Navy and the British army should be considered. There is some merit in that suggestion.


Charles Gavan Power: My understanding is-and
frankly, I speak subject to correction, because I do not know much about it-that the volunteer medal is entirely a Canadian medal. I have some doubt as to whether a man serving in another force would be entitled

War Appropriation-Air Services
to put it up. However, I am not sure about that. Perhaps the hon. member for Royal would know more about that than I.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Could there not be another kind of medal for those boys, similar to the Canadian volunteer medal?


Charles Gavan Power: I would have some difficulty in explaining how the Canadian government could strike a medal for the use of people serving in other forces. But if it can be done, I would have no objection.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: These boys are still Canadians.


Charles Gavan Power: I understand that; but the question with me is whether the other services would allow them to put it up. However, I do not mind looking into the matter.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Does the minister not think the suggestion has some merit?


Charles Gavan Power: So far as I am concerned it does not matter to me at all. I shall look into it.


John Ewen Sinclair: All Canadians in the R.A.F. will get the general service medal, 1939-43, from the British government, which they would not have got had they stayed in Canada. Most of them are prouder of the fact that they wear the Canada badge on their shoulders than they are of the service medal. That shows that they are Canadians.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I
think they would also like to have the volunteer medal.


Mr. BROOKS:: I believe it was stated that it was considered invidious for Canadian airmen in the R.A.F. to receive more pay than R.A.F. personnel received. My understanding is that we are sending about 1,500 army officers to the British army, and that they are to receive Canadian pay. Frankly I do not see how it would be more invidious for the airmen to receive such pay than for the army. I believe there should be some coordination between the air force, the army and the navy in matters of this kind; if one receives a certain rate of pay, they should all receive the comparative rates.


Charles Gavan Power: These are men who are in the R.A.F., and who now have the opportunity to transfer, if they like, under certain circumstances. If they prefer to stay in another service, and then ask us to pay them in another service, I think my friends in the treasury might object. On the other hand the men about whom the hon. member for Royal has spoken are Canadians who have been lent
to the imperial army, in the same way as a good many R.C.A.F. men have been lent to the R.A.F. Canada pays their full salary, of course.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: The fighting, it seems to me, is the same, and the service is the same. No doubt the responsibilities these men have taken are the same. Those are factors which should be taken into consideration perhaps more than some which have been mentioned by the minister.


Mr. GILLIS:: I asked a question on Friday respecting Canadian nationals in the R.A.F. subject to income tax.


Charles Gavan Power: I remember that question. I was astonished when my hon. friend stated in the house that the Americans-or perhaps it was not my hon. friend who said it-who had transferred from the R.A.F. back to the American force were reimbursed the amount of the income tax they had paid into the treasury of Great Britain. My hon. friend was not quite clear as to whether the reimbursement was made by the American government or the British government. I learned afterwards-I believe from the hon. member for Vancouver North-that the British government had done it.


John Ewen Sinclair: When they joined they were promised that it would not be deducted. They were promised that in America before they went to England.


Charles Gavan Power: I see; that is another story. I am informed there has been no approach made by the British treasury to repay those Canadians any income tax they may have paid the British treasury. That is as far as I have got. It will involve communication with the other side to get further information. If it is not a fact that the British government are going to consider reimbursing these men, then that will involve a diplomatic approach on my part to our treasury.


Clarence Gillis: What I am concerned about is whether the minister's department intends to make that representation. My information on the United States angle-I do not intend to elaborate this-comes from Canadian nationals in the R.A.F., and I think it is authentic.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know just how it was worked, whether the United States government reimburse these men for income tax paid to the British treasury or whether, as the hon. member for Vancouver North says, the arrangement was that where Americans enlisted in the R.A.F. they were not to be

War Appropriation-Air Services
subject to British income tax. If that is a fact, naturally the British treasury would reimburse them.


Alfred Henry Bence: Is the minister or his parliamentary assistant in a position to give us some information with regard to retirement of members of the permanent R.C.A.F.? I notice the minister answered a question asked by the hon. member for Vancouver North, but I do not know just what information was given. I asked a question the other evening in connection with the retirement of high ranking officers. I wanted to know what rank they held when retired, what rank they held at the beginning of the war, what pension is being paid, some indication of the ages of these men and whether they are capable of carrying on similar work or whether their health is so much impaired that they would be of no further service.


Charles Gavan Power: Nine permanent officers have been or are being retired since the beginning of the war. I may say that the retirements were not based on health.


Alfred Henry Bence: What were their ages?


Charles Gavan Power: Their ages ran around fifty years. In the statement I gave I said it was proposed to retire men who were comparatively young. As I said, there is a thick ceiling of comparatively young men at the top. Through no fault of their own, these men have not been able to see active service, and it was hoped that men who had seen active service would gradually get to the top as they returned from overseas. I do not mean that men necessarily will be retired in order of age, that a man of fifty-one or fifty-two years of age who is an air vice marshal will be retired and a man of forty-nine years of age take his place. It may be that a man of fifty-nine years of age will be retired before a man of fifty-two years of age, not necessarily because his services are not satisfactory but- I think the country will agree with me in this [DOT]-because it is imperative that we show these young men that there is a way through this ceiling by which they can get to the top. That is the general policy.
The pensions they receive are quite reasonable amounts. I have not the details, but they run from $4,500 to $5,500 per year. These ire contributory pensions under the Militia Pension Act, which has been in effect for some thirty or forty years. There is no great hardship involved in retiring these men, although my hon. friend has raised a point in that connection. For some considerable time the treasury mar have to pay fairly

high pensions, but I do not think the air force should be asked to keep these men in positions where younger men will not be able to come forward. It is part of the pension scheme under which they enlisted. It may be a little expensive for the country, but I suppose the country will have to put up with it for the good of the service generally.


Alfred Henry Bence: It all depends upon how rapid their promotion was during the last four years.


Charles Gavan Power: Promotion was exceedingly rapid, but you cannot have the expansion of a force from 4,000 to 200,000 without having rapid promotions. You must give men ranks called for by their increased responsibilities. A man who in peace time may have been in charge of ten or twenty men, would probably be in charge of from 2,000 to 3,000 men now. A man who was in charge of an equipment depot of $100,000 worth of goods, will now be dealing with an equipment depot with $100,000,000 worth of goods. Responsibilities increased as we expanded, and these men necessarily obtained promotions. As I said in my statement, rapid expansion means rapid promotion, rapid promotion brings its own penalty of early retirement.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Does the same principle apply to the army and navy?


Charles Gavan Power: I understand the army beat me to it.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Good for them. It is the first time they have done it.


Charles Gavan Power: The Minister of National Defence stated that in the house. They have been doing it for eight or ten months.


Mr BENCE:: Could the minister give us any information as to how many high ranking officers over the age of fifty-five years have been retired?


Charles Gavan Power: Very few; I do not suppose there would be ten. I have a copy of the answer that was given to-day. The question asked was:
How many officers of the R.C.A.F. of air rank have been retired since September 10. 1939. (a) of the permanent force; (b) of the auxiliary force; (c) of the special reserve?
The answer given was:
(i)	One officer of the permanent force.
(ii)	Three permanent force officers presently on retirement leave-two retirements effective in June and one in July of this year.
(iii)	Five permanent force officers whose retirements have been authorized but not yet promulgated.
There seems to be an idea that it is only permanent force officers who are to be retired, and that idea seems about to be made into a

War Appropriation-Air Services
grievance. In addition to the permanent force officers, there was a large number of officers who entered the force at the beginning of the war. These were men of considerable experience in business and the professions; they were lawyers, engineers and so on. Some of these men have risen rapidly, but few of them are receiving the salaries which they would have enjoyed in civil life. Some came from prominent positions in the business world. These men have done a wonderful job, as the hon. member for Spadina has stated. They have been doing administrative work, since they were too old to go overseas to fight in squadrons. Early in my administration I passed regulations by which no one of aircrew age and fitness could enter the air force as an administrative officer. That is to say, if a man was under thirty-two years of age, no matter what his experience may have been as a lawyer or in any other profession-the exception was the medical profession-he could not get a commission. Therefore we had these men of experience in business who became administrative officers, and they have done a marvellous job in the expansion of our force. No one can say that their work has not been as patriotic and as helpful as that of other men in our own force or in other forces. They have now trained younger men to take their jobs, perhaps men who were in the permanent force and who are going to continue in the service after the war. I should like to state publicly that if any of these men feel that they would like to return to their occupations in civilian life, unless they are essential key men I will put no obstacle in the way of their retirement. Already that has gone forth through the services and quite a few officers, some N.C.O.'s in the higher categories whose firms require their services, are asking that they be allowed to retire. We are allowing them to do so and thanking them for the great services they have rendered.


Mr. ADAMSON:: Do they receive any retiring allowance?


Charles Gavan Power: They will get the rehabilitation grant and whatever war service gratuity is given, of course.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Even for those who retire voluntarily?


Charles Gavan Power: I am not quite sure that that point has been straightened out as yet.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The army does not do it.


Charles Gavan Power: We do not do it yet, but I think it will be arranged that we shall, very shortly.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I understand that anybody in the air force who is seriously wounded and sent back to hospital in Canada gets the pay of his rank until he is either sent back to duty or discharged to civilian life.


Charles Gavan Power: If he is discharged to Pensions and Health, he comes under Pensions and Health regulations.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The air force has the same regulations as the army in that matter?


Charles Gavan Power: Absolutely.


Mr. MacNICOL:: On comparing the typewritten list of probable cash requirements for 1943-44 and estimated requirements for 1944-45, with the details for air services given on page 394 of Hansard of February 11, 1944, under the war appropriation, I find that the figures of probable expenditure for 1944-45 on the typewritten list and in Hansard tally, but that the figures on the typewritten list of probable expenditures for 1943-44 are not in any particular similar to those given on page 394 of Hansard, the difference amounting in the aggregate to about $60,000,000.


Charles Gavan Power: I think I know the reason, but I will have the officers of the department come down to help me explain. There was a revision of the estimates as first brought down. I am not sure whether that came between February 11 and February 25, but I shall be glad to have the officers look into it, and then answer my hon. friend.


Mr. GREEN:: What is the policy of the government with regard to the use of the Royal Canadian Air Force in the war against Japan? There has been very little said on that subject in the discussion of these estimates. I notice that on March 2 the minister said, at page 1067 of Hansard:
There would be the problem of shifting personnel from one theatre of war to another when we go toward the Japanese theatre and so on.
It would be interesting if the minister would tell the committee whether the air war on the Pacific so far as Canada is concerned is to be a defensive war until Germany is beaten, or whether there is some idea in mind of Canada taking part in the air war there in the meantime. I should think it would be wise to give at least some of our airmen training in fighting against the Japanese. Would the minister explain the situation?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Order. We have passed item 1, on which a general discussion was allowed, and we are now on item 2, pay and allowances.


Charles Gavan Power: I will answer the question anyway, Mr. Chairman.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Howard Charles Green: I submit, Mr. Chairman, that the men on the Pacific coast will have to be paid, so that I think my question is pertinent. This item is for pay and allowances.


Charles Gavan Power: Canada will be in the war
against Japan until the very end. I am no strategist and cannot tell my hon. friend just what part we are going to take in the war on the Pacific, but we are going to shift from the European, theatre to where we can do the most harm against Japan at the proper time.


Howard Charles Green: Are steps being taken to
give our airmen training in the warfare against Japan?


Charles Gavan Power: Steps are being considered
along those lines, if that will satisfy my hon. friend.


Howard Charles Green: The minister on March 2
asked for suggestions with regard to what should be done towards helping our airmen take their places in civilian life. It just so happened that over the week-end one or two airmen were speaking with, me and made certain suggestions. They said that even instructors on the stations in Canada have very little information about the government's rehabilitation plans. We all know that certain, publications have been issued giving a summary of what is proposed, but apparently these are not being distributed1 on the stations at all. These lads suggested that it would be very helpful if such publications were distributed., and if the men on the stations were asked for their suggestions, as they are the ones most vitally concerned, and apparently have been giving great thought to this matter. It would be helpful if they knew just what the government's plans are.
Another suggestion was that some attempt should be made to find out how many of the airmen would be willing to serve in the air force after the war; that is, to join the permanent air force. Apparently quite a few would be glad to do so, but I am told that no attempt has been made to find out just what proportion would like to do that. Inquiry should also be made as to how many would be willing to serve for six months, say, or a year, after the termination of hostilities, the understanding being that they would not thereby lose their privilege of taking vocational or university training once they had been discharged'. These lads seemed to think that it would be very helpful if the minister could get that information. I notice that in the committee on reconstruction and reestablishment the suggestion was made on February 23 that there would be from 135,000 to 150,000 men in the armed services, including munitions
'Mr. Power.]
and equipment factory workers, after the war. I do not know whether the air force have made a rough estimate of how many will be required in that service, but it looks as though the number will be quite large. I think it would be well worth while for the minister to have inquiries made among his air force personnel to find out what proportion are interested in staying in the force.


Charles Gavan Power: Replying to my hon. friend's first question with regard to rehabilitation, as he knows, that is a matter for Pensions and National Health. I understand that Pensions and National Health have set up a public relations office and that they are now in the process of distributing as widely as possible all the information dealing with rehabilitation to civilian life.
Iq reply to the second question, one at least of our service papers, Wings, has been giving explanations of the rehabilitation programme. I have a copy here of an article in. Wings, headed "Fighting for the Future. What do I do when the war is won?" This is in Wings of March. I know there was something in the issue of February, and also, I believe, in that of January, about return to "civvies." The Minister of Pensions and National Health says that about 100,000 copies of this little blue book were distributed1.


Howard Charles Green: Are they distributed among the forces?


Charles Gavan Power: Among the forces overseas, yes.


Howard Charles Green: And in Canada also?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: If I may answer the question, a new one is being got ready and will be sent to all next of kin in Canada. It is a little more comprehensive than the other.


Charles Gavan Power: In one of our service papers -I think, Contact, published at Trenton- there was a kind of Gallup poll as to what the boys wanted to do after the war, and I am told that fifty per cent thought they would like to stay in the service. So that to the extent of the Gallup poll, at least, they have been consulted. As to what the strength of the air force will be after the war, as my hon. friend knows, we are studying the matter, 'but so many factors enter into the question of the strength and nature of the armed forces of Canada after the war that I should be reluctant to make any pronouncement. I know that we shall keep a certain number for the occupational phase of Europe, a number for the policing of Europe if Canada decides to participate in it, and a large number will remain in Europe,

War Appropriation-Air Services
or wherever they may be, for quite a while after the Germans fold up, because there will not be shipping to bring them back. That will be one of our troubles. I do not think there is any prospect of an extremely hasty demobilization, at least of the people overseas.


Howard Charles Green: Would it be wise to establish more operational-training units in Canada than there are at the present time? Apparently a good deal of that work is done in Great Britain, and the suggestion has been made that it might very well be done in Canada.


Charles Gavan Power: On various occasions we have thought of it, and we are doing some, but our great difficulty has been to get operational aircraft for operational training units, because all this class of aircraft is wanted directly for fighting the enemy. As ray hon. friend knows, we have several operational training units in Canada.


Mr. ROSS (Souris):: What policy is
followed in the selection of training personnel? The minister has stated that some of the senior administrative officers are being retired to make room for younger officers who are coming along. Is any policy of that nature in effect for the selection of training personnel in this country?-as, when a class graduates, so many go overseas, so many are selected for training. Is there at this stage of the war any policy under which those who have had actual experience in foreign lands have the opportuuity of coming back as training officers? If so, what is the policy?


Charles Gavan Power: That gives me an opportunity to answer the leader of the opposition. In operational training units, instructors must be men who have had operational experience- actual experience in contact with the enemy. In our arrangement with the United Kingdom government in 1942, when we decided to open operational training units here, we asked that all those who were sent here as instructors of our operational units should be Canadians, and they have to a certain extent followed out that policy; but that, also, has its difficult side. Some who come back here to our operational training units will in due course go to training units which are not operational. But we have made arrangements whereby most of the operational training units are up close to the front line. We shall never be able to get away from that. As a man returns from his first operational tour he is sent back for a tour in an operational training unit, because they want to use his very latest experience in the front line. The result is that a good many of our
Canadians as soon as they finish their operational tour must do a tour of what is called non-operational work, that is in an operational training unit, but it keeps them overseas a very long time before they return here. We have recently made an arrangement with the United Kingdom government whereby we shall retain in England, in the east, or in whatever theatre we maye be operating, a number of men who have done their operational work, their actual fighting operations, to work as instructors in operational training units, the number to be in proportion to the number of men we actually have in the front line of operations. Until recently the United Kingdom government just kept them Now we have reached a compromise whereby they will do their one tour of operations, one tour of instruction in operational training units, and then return to Canada.


James Arthur Ross: There is no such policy in mind for the schools in Canada other than the operational schools?


Charles Gavan Power: There is for the schools; but because these men are latest from the scene of operations, they must, after they have done their operational tour, go to an operational training school before they come back to another school. That is the general policy followed, and that is the policy we have agreed to.


James Arthur Ross: And there is as yet a
lack of those officers for other schools in this country?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, but as soon as we get them back they will have first choice of any instructional work. I may say that all of them do not like it. Even those who come back now are offered instructional work as soon as they get here.


Howard Charles Green: Have any of the Royal
Canadian Air Force been trained in transport planes and the transporting of troops by air?


Charles Gavan Power: We are opening a transport O.T.U. next month in Canada.


George Hugh Castleden: Would the minister give us some figures with regard to the number of non-commissioned officers, warrant officers and commissioned ranks who are prisoners of war, and what the policy of the department is with regard to granting promotions to these men after they are prisoners of war? Is there any difference in automatic promotions as between warrant officers and N.C.O.'s and commissioned ranks?


Charles Gavan Power: I am not sure I have that information here. I have not got it broken down. The total number of officer prisoners

War Appropriation-Air Services
of war appears to be 363, and the total number of N.C.O.'s, 847. I know that we have a policy developed on that, and I know the general lines of it, but I should prefer, if my hon. friend will wait until this evening, to give him then the policy more, specifically.


Mr. MACDONALD (Brantford City):: When the minister gives that information will he also inform the committee as to the method of granting commissions? We have discussed this in previous years under the estimates of the Department of National Defence. I was one of those who suggested that all members of aircrew should be commissioned-not that I believe in that in principle, but because so many commissions had been granted that I felt, as did others, that there should be a general granting of commissions to members of aircrew. If I remember correctly the method adopted in Canada in 1940 was to grant commissions to one-third of those who graduated and subsequently to grant commissions to seventeen per cent more when they got overseas; that is to say, fifty per cent of each class graduating in Canada eventually received commissions. In 1942 there was a change made, if I remember correctly, and all pilots, observers, navigators and air gunners who were considered suitable according to the standards of the government of Canada, and who were recommended by their commanding officers, were commissioned. I think the standard set in Canada was sixty per cent for each subject and seventy per cent in all during training operations; that is to say, a young man taking a course as a pilot in Canada would have to receive sixty per cent in each subject and seventy per cent on his total in order to get a commission on graduation. I approve that method because it sets a standard toward which a man can strive while he is taking his training. But I do not think those who do not succeed in reaching that standard during their training should be deprived of ever getting a commission. I think they should still be considered as worthy of commissions after they have proven themselves in the air. I believe they should still be allowed to strive for a commission, and I hope that when the minister replies he will tell the committee whether opportunity is given to those who do not attain to sixty per cent or seventy per cent during their training to obtain commissions later on.
Another matter I should like to bring to the minister's attention is the question which was raised by the hol>
member who spoke with regard to granting commissions before I rose to speak. I refer t*,. the question of men who are taken prisoners. Do the enemy recognize commissions which are granted after

a man has been taken prisoner? Suppose he were not gazetted until some time after he had been forced down in enemy country, is the commission then recognized? As far as I am concerned I should like to think that all men who fly over enemy territory are commissioned, because without doubt they receive better treatment as officers than as noncommissioned officers.
The hon. member for Vancouver North, speaking the other day from his .very wide experience, suggested that there should be a mess where all aircrew should dine and live together. I understood that that was so when they were in actual operations. He referred to certain messes in North Africa. I approve of that. I think it is only fair, but it does not meet the objection with regard to airmen who are forced down over enemy territory. They have not a common mess with officers who are prisoners of war. Nor does it meet the objection with regard to young men who have flown as sergeants or warrant officers probably on many, many occasions over enemy territory and who when they return to Canada are still non-commissioned officers and are not admitted to officers' messes. As long as there are two ranks, the non-commissioned officer and the officer, in aircrew, then I think we should extend the principle of a common mess where they can all live. It does not seem right that a young man who is a sergeant and has command of a plant when it is in the air,-and in the same plane there may be a commissioned officer, who must take his orders from the sergeant while the plane is in the air-must, as soon as the plane comes to the ground, walk out after the officer and go to his own mess while the officer goes to his. They do not associate. I hope that the minister will be able to tell us that commissions are being granted to these men who in training do not get the standing required. I hope he will tell us that commissions are being granted to them after they have proven themselves to be officer material, after they have proven themselves to be good flyers, after they have had a number of operations over enemy territory.


Charles Gavan Power: The answer to the last question, of course, is yes. There is no bar to any man getting a commission. He may not get it immediately if he does not pass the required test, but he is certainly encouraged to proceed to a commission, to carry on useful work with every hope that he will obtain a commission even if he does not get it on graduation.


Howard Charles Green: Are any Royal Canadian
Air Force officers being seconded for duty

War Appropriation-Air Sermces
with the military governments in occupied countries. I believe in that way some of those men, who would otherwise be retired, may render further useful service to Canada.


Charles Gavan Power: We have some following
courses now, not very many.


Howard Charles Green: It is open to air force
officers.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Robert Fair: Are pensions paid to the wives and families of flying instructors killed in Canada?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I think Captain Balfour, Miinster for Air in Great Britain, said the other day that one-third of the fleet air arm was trained in the United States. Are we training any men for the fleet air arm?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes; we have two elementary and two service flying training schools training for the fleet air arm in Canada.


Agar Rodney Adamson: We are not sending any of our men down to the United States?


Mr. POWDER:: These are.all men who come here from the British admiralty under some kind of a R.A.F. contract. In other words, the R.A.F. have handed over part of their schools to the admiralty to train men for the fleet air arm. We deal with air ministry only.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Are there any specific
limits to the operational tours?


Charles Gavan Power: In answer to my hon.
friend-


Agar Rodney Adamson: How flexible is the
arrangement?


Charles Gavan Power: I would prefer not to give it because it has been kept more or less as a secret.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That is all right.


Charles Gavan Power: It is a secret that everybody on operations knows. It differs. The Americans have one criterion. There is one involving sorties in the bomber command. It is hours flown in the coastal command, and so on. It is a complicated matter, but it has been always marked "secret". I do not think there is any very great secret about it, but because it is marked "secret" when it comes to me I would prefer not to make it public in the committee.


Major James William Coldwell: I presume that when
R.C.A.F. personnel fly in R.A.F. units, the planes are provided by the unit?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Major James William Coldwell: I should like to endorse what the hon. member for Brantford City has said regarding commissions. He will remember that when we were in Great Britain over two years ago. we were approached by a group of young officers who pointed out to us how ridiculous it was that they were flying every day with non-commissioned officers and that as soon as they arrived at the bomber station they had to go to two different messes. The minister will remember that we made representations in this regard when we reached London, and I think, as a matter of fact, we made representations in this house also. I just wish to lend my support to the expressions that have been' uttered in this house again this year along these lines.


Charles Gavan Power: I can report progress in the commissioning; we are getting ahead much better than we were. Offhand I can say that so far, out of some 32,000 who hold commissions in the air force, 25,971 persons have been commissioned from the ranks, which is not bad.


William Ross Macdonald: How many officers are there in the air force altogether?


Charles Gavan Power: About thirty-two thousand. As hon. members know, when we started this training plan the procedure first followed was that the top thirty-three per cent of the graduating class obtained commissions, and that seventeen per cent more were to obtain commissions overseas. The first trouble that developed was that we had great difficulty in finding that other seventeen per cent, so that in the 1942 agreement with the United Kingdom we made arrangements under which these men could themselves apply to their commanding officers, and if their commanding officers did not agree that they were commis-sionable still they could go on and eventually wind up before a board at Canadian headquarters, where the standards of these men for commissioning would be judged by Canadians.
Then we thought the quota system was not satisfactory and we instituted the merit system, under which the number of points a man obtained on graduation would count, that number being sixty in each subject and seventy over all. That developed a far greater number of commissions than the quota system; in fact, in some classes it went up to eighty per cent, while in others it went down to twenty or thirty per cent, depending upon the calibre of the class; but no longer did it depend upon a certain quota. Then we ran into difficulties with the boys overseas who had not received their commissions. They
War Appropriation-Air Services

asked how it was that a lad just graduated would come over as an officer while a fellow who had been there for two years had not received his commission. That had the salutary effect of making us try to speed up the commissioning overseas, and I think we have been fairly successful in catching up with the nacklog. There may be some who are still ost somewhere in the blue, or whose immediate commanding officers do not as yet understand the procedure. It has come to my notice that certain of our own lads who are isolated in R.A.F. units would make application and ask that their application be sent or to Canadian headquarters, but it took a long time for those applications to get there if they ever did get through. I must say that whenever we called the attention of air ministry to the matter they did not hesitate a bit in hauling their own people over the coals. That was largely because the commanding officer perhaps had never been made familiar with the agreement entered into between the United Kingdom and ourselves. I do not put it down to any ill-will at all; as far as I have been able to ascertain, now at any rate there is the best of good will prevailing between the two services. However, it is very difficult for a squadron leader in Burma or India or the middle east to know everything that is undertaken by way of agreement between the two governments. So that a large number-I do not know how many, but at least some-of our men have not as yet had their applications go through.
That is the number one backlog; that was the important thing we were trying to clean jp, and I think we have cleaned it up fairly well. Then we applied the 60-60-70 ratio to all those who had graduated, no matter where they were, prisoners of war or anything else. We just looked over their marks, and if we found that they came within this ratio we promptly commissioned them wherever they were. That caused a little trouble for a while, too, but that has been cleaned up. So that the commissioning is on a pretty fair basis at the present time, though the ultimate for which a good many of us had hoped, namely, that everybody would be commissioned, has not as yet been reached.


William Ross Macdonald: That is, all aircrew.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes; but I would be deterred from putting that into effect at the moment because it would be so difficult. If we were to say now that everyone would be commissioned on graduation we would still have that backlog of boys who have done good service [Mr. Power.}
overseas, whom we have not been able to find and whom perhaps we could not commission; or perhaps we might have some who had done very good service but had deteriorated since then so that we could not by any means give commissions to them. Therefore I think we shall have to proceed as we have for the past six months, with a broader and more generous commissioning policy, and an agreement, firmly confirmed, with the United Kingdom covering all categories of aircrew, not only pilots, bombers and navigators, whereby the United Kingdom government definitely agree that commissioning is a matter for the Canadian government alone, and that this government shall commission according to its own standards and irrespective of those of any other nation.


George Hugh Castleden: What is the percentage of aircrew with Canadian squadrons in Britain who are commissioned?


Charles Gavan Power: I may be giving information from which, by adding or subtracting, somebody may find out something of value to the enemy; but as I figured it the last time I looked at it, it was about two to one for pilots, about the same for navigators, and about one to one for air bombers. Of course gunners are away below that; only five per cent were granted commissions on graduation. We have thousands of them over there whose cases we are now reviewing, trying to bring them up. Then wireless operator air gunners were only allowed ten per cent on graduation, with another ten per cent to be commissioned for service in the field.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Order. I believe the present discussion should come under item 13, which covers the maintenance of overseas squadrons. I must remind the committee again that we are now on item 2, which covers pay and allowances.


George Hugh Castleden: The pay and allowances for N.C.O.'s and officers are different.


Charles Gavan Power: I think it is still pay and allowances, Mr. Chairman; it is all one to me whether I answer the question now or later. I have the ratio of officers to otheT ranks. Overseas the ratio is two officers to five other ranks in the R.C.A.F. squadrons; I am not talking about our men in the R.A.F., because I have not that information. In the Canadian squadrons, among aircrew, there are six officers to five N.C.O.'s, showing that we have made a great advance in commissioning. In the ground-crew there is one officer to thirteen other ranks, and the over-all ratio is four officers to nine other ranks.


George Hugh Castleden: These figures scarcely seem to bear out the statement just made

War Appropriation-Air Services
by the minister in regard to prisoners of war, where I think he said there were 362 commissioned officers and 847 N.C.O.'s.


Charles Gavan Power: Of course a good many of these N.C.O.'s were taken prisoner some time ago. That would not be the very latest report.


George Hugh Castleden: Then could the minister give us the cost of training a wireless air gunner and the cost of training an air bomber?


Charles Gavan Power: We have not a recent figure, I am told, because of a change in the syllabus. I am instructed that it has been altered so many times that it would not be fair to give any kind of figure.


William Ross Macdonald: Could
the minister tell the committee whether enemy governments recognize commissions that are granted after N.C.O.'s have been taken prisoner?


Charles Gavan Power: Perhaps I can say yes to that now. To the same inquiry I was not in a position to make that answer last year. However now I know they are doing it. But how- quickly that recognition is given, and what steps are taken to move N.C.O.'s who become officers from an N.C.O. camp to an officers' camp, I am unable to 6ay.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I should like to ask some questions respecting one or two classes of people who have been associated with the air force. 1 have in mind, first, those young Canadians who, both before and during the war, wanted to join the air force and go overseas, and who at a later time did go overseas and joined the Royal Air Force. These were Canadians, and in some instances they were killed. Some of them had married English women overseas, and had children. What will be the status of those women and children, when coming to Canada? Will they receive pensions the equivalent of Canadian pensions, although their husbands were not in the Canadian service?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That is, a man who went overseas, joined the R.A.F. and married an English girl, or an old country lady-


An hon. MEMBER:: That sounds better.


John Ritchie MacNicol: They are all good-
English, Scotch, Irish or Welsh. -This man, as I say, after marrying was killed in action. If the wife and mother returns to Canada with her children, will she receive a Canadian pension?


Charles Gavan Power: My colleague the Minister of Pensions and National Health says yes.


John Ewen Sinclair: Will that also apply to Canadians who went over after the outbreak of war and joined the R.A.F.?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Yes, if they were domiciled here before they went over.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: How much worse off financially is the young man after he becomes a commissioned officer than he was before?


Charles Gavan Power: I have not the figures, but I know a great many find that after they become officers they are not anything like as well off as they were before.


John Horne Blackmore: Does the minister not think something ought to be done about that? Surely a boy ought not to be penalized financially because he accepts a commission in the forces of his country?


John Ewen Sinclair: He is not.


Charles Gavan Power: I understand it does not apply in commissioning from the rank of sergeant, but it does apply when commissioning from the rank of warrant officer first class -and second class?


John Ewen Sinclair: No.


Charles Gavan Power: No; I am informed it is just when commissioned from warrant officer first class. The W.O.l receives reasonably good pay. Although he does not have the privileges of the officers' mess, he stands high in the community, as a rule. I may say that he runs the army.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: And he is entitled to be called "mister".


Charles Gavan Power: Yes. Then, he gets what is equivalent to an officer's uniform, and does not have to pay for it.


James Arthur Ross: And he does not want to take a commission, either.


Charles Gavan Power: As a rule he does not want a commission.


John Horne Blackmore: I am informed that
not only is this condition revealed on paper, but the results are serious in connection, with certain small matters. For example, a commissioned officer is expected to incur certain incidental expenses which, in the aggregate, amount to a considerable sum of money, and constitute a deduction from the money he receives. So that, although on paper he may receive a certain, amount, he is actually much worse off financially. Is there any definite information on the point?

War Appropriation-Air Services


Charles Gavan Power: He usually has a somewhat higher standard of living. I suppose his messing is better than it would be if he were a non-commissioned officer. My experience, however, is that the N.C.Os. usually live just as well as the officers. However, the officer has to pay more for his messing privileges- although I do not think the messes are as expensive in this war, either in the air force or in the army. I can give my hon. friend the rates of pay for N.C.Os. and officers, if he wants that information. I must say to him, however, that I do not know just what extras the officers would be called upon to pay, apart from their generally higher standard of living.


John Horne Blackmore: It is my opinion the minister should institute a rigid investigation into the matter, and see that there is a sufficient difference in pay to make it financially worth while a accept a commission.


Charles Gavan Power: I shall be glad to do so.


Agar Rodney Adamson: There is a machinery for liaison with the Canadian personnel, including officers, N.C.Os. and other ranks, serving with the R.A.F. in the United Kingdom. I met some of the officers who were doing that work. Is there any similar machinery elsewhere in the world?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: With respect to messing, there was some discussion a year ago in connection with air force messes. That discussion, which appeared in the English press, stated1- whether true or not-that some of the English RA.F. messes were very expensive. I think the average messing in an army mess could not, by statute, go above three shillings a day. That was the maximum- messing we were charged in the army. But I understand that in the air force some messes ran as high as fifteen shillings a day.


Charles Gavan Power: In war time?


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes, in war time. At
least, that was the complaint in the English press. It was brought up in the House of Commons at Westminster at the time. Has the minister any information on that?


Charles Gavan Power: No, but I shall be glad to
look into it. Fifteen shillings a day is a lot of money.


John Ewen Sinclair: There is an order saying that two shillings a day is the maximum. So far as the hon. member for Lethbridge is concerned, no R.C.A.F. man- suffers by having a commission. The highest pay for aircrew warrant, officer is $5.75 a day, and the lowest pay

for aircrew pilot officer is $6.25 a day. This is how the R.C.A.F. differs from the R.A.F., because in the R.A.F. the man does lose pay by taking a commission.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Could the minister give information respecting the liaison machinery?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, we have liaison officers. We have a headquarters at Cairo, one at Naples, one in India, one in Tunis, and liaison officers in about a dozen different parts of the United Kingdom, if I am not mistaken. The hon. member for Vancouver North could tell us about that.


Agar Rodney Adamson: There are a couple in
London.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, about half a dozen.
There are about a dozen different liaison or district officers who are in touch with Canadians in R.A.F. squadrons.


Agar Rodney Adamson: And if they find a Canadian who is, shall we say, unhappy, because of being in an R.A.F. squadron, they may make recommendation to have him moved to another squadron?


Charles Gavan Power: That is what they are appointed for.


William Ross Macdonald: With respect to the allowances granted officers, N.CO's and airmen in Canada who do not live on the stations, it is my understanding that any officer when stationed in Canada is allowed to live out, provided his wife and family live near the station. In such event subsistence allowance is granted to him. Is the same privilege granted N.C.O's and airmen? That is, if an N.C.O. is fortunate enough to be stationed at No. 5, which is near the city of Brantford, is he allowed to live out? And if he lives out, is he granted subsistence allowance? Is there any limit to the number of N.C.O's who can live out? If so, is there a limit to the number of officers who may live out?


Charles Gavan Power: I am informed that, with regard to both N.C.O's and officers, the answer is broadly this: If there is room and accommodation in the station, while they may live out if they choose, they do not receive subsistence allowance. They can live out with the permission of the commanding officer, but they do not get any subsistence allowance. That allowance is given to them only when there does not happen to be room on the station, when there is no accommodation for them and they are obliged to live out. I understand that this is the common practice throughout all the services.
MARCH 6, 1944	[T* T	1199
War Appropriation-Air Services


Clarence Gillis: Is there any immigration restriction on the wives of R.A.F. Canadian nationals coming to this country? Has the minister any knowledge of just what is the immigration policy in that connection?


Charles Gavan Power: How do you mean?


Clarence Gillis: I am referring to a Canadian national serving overseas with the R.A.F. Can his wife enter Canada?


Charles Gavan Power: That would come under the Department of Mines and Resources.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: She would have to get an exit permit from the British government.


Charles Gavan Power: He would be a Canadian who had been domiciled in Canada, and I would think by marrying him she would become a Canadian. However, the question of citizenship is somewhat involved. I have heard it discussed in the house many times, but I could not really give my hon. friend an answer offhand.


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: There are a couple of questions I should like to ask in connection with this item. First, what is the basis of the inequality in flying pay as between officers and non-commissioned officers? As I understand it, where an officer and a noncommissioned officer are travelling on the same plane, the first receives $2 flying pay and the second receives only seventy-five cents. What reason is there for this difference? It has become the subject of considerable complaint.


Charles Gavan Power: It is a fair question but I have not the answer. I shall see what I can do about getting it for my hon. friend.


John George Diefenbaker: It is something
which cannot be justified. The officer receives considerably more pay than the non-commissioned officer and yet the two men are in the same plane. Up until last year there was considerable complaint over the fact that non-flying officers were able to secure exemption from income tax by flying a certain number of hours. I understand that a new rule has been put into effect whereby nonflying officers, administrative officers and the like, can be designated by their commanding officer as officers to whom exemption is to be granted, even though they are not flying.


Charles Gavan Power: My hon. friend is perfectly right. We cannot now be made the object of accusation that we are now flying in our income tax, so to speak. There has been created a certain number of what are known as annotated positions. These positions call
for a considerable degree of flying. They have not been established by the grace or pull of the commanding officer; they have been set up by the air member for organization working with a committee of officers of the R.C.A.F. They have decided that certain positions shall be annotated and the occupants thereof exempted from income tax during the time they occupy such positions.


John George Diefenbaker: Is it not a fact that there are quite a number of officers occupying these annotated positions who do little or no flying? By flying I mean to accompany pilots on flights. By being appointed to these annotated positions they have been able to secure exemption from income tax which otherwise they would not be able to get.


Charles Gavan Power: I shall have to get a report on that.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister possibly can give us an answer that will cover the situation by telling us the number of administrative officers who fill annotated positions and who thereby secure exemption from income tax although they are not actually engaged in flying.


Charles Gavan Power: I am told that they must be general list officers and not administrative officers.


John George Diefenbaker: That is the point I am making. The information I have is that certain administrative officers have been annotated and that as a result they are exempted from income tax. I should like to have the number who have received exemption by being placed in these annotated positions, the number who have received exemptions even though they have had less than fifteen hours in the air accompanying crews in one year.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I should like to pursue a little further the question asked by the hon. member for Cape Breton South with reference to widows of Canadians who went overseas and married women there. The hon. member inquired as to their eligibility to enter Canada. The Minister of Mines and Resources is in his place and perhaps he could give us an answer. I see he is now listening. I realize he has nothing to do with this department, but may I tell him that a few moments ago the hon. member for Cape Breton South asked the minister a question in connection with the admission of old country women who had married Canadians who were in the R.A.F. and who had since become deceased. The hon. member wanted to know if such women would be admitted to this country without
War Appropriation-Air Services

difficulty, and I understord him to say that there was some difficulty about their entry. The minister could not give a full' answer because he did not know. Perhaps the Minister of Mines and Resources could give us the answer.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Unless the minister wants to answer I do not believe it would be in order. He has not his officials before him and I really think that question should be allowed to stand.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Can he not enter the debate?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Certainly, but this has nothing to do with the item before the committee.


Gordon Graydon: The minister appears to be anxious.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I repeat that it has nothing to do with item 2. If the minister wants to answer it is up to him.


William Ross Macdonald: One department at a time.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The minister can take part in the debate if he wishes.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I want to make my point clear that this question has nothing to do with the item under discussion.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I have a case in mind.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: If I understand the question aright, I see no reason why the lady could not be admitted to Canada, assuming that she comes within the requirements of the Immigration Act. There are prohibitions in the act against entry of certain people, but if the lady is not in any prohibited class I see no reason why in due time she should not come to Canada.


Gordon Graydon: There could be nothing controversial over the minister's statement.


John Ritchie MacNicol: If a lady overseas marries a Canadian, she at once becomes a Canadian, so far as our immigration laws are concerned.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No; that would not overcome the prohibitions in the Immigration Act. Take, for instance, a person afflicted with epilepsy. That person would be prohibited entry under the act. But assuming that the lady in question can meet the requirements of the act, I see no reason whatever why in due time she should not be permitted to come to Canada.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I wish to thank the minister for interjecting and answering a question that already had been asked by another hon. member.


John Ewen Sinclair: I should like to 6ay a few words with respect to the matters raised by the hon. member for Lake Centre. He may have given a wrong impression as far as certain non-flying officers are concerned. There are non-flying officers, gunnei-y instructors, navigation instructors, signalling instructors, for instance, whose duties entail travelling around, and they are deserving of all the flying pay they get. I must join with the hon. member, however, in his suggestion that no administrative officer should secure exemption from income tax because he travels from one place to another in an aircraft. Let me give an example that happened to me quite recently. I had an opportunity to go for a flip in a Canso-I had never before ridden in a Canso. Seventeen other officers piled in and we had an enjoyable flip. The next day the adjutant asked me for my name and number so that he could post me S2 for a flip for which most of us would have gladly paid S5. The time has come, I think, to cancel special flying pay for non-flying personnel.


Charles Gavan Power: Would my hon. friend pardon me. We are now talking about exemption from income tax.


John Ewen Sinclair: I am talking about flying pay. It is double-edged. Not only do they get exemption from income tax but S2 extra as well.


Charles Gavan Power: Flying pay is a different thing. That applies to all the service.


John Ewen Sinclair: I think the minister has mistaken my point. Administrative officers who take casual flips ought not to get S2 extra a day for that, and exemption from income tax as well. It is a very nice bonus for them.


William Ross Macdonald: Do they not have to be on the general list?


John Ewen Sinclair: No. Any non-flying officer who can claim that he is flying on duty-and it may be a very flimsy reason-gets $2 for that flip and the N.C.O.. and an airman seventy-five cents, and some of them run up quite a respectable sum in a month. Flying in an aeroplane is as safe to-day as travelling in a bus or train, except for those who are flying over Europe or are on operational duty. I would suggest that flying pay for non-flying personnel, other than navigation men, signal
I Mr. MacNicoJ.l

War Appropriation-Air Services
men, bombing and gunnery men, should be eliminated, and for all flips. The time has come to end that.


William Ross Macdonald: Both at home and abroad?


John Ewen Sinclair: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: The pay regulations to which my hon. friend refers have been in existence for a long time, since pre-war. That is to say, under the regulations any officer or airman who goes on a duty flight gets $2 a day for flying. If my hon. friend were detailed for duty in Montreal he would get $2 for his trip there. But-if there has been abuse of the regulations such as my hon. friend mentions, of a man taking a trip in a plane just to get flying pay, I am glad that my hon. friend has called my attention to the matter. I can assure him that it will not happen again, and the boys will have to pay for their flights. But I do not see how I could overcome, without serious difficulty, a pay regulation which has been in effect for quite a long time and which provides that even though a man be on the general list, and his position is not annotated, if he is detailed for duty somewhere else, he gets $2 for flying to that particular place, if he is an officer, and somewhat less if he is an N.C.O. or an airman. But that is not the point my hon. friend brought up. His point was that in some way they evade payment of income tax.


John Ewen Sinclair: If they do it often enough, they evade payment of income tax and get the $2 for the flip as well.


Charles Gavan Power: The $2 a day is a different matter. That is the practice and has been in the regulations for quite a long time, and I could not promise to change it without perhaps having to turn the whole service upside down. But I will certainly look into the abuse of annotated positions referred to by the hon. member for Lake Centre.


John George Diefenbaker: And will the minister give the committee a list of the annotated positions?


Gordon Graydon: I think a number of members have received letters from various air observer schools on behalf of civilian pilot instructors. They have taken some pains to make a case with respect to income tax, comparing their duties with similar duties in the ferry command. I do not rise to do more than simply ask the minister for the explanation which must underly the position which the government takes with respect to income tax. I would be very glad if he will enlighten the committee on that.


Charles Gavan Power: There has been a concerted drive put on, and I think I have answered every member who has written me a letter about it. The reply is one of those formal ones. I will bring it down for my hon. friend to-night. If it is not satisfactory I think the only thing for hon. members who are being asked by these civilian instructors to present their case would be for them to present it to the Minister of Finance. I have made my reply and I shall be only too glad to read it into Hansard to-night.


Gordon Graydon: I think the minister ought to do that, and if there is anything further to be done when the estimates of the Minister of Finance are before the house, we can deal with the matter then.


Clarence Gillis: Are there any regulations on the subject of messing with respect to R.C.AT. personnel in Canada? From time to time I have received complaints from different stations that at some stations the food is not so good and there is a fixed messing fee, while at other stations there is no messing fee. Where there is a fixed fee, a monthly deduction is made from the pay cheque.


Charles Gavan Power: This applies to other than officers?


Clarence Gillis: Just to the rank and file below warrant officer. Is there any regulation that permits those administering an operational station or training school to make a deduction for messing from the pay cheque of any of the personnel below the rank of officer?


Charles Gavan Power: I gave instructions about a month ago to abolish that. It had been hanging fire for six months.


Clarence Gillis: It was abolished a month ago?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes. It is six months since my hon. friend called my attention to it and I determined that the practice should be abolished. There were, however, certain reasons for it which I felt were not very strong, and eventually I got my way.


Clarence Gillis: There is no regulation to-day which permits it?


Mr.   POYER@: There is a regulation prohibiting them from doing it.


John Ewen Sinclair: With regard to the point raised by the leader of the opposition, probably all of us have received these letters from civilian pilots. I should like to point out one thing that is not mentioned in the letter. A sergeant pilot who goes on leave as a civilian pilot to an air observer school gets $300 a month. A sergeant pilot who stays with the an' force and flies over Europe gets $105 a



War Appropriation-Air Services
month. I think most hon. members will agree that civilian pilots can afford to pay income tax.


Charles Gavan Power: I will not give any answer, now, if that is satisfactory.


Gordon Graydon: I was not raising any question, but merely asking for information. So many hon. members have received these letters from time to time that I thought it was a matter about which the committee ought to know something. I am much obliged to the hon. member for Vancouver North. I think most of us who were not fully acquainted with the circumstances in this connection would like to have the facts put on Hansard for our information.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Before we pass this item
of pay and allowances there is a matter about which I intended to speak to the minister privately and personally. I believe it has already been brought to his attention, but he might be able to give us some further information. It has to do with young men who join the air force and are sent to places like Ottawa, and other centres, to the technical schools and colleges for training. These boys are put on subsistence, and frankly I think the rate is very low. It does not come near to paying their expenses. Here in Ottawa the allowance is $1.25 a day, and these boys are paying $1 for their room, and the other twenty-five cents is all they have, if it is not supplemented from some other source, for their meals. Possibly the minister is making other arrangements.
Mr, POWER: I am afraid I cannot make any other arrangements, except to see to it that as few as possible of our men are on subsistence allowance, and I think, as time goes on, there will not be many. It is almost an impossibility to work out a system of subsistence allowances in different zones or in various parts of the country. What a man gets is $37.50 a month: it is not enough for the time he stays here, but these men do not stay very long in congested centres.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Well, they stay for two or three months. I think some arrangement should be made if possible to put them in barracks.


Charles Gavan Power: We are trying to do that.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I do not think they should be wandering around at night.


Charles Gavan Power: But I could not raise the
subsistence allowance.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: It is better to have them in barracks. They are under discipline and receive better care and attention.


Mr. CARDIFF:: Has the minister any
control over the way in which food is served in the R.A.F. camps? As he knows, some of the air force are transferred to R.A.F. camps, and the complaint has come to me at different times-I have a boy in the service -that the food service in these camps is not comparable with the service in R.C.A.F. camps.


Charles Gavan Power: Does the hon. member mean overseas, or in Canada?


Lewis Elston Cardiff: I mean in Canada. I imagine that the food supplied to all the camps is the same. Presumably the objection is to the way in which it is put up and served, but there seems to be a great difference in the way it gets to the men, as between R.A.F. and R.C.A.F. camps.


Charles Gavan Power: I have heard that complaint frequently. The food is the same.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The rations are the same.


Charles Gavan Power: The rations are exactly the same. Although we have full authority over the R.AE. here we hesitate to infringe on their autonomy. But we have put in our sergeant cooks at times, and we have put in our own messing officers. I was under the impression that the situation had improved considerably during the past year, but it may still be that at some R.A.F. stations the cooking is not as good as it should be. They come under our command messing officers, and our people inspect as frequently as they can.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
S. Travel, transportation and freight, $27,345,330.
Agar Rodney Adamson: Will the minister give some break-down of this item?


Charles Gavan Power: The reason for the increase?


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: I will give reasons for the increase. The cash requirements for the fiscal year 1944-45 are $27,345,330. This represents an increase of $615,330 over the probable 194344 expenditure, due mainly to (1) additional sea transportation costs resulting from (a) the number of personnel proceedings overseas; (b) the number of personnel returning to Canada as repatriates or on special leave after completion of tours of duty; (2) increased requirements in respect of freight and drayage charges in Canada. Ocean transportation for Royal Canadian Air Force personnel proceeding overseas was assumed by Canada as of April 1, 1943. These costs were absorbed by the United Kingdom prior to that date. Is that sufficient?

War Appropriation-Air Services


Agar Rodney Adamson: Has the minister any idea -or is it secret?-as to what it costs to send an airman overseas?


Charles Gavan Power: 
Agar Rodney Adamson: Does it also include transportation on the Canadian railways?


Charles Gavan Power: No.


Agar Rodney Adamson: It is purely from the-?


Charles Gavan Power: -boat.


Agar Rodney Adamson: From the coast?


Charles Gavan Power: On board the boat.


Agar Rodney Adamson: And it does not include any transportation of equipment?


Charles Gavan Power: We take only our personal equipment with us.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I mean, no aircraft
transportation?


Charles Gavan Power: No; we do not take any aircraft with us.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Does it include those who have anything to do with the R.C.A.F. transport command?


Charles Gavan Power: They fly.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes, I know. This is purely by ship; it does not include any of the men who fly at all?


Charles Gavan Power: No.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I mean, the lucky officers get taken over by air. It does not include them?


Charles Gavan Power: No.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock. Mr. POWER: The leader of the opposition asked me a question about income tax exemptions for instructors at civilian schools. I
have in my hand a form letter which I sent to several members of the committee who have written to me. I shall leave out the name of the member to whom it is addressed. The letter reads as follows:
Your letter of February 22 received relative
to the request of Mr	for a reduction in
his income tax on the grounds of the danger
of his occupation as a staff pilot at	air
observer school.
Mr	suggests that since these schools
have increased in size, the hazards of his occupation have increased. I am glad to say this is not borne out by our accident records and I am at a loss to understand his reference to higher insurance rates.
At these schools we have a number of service personnel, on leave without pay, employed as staff pilots and they are adjudged as of civilian status for income tax purposes and, consequently, there is no discrimination as suggested.
Similar inquiries having previously reached this department caused a thorough investigation to be made, into which the Department of .National Revenue (income tax division) was drawn. This investigation satisfied us that, after payment of income tax, pilots on leave without pay, employed at air observer schools are slightly better off financially than in the service.
For your information I am attaching a schedule of comparative income of civilian instructors at A.0.S.'s, and sergeant pilots, R.C.A.F., after making provision for a proposed tax on 1942 incomes.
It is to be noted that the rank from which civilian instructors are drawn is sergeant pilot, and in order to make a fair comparison of their relative incomes, an amount of $1 per day being the value of the subsistence allowance at both service schools and air observer schools has Peen added to the pay of the rank of sergeant pilot.
From the schedule presented it can be seen that the net cash income of the instructor at the civilian school after the deduction of both the tax and savings element is greater than the income of a sergeant pilot in any degree of marital status.
I have here the schedule, and with the consent of the committee I ask that it be placed in Hansard:
Single .. Married
Schedule of comparative incomes civilian instructors at A.O.S.'s and sergeant pilots, after making provision for a proposed tax on 1942 incomes Gross income $3,600 00 1,715 50
3.600	00 2,135 50
3.600	00 2,279 50
3.600	00 2,423 50
3.600	00 2,531 50 3,GOO 00 2,603 50
Married and 1 Married and 2 Married and 3 Married and 4
Status Civilian Sgt. pilot Civilian Sgt. pilot Civilian Sgt. pilot Civilian Sgt. pilot Civilian S^t. pilot Civilian Sgt. pilot
T q V $1,106 40	Income after deducting tax $2,493 60	Compulsory savings $288 00812 40	2,787 60	360 00668 40	2,931 60	396 00524 40	3,075 60	432 00424 20	3,175 80	424 20370 20	3,229 80	370 20



R.C.A.F.,

[Stage Direction]
Net cash income $2,205 60 1,715 50 2,427 60 2,135 50 2,535 60 2,279 50 2,643 60 2,423 50 2.751 60 2,531 50 2,859 60 2,603 50
1.	An amount of $365 has been added to cash income of sergeant pilot as value of subsistence allowance at $1 per day.
2.	Deductions for compulsory savings may be reduced by the amount paid out for insurance premiums, mortgages on home, pension funds as provided in proposed amendments to the income tax act.
3. The salary of with civilian school.
3,600 shown for civilians is the salary attainable after provisional period
100-76i
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation-Air Services
Gordon Graydon: In order to obtain information may I ask the minister a question?
I have not had an opportunity of interviewing any of these men. I simply passed on the letters that I received in order to get the information in a public way. How do the air observer schools or the other training schools recruit these civilian instructors? From what group in the air force are they taken?


Charles Gavan Power: They are largely sergeant pilots who have gone through the air training plan; are given leave without pay, and are then employed at civilian schools.


Gordon Graydon: In most instances are they men who have had operational service overseas?


Charles Gavan Power: Not any of these.


Gordon Graydon: I am quite sure that most members of the committee are a little confused when the question is answered in this way. Are these sergeant pilots who find themselves in the position of civilian instructors picked out or chosen from the sergeant-pilot class because they have special adaptability or special training? How do these men happen to get leave without pay and then be taken on, as the hon. member for Vancouver North says, at S300 a month? What is the test by which these men are chosen?


Charles Gavan Power: Originally when we started the civilian schools these men were civilian bush pilots or men who had done some flying before the war. For some reason or another they did not care to come into the R.C.A.F., or perhaps they did not qualify for aircrew on some ground or another; therefore they were employed by these schools. As time went on, they either did not join the R.C.A.F., or disappeared from the scene and got other jobs in other civilian occupations, so that we had to fill those schools either with these men whom we took into the R.C.A.F., blanketed them in as civilian instructors, or with some of our own graduates who, for some reason or another, were perhaps not fit for overseas or who had probably joined through the civilian schools and had been sworn into the R.C.A.F. with that purpose in mind. I am not sure about that. I know that at one time the civilian schools could not get any more civilian pilot instructors. They came to us and we said: "We will take them all over and make
iMr. Power.]
them R.C.A.F. men." In that way we probably absorbed some who otherwise would not have joined the R.C.A.F. at all. We did that in order that we could have some control over them. We can send them overseas.


Gordon Graydon: They are available for operational work overseas?


Charles Gavan Power: They are now. We can call them back any time.


Gordon Graydon: Would the minister give the committee some information as to how many civilian instructors of that class there are in Canada?


Charles Gavan Power: I would not guess. I would have to find out. I can give the number of schools, but I cannot give the number of instructors with any degree of accuracy.


Gordon Graydon: Is an opportunity given to those who have completed operational work overseas and who have come back .to Canada to take up work of this kind?


Charles Gavan Power: Oh, yes; we are looking for these men. Unfortunately quite a few of them do not want to be instructors. More and more as time goes on we shall fill all our schools with instructors who have had overseas experience. That is the intention and the policy.


Gordon Graydon: Some of these men who have made the claim are no doubt men who have had operational training overseas?


Charles Gavan Power: No.


Gordon Graydon: None of them?


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think there are any civilian instructors or R.C.A.F. men on leave without pay in our air observer schools of the class who are now complaining about income tax, who have had actual experience overseas.


John Ritchie MacNicol: When the committee rose I was on the point of asking a question in connection with travel. At Christmas time I met a number of young airmen in my riding who had just returned from British Columbia. Two of them told me-and maybe others went through the same experience-that they were well into Alberta and some in Saskatchewan before they were able to get a berth. In other words, they had to sit up all the way from Vancouver, or wherever they boarded the train in British Columbia, to well across

War Appropriation-Air Services
the prairies. I suppose the same condition applies to those who board trains at Halifax or Saint John or anywhere in the east. I have been wondering if in the case of holidays like Christmas and Easter or stated holidays when large numbers of these young men are returning to their homes in the east and west, the government could1 not provide sleeping cars, especially for airmen or service personnel returning to their homes in the central provinces from both east and west coasts.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think any of the services have ever provided berths and meals for personnel travelling on leave.


John Ritchie MacNicol: But where there are such numbers travelling at Christmas time from British Columbia or Halifax does the minister not think something should be done? These men are coming to their homes in.Ontario and other provinces, and they are entitled to accommodation. As I said a moment ago, it would only be fair to provide one, two or three cars, or whatever is required, wholly for the service personnel. I speak now of the air force, but the same thing will apply to the others as well.


Charles Gavan Power: I think that would be a matter for the railways. There is always a shortage of accommodation at that particular period of the year. It would be for the railways to arrange that, provided the men would pay for their berth and meals. The services do not pay.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The minister is so persuasive with the railways and everybody else that I have the notion if he would interest himself in the matter something would be done.


Charles Gavan Power: Very often I would like to get a berth for myself, but I cannot get away with that.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I am speaking of special
occasions, not ordinary trips such as the minister and I take. When a large number of these young men are returning after a holiday, such as Christmas, two or three cars could be provided for them if an effort were made.
Mr. HARRIS Danforth):	As the minister
probably knows, it is a practice in the United States, something that has grown up as a courtesy rather than under any rules or regulations, for civilians to stand aside until such time as men in uniform have found accommodation on the trains. I should like to take this opportunity to say to ithe people of Canada through you, Mr. Chairman, while this matter is being discussed1, that it would not hurt the civilians of this country to step aside, when men in uniform are boarding trains, and let those boys have everything that is coming to them. I agree with the minister that it is a matter for the railways. I do not suggest that the railways should make any rules or regulations in this regard, but I do ask the civilians of Canada, who are not doing nearly so much in behalf of Canada as those lads are doing, to step aside on station platforms in order that those in uniform may go through first and have their choice of accommodation. Then we can take what is left.


Alan Webster Neill: I should like to add a word in a different connection. Only to-day I received a letter from which I should like to read a few lines:
I wonder if some day you would ask the hon. Minister of National Defence for Air why air force personnel are not allowed any travelling time with their fourteen days annual leave? The navy and the army get it, the latter get seven days paid travelling time. This has always struck me as rather unfair and I can see no good reason for our being denied this privilege since the same taxpayers and government are paying us all. Last fall when the new K.R. (Air) was issued travelling time (8 days) was included as one of the new regulations, but shortly after this was, so I am told, cancelled.	-
Then this girl goes on to give an instance of a girl going from Toronto to the west coast, stating that she had only five days at home out of the fourteen days leave. Are members of the air force treated differently from members of the army and navy; and, if so, why?


Gordon Graydon: When these appropriations were first before the committee I raised the matter which has been mentioned by the hon. member for Comox-Alberni, and I should like to support what the hon. gentleman has said. This particularly concerns those who travel from, the part of the country from which the hon. member comes. Travel takes so much of the time that there is not much time left for these boys and girls to spend at home, though they have planned and saved1 for months in order to make the trip; and every-

War Appropriation-Air Services
one knows that it is not very' easy to save money on the pay they get in the armed services. I do not think there can be any very good reason for longer withholding from' those in the air force the privileges which are granted to those in the other branches of the armed forces. I understand the situation to be as outlined by the hon. member for Comox-Alberni, and perhaps the minister would be good enough to explain it.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think it is quite as has been stated. I must say that I am surprised to find the situation to be as it turns out to be, because I was always under the impression that the other services complained that the air force had too much leave. This is the information I am given. A table has been prepared setting out in detail the regulations of the army, navy and air force with respect to the leave. That table is attached to this statement, and I can place it on Hansard. It is pointed out that the information contained in the table, with respect to the army and navy, has been taken from the latest available regulations and orders of the navy and army, and it is suggested that before this is tabled and used it might be advisable to have it approved by the appropriate army and navy representatives. I think this has been done. As indicated in the table, no travelling time is granted by the R.C.A.F., except in the case of special leave at isolated units. Similarly, no travelling time is given by the army, except in connection with embarkation leave or furlough, when personnel of the army warned for overseas service may be granted leave or furlough sufficient to provide two clear days at home. All personnel of the R.C.A.F., when posted overseas, are granted fourteen days embarkation leave irrespective of where their homes are located, and this period is considered sufficient to allow personnel proceeding on this leave, even from one coast of Canada to another and return, to have the same, if not more, time at home than is given to army personnel on embarkation leave. I
I am not prepared to discuss that, because it may be a pretty broad statement. However, my information goes on to say that it is therefore considered that in general the army and air force regulations with respect to travelling time in addition to leave are on the same level. The navy does grant travelling time in addition to normal leave. This is considered justified in view of the fact that the larger proportion of the personnel of the navy are serving at sea and leave must be taken from whatever port the ship may arrive
tMr. Graydon.]
at and at a time when leave can be granted. The conditions of service of Royal Canadian naval personnel who are serving at sea differ from personnel of the army and air force serving at fixed units in Canada, and because of this, travelling time in addition to normal leave is justified. It is also considered that reasons to justify the granting of travelling time in addition to normal leave to naval personnel are not present to justify the granting of such travelling time to army and air force personnel.
Then there is a long story here setting forth the different kinds of leave: annual leave, embarkation leave, disembarkation leave, even political leave, with the conditions in the three services set out. If the committee would like to have this table on Hansard I would have no objection.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: By unanimous consent of the committee.


Charles Gavan Power: The table is ns follows: Leave and Passes
1.	Annual Leave.-Personnel who are continuously employed on flying duties are eligible for 14 days leave with pay once every six months. Personnel not employed on flying duties are eligible for 14 days leave with pay once every fiscal year. Leave not taken may be accumulated in exceptional circumstances, but this is not encouraged.
2.	Granting of.-Normally leave is not granted during the first six months service of officers and airmen, and trainees other than aircrew are not given leave until completion of training. Leave may be granted to aircrew trainees when time is available between courses and in such cases is not charged against annual leave.
3.	Isolated Units.-On completion of a tour of duty of not less than six months at isolated units, personnel are eligible for seven days special leave in addition to annual leave authorized, together with travelling time actually required for the return journey to the mainland or railhead, but not to exceed five days in any case.
4.	In the case of personnel posted to isolated units on the east coast, arrangements are made for them to take annual leave prior to posting, and they are not granted annual leave during their tour of duty at such isolated units. This does not apply to aircrew. While such postings are for an indefinite period, in practice personnel are posted away after a tour of duty of from 12 to 18 months. At the request of the A.O.C., W.A.C., this restriction w'as not extended to the west coast.
5.	Indefinite Leave.-Indefinite leave without pay is no longer granted, and applications for this type of leave to return to essential industry are treated as application for discharge, provided a certificate is obtained from national selective service that the individual's services are

War Appropriation-Air Services
essential to the efficient conduct of the industry concerned, and that there are no other personnel available with comparable qualifications.
6.	Farm Leave.-A.O.s.C. have authority on the C.O.'s recommendation to grant spring farm and harvest leave to personnel who can be spared from their duties, up to a maximum of two months, for each type of leave. Such leave is without pay and allowances, including dependent's allowances.
7.	Sick Leave.-Sick leave is granted by
C.O.'s on the recommendation of a medical board.
8.	Compassionate Leave.-Compassionate leave may be granted either with or without pay, depending on the circumstances of the case.
9.	Embarkation Leave.-R.C.A.F. personnel and C.T.E. trainees from Newfoundland are given 14 days embarkation leave, including travelling time, irrespective of the leave destination. Where possible personnel other than trainees proceeding overseas on posting, or for a period of not less than six months on temporary duty, are given 14 days embarkation leave.
10.	Repatriation Leave.-Personnel who have carried out a term of two years on ground duties overseas or aircrew who have completed an operational tour, and who have been returned to Canada for other than disciplinary or medical reasons, are given 30 days leave including travelling time. Personnel rvho have carried out a term of duty extending for a period of at least six months overseas but less than two years in the case of groundcrew and aircrew who have not completed an operational tour, and who have been returned to Canada for other than disciplinary or medical reasons, are given 14 days leave, including travelling time. In exceptional cases such personnel may be given leave not to exceed 30 days.
11.	Passes.-Periods of absence from duty of 48-hours or less are considered as a pass and are not charged against leave entitlement. Some flexibility is necessary under active service conditions, and the exact number of off duty pass privileges is left to the discretion of C.O.s. including decisions as to whether these pass privileges are to be given on week-ends or during the week.
12.	Transportation on Leave.-Personnel proceeding on authorized leave may be granted one special reduced fare annually to return to their bona fide homes, at a cost to themselves of one-third of the existing reduced rate which is
round trip at the price of a single fare. In addition, a similar warrant may be issued on embarkation or disembarkation leave.
13.	Furlough warrants, i.e., return ticket for the price of a single fare, may be purchased by personnel in uniform or in possession of Canadian passenger association form 95, which is issued by the adjutant of the station, and these tickets are available without retsriction as to number.
48- and 72-Hour Passes 48-Hour Passes.
1.	The regulations relating to the granting of 48-hour passes are contained in A.F.A.O. A.24/6, paras. 7 to 10, inclusive.
2.	Certain instructions were issued in amplication of the provisions of this A.F.A.O. with respect to personnel at air force headquarters and command headquarters, and such instructions are now being issued generally by way of amendment to this administrative order. The amendment has been forwarded for promulgation and will provide as follows:-
"Forty-eight hour passes at air force headquarters, command headquarters and stations or units other than those where personnel are actively engaged on flying duties or where the pool system is operated are only to he granted to personnel who have put in a reasonable amount of overtime during the month prior to the application for the pass or in other extenuating circumstances."
3.	Personnel to whom 48-hour passes are granted fall under two classes:-
(a)	Personnel who normally work a five and one-half day week. Such personnel only receive a 48-hour pass where they have put in a reasonable amount of overtime work or in special circumstances where such a pass is required to take care of urgent personal affairs.
(b)	Personnel who normally work a seven-day week. Such personnel, at the discretion of their commanding officer, are normally granted two 48-hour passes a month to compensate for the continuous nature of their employment. Such passes are given either in rotation or periodically during the month as may best fit in with the type of training carried on at the particular unit.
72-Hour Passes.
4.	There are no regulations in force which authorize the granting of a pass of more than 48 hours.

Comparative Table of Leave Entitlement for the Armed Forces in Canada
Royal Canadian Navy
1.	Annual Leave (Normal Leave)
(a)	Up to 28 days normal leave plus travelling time may be granted in each year if the exigencies of the service permit-1st April-31st March.
(b)	For periods pf less than a year, officers and ratings may be granted 14 days normal leave plus'travelling time for a completed period of six months service, plus two days for each complete month's service, subject to the conditions that no leave will be granted until the completion of six months active service-1st April-31st March.
(c)	When the journey by the most direct route to or from the home of an officer or rating exceeds 24 hours, additional leave to cover the period of travelling in excess of 24 hours each way is to be granted once annually.
(d)	Leave for service ashore in Canada will not be cumulative from one leave year to the next, and any leave not taken before the end of the leave year will lapse.
(e)	Leave for service at sea or outside Canada will be cumulative up to a maximum period of 60 days.
(Naval order 3241/43, paras. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.)
2.	Embarkation Leave
Normally no embarkation leave, but such leave may be granted in exceptional cases to attend to personal affairs if absence from duty permits. (No reference.)
Canadian Army (Active)
1.	Annual Leave (Ordinary Leave and
Furlough)
(a)	Officers may be granted leave, not exceeding 14 days with pay during each fiscal year, i.e., 1st April-31st March. Such leave may be granted on the authority of the district officer commanding.
(b)	Other ranks may be granted furlough not exceeding 14 days with pay during each fiscal year, i.e., 1st April-31st March. Such furlough may be granted on the authority of the officer commanding the unit.
(c)	Leave and furlough authorized under (a) and (b) above is not accumulative, and. except as provided in para, (d) will not be granted until the officer or soldier has completed six months continuous service in an active unit of the Canadian Army. In no circumstances will ordinary leave or furlough exceed 14 days during a fiscal year.
(d)	(i) Personnel in advanced training centres selected for trades training may be granted furlough at the completion of advanced training and prior to proceeding to trades training, even though the soldier concerned may not have completed six months service as required by sub-para. (c).
(ii) Furlough may be granted to personnel of units other than advanced training centres who are selected for trades training provided they have completed five months service with their unit.
(C.A.R.O. 2347.)
2.	Embarkation Leave and Furlough
,	(a) Personnel warned for service overseas
may be granted embarkation leave or furlough to provide for two clear days at home.
(b) The fact that an officer or soldier has had ordinary leave or furlough will in no way-prejudice the grant of embarkation leave or furlough.
(C.A.R.O. 699.)
Royal Canadian Air Force
1.	Annual Leave
(a)	28 days a year, i.e., 14 days every six months may be granted to personnel continuously employed on flying duties.
1st April-30th September
1st October-31st March.
(b)	14 days leave may be granted to personnel not continuously employed on flying duties-1st April-31st March.
(e)	Annual leave is not to be granted until the completion of six months paid service or until the completion of training, whichever is the longer, w-ith the exception that commanding officers may grant annual leave not exceeding that authorized under (a) and (b)
(i)	in urgent circumstances connected with family affairs.
(ii)	on posting to remote operational units if
circumstances permit.
(d)	Athough the taking of leave within these periods is to be encouraged, the air or other officer commanding may authorize the carrying forward of the whole or part of the leave not taken, provided he is satisfied that special service circumstances have prevented it being taken within the stipulated periods and provided that not more than one year's leave may be accumulated and carried into a subsequent year.
(A.F.A.O. A.24/5.)
2.	Embarkation Leave
14 days leave may be granted to all R.C.A.F. personnel on posting overseas.
(A.F.A.O. A.24/5.)

m
War Appropriation-Air Services

77	REVISED EDITION
3.	Disembarkation Leave Nil.
4.	Compassionate Leave
May be granted by commanding officers in exceptional cases. Such leave is normally deducted from normal leave, but where no normal leave is due, such additional leave may be granted with the approval of a flag officer, a commodore, or commanding officer, reserve divisions.
(Naval order 3241/43, para. 17.)
5.	Agriculture or Essential Industry
A period of leave not to exceed two months to return to agriculture or essential industry may be approved by a flag officer, a commodore or commanding officer, reserve divisions, only where exceptional circumstances such as death or disability of a member of immediate family render it essential that the rating concerned return to his home for a short period. This leave is subject to the conditions laid down in Naval Order 3241/43, paras. 18 and 19
Note:-Although not stated in the order, it is understood from Naval authorities that agriculture or essential industry leave is granted without pay and allowances.
3.	Disembarkation Leave
(a)	30 days leave may be granted personnel who have been overseas for a period of two years, or personnel who have served in a theatre of operations regardless of length of overseas service.
(b)	14 days leave and one additional day's leave for each completed month served overseas in excess of six months up to a maximum period of 30 days leave may be granted to personnel who have been overseas for a period of at least six months, but less than two years, and who have not been serving in a theatre of operations.
(C.A.R.O. 3912.)
4.	Compassionate Leave
To meet special cases involving hardship, compassionate leave or furlough not exceeding 10 days may be granted with pay to officers and other ranks irrespective of length of service in the C.A.S.F., on the authority of the district officer commanding. Such leave on compassionate grounds is to be restricted to cases where the D.O.C. is satisfied of the urgent necessity for the grant.
(C.A.R.O. 699.)
5.	Farm Leave
The army may grant assistance to agriculture in two ways:
(a) by granting of leave (known as compassionate farm leave) to certain personnel under the provisions as outlined in appendix "A" to C.A.R.O. 3456-
(i)	This leave may be granted to men for the purpose of v'orking on farms owned by members of their immediate family where there would be undue hardship if the leave were not granted. This leave is applicable w'here the relative working the farm is, because of old age or disability, incapable of continuing to do so, and, by reason of their enlistment or enrolment, there is no other member of the family available to assist.
(ii)	The general officer commanding or district officer commanding may authorize leave for period applied for or for such period as he deems advisable, but not to exceed six months.
3.	Disembarkation Leave
(a)	30 days leave may be granted to personnel who have carried out a term of two years on ground duties overseas or aircrew who have completed an operational tour and who have been returned to Canada for other than disciplinary or medical reasons.
(b)	14 days leave may be granted to personnel who have carried out a term of duty extending for a period of at least six months overseas, but less than two years in the case of ground crew, and aircrew wrho have not completed an operational tour and wdio have been returned to Canada for other than disciplinary or medical reasons. One additional day's leave may be granted for each completed month served overseas in excess of six months, up to a maximum period of thirty days leave.
4.	Compassionate Leave
Air officers commanding may grant leave on compassionate grounds up to a period of 30 days in excess of that normally permitted during the year. Compassionate leave is to be counted against any portion of annual leave that has not been taken.
(A.F.A.O. A.24/5, para. 5.)
5.	Spring and Harvest Leave
The regulations covering the granting of spring and harvest leave are laid dowm each year by instructions to all commands. In 1943 the conditions governing the granting of both spring and harvest leave were as follows:
"Air officers commanding are authorized to grant spring and harvest leave during the 1943 spring and harvest season subject to the following conditions:
(a) Where the commanding officer is satisfied and certifies that personnel can be spared from their duties without interference to training or operations, leave may be granted up to a maximum of two months and no extensions are to be given. The maximum period of two months is not to be granted if the commanding officer considers a shorter priod would prove satisfactory.
g
>
a

War Appropriation-Air Services
fcMr. Power.]
Comparative Table of Leave Entitlement for the Armed Forces in Canada-Royal Canadian Navy	Canadian Army (Active)
-Continued
Royal Canadian Air Force
Subject to the exigencies of the service, the same officers may grant extensions for such periods not exceeding six months as they consider advisable.
(iii) Compassionate farm leave will be without pay of any kind or allowances of any kind, or subsistence, and soldiers will not be entitled to medical or dental attention, hospitalization, or compensation due to illness, injury, or death, while on compassionate farm leave.
(b) By the detailing for duty on farms (known as farm duty) of certain designated personnel under authority of P.C. 5931, as outlined in appendix "C" of C.A.R.O. 3456 and under the provisions as outlined in appendix "B" of C.A.R.O. 3456.
(i)	In order to meet the present emergency in addition to the granting of compassionate farm leave, men may be directed to work on farms under arrangemepts to be made by G.O.C.s. and D.O.C.s. with the director, dominion-provincial farm labour plan. Requests _ for soldiers for farm duty will be made in writing by the director, dominion-provincial farm labour plan, to the G.O.C. or D.O.C. concerned.
(ii)	Personnel from which assistance may be provided are
(a)	personnel in disposal wings of depots;
(b)	personnel in home war establishments who by readjustment, and rearrangements it may be possible to release for the time being. Regard shall be had to the continuing withdrawal of general service personnel for overseas duty;
(c)	personnel in operational units, also having regard to the continuing withdrawal of general service personnel for overseas duty;
(d)	personnel of the Veterans Guard of Canada.
(b)	This leave is not available to any personnel undergoing training including aircrew under recruit's training at manning depots, except on extreme compassionate grounds.
(c)	Personnel who have not completed annual leave may if desired be granted annual leave with pay and allowances, plus the remainder without pay and allowances to complete the maximum of two months.
(d)	Where annual leave has been completed, the entire period of leave granted will be without pay and allowances.
(e)	This leave is to be granted only to those personnel who wish to return to their own farms or tb farms operated by their parents and is subject to the exigencies of the service. Personnel required for posting or duty may be recalled before the termination of the leave period."
(iii) Normally the period of absence of such personnel from their units will not exceed 30 days, but in exceptional cases G.O.C.-in-C. or D.O.C. may authorize such reasonable leave extension as they may see fit.

War Appropriation-Air Services
6.	Special Leave
(a)	Special periods of leave in excess of 48 hours granted in Canada such as Christmas leave, leave in accordance with Naval Order 2877, leave for R.C.N.R. officers to sit for mer-cantile marine certificates, etc., are to be deducted from normal leave. (Naval order 3241, para. 20).
(b)	Survivors' Leave-Up to 28 days as recommended by the medical officer plus travelling time may be granted whether or not there is any normal leave due and may be granted in addition to normal leave, but must not run tonsecutively with such leave. (Naval order 3241/43, para. 14).
7.	Political Leave
May be granted as provided for in Order-in-Council P.C. 3205, dated 31st May, 1943.
8.	Sick and Convalescent Leave
Sick or convalescent leave may be granted at the discretion of commanding officers, on recommendation of the medical officer. Not more than two months sick or convalescent leave is_ to be granted at any time. Officers and ratings are to be medically re-examined on completion of any leave so granted, (Naval order 3241/43, para. 16),
6. Special Leave Nil.
7. Political Leave
May be granted as provided for in order in council, P.C. 3205, dated 31st May, 1943.
S. Sick Leave and Furlough
(a)	Officers may be granted sick leave under the provisions of K.R. (Can.), para. 1113.
(b)	Other ranks may be granted sick furlough for a period not exceeding 60 days without a medical board provided they are not being considered for discharge on medical grounds by general and district officers commanding. Sick furlough in excess of 60 days will not be granted without recommendation of a medical board. (C.A.R.O. 3397).
6.	Special Leave
(a)	Isolated Units.-On completion of a tour of duty of not less than six months at isolated stations on the east and west coasts, personnel may be granted 7 days special leave in addition to annual leave authorized. (A.F.A.O. A.24/5, para. 6).
(b)	Between Courses.-Commanding officers on the authority of D.A.P.S. may grant leave to aircrew trainees up to a period not exceeding 14 days on receipt of posting instructions in the following circumstances:
(i)	if time is available between courses (including operational training and advanced training) or
(ii)	when retained at a unit pending posting instructions, or,
(iii)	.if subsequent to course commencement at a new unit such trainees are surplus to course requirements.
(c)	Special Aircrew Leave
(i)	It has been agreed between air ministry and R.C.A.F. headquarters that aircrew personnel of the R.C.A.F. serving in the U.K. may be granted special leave to proceed to Canada after the completion of an operational tour plus an instructional tour at an O.T.U. or other tour of non-operational duties.
(ii)	The period of special leave in Canada, including outward and return passages, will not exceed eight weeks.
7.	Political Leave
May be granted as provided for in order in council P.C. 3205, dated 31st May, 1943.
8.	Sick Leave
Sick leave is to be granted by commanding officers in accordance with instructions contained in K.R. (Air), para. 286, which states that sick leave for a period not exceeding six months in the case of an officer and two months in the ease of an airman may be granted by a commanding officer on the recommendation of a medical officer, or, where a medical board has been assembled on the recommendation of the medical board.



w
War Appropriation-Air Services
(Mr. Power.]
Comparative Table Royal Canadian Navy
3. Essential Industry
As laid down in para. 5 above.
10. Travelling Time
Royal Canadian Navy personnel on normal leave when the journey by the most direct route to and from the home of an officer or rating exceeds 24 hours, are granted additional leave to cover the period of travelling in excess of 24 hours each way. Such additional travelling time is granted once annually. Naval order 3241/43. (Reference para. 1 above R.C.N.).
of Leave Entitlement for the Armed Forces in Canada-Concluded
Canadian Army (Active)
9. Essential Industry
Soldiers of the active army, including N.R.M.A. personnel serving as "members (H.D.)" may be granted leave to return temporarily to war industry under the following conditions:
(a)	The application for the return of a soldier to temporary civil employment must be originated by the employer who will submit it to the officer commanding the unit in which the soldier is serving, giving complete information as to the nature of the man's employment before enlistment, and future employment it granted leave, indicating the nature of work, grading, and rate of wages, and verifying that no other suitable man could be obtained, from an employment bureau or any other source. The employer will show what effort he has made to train other men to do the work of the soldier on whose behalf application is made and will state the length of time during which the soldier's services will be required in civil employment. Only applications in respect ot men considered craftsmen, and not apprentices, will be entertained.
(b)	All leave so granted will be without pay and allowances.
(c)	The soldier at all times, will be subject to recall to military duties on 48 hours notice. (C.A.R.O. 1935/42).
10. Travelling Time
Travelling time for Canadian army (active) personnel in Canada is not granted, in addition to leave periods, except for embarkation leave, when personnel warned for overseas service may be granted leave or furlough sufficient to provide two clear days at home.-Canadian active service routine order 699/40, para. 4. (Reference para. 2 above CA.S.F.).
Royal Canadian Air Force
Note.-A medical board shall be assembled before sick leave is granted to an officer or airman for a period of time exceeding 28 days, including any periods of sick leave granted during the previous six months.
9. Return to War Industry
Personnel are not to be granted leave to return to industry. (A.F.A.O. A.24/5, para. 13).
10. Travelling Time
Travelling time for R.C.A.F. personnel in Canada is not granted, in addition to leave periods, except for personnel stationed at isolated units on the east and west coasts. An additional leave period not to exceed 5 days in any ease is granted to personnel of such isolated units to cover time actually required for the journey to the mainland or railhead and return having due regard to the method of travel, i.e., air or sea. (Reference para. 6 (a) above R.C.A.F.)



s
o
War Appropriation-Air Services

War Appropriation-Air Services


Alan Webster Neill: It is not clear to me yet why these girls should get practically no leave at all while soldiers get as much as five days paid travelling time. This girl went from Toronto to the far side of British Columbia, and she had only four days at home.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know how the time would figure out, but the army get two clear days at home, as I understand it, while the air force get fourteen days all told.


Alan Webster Neill: That is not enough; it is not fair.


Charles Gavan Power: I am not arguing for the army. They get two clear days at home while we get fourteen days to make the trip, stay at home and return.


Alan Webster Neill: But that discriminates against the remote places. '


Gordon Graydon: The minister is making a better case than I thought he would make, but even at that it falls short of being a convincing case. It seems to me that under this plan you cannot help having discrimination against places which are located at a distance. I do not think there should be any discrimination because a person happens to live far away. After all, one Canadian is just as good as another in the air force, and I do not think a person's leave should be cut down by virtue of the distance he may have to travel. I think the minister should give consideration to the whole question of leave in relation to travelling time.


Charles Gavan Power: I am rather inclined to agree with my hon. friend. I had an idea that they got more leave than this, and I do not believe this is very satisfactory.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I have always wondered how the posting of recruits in the air force was arranged. For instance, we may find someone from Toronto posted to Vancouver, and someone from Vancouver posted somewhere else. There is probably a very good reason for this, and that reason may have much to do with the difficulty of arranging leave. I had thought that in connection with the first part of the training-I think they call it pre-I.T.S., do they not?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I have often wondered why the boys should be sent so far away. Probably they like to go, because they enjoy seeing the country-and when I say that I speak from experience. On the other hand, they are a long way from their homes. Is there any other reason why they are posted at long distances from home?
	, j Y 1
While I may not be in order, I should like to ask a further question. Last year the minister gave us an idea of the length of time it took to train aircrew of one kind or another; that is, pilots, gunners, navigators, radio operators and so on. I do not -know whether he would care to give us that information again, and if he does not I shall not press for it. I believe, however, that the information would be of interest, because he has told us the courses have lengthened materially from what they were last year.
Then we must consider the cost of transportation for the forces. They do get a reasonable rate when they are travelling on leave, but I do not think it would cost the country very much to give them free transportation either on annual or on embarkation leave. I do not believe that privilege would be abused. Probably in respect of a 48-hour leave it is proper to have them pay on a reasonable basis; but when they have either embarkation or annual leave I can see no reason in the world why they should not have their transportation free, and receive decent accommodation.
The hon. member for Danforth has just spoken about civilians giving up their places in cars to air force .men, and men in the army and naval forces. I agree with the hon. member, and I believe some other arrangement ought to be made whereby these lads might be given better consideration. I have seen them standing all the way from here to Toronto on the afternoon train. It does not seem right that they should have to do that.


Charles Gavan Power: I would say that postings present a very difficult problem. We have been Hying as far as possible not to post men too far away, and to keep them within the command at which they entered the service. But it often happens that a course has to be filled. A class may be opening on a certain date, and has to be filled by pupils who have entered their training in Ontario. The course in question may, for instance, be in Alberta, and we have to send men out there. The same applies all along the line. Sometimes it looks easy on paper to say that so many hundred will graduate at a certain date from such-and-such a school from, let us say, Toronto. They may have gone to E.F.T.S. at some point close to Toronto. In that event it would be St. Catharines. Or, in respect to Ottawa, it would be Pendelton. After going through that school they would move to S.F.T.S. at Uplands. But it does not always work out that way.

War Appropriation-Air Services
Our people are constantly striving to prevent extra travelling by posting the men, in so far as possible, within the area whence they started their training.
With respect to the length of time required, I can give only approximate figures, because the time is constantly changing. At the time this estimates book was prepared, namely around October, a pilot in service flying training school stayed sixteen weeks; a navigator-B stayed in navigation training school twenty weeks; a navigator-W stayed in navigation training school twenty-two weeks; a straight navigator stayed twenty weeks; air bomber, six weeks; air gunner, twelve weeks-I believe that has been raised. Then, W.O.A.G., six weeks, and flight engineers two weeks. On top of that I believe there are twenty-eight weeks somewhere else.
There have been constant changes, and in order to estimate how long a man would be in training I would have to find out in what category he was, the availability of places in schools, and_ the backlog in reserve. Sometimes they stay two months on tarmac duty before they enter their training schools. Then they go from that school to elementary, on to service flying; from there to operational training, and so on. I would not guarantee that anyone would become a pilot nowadays under eighteen months.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Last year under this item we passed an estimate of $20,838,068. The sheet this year shows that that amount was exceeded, and the actual cost was over $6,000,000 more; it was jumped up to $26,730,000. Could be minister tell us why he estimated last year's expenditures would be $20,838,068, and he had to spend $26,730,000? I notice that this year his estimate is a million dollars more than that, again.


Charles Gavan Power: The estimate for travel and transportation requirements for personnel of the J.A.T.P. and western hemisphere organ-, ization is calculated at the rate of $50 a head. The actual expenditures to date indicate the cost to be approximately $100. The cost is higher than we estimated.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: This afternoon the minister gave us an idea of how much was split up between the railways for transportation on leave. If we were to pay transportation for the lads on embarkation and annual leave, how much would it cost the country?


Charles Gavan Power: I think I put that on Hansard this afternoon.


Clarence Gillis: I do not think this matter of leave should be so difficult to settle. There has been a good deal of complaint. The min-
(Mr. Power.)
ister states that as far as possible they are posting R.C.A.F. personnel in Canada close to their own homes, or in the provinces in which they live. If that is the policy, then there should not be many in stations east and west who would have to be transported. The suggestion I have with reference to men posted from Quebec to Alberta or British Columbia is a very simple one. They claim all that is required in addition to the fourteen days' leave now granted is the addition of the 48-hour pass to which they would be entitled, were they back in their stations. Apparently in some commands that is done, but in the eastern air command it is not done when granting leave to those travelling west of Ontario; they do not include the 48-hour pass. The suggestion I have is that if that were done it would solve the problem. Another question I should like to ask is in connection with R.A.F. personnel attached to the Canadian forces in Canada. Are they subject to the same leave regulations as members of the Canadian forces while they are serving in Canada?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Clarence Gillis: They claim that in England they get four weeks' leave and four travelling warrants and eight 48-hour passes. The question is why that practice is not followed out in Canada with reference to that particular personnel. -


Charles Gavan Power: We are less generous with
regard to leave and warrants than they are, but do not forget that these men get Canadian rates of pay. I think they would be sorry to give up their rates of pay in order to get the leave advantages.


Clarence Gillis: The British government
taxes a lot of it back from them.


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: A number of hon.
members have raised the question of the cost of travelling for boys and girls in the air force when on leave. A suggestion was made in the house last year that those required to travel long distances should not be required to pay more than a maximum mileage. If personnel were being moved more than 500 miles away from their homes the suggestion was that no one should be required to pay more than a maximum amount.


Charles Gavan Power: A ceiling on the amount the personnel should have to pay. The last time I heard this matter discussed was about two or three weeks ago and I think it is still under active discussion. It is one solution of what is admittedly a difficulty. I do not know just what stage it has reached now. These matters are discussed in order to arrive at

War Appropriation-Air Services
some common policy, and I know that for some time that solution was being discussed but it certainly has not come into effect as yet.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
J,. Construction, purchase, repairs and operating expenses of properties-
(a)	Capital expenditure, $39,750,000.
(b)	Repairs, operating expenses and rentals, $17,689,838.
Mr. STIRLING:: Will the minister give us some explanation of this item which I see is about half of what it was last year. Will he describe how the $56,000,000 is to be spent. Several times reference has been made to establishments being closed in different places in Canada. What use is being made of these places and are they to be fitted into the general scheme which is being considered for the use of military establishments of various descriptions after the war?


Charles Gavan Power: I would have to divide in two the answer to the last question. The hon. member, coming as he does from British Columbia, is probably referring mainly to defensive aerodromes, and for security reasons I had better not say anything about those that are closed. In my opening remarks I stated ,, that there were four agencies which would study the use to which aerodromes could be put. First, there was the post-war civilian aviation committee of the war committee which is now endeavouring to work out some means of utilizing these for post-war civil aviation. Next, there is the Department of Pensions and National Health which will require accommodation at some, time or another for convalescent homes or for the training of returning soldiers. Next, there is the Department of Labour which is seeking to obtain space for vocational training. Fourth, there is the Department of Transport which inevitably will come into possession of the aerodromes which we are abandoning for air force purposes.


Grote Stirling: Are these establishments just being cared for now by caretakers?


Charles Gavan Power: They are being put on care and maintenance. This closing-down policy with regard to the empire training plan has only been developed to any extent within the last two weeks. We are just looking around. With regard to defensive aerodromes, we are gradually moving to the point where we have concluded that some of these need not necessarily be garrisoned at this time because of the favourable turn in the war situation.
No specific provision has been made for the construction of new projects in 1944-45. Expenditures for new construction will be
limited to the cost of items which must be provided during the year and liquidating existing contracts in respect of construction work now in progress. Perhaps the committee will be interested in the following figures which show the cash requirement for 1944-45:
Joint air training plan
Operating expenses	 $ 6,979,741
Construction	 18,000,000
Repairs	 3,120,000
Total	 $28,099,741
Western hemisphere operations
Operating expenses	 $ 4,295,000
Construction	 21,000,000
Repairs	 2,641,000
Total	 $27,936,000
Overseas	 $	594,000
I have some other statistics which may be of interest and which can be placed on the record.


Grote Stirling: The minister did not give any figures covering purchases.


Charles Gavan Power: Construction would include purchases.


Grote Stirling: Are lands and buildings being purchased at this stage?


Charles Gavan Power: No; there is nothing proposed to be purchased this year. This is a summary of the buildings erected under the British commonwealth air training plan:
Number of	hangars	
494Number of	drill halls	
98Number of	other buildings	
5,476
6,068
Paving. Concrete and bituminous surfaces and the paving of runways, taxi strips, parking areas, et cetera, 251,116,000 square feet or 2,377 paved miles 20 feet wide.
Parade grounds. 9,000,000 square feet or 91 paved miles 20 feet wide.
Paved hangar floors, 18,000,000 square feet or 177 paved miles 20 feet wide.
Total, 2,648 paved miles 20 feet wide.
If the committee is interested I have a long list of places where construction has been stopped, where construction had been planned and has since been stopped because of the closing of some of our units. This is four or five pages long and since it is mainly of local interest perhaps it need not go on Hansard.


Grote Stirling: Would the cost of dealing with snow conditions come under this item of operating costs?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Mr. McIVOR:: I think we should have the places that are closed put on Hansard. I notice there is a reduction of $54,000,000 in this item and I should like to know if any other airfields are to be closed?


Charles Gavan Power: As I indicated to the hon. member for Yale, we have not definitely arrived at the indication of what particular

War Appropriation-Air Services
air units are to be closed. Within two or three days I shall have a list of the schools which are to be closed up to about September 1, and shall be glad to place it on Hansard.


Ernest Edward Perley: Are any schools in Saskatchewan to be closed?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, there are schools all over.


Ernest Edward Perley: Would the minister name them?


Charles Gavan Power: When I give them all.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Has the minister
any figures regarding the cost of grading and the amount of gravel used' at Mount Pleasant airport in Prince Edward Island as compared with normal airports?
There is another point. I found last summer that large numbers of groundcrew who were enlisted in the air force were working for the construction contractor. Is that the usual practice, and what are the terms of payment? How much does the contractor pay to the government for the difference in their pay? Just what is the arrangement?


Charles Gavan Power: I could not give the cost of grading at Mount Pleasant offhand; it will take time to dig that up.
With regard to my hon. friend's other point, some time ago we found it impossible to get contractors to do work in isolated places, particularly in the northern parts of British Columbia and along the east coast-along both coasts-especially for the building of small units to house from four or five to ten men. It was impossible to get contractors to do the work in isolated places along the coast and to look after the maintenance of a number of stations on the northwest staging route, for instance, or along the coast of Newfoundland, Labrador and the Pacific. Therefore we formed what are known as construction and maintenance units and enlisted in them are tradesmen of all kinds. The maintenance units have been carrying on that work for us in places where we could not get a contractor to do the work. Recently, now that the manpower shortage has eased up a bit, we are doing some of this work in the more settled portions, in Halifax, for instance. There was some 'protest there from labour unions, but we said that we would take all the civilians we could get to do the work and that we would withdraw our men in equal proportion to civilian labour we could secure. I can assure my hon. friend that it was not with any intention of taking work away from civilians but simply to get the work done where we could not get civilian labour.
fMr. Power.]


John Ritchie MacNicol: Would the tradesmen to
whom the minister has just referred as having enlisted in the air force be paid union rates of pay or air force rates when they worked in these camps as plumbers, steamfitters, carpenters and' so on?


Charles Gavan Power: We have trade rates of pay for all these classes, and a fitter would be paid more than less skilled tradesmen, and so on.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Will a portion of this
item be used for the construction of the camp at Mossbank, Saskatchewan?


Charles Gavan Power: That work was pretty well
finished before the maintenance units were formed. There may be still some maintenance work to do there, such as the fitting of doors and windows or work of that kind-repairing the tarmac, for instance.


Ernest Edward Perley: From how many miles did they have to bring the water for Mossbank?


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think our maintenance units were engaged on that. .


John Ritchie MacNicol: Where does Mossbank
camp get its water?


Charles Gavan Power: I shall have to look over my last year's answer to that question. I answered it last year and the year before, and I do not think the answer was ever satisfactory to anybody. I really could not say offhand. Perhaps that answer is not satisfactory. Then I shall have to find another answer if I can.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I have been trying to find out for three years where Mossbank camp is getting its water supply.


Joseph William Noseworthy: To return to the question of pay, the boys I met last summer enlisted as aircrew and were receiving $1.30 a day, with no extra pay as tradesmen. They were working for a contractor * at $1.30 a day and were getting nothing extra. I was wondering if the contractor was paying anything to the government.


Charles Gavan Power: They should not have been working for that if they were aircrew; I cannot understand aircrew being on maintenance work. Perhaps my hon. friend would give me the details.


Joseph William Noseworthy: The men were
groundcrew, working for the contractor and receiving regular air force pay of $1.30 a day.. They were just new recruits.


Charles Gavan Power: The money coming from the contractor goes to the receiver general. These men must have been doing the same kind of work they would have been doing as ground-

War Appropriation-Air Services
crew at the station. Had they been doing tradesmen's work they would have received tradesmen's rates of pay.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
5. Personnel, supplies and services:	Food,
medical and dental stores, clothing and personal equipment, $38,515,252.
Clarence Gillis: Is there any regulation specifically covering recreation facilities at air force stations? I know of one station where moving pictures are brought in and operated by an outside concern, and the boys at that station are obliged to pay an admission fee of twenty-five cents to see the show. My recollection is that when the last canteen fund committee sat, it was understood that all canteen funds were to be used to provide recreation facilities in and around any of these camps and stations, and I am wondering if the boys at the station I have in mind are not being exploited. Upon making inquiries I find that at some stations the boys are charged nothing, and at others they are charged ten cents, but the station I have in mind charges twenty-five cents. It is not because the entertainment is extraordinary; it is just the regular run-of-the-mine show as provided at all the stations and camps across Canada. Would the minister care to comment on that?


Charles Gavan Power: I would think it was a civilian moving-picture organization using one of our recreation halls and getting it rent free, light free, and accommodation free, and that if any profits were made they would go to the canteen fund to be used for the benefit of the men. I have never heard of twenty-five cents being charged, but it might have been done without my knowing it. ' It is a matter of arrangement between the canteen committee and the person showing the pictures.


Clarence Gillis: It is the station at Sydney I have in mind, and the boys there think they are being exploited.


Charles Gavan Power: I shall certainly be glad to look into the matter. My impression is that any profits would accrue to the canteen fund. I cannot see how we would give the use of the hall free, and free light and heat, if necessary, just for the purpose of making some money for a civilian concern. If that is being done, it will certainly be stopped.


Clarence Gillis: Does the minister's department get a report on these canteen funds? I understand that the reverse is true; the canteen funds were to be used for that purpose instead of the canteen fund being provided in that way with extra profits. Is a report on canteen funds at the R.C.A.F. stations made to the department?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes; every quarter our financial people receive a report on canteen funds from every station, from every unit.


William Ross Macdonald: In 1942 a special committee was appointed to consider the whole question of canteen funds. At that time the committee was advised that one per cent of the gross sales of all canteens operated by the R.C.A.F. was paid to the R.C.A.F. benevolent fund. It was further represented to the committee that the only persons entitled to benefit from the R.C.A.F. benevolent fund were members of the permanent force. The committee recommended that no further payments should be made to the benevolent fund until provision was made that all members of the Royal Canadian Air [DOT] Force now serving should be allowed to participate in that fund. I would ask the minister if that recommendation has been put into effect.


Charles Gavan Power: I would say yes: the benevolent fund now is for the benefit of all members of the R.C.A.F., past, present and future.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I have had complaints from boys who have had their "medical" in the different air force pools and have then been told that they would have to report at a certain time. When they report they are lined up, perhaps with ten or more other boys, to go through, and then one, two or three of them are called out and told, "Well, now, you have not a full medical", or some other reason is given, and they are not allowed into the air force. Perhaps these boys have been counting for three or four months on going in, and it is certainly a great disappointment to them. Could the minister arrange that these boys shall have a full medical?


Charles Gavan Power: Have what? A full medical?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes.
I do not know the reason for this practice.
It may be that there is something about a boy which determines them not to accept him, but it works a hardship on these lads. Many of them have had going-away parties attended by a number of their friends, and it is pretty hard for them to return to their ordinary life again.


Charles Gavan Power: If my hon. friend will tell me where this has occurred I shall be only too glad to check up with the medical officers.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I shall do that. I put a question on the order paper some days ago with regard to the clothing supplied to our boys overseas. It appears that

War Appropriation-Air Services
Great Britain supplies these uniforms. Some of the boys complain that the uniforms which they are getting there are not of as good quality as those supplied here. Is there a chance of their receiving uniforms from Canada? They state that the clothes they get overseas are a little coarser and are not as comfortable.


Charles Gavan Power: We have had that complaint before. We have made representations to Great Britain. My hon. friend will realize that if we started distributing uniforms and all the other equipment overseas we would have to set up a pretty big establishment, a kind of ordnance corps, overseas, and I do not think that at this stage we are justified in doing so.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I
hardly meant that. There are friends of these boys who are quite willing to buy clothes and send them over. Would they be allowed to do that?


Charles Gavan Power: I have never heard of any "other ranks" in either the army or the navy or the air force buying their own clothing, and I am sure that if we permitted such a thing there would be a howl of indignation from this house which I would never get over.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: There are some who would be willing to supply the clothing.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Do the Royal Canadian Air Force make their own messing arrangements or are they supplied by the army service corps?


Charles Gavan Power: The army service corps feeds us.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: There are only one or two of these training schools about which I have had complaints, but one about which I have heard several, is Lachine. I do not know whether the minister has had any complaints along these lines. I was wondering whether the R.C.A.F. have general supervision, over and above the army service corps.


Charles Gavan Power: We cook the food and serve it and all that. We get our supplies from the army service corps, and we look after all the messing.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: You look after all the cooking?


Charles Gavan Power: Certainly, and wash the dishes.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Has the minister had any complaints about that sort of thing at Lachine?


Charles Gavan Power: Not lately. Off and on, I suppose, I have had complaints with respect to pretty nearly every station of the air force. As soon as we get a complaint we hand it on to the chief messing officer of the particular command, and he makes an investigation and reports to me. Usually the matter is cleared up. I have not had anything lately with regard to Lachine; that is, not for the last six months or a year. It may develop rapidly, and sometimes it evaporates just as rapidly when checked up.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: These lads who have been to camps all over the country usually have nothing but praise for the food; they do not think it could be bettered. But there are just one or two exceptions, among them Lachine. That is why I asked the minister if there is something wrong with the place, because I have had several complaints about it.


Charles Gavan Power: Lachine has changed its organization. It was a manning depot; it is now a "Y" depot, and probably the whole organization of messing has been changed in the last two months. If my hon. friend receives another complaint and will let me know, we shall have a look at it.


Mr. WRIGHT:: I have a question with respect to Canadian personnel serving in the Royal Air Force overseas. I understood the minister to say that the British government supplies them with their personal equipment, rations, et cetera. * What is the financial arrangement with respect to that? Does the Canadian government reimburse the British government? Also, what is the position with regard to expenditures, say, on ammunition, wastage in aeroplanes and equipment which our men who are attached to the R.A.F. are using?


Charles Gavan Power: That is all in the lump sum payment of $345,664,944, item 13, maintenance of overseas squadrons for the year 194445. It also includes all our personnel overseas.


Percy Ellis Wright: What is the arrangement with regard to the personnel in the R.A.F.? Is that paid on a per capita basis?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


John Ritchie MacNicol: On page 394 of Hansard I find that item 5 in the list of estimates contains "personal equipment", as well as "personnel". The words "personal equipment" are not in the typewritten list. If the item as

War Appropriation-Air Services
detailed on page 394 of Hansard is correct, what is included in personal equipment?


Charles Gavan Power: My hon. friend is talking about item 5 at page 394 of Hansard?


John Ritchie MacNicol: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: It reads: "Personnel supplies and services: food, medical and dental stores, clothing and personal equipment." In my sheet the words are "personal supplies." I think it is the same. The list is: "Personal supplies and services, clothing, rations, barracks stores, laundry and medical."


John Ritchie MacNicol: Personal equipment is'
left out?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes. Clothing would cover that, I suppose. Rations would be food. I think it is intended to cover the same thing anyway, although there might be a different enumeration.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Are
there any psychiatrists in the medical service of the air force?


Charles Gavan Power: Eighteen.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: How
many of those are overseas?


Charles Gavan Power: I have not that with me; I shall have to find out.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The reason I ask that is this:	I notice in the
British Hansard that twenty-three per cent of the men discharged from the British army were discharged for psychiatric reasons. I wondered if the minister had a good staff from over there?


Charles Gavan Power: We have the number of discharges from the air force for various reasons.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Can
the minister give them?


Charles Gavan Power: I shall give the numbers. Perhaps I had better put the table on Hansard. It is rather interesting, being a reconciliation of present strength of R.C.A.F. personnel to total who have served in the present war:
Reconciliation of present strength of R.C.A.F. personnel to total who have served in present war
Total names recorded	
Less duplication-number commissioned from the ranks	
Total who have served	
Less:
Loss by casualty	
Final discharge	
Retirements	
Resignations	
Deserters-
Americans (discharge action pending)	
Other deserters	
'Leave-definite	
indefinite	
Taken on strength not yet entered on records...
Total	
Present strength R.C.A.F	
		Officers	Air-	
Officers	Airmen	(W.D.)	women	Total33,639	214,270	648	16,549	265,10625,392	579	25,97133,639	188,878	648	15,970	239,1353,495	7,976	2	10	11,48314,933	1,303	16,2361,399	20	1,419312	7	3196	433	3	44212	198	2	2121,372	1,37223	895	91832	325,247	25,839	29	1,318	32,43328,392	163,039	619	14,652	206,702
'Personnel on definite leave are aircrew recruits, and occasionally a very small number of ground tradesmen, enlisted and ordered to report on a definite date in the near future Personnel on indefinite leave comprise aircrew and groundcrew employed by civilian operated R.C A F. schools and W .E.T.P. schools, and a few personnel released temporarily to private industry.
I have the break-down here. It is long, but I shall give it to my hon. friend.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The
minister said that some were definite and some indefinite among those who had not been posted; is that so?


Charles Gavan Power: That is right. The number of discharges were-perhaps these figures do not gibe because they are a week earlier than the ones I gave. I gave the total discharges as 16,236. I have the break-down here. It is quite long, but I shall put it on, Hansard:

War Appropriation-Air Services
(iii) Terms of rehabilitation following discharge, etc.: Rehabilitation benefits for other ranks include the following:
Rehabilitation grant-30 days' pay, and dependents' allowances where applicable, if six months' continuous service has been recorded.
Tr^^porta^thm-transportation with travelling expenses is provided to the point of enlistment, or to the place of residence at,the time of enlistment, or to any point m Canada that can be reached without additional expenditure.
(b) Retirements and Resignations of Officers.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(i) Reasons for retirement or resignation:
Reasons for retirement are as follows:
Medical grounds; transfer to U.S. forces; unable to meet Be:rvice reqmrements; retired to pension; other reasons (including over-age, cannot be ad\ antageously employed, and return to civilian employment).
Reasons for resignation are as follows:
Compassionate grounds; transfer to other armed forces; unsuitable for service life; other reasons (including over-age and return to civilian employment).
(ii) Number of retirements and resignations:
The number of retirements and resignations from the outbreak of the present war to 31st January, 1944, is as follows:
Retirements:
Medical grounds	[DOT][DOT][DOT][DOT]*********
Transfer to U.S. armed forces (in Canada) . Transfer to U.S. armed forces (overseas)...
Unable to meet service requirements	
Retired to pension	
Other reasons	
504
175
139
Total retirements
1,426
Resignations:
Compassionate grounds	

	 sn
Transfer to armed forces (other than U.b.A.)	
Unsuitable for service life	 g^
Other reasons	
[DOT]	310
Total resignations	  .
Total retirements and resignations	 1,736
The above figures include retirements and resignations approved by the minister but not yet promulgated as at 31st January, 1944. Also included are 15 ret,cements and 7 resignations of officers of the R.C.A.F. (W.D.).	[DOT]
(iii)	Terms of rehabilitation:
Rehabilitation -benefits for officers include the following:
(4) Rehabilitation grant-30 days' pay, and dependents allowances where applicable, if six months' service has been recorded.
(2) Clothing allowance-no clothing allowance is provided for officers.
(31 Transnortation-transportation with travelling expenses is provided to the noint of enlistment, or to the place of residence at the time of enlistment, or to any point in Canada that can be reached without additional expenditure.


Percy Ellis Wright: I should like to ask the minister a question with respect to medical services Tendered to aircrew injured in Canada. Is there any discrimination as between ranks? It was brought to my attention recently that in an accident a sergeant pilot and a wing commander were injured. The sergeant pilot was placed in the public ward in one of our hospitals, while the wing commander, who was not injured as seriously as the sergeant pilot, was given a private room with a special nurse. I am wondering if that discrimination exists.


Charles Gavan Power: I am inquiring about the answer. I do not know. It may well be that that happens. I shall look into it. Is the hon. member speaking of an accident that happened recently at St. Hubert?


Percy Ellis Wright: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: I shall find out.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: The question I am about to ask may not arise out of this item, but it arises in connection with the minister's state-

War Appropriation-Air Services
ment with regard to the number of Americans discharged from the Canadian air force. How many United States pilots are there in the Canadian air force at the present time?


Charles Gavan Power: I can find out. I think between two thousand and three thousand were returned home. Some are represented as deserters. Some of them have done very well in their own service, but they did not say, "Thank you, good-by," before they left, and they were put down as deserters. I am clearing them up.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: In the casualty lists that we receive there are a great many Americans.


Charles Gavan Power: I can get that figure, but we shall have to subtract from that number the number who have returned to the United States forces. I did have some pretty clear information as to what the number was a couple of years ago, but it has slipped my memory since that time. They were very numerous. I shall put it on the record.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Are musical instruments supplied to the bands? It is very important that we have lots of bands.


Charles Gavan Power: We have lots of bands. I am told by my Scottish and musical friend, the Minister of Pensions and National Health, that we have the best bands in Canada. He ought to know.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I do not agree with the minister; I know of many pipe bands that are a little ahead of that one, though it is a very good band.


Charles Gavan Power: I should say my colleague
was not a good judge of music; he plays the bagpipes.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Some people understand music and others do not; you have to be Scotch to really understand it. I just wanted to know whether these instruments were supplied, because I think it is wondferful to have bands of one kind and another.


Charles Gavan Power: We have bands both here
and overseas.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Do you supply the instruments?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes:


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
6. Signal and wireless equipment, line construction, etc., $34,654,365.
Grote Stirling: Are all these instruments and materials purchased through munitions and supply?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes; everything.


Grote Stirling: Does the minister indicate his preference as to whether these instruments should be purchased in this country or in another country?


Charles Gavan Power: I am told that this signal
and wireless equipment is always purchased in Canada if we can get it here, or in other countries if we have to go there.


Grote Stirling: The minister does not
indicate any preference?


Charles Gavan Power: No.


Grote Stirling: He gives Munitions and
Supply a free hand to supply that which the R.C.A.F. require, according to their specifications?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes; but I would imagine
that in things such as signal1 equipment our technical officers might say that such a gadget was better than another gadget. I really do not know.


Grote Stirling: That was what I wanted to know.


Charles Gavan Power: I think for a long time it
was not a question of indicating where this sort of equipment could be obtained; it was a question of trying to get people to make it. I think that was the great difficulty, and in the earlier stages we were very much bothered with that.


Grote Stirling: A considerable change
took place in the course of last year, I think.


Charles Gavan Power: I would not know; we
simply send our financial encumbrances and our requirements to Munitions and Supply, and they make the purchases.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I think I shall have to crave your indulgence, Air. Chairman, in asking this question; probably I should have asked it under item 2. It has come to my attention that wireless mechanics require anywhere from twelve to fifteen months to finish their course and that they are kept on the basic pay of $1.30 a day until the course is completed, whereas in most other branches of the services the pay is stepped up from $1.30 to $1.40 and then to $1.50 at the end of three or six months. Has the minister given any consideration to stepping up the basic pay of the wireless mechanics at certain periods of their training, on the condition that their progress is satisfactory?


Charles Gavan Power: I am told that all our men
automatically get up to $1.50 after six months service.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Joseph William Noseworthy: Is a wireless mechanic brought up to $1.50 at the end of six months?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, so I am told.


Joseph William Noseworthy: My information is
that they get their first increase when they complete their course.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think that is right, but I shall check into it. My officers tell me that they get their increase after six months, but I shall make sure that this is accurate.


George Hugh Castleden: This afternoon the
minister intimated that he would make a statement in connection with prisoners of war.


Charles Gavan Power: I shall do so when we get a little farther along. I am waiting for it to come from upstairs.


John Ritchie MacNicol: In item 6, at page 394 of Hansard, the words "line construction, etc." appear, but in the typewritten sheet those words are left out. Is line construction included in the word "communications" on the typewritten sheet?


Charles Gavan Power: The same thing is meant, but perhaps they did not consider line construction so important this year, because it is not proposed to build as much as we built last year. We had a very big programme of line construction last year and it is not quite so big this year; we are only completing what has been started. Any change in the phraseology was not done with intent; it is supposed to mean the same thing. This item would cover the construction of lines which we have to carry out this year.


Grote Stirling: But there is a considerable increase in the item.


Charles Gavan Power: That is largely a carryover on account of articles and equipment ordered previously, sometimes as long as two - years ago. There was a very great shortage of manufacturing capacity in connection with signal and wireless equipment. When it started to come in we got a lot of it, and I may be quite frank in telling the committee that we received some that is not of much use to us, since it is almost obsolescent by the time it comes in. This has almost become a problem with us, because developments in reference to wireless are going ahead so rapidly that the production of one particular gadget is just about completed when a better one comes on the market and we almost have to throw away what we thought was the latest thing up to that moment. However,
the increase is largely due to what is coming in now, with the increased productive capacity both here and in the United States.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Have more teletype machines been installed this year?


Charles Gavan Power: That is included in this item, but we only show rentals of teletype machines, no new purchases.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
7.	Ammunition and bombs, $18,175,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Why would there be a reduction in this item when we are just about to enter the most vicious phase of the war?


Charles Gavan Power: This is for Canada only. The bombs and so on that we use on the other side are obtained from the R.A.F. We have a goodly supply of bombs for practice and for our western hemisphere operations in connection with anti-submarine patrols and so on.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Under what item shall we find the estimated amount to be paid for material purchased from the R.A.F.?


Charles Gavan Power: That would come under item 13, covering maintenance of overseas squadrons.


Mr. MARSHALL:: There seems to be a difference between the statement appearing in Hansard and this typewritten statement, as far as 1943-44 is concerned. On the typewritten sheet the amount under this item is $17,000,000, while according to the statement in Hansard it is $23,990,000. Would the minister explain the reason for the difference?


Charles Gavan Power: At page 394 of Hansard we compare last year's estimate with this year's estimate. On the sheet which my hon. friend is holding we compare the probable expenditure under this item with the estimate for 1944-45. That is how the difference arises.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
9.	Fuel costs for aircraft, M.T. and marine craft, $19,892,038.
Gordon Graydon: Is this item for Canada only.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
10.	Aircraft engines and spares, including overhaul, $188,947,545.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Does this cover equipment for paratroopers, too?


Charles Gavan Power: No.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Gordon Knapman Fraser: And gliders?


Charles Gavan Power: I am told we have to provide machines in connection with the training at Shilo, but I do not think we are doing much of it at this time. It has nothing to do with the machines overseas.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: This is just for Canada?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes; this is for Canada. Offhand I cannot say how much we are providing for machines to carry parachutists. That is all we do, in fact; we carry the parachutists to their targets, and drop them.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I
asked the Minister of National Defence and he did not give me an answer. Now the minister does not give me a satisfactory answer.


Charles Gavan Power: I shall find out for my hon. friend. I cannot for the life of me recollect whether or not we may have two, three, four or five aircraft at Shilo, where parachutists were trained at one time. If we have, I shall let my hon. friend know. But that would be the limit of our responsibility in training the paratroopers.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: These other boys go to the United States to train, do they?


Charles Gavan Power: They are army; they have nothing to do with us.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: That is all American?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, it is all American.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Mr. Chairman, I notice that this item provides for an expenditure of more than 3188,000,000 for aircraft engines and spares. We ought to have an explanation of this item. What kind of engines are these? I know they are aircraft engines, but of what particular kind? This is a huge amount of money, and there ought to be some explanation for a sum of that size.


Charles Gavan Power: My hon. friend will see that there is a reduction of about 372,000,000 from 1943. The reduction is accounted for by reduced aircraft requirements, owing to a revision of our defence of Canada plan, because a more favourable situation, and to the end that we shall require no further provisioning of aircraft for the British commonwealth air training plan. We shall have enough aircraft. We have provisioned for, I think, up to 194S or 1946, so that we shall not require to purchase more. Moreover, aircraft contracts have been liquidated more rapidly than anticipated during 1943-44. That is to say, we are getting

in more aircraft than we anticipated, in the fiscal year 1943-44, thereby reducing the amount of long-term liability to be liquidated in 1944-45. But we still have a tremendous amount of aircraft to pay for in 1944-45. Aircraft for training and aircraft for combat units on the coast are included. I do not wish to give numbers, but I think we have reached the stage now in the war where we can to some extent give numbers of aircraft.
The aircraft position for this year shows that the total number to be delivered is 960 aircraft. We now have over 11,000. I shall not give the exact figure, but we have over that number. That is 60 single-engine aircraft, and we have over 5,000. That is only in the air training plan. Of twin-engines we expect delivery of 862, and we have nearly 6,000. That is in the air training plan alone, and does not include the defence of the coasts.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And that is not for
overseas?


Charles Gavan Power: No, not for overseas at all.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: What is the wastage of them?


Charles Gavan Power: I cannot really say-and I do not know whether I should say. In other words, we expect the total of over 900 planes to be delivered this year, and in 1945-46. We have nearly 12,000 already, in the air training plan alone, exclusive of what we need for western hemisphere defence operations, and for overseas. Those figures I do not care to give.


John Ritchie MacNicol: This is a summary for air training alone?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, air training alone.


John Ritchie MacNicol: What types of aircraft are we using now for air training? Up and down the years the minister has told us about the different kinds of aircraft. We have heard a different story every year. What types does this amount cover?


Charles Gavan Power: I would say that we are now using Cornells, chiefly, for elementary training. Then, for single-engine trainers we have Har-vards and Yales. For twin-engine training we use Ansons, Cranes, Oxfords, Beechcraft and Lockheeds. For bombing and gunnery trainers we use Battles, Bolingbrokes, and Lysanders. For wireless trainers we use Forts, Harvards, Yales, Norseman. For single engined transportation we use the Norseman aircraft. For operational trainers we use Hurricanes, Cansos, Liberators, Mitchells, Mosquitoes, Beechcraft, Dakotas, Venturas, Baltimores and Swordfish.

War Appropriation-Air Services


John Ritchie MacNicol: How many of these are made in Canada?


Charles Gavan Power: Cornells and Ansons-and Lysanders were. Bolingbrokes, too, were made here; and Harvard, Norseman, Hurricanes, Cansos and Mosquitos. I believe that is about all.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Is any part of this item of more than $188,000,000 connected with the Department of Munitions and Supply? How much of it is supplied by that department?


Charles Gavan Power: We buy everything from the Department of Munitions and Supply-every cent of it.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Does any of this amount appear in the estimate of the Department of Munitions and Supply, later on?


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think so, no.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Included in this item is an expenditure for aircraft engines and spares. Have we yet undertaken the manufacture in Canada of aircraft engines?


Charles Gavan Power: The answer is no.


Gordon Graydon: To follow up the question by the hon. member, has any move been , made by the government with respect to setting up a plant and the necessary equipment for the purpose of manufacturing aircraft ' engines in Canada?


Charles Gavan Power: I should much prefer that that question be asked of the Department of Munitions and Supply. All I do is use the engines I can get, wherever I can get them and when I can get them. If my hon. friend would ask the Minister of Munitions and Supply, whose job it is to procure these things,
I am sure he would get a much better answer than I can give him.


Gordon Graydon: I am not so sure about that. I only ask the question of the minister because in all our aircraft industry in Canada, and all our development in connection with aircraft manufacturing, the one great bottleneck which will occur, perhaps, in the post-war period is that we shall have to go elsewhere to get the engines. The minister will recall that in a former debate-I am not sure but that it was 1942-the question of replacements and overhaul was stressed as being a very serious problem for the air force. I remember at the time listening with no small degree of gloom to the minister's statement as he uttered it. It seemed to me, a layman, that our position with respect to repairs for the machines we had became a serious matter. Would the minister tell us now whether we
are able to get ample planes, and able at the same time to repair and overhaul them, so that there will be no difficulty as far as our men in training are concerned, and no interruption of that training?


Charles Gavan Power: At one time back in 1941 there was a really acute situation. I expressed the fear in this house, and I had reason to do so, that the opening of some of our schools might have to be delayed and that others might have to curtail their operations owing to lack of spares, No. 1; lack of repair facilities, No. 2, and lack of new planes coming in, No. 3, which probably should be No. 1. We had a critical period for several months, but since then we repaired a lot more of the aircraft in our own establishments. We recruited men, turned out mechanics and put them into our own establishments to do the work. Fortunately we were able to get spares although, as I say, there was a shortage for some considerable time. Aircraft had come in at a greatly accelerated rate. There is no difficulty in securing training aircraft at the present time, except that operational training aircraft, which are of the same type as those used in combat overseas, are hard to come by.


Gordon Graydon: How many hours of flying does a training plane complete before it has a general overhaul?


Charles Gavan Power: There is airframe and engine overhaul. It runs from 800 to 1,200 hours.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: That would vary with the machine?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I think two years ago the figure given was 400 hours.


Charles Gavan Power: That has been raised since.


Mr. POTTIER:: A few moments ago the minister gave the number of training planes. Would that number include those used in the R.A.F. schools?


Charles Gavan Power: The figure of 11,000 or 12,000 would include the planes used in all R.A.F. schools.


James Arthur Ross: How many overhaul
stations are there in Canada, and what portion of this $188,000,000 is for overhauling?


Charles Gavan Power: I cannot say offhand how
many establishments there are for overhauling, but the amount is $41,500,000.


Percy Ellis Wright: Is most of this work done in government- or privately-owned plants?


Charles Gavan Power: This $41,000,000 would be
civilian contractors.

War Appropriation-Air Services


James Arthur Ross: How many contractors are doing this work for the department?


Charles Gavan Power: I get a report every week as to the progress of civilian contractors on overhauls, but I do not happen to have it here. I could put the list of civilian contractors on Hansard. They are arranged for by the Department of Munitions and Supply; I have nothing to do with them except to pay them.


James Arthur Ross: What portion of this
expenditure would be for engine spares? We would then have the break-down of the three items.


Charles Gavan Power: The $41,000,000 is for repairs, The estimated cost of additional aircraft is $19,000,000. The estimated1 cost of additional engines is $6,000,000. The estimated cost of spares for new aircraft and maintaining existing equipment is $17,000,000. That gives a total of $43,000,000. Some equipment, such as guns et cetera, would go in, totalling $830,000. Then there is $32,000,000 for airframe overhaul; $10,000,000 for engine overhaul, giving a total of $43,000,000. From this we deduct the work done in our own repair depots to the extent of $6,000,000 which would give a total of $37,000,000 under the plan, alone. Under western hemisphere operations, the amount for overhaul of airframes is $4,000,000, and for engines, $1,000,000. From that total of $5,000,000 we knock off fourteen per cent for repairs we complete in our own repair depots. That gives a net figure for repairs to engines and airframes for western hemisphere operations of $4,300,000. The cost of aircraft to be purchased during the fiscal year for the British commonwealth air training plan will amount to $11,224,000, and engine spares to be purchased will amount to $934,600.


James Arthur Ross: That is not a very
satisfactory break-down. Surely the minister can give us the totals for aircraft and, for engine spares in addition to the total he has given us for overhaul of some $41,000,000.


Charles Gavan Power: I gave it for aircraft as well. My officers will work it out. The trouble is that it is divided between the western hemisphere operations and the plan.


John Ritchie MacNicol: This item totals $188,-
000,000 and so far we have had but two figures, one of $37,000,000 and another one, $41,000,000. We are not finding any fault, but I think we should have a proper break-down of this $188,000,000.


Charles Gavan Power: As regards the $37,000,000
and the $43,000,000 it was just my mistake in reading the figures. The total cost of airframe overhaul and engine overhaul was $43,000,000,

but we as a service do $6,000,000 worth of work. This is charged to another item as pay and allowances because our own men do the work, so that the total under this item would be $37,000,000.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The minister understands that I am not finding any fault with him because he is really a good minister, but his officials should be able to give him the exact break-down of this figure. That is what they are there for.


Charles Gavan Power: We have lots of figures.


John Ritchie MacNicol: When the minister asks for an expenditure of $188,000,000, his officials should be able to hand him a slip showing the break-down.


Charles Gavan Power: We have it broken down, but in a different way. We have enough mathematicians to give all the break-down possible. I may be able to satisfy my hon. friend in this way.
For the joint air training plan it is estimated that it will cost $67,163,710 for aircraft in 1944-45; for home war, that is western hemisphere operations, $79,292,650; overseas, $1,100,550. That is aircraft for our own use overseas; it has nothing to do with combat aircraft. Then, under the air training plan, overhauls for 1944-45 will cost $37,054,145; overhauls for western hemisphere operations, $4,336,490. Overhauls for overseas are in the total figure. That makes a total of $188,947,545.


John Ritchie MacNicol: There you get the
$188,000,000 odd.


Charles Gavan Power: I was going to break it down still further. For the joint air training plan the total, in round figures, for aircraft and engines is $67,000,000; for overhauls, $37,000,000, making a total of $104,217,000. Then, for western hemisphere operations, aircraft and engines, $79,292,000, and overhauls, $4,000,000, making $83,000,000 in round figures. Then for overseas, for transport aircraft, $1,100,000. That makes a grand total of $188,947,545, which is the figure I started out with. If my hon. friend wants any more break-downs I shall have to see what I can do for him.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The minister has my
sympathy. We have been voting millions so easily and generously from this side of the house that perhaps everybody is getting a little befuddled with the magnitude of the figures.
I wish to ask a question with reference to overhauls. The government has some crown plants making aeroplanes, one at Mal-ton and one out on Dufferin street, Toronto. Those are two very large crown plants.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Clarence Decatur Howe: DeHavilland is not a crown plant.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Has any of the overhauling and repair work been done in crown plants? I understood the minister for air to say a few moments ago that all the overhauling was done by private companies. Why not use some of these huge crown plants for overhauls and repairs?


Charles Gavan Power: DeHavilland is turning out a certain type of fighter aircraft and Malton is turning out bombers.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Repair work interferes with production. It is much more economical to do overhaul work in separate plants. To put overhaul work into production plants interferes with the production line and is very expensive.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I helped operate a big plant for a long time and we did not send our overhauling out to be done.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps you were not very busy.


John Ritchie MacNicol: We had 925 men on our payroll.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We have 8,000 at Malton.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And we paid them out of profits from production in a private plant. We did not have a government to get the money from. It is a different proposition. We had to run it as a business. The minister has been in business, and when he looks back to his own system of operating business he knows very well that he had to pay for his repairs and overhauls out of profits. He would have gone to the wall if he had not done so.


Gordon Graydon: In regard to overhauls and repairs there was a time, not recently perhaps, when Yales and Harvards were overhauled at what is now Victory Aircraft, but that was perhaps when production was being changed over from one type to another.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
11.	Miscellaneous stores and equipment, including machine guns and other armament, $15,992,000.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: The minister said that some of the air fields would be discarded. Is that right?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, but not under this item,
of course.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: This item deals with maintenance, stores and equipment, which would be removed when the air fields were discarded.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes; that would be under care and maintenance. I suppose my hon. friend refers to barracks stores and things of that kind.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: I would hope that my hon. friend the Minister of Pensions and National Health, when he is starting new hospitals or other institutions, would take advantage of the fact that we have spare beds and bed equipment of all kinds which would be suitable in these other institutions.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I have suggested before that he take over some of the staff houses for hospitals.


Charles Gavan Power: I hope he will.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Because after the war they will not be used, and some of them could be taken over right now for hospitals. There might be a chance that under this item the minister might have some old planes and engines. We have some wonderful air cadet corps throughout Canada, and those boys would be tickled to death if they had an aeroplane engine.


Charles Gavan Power: They have got them.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Not all the corps.


Charles Gavan Power: Let my hon. friend ask for one and I shall be glad to give him an aeroplane and an engine any time.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Good! That is fine!


John Ewen Sinclair: Almost all the items of equipment that I can think of are covered by items 5, 10 and 14, and yet here is an item of over $15,000,000 for miscellaneous stores and equipment. Can the minister tell us just what the items are?


Charles Gavan Power: I have a list here: Small arms; A/C machine-gun mountings; ground machine-gun mountings; ordnance and ordnance sights; guns and spares; machine-gun firing gear; machine-gun sights; filling and positioning machine; special tools for armament equipment; armament ground instructional equipment; bomb gear; range finders; Browning guns; miscellaneous electrical stores; cable and wire electrical; aircraft electrical stores-


John Ewen Sinclair: That is enough.


Charles Gavan Power: I have two pages more.


John Ewen Sinclair: It is armament, in other words.

War Appropriation-Air Services
Mr. LOCKHART r Will the chassis of aeroplanes be available to vocational and technical schools as the minister said they would be for cadet corps?


Charles Gavan Power: While I am in a generous mood, because the committee has been very good, and am willing to give away a lot I do not think I would have authority to give away to civilian institutions crown property that belongs to the R.C.A.F., but if my hon. friend will make application for what is required for a vocational training school I shall do the best I can to get it to him somehow. The air cadets, of course, are in a different position. They belong to the air force and it is easy to give them anything.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: 
Charles Gavan Power: Not at the present time.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: It will be handled
through some crown company, I suppose.


Charles Gavan Power: It will be turned over. Perhaps my hon. friend would like me to explain the set-up of surplus asset disposal?


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I shall be glad to have a brief review of the matter. But I would again impress on the minister that there are lots of useful avenues into which such articles as these chassis could be turned instead of being broken up into scrapiron. They would be extreme!}' useful in such places as vocational schools if some arrangement could be made with the provinces.


Charles Gavan Power: That is why I said that it is easy enough for the R.C.A.F. to arrange for the disposal of some of its own stores to one of its own components, namely the air cadet league, but it is not so easy to dispose of them to civilian organizations. We have a new set-up under order in council, namely an assets disposal committee, operating under the Minister of Munitions and Supply, which decides on all policies with regard to surplus

assets. If I have spare aeroplanes, barracks stores, engines, rubbers, shoes, clothing or what-not, they are handed over to the surplus assets committee, which decides on the policy generally to be followed out in disposing of such assets. If it is decided that they shall be disposed of by sale they are handed over to the crown assets corporation, which actually does the selling.


Gordon Graydon: War Assets Corporation.


Charles Gavan Power: War assets. But the committee first deals with the policy. My hon. friend, for instance, would know that certain vocational schools require a certain type of equipment to assist in their training. He vtfould probably ask the air force if he had reason to believe that we have surplus supplies of this kind, and we would pass the request on to the surplus assets committee, which could then say, "Well, in the general interest of the country any of these surplus assets could very well be given to such an organization rather than be held for sale by the crown corporation."


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I just correct that? Crown assets cannot be given away. That has been decided.


Gordon Graydon: The minister for air has beaten you to it. He has given a couple of aeroplanes away already.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Air cadets' property, of course, is still retained in the crown. No one can give away crown property, not even the committee.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I wish to make my
position clear on this matter of giving equipment away. I am not asking for something for nothing, but I would point out that when the war clouds were gathering, before the year 1939, small groups of men banded themselves together and established civilian flying schools in connection with municipal airports, and certain types of aeroplanes, such as antiquated Moth planes, were used, although they were always falling to pieces. I recall that there was some difficulty about getting possession of one or two of these chassis, which proved1 a great inspiration to the young boys who at that time were going through the vocational schools. I cannot substantiate this, but I am reasonably certain that my information is correct, that on two occasions old Moth planes were sold for scrapiron in spite of efforts which were made to have them turned over to groups of boys who were working ip vocational schools and were very much interested in aeroplanes at that time. I suggest to the minister that he make sure that whatever crown organization is formed will not make any difficulties

War Appropriation-Air Services
about dealing with municipal bodies, and will not allow some of these planes of obsolete design to go into scrap when they might be an incentive to the training of the young boys who are coming along and who will do our commercial flying in the days to come. I point out that we did have difficulties a few years ago, just before the war, obstacles owing to what may be called red tape. At least let it be known that some of these obsolete types are available, so that application may be made.


Charles Gavan Power: We are making it known
now that we shall have a lot of them.


Gordon Graydon: With respect to the
matter of disposal of assets such as the minister has described, this matter arose in a similar way when the appropriations relative to the army were before the committee. While I have not personally had any requests from persons in the air force for an opportunity of procuring machines when the war is over, I have one or two requests with respect to the disposal of jeeps to members of the armed forces.


Charles Gavan Power: I want one myself.


Gordon Graydon: Well, the. minister would look pretty good in a jeep. It is a vehicle very appropriate to the minister. I believe that one of the things which men in the air force will want, to do when the war is over is, continue their flying. It would seem- only fair that if aeroplanes are to be disposed of, some of them should be available for the men who want them, provided, of course, they are suitable for use in civilian operations. Has the government any policy in this matter?


Charles Gavan Power: I have known quite a few
officers to say that they would like to buy a small Moth plane or something of the kind to go travelling around in after the war. I assure my hon. friend that there will be, as he can readily understand, surplus aircraft of all sorts and conditions, and that the corporation presided over by my colleague, the Minister of Munitions and Supply, will, I think, be glad to receive offers for air frames before they are broken up, because there would not be much salvage in breaking them. up.


Gordon Graydon: Perhaps I should not delay the _ committee at this time on something which I fancy does fall in the category of the debate which would normally be expected to take place on the War Assets Corporation. Pefhaps I need not proceed any farther with that, but I should like to content myself with this one observation in connection with salvage. Let us not forget
as a parliament and as a government that at the moment the public is ready to spend money if it is spent for war purposes; but the pendulum will swing-


Charles Gavan Power: It has swung already.


Gordon Graydon: Yes, I think the minister is correct in that. The pendulum will swing more and more. The whole question of waste and the utilization of the assets that have been bought is becoming of great importance as far as the public is concerned.
I think the government might well take into consideration the position in which we shall find ourselves with respect to public opinion in that regard. After all, while the public is ready to put money into these things to-day for the purpose of winning the war as speedily as possible, the same public in years to come will be-as the minister says they are now- more alert and more conscious of the disposition that is to be made of those assets once the nation has no further use for them in connection with the war or before they become obsolete or something of that kind occurs. I am hopeful the government will make sure that such economies with respect to salvage-and there are 'a lot of economies possible with respect to salvage that the two ministers now in front of me will readily attest-will be carried out so that the public will not get the idea, as the years roll by, that this material is to be thrown on the market at bargain prices, that no attempt will be made to overhaul it and put it into salable shape; in other words, that the whole matter will 'be let go in a reckless form of abandonment.


John Ritchie MacNicol: A few moments ago the minister referred to the .company. Did I understand him to say that it had been set up? My information is that it has not been set up. The Minister of Munitions and Supply will know. About ten days ago I was in several plants and I saw some surplus equipment. In one of those plants I learned that a company was to be set up, and the gentleman who told, me said that perhaps in a few days it would be brought before parliament. I am heartily in accord with the setting up of a crown company to conserve the vast quantity of equipment which is likely to be a hundred per cent usable and can be resold. I do not suppose the company has been set up. I have heard the names of some of the men who are to be chosen to head that company and they were all first-class men. If the Minister of Munitions and Supply names these men to form the company. I shall be glad to support the

War Appropriation-Air Services
proposal. The minister spoke as if the company had already been set up.


Charles Gavan Power: The order in council is
passed.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I do not want to ask
the Minister of Munitions and Supply if it is so or not until he wishes to announce it. I was under the impression it would be announced in parliament.	[DOT]


Charles Gavan Power: The order in council is passed. I am not sure that the company has actually been incorporated, but the order in council dealing with all this was passed some time ago.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps. I can explain this
a little further. The company has been functioning for about six weeks. It was set up by order in council as a matter of urgency. The surplus problem was becoming rather acute. Later in the session there will be legislation dealing with the whole matter.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That is the information I received. It was said that later on it would be announced in the house. It should have been announced in the house. Parliament has been in session now for four weeks or more.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: What is the item? Mr. MacNICOL: The hon. member says, "the next item." I should like to tell him something. The opposition has supported the government in putting through large sums of money. We could not alter the amounts if we talked for a month, but the minister has been kind and courteous. We have been trying to be kind and courteous, and we have tried to help him put through his estimates. There is no use in saying, "next item."


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I think the hon. member said he wanted to go on with potatoes.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Pardon me. I thought the hon. member said, "next item." I apologize to him now. Let me return to the crown company. The crown company has been set up by order in council but has not been announced in parliament until to-night; at least I have not heard it. I would appreciate it more if it had been brought to parliament earlier. Anyone who knows anything of business knows that such a company would have to be set up, but in courtesy to the House of Commons, it should have been announced here first. I should not have to be told of it in a plant.


Charles Gavan Power: It was set up by order in council before parliament sat. The intention is to put legislation through the house; it 
was set up because the business was getting acute, -and it was thought well to have some little experience in dealing with these surplus assets and getting the whole set-up in good shape before the bill was brought down. The bill ought to be brought down at any time now.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The names that were given to me were all of good men, men who have had experience. I support that.


Charles Gavan Power: It was announced in the speech from the throne that legislation was to be brought down.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Exactly, but it has not come down. Yet the company has been set up and parliament will be asked to support something that has been done.


Mr. ILAZEN:: What are the positions in civil life of the members of the crown
company?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I do not remember. I think there are twelve directors. I shall be glad to give my hon. friend a partial list from memory. I shall be glad to get the information and give it at a later date if that is satisfactory.


Douglas King Hazen: I happened to hear this matter discussed briefly not long ago, and the suggestion that was made that there should be among the directors a man who was engaged in the retail business. Are there any men like that on the board?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes. Originally the list did not contain men from the retail trades, but that has been corrected in the last two or three weeks. We asked the retail organizations to nominate a panel of men, and we chose one from that panel. He has now been added to the board. I think the situatioa has been rectified.


Mr. NOSE WORTHY:: Is it not correct that that company has already been disposing of some of the equipment?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, it has sold nothing at the moment. The committee delivered certain material to it within the last week, I think, but the company has actually sold nothing up to this time.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I wrote the department several weeks ago with reference to a serious complaint about tents being sold. I received a reply saying that it was not tents that had been sold but that mill ends of tent canvas had been sold. The company must be operating, and the public are a little bit concerned about the disposition of certain material

War Appropriation-Air Services
which they seem to think will go into the junk piles. I urge upon both ministers-


Charles Gavan Power: Would my hon. friend say *whether that was army tents?


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I cannot tell where
these tents might have been used.


Charles Gavan Power: I understand that this has
to do with raw material, which hardly has to dio with air force estimates. ,


John Ewen Sinclair: Hear, hear.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Oh, that "hear, hear"
stuff is all right.


John Ewen Sinclair: What has this to do with the air force?


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: It has to do with disposing of surplus materials. Do not get overanxious.	.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Prior to the establishment of
the disposal company each branch had some means of selling its surplus waste material. The army had its disposal branch; my department had its branch; other departments had their branches, and it was sold through that channel, not through the crown company.


Joseph William Noseworthy: There are two
features in this connection I should1 like to bring to the minister's attention, though perhaps I might do so more properly later on. In the first place there are a great many boys in the air force who have received mechanical training and who would like an opportunity to acquire some of this equipment in order to establish themselves when they return to civil life. There is a concern felt that this may be all disposed of to civilian employers or others before these men return, and it is believed that their need should be taken into consideration and an attempt made to see that they have an opportunity to share in the purchase of some of these items. The second point is that a vast quantity of this material would be invaluable to the schools that will train or retrain some of these boys. I would suggest that before any plans are made for the disposal of this material the educational authorities should be consulted, to the end that any of this equipment that may be used in schools for the education of the boys who come back, and to extend vocational training among the general school population, should be kept for that purpose, and that this matter should receive first consideration before this equipment is disposed of.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
12.	Flying training contracts, $29,345,667.
Ernest Edward Perley: Would the minister give us a break-down of this item, giving the reason for the increase of $2,500,000? I should also like to know how many of these training schools are operated in Canada and particularly in Saskatchewan; what the contract terms are, and what profits these companies may make under their contracts.


Charles Gavan Power: The contract is very long
and my hon. friend has a copy of it; he asked for it last year. There are sixteen elementary and eight air observer schools in Canada. In Saskatchewan there are elementary schools at Prince Albert, Regina, Davidson and Assini-boia. There were air observer schools at Regina and Prince Albert, but they have been closed.


Ernest Edward Perley: What are the terms of the contract, and what profits are allowed to be made? Has there been any particular change in the contract in the last year?


Charles Gavan Power: They are still on a no-profit basis. Certain changes were made. Operation and maintenance expenses are paid to civilian operators on the basis of schedules which have been prepared, and take into account estimated normal expenditures for each type and size of school. In the event that the actual expenditure for a given period is less than the target expenditure, eighty per cent _ of the saving reverts to the Royal Canadian Air Force and twenty per cent is retained by the company. The amount retained by the company cannot be distributed but must be held in reserve account until the termination of the contract. Similarly, in the event that actual expenditure exceeds the target, eighty per cent is repaid by the Royal Canadian Air Force and twenty per cent must be charged by the contractor to the afore-mentioned reserve account. The disposition of reserve accounts at the expiration of contracts will be made as follows: E.F.T.S. balances will be paid to flying clubs approved by the minister or will revert to the crown. I may tell my hon. friend that many of the E.F.T.S. were offshoots of certain civilian flying clubs; if they make any profits they may, with the permission of the minister, pay those over to the flying clubs, not to be used for any individual members but to be used by the clubs, and if there is no such club they revert to the-crown. With regard to the air observer schools, all the profits and balances go to the crown. ,


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: What percentage is permitted to those who put their money into the original set-up?

War Appropriation-Air Services


Charles Gavan Power: They were getting 5 per cent, but as far as elementary schools are concerned, we have bought them all out.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Would the minister give the committee a complete list of the centres at which these contracts were made, the types of schools, the holders of the contracts, and the estimated cost of each contract?


Charles Gavan Power: I believe that information was given last year, but I shall be glad to give _ it again.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
IS. Maintenance of overseas squadrons, $345,664,964.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Would the minister break this down? I notice that it is up by about $12,000,000.


Charles Gavan Power: We have extra squadrons. Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West): I know that.


Charles Gavan Power: And we have converted to newer and better aircraft.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: This is all paid to the British government.


Charles Gavan Power: The purpose of this item represents a provision for maintenance costs relating to the operation of Royal Canadian Air Force overseas squadrons, together with pertain ancillary units, formed for service in , conjunction with the Royal Air Force. Provision is made herein for all maintenance costs, with the exception of the items of pay, dependents' allowance and clothing which are shown separately in estimates under the appropriate headings of pay and allowances, and personnel supplies and services, respectively.
This item also includes, in addition to maintenance costs, a provision for the initial capital costs for the equipment of certain Royal Canadian Air Force squadrons to be established overseas during the first few months of the 1944-45 fiscal period.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: That includes aircraft, too?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, it applies to aircraft. Arrangements have been completed recently with the air ministry of the United Kingdom whereby six additional Royal Canadian Air Force Squadrons will be established overseas by the transfer of certain complete squadrons at present organized in Canada for operation within the home war establishment. We shall have to buy planes for those six, too.
The present and future strength of the Royal Canadian Air Force overseas squadrons in accordance with present operational plans

would be, roughly, forty-four squadrons, divided into heavy bomber squadrons, fighter squadrons and coastal command squadrons. Heavy bomber squadrons, of course, cost more money, because the bombers are very expensive.
Provision has been made in the 1944-45 estimates for the above-mentioned squadrons, together with ancillary units as follows:
Capital charges, six squadrons_ $ 13,667,285
Maintenance, forty-four squadrons. 327,353,125
These tw6 figures make a total of $341,020,410. Then, ancillary units include personnel reception centre; personnel disposal centre; bomber group headquarters; bomber group communication flight and fighter reconnaissance wing, and total $4,644,554. The grand total is $345,664,964.
These charges include only the capital cost of aircraft required for the initial equipment and immediate reserve of the six additional squadrons to be established during 1944-45, together with the cost of unit equipment for these squadrons. Unit equipment represents aircraft handling equipment and other important items which are taken on the charge of each particular squadron, and normally move with the squadron from station to station.
Maintenance charges are billed to Canada quarterly by. the United Kingdom air ministry on the basis of annual squadron charges which are dependent upon the type of aircraft and the operational role in which aircraft are employed by the Royal Canadian Air Force squadrons. The basis of squadron charges and the elements of cost included therein have been carefully reviewed in the United Kingdom by responsible Royal Canadian Air Force officers, and are considered to be fair and reasonable in accordance with past experience and available information. Arrangements have been made whereby squadron charges will be reviewed annually for the purpose of making any necessary adjustments which may be required as a result of new conditions.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Last
year the minister said he was buying helicopters.


Charles Gavan Power: They are not included. We did not buy them.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Are salaries included in this item?


Charles Gavan Power: No. They were in the second item.


John Ritchie MacNicol: This is all the equipment and it includes that in Italy, North Africa and at every point where Canadians are engaged.


Charles Gavan Power: Wherever there are Canadian squadrons.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

War Appropriation-Air Services
H. Sundries, including printing, stationery, telephones, telegrams, teletype rentals and other costs not included in above items, $8,981,443.
James Arthur Ross: What portion of this is for air cadets? Is it expected that authority will be granted the air cadets to fly? That [DOT]matter has been discussed lately. If, as the minister has said, he is going to let these local units have some aircraft, I trust they will be able to use them.


Charles Gavan Power: The amount included for air cadets is $1,012,480. The question whether or not we could allow these air cadets to fly in their two weeks' training is one which, I am frank to say, is giving me a great deal of concern. Sometimes I feel like saying yes, and more often I feel like saying no. Frankly, last year I was inclined to agree, and to obtain a waiver from the parents. Shortly before that, however, we had several severe accidents in training-not the cadets, of course; I am referring to our own airmen. I received a flood of letters from parents of boys who were in training, blaming us for the equipment, or the maintenance, or carelessness of people. The result was that I changed my mind with respect to the cadets. I thought that if we were to be blamed for the accidental deaths of men actually in training, whose job it is to take those risks, we might be blamed far more by parents of boys of fifteen or sixteen years. Even though the parents might sign a waiver, they might complain. That is the state of mind I am in this year.
Last year, over and above all this, there was the very good reason that we would not have had the time. This year, with more schools- although some of them will not be schools until later on-and with more instructors available, it would have been possible. But there is a risk involved. A great many parents might sign a waiver, but if the boy of certain parents were unfortunately killed or badly injured as a result of an aeroplane accident, the parents would never forgive either the minister or the air force for having given their boy a chance. I am open to conviction [DOT]either way on the subject.


James Arthur Ross: I agree with the minister that this is a very important decision to make. However, it is a live question. There is no decrease anticipated in the cadet programme ?


Charles Gavan Power: No.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Before the Minister of Munitions and Supply leaves the chamber, I would point out that he said there was nothing disposed of by this company.


Charles Gavan Power: I can answer that. That was one reason why the company was formed. Normally, as the minister says, each department disposed of its own, through a salvage officer, who is an officer under control of the treasury. We had a certain -number of surplus aeroplanes, and we had to hand them over to the salvage officer. He called for tenders, and the only tenders he could get were for this small amount. It was after we went through this experience-although we had been thinking of it for some time- that it was borne in upon my mind just what the situation was. One of my officers said that the disposal of surplus assets would become one of the greatest rackets since the invention of loaded dice, unless someone took charge of it pretty soon.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: It was, after the last war.


Charles Gavan Power: Therefore we got to work. I asked my officers; other ministers who were likely to have large surplus assets asked their officers, and we evolved the present set-up which will be placed before the house by way of legislation. The answer which my hon. friend has indicates just what would happen if this surplus equipment were left to disposal by the calling for tenders. It is not my baby, it belongs to the surplus assets corporation. I became interested at some stage of the matter because we found that to dispose of assets of this kind by simply calling for tenders would get us into all kinds of trouble and lose much money for the country.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: There is about a million dollars for air cadets; how is that sum arrived at?


Charles Gavan Power: Does my hon. friend want it on Hansard, or shall I read it? It provides for instructors, travelling and transportation, clothing, miscellaneous stores, ammunition, targets, rifle cleaning materials and certain medical services.


Grote Stirling: That is all included in the million dollars?


Charles Gavan Power: The amount is $1,012,480.


Grote Stirling: Where does the money go in the case of a typical corps in one of our towns?


Charles Gavan Power: The officers are paid for fourteen days summer camp with a maximum of fifty-five days in the year. The average rate is $4 a day.


Grote Stirling: W'ould there be one officer to a corps?

1234	COMMONS
War Appropriation-Air Services


Charles Gavan Power: They have a larger establishment than that. I believe it calls for over
2.000	officers.
. Mr. STIRLING: How many corps are there?


Douglas Gooderham Ross: How many cadets?


Charles Gavan Power: There are between 29,000 and 30,000 cadets, in 367 squadrons.


Grote Stirling: And there would be several officers in each squadron?


Charles Gavan Power: They would average probably a little more than three. My recollection is that there are three to a squadron of fifty, and as the numbers in the squadron go up there would be more officers.


Grote Stirling: There would be from
1.000	to 1,200 officers receiving this pay for the fortnight camp, plus fifty-five days?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: How are they distributed across the country?


Charles Gavan Power: I think they are in every province.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: By military districts?


Charles Gavan Power: They would be distributed by our six commands.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Are the cadets paid when they go to camp?


Charles Gavan Power: No.


Grote Stirling: The cost of transportation is paid?


Charles Gavan Power: We pay the transportation; it averages about $3. The total cost is estimated as $66,900.


Grote Stirling: That is taking the corps to the summer camps?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, to and from the
camps.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: When the minister was talking about the dangers of flying did he have in mind that these lads might fly with instructors?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Several of these
boys have spoken to me and they are extremely anxious to have a flight. Would it be possible to have some of them taken up?


Charles Gavan Power: The latest proposal is that
it be done on the basis of merit, but I cannot guarantee that there will not be any 
accidents. It does not matter whether they go up with the best instructor in the world, in the best plane in the world., there may be an accident because flying is a dangerous game. If the committee is strongly of one opinion or another I should like to get its adivice on the matter.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: They take the same chances riding in automobiles and perhaps they are safer up in the air than they would be driving along some of our roads. This would be a great, stimulus to the cadets.


Mr. GLADSTONE:: Could I have some
information about the graduating schools of the R.C.A.F.?


Charles Gavan Power: Aircrew on graduating may
obtain further instructions in their duties as commissioned officers or as non-commissioned officers. Four schools have been established within the last two months and three are now operating. There are schools at Maitland, Three Rivers, Valleyfield, and one at Calgary will be opened on March 10. The hon. member for Yorkton asked this afternoon about the policy with regard to commissioning and promoting prisoners of war. The policy 'regarding the commissioning of R.C.A.F. personnel, provides for the commissioning of a non-commissioned officer prisoner of war provided there is no adverse report in existence and no adverse circumstances surrounding his capture if (a) he has attained the 60-60-70 standard on graduation, having been graduated prior to the inauguration of this standard or (b) he has been recommended by his unit commander prior to date of capture.


Gordon Graydon: What does the minister
mean by adverse circumstances?


Charles Gavan Power: Disgraceful circumstances;
provided there are no adverse circumstances, provided a man did not just go and give himself up. As a flyer that is not very likely because he just comes down; he does not give himself up.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Earlier in the evening the minister undertook to look into the question, of the pay of wireless mechanics.


Charles Gavan Power: I can answer that on Hansard in reply to a question on the order paper if my hon. friend puts it in that way.


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: Does the
Canadian government accept responsibility when damage is occasioned to someone by a member of the R.A.F. driving a motor car? Supposing a man in Canada sustains personal injuries or property damage because of the

Supply-Agriculture
operation of a motor car by a member of the R.A.F. in the course of his duty, has he a right of action against the Canadian government, or has he to proceed against the British government? .


Charles Gavan Power: My hon. friend knows that
has been a matter of discussion between the lawyers of the Department of Justice and, I think, his department and ours. An attempt has been made to arrive at a conclusion as to what should be done in connection with claims against persons belonging to other forces. I took part in these discussions, but I cannot say what the order in council which was eventually passed contains. My hon. friend will probably know better than I.


William Chisholm Macdonald: I want to
know what a man can do who is injured through the actions of a member of the R.A.F. while carrying out his duties in Canada.


Charles Gavan Power: I believe all three services
are bound by the same order in council, but I cannot just say what it contains.


William Chisholm Macdonald: I know it is generally recognized that there is some responsibility on the part of the Canadian government, but I have not been able to find out how the man who is injured can get redress, or to whom he should look for payment or whom he sues if the matter has to go to litigation. I should like to know what course he is to take.


Charles Gavan Power: An order in council has been passed, but I do not know just what its provisions are.


Mr. WEIR:: A few moments ago the minister announced a policy in the matter of commissions with respect to R.C.A.F. personnel who might become prisoners of war. Can he inform the committee similarly with regard to Canadian personnel in the R.A.F. who may become prisoners of war?


Charles Gavan Power: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Gordon Graydon: Before progress is reported may I make this clear? I presume the minister still has some queries to answer with respect to his war estimates.


Charles Gavan Power: I think they are nearly all cleared up.


Gordon Graydon: My impression was that
some were outstanding. We are anxious to preserve our rights with respect to those. I hope, therefore, that it will not be understood that the minister has cleared himself 100-78i
completely as far as his war appropriations are concerned until those questions are answered, and that supplementary comment may be made later.


Charles Gavan Power: If it is satisfactory I could answer any queries that are outstanding, during the discussion of the navy war appropriations, which will be coming on in the next two or three days. But I am in the hands of the committee. I have done very well so far, and I am not complaining a bit.


Gordon Graydon: No; I do not think the minister should, but I am anxious that the discussion shall not be regarded as closed in case there is something we wish to bring up at the time the minister provides the outstanding answers. While it may be most convenient and expeditious to have the navy go on at the next sitting, I wish to reserve our rights as I have already indicated.


Charles Gavan Power: Quite.
Progress reported:


Thomas Alexander Crerar: If the house is agreeable we might go on with supply, agriculture. It would require unanimous consent to go into supply again to-day.

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



DEPAETMENT OP AGRICULTURE

[Stage Direction]
Science service-
6.	Animal and poultry pathology, $147,300.
Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) Mr. Chairman, we had considerable discussion on this item the other evening, and if there are no further questions we might proceed to the next item.
Item agreed to.
Science service-;
7.	Bacteriology and dairy research, $44,620.
Mr. GARDINER:: The purpose of the vote is to provide for bacteriological research and in cooperation with other divisions and services research into soil fertility, crop production, milk production, technical problems in milk processing and the manufacture of dairy products, utilization and preservation of foodstuffs, utilization of agricultural byproducts and work in connection with standards of products within the scope of the department.
Supply-Agriculture


Mr. BRYCE:: Does the cost of the milk
production survey in Manitoba come under this item?


James Garfield Gardiner: I have not a report on the Manitoba investigation, but I might say that the question of finding a practical procedure for determining the bacteriological quality of raw milk is of importance to the whole dairy industry and of aid in improving the supply. Increasing interest is being taken in the reduction test, and attention is being given to details of technique with the idea of increasing the usefulness of this test, which appears to have many advantages over the older methylene blue test. Many points have still to be considered, including that concerned with an examination of the dyes so that the test can be standardized.


William Scottie Bryce: Have they taken into consideration the cost of the production of milk in the western provinces?


James Garfield Gardiner: That does not come under this.


Mr. TUSTIN:: Last year the agricultural food board designated where milk should go, whether to cheese factories or to conden-series. I have had a good many complaints recently from farmers who have had to send their milk to cheese factories. Last fall, when usually a number of factories would be closed, a subsidy was placed on milk for cheese factories, and consequently a number were kept open during the winter months. The complaint that I have from a good many farmers' in my constituency is that the price of milk going to the cheese factories is not comparable with the price of milk going to condenseries. There is a good, deal of dissatisfaction over that and a number of farmers appealed to me just over the week-end, saying that they had applied to the agricultural food board to be allowed to change over from sending their milk to the cheese factory but were refused permission to ship it to the condenseries. I have in my office a table which was prepared over the week-end, showing the difference in the amount the farmer receives according to whether his milk is shipped to a cheese factory or to a condensery. I have not it here because I did not know this item was coming up to-night. If I remember the figures correctly, a man who had twelve or fifteen cows last year showed me by a table that he had lost almost S200 by having to ship his milk to a cheese factory when he could have shipped it to a condensery if the food board had given him permission. On top of that, over the last

several months the condensery plant at Napanee has been shipping a good deal of milk to the city of Toronto for distribution, and all the milk shipped from there to the city of Toronto pays a premium to the farmer of twenty-five cents a hundred. So that the farmers, if they had been allowed to ship the milk to Toronto for distribution, would have benefited to that much greater extent. I appeal to the minister to give this matter consideration, because it is of much concern to the farmers. I should be glad to let the minister have the table I have in my office or present it to the committee at a later stage.


James Garfield Gardiner: That would not come under this item. As a matter of fact, it would hardly come under any item in the main estimates, since the authority which we have to deal with that comes from the War Measures Act and the moneys provided come under the war appropriation. But I would be pleased to discuss the matter at that time.
This particular item has to do with scientific investigation of the qualities of milk and the treatment of milk as against different bacteria and things of that kind. It is just the scientific treatment of milk itself.


Mr. SENN:: I understand that the different uses to which the by-products of milk might be applied could be investigated under this item. For instance, the use of whey. Whey comes from the production of cheese. In some instances it is worth quite a considerable amount for feed; but if it gets too sour, if it is not properly cared for after the cheese is made, it is not nearly so valuable. Then there are the other by-products of the manufacture of butter, such as skim' milk powder and casein, and the different manufacturing outlets which I suppose should be investigated to see how much the price of them does add to. the value of the milk. However, if I am in the wrong category I do not want to continue.


James Garfield Gardiner: All the research in connection with the fact that bacteria exist in the different products of milk comes under this particular item. I am not so sure that the values of milk as defined by the hon. member would come under this item. For example, the first matter dealt with is methods for measuring the quality of raw milk; next, care of milking machines, methods of taking care of them in order to avoid bacteria getting into the milk; surface deterioration in storage butter; the cause and remedy of discoloration in print butter; winter flavour in creamery butter; rancid flavour in Cheddar cheese; the

Supply-Agriculture
matter of studies on clarification of milk for Cheddar cheese making. These are the chief items under which discussion comes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Science service-
8.	Botany and plant pathology, $312,520.
Gordon Graydon: I know that the item
has been carried with respect to dairy research, but there is one matter to which I wish to refer. In the mines and resources estimates, under "national research council," a rather large sum of money, something over $300,000, is being appropriated, as the minister indicated at the beginning of his estimates, for research on agricultural matters. This dairy research, together with bacteriological and dairy research, as proposed1 under the increased vote indicated in the mines and resources estimates, will then be carried on under the auspices of the national research council. Does it not raise the whole question whether the council is the organization under which money voted for agricultural research should be expended? The minister will find himself, I believe, with research being done in the national research council under a vote in the mines and resources estimates, and he will also be saddled with another research branch having to do with problems of bacteriology and dairying. This matter was brought up before and received some attention in the discussion. I am inclined to think that those who took part favoured the retention in the Department of Agriculture of the research facilities which were being thus'expanded. If the minister would give an explanation in this connection it would be helpful.


James Garfield Gardiner: It will not affect at all the matter of research as it is spoken of here. This has always been carried on in the Department of Agriculture under its usual activities, and will so continue. But there was a vote of $200,000 put in the agriculture estimates last year, in a supplementary vote, which was set apart for the purpose of doing certain research, more particularly in connection with oil-producing plants and the growing of different products particularly in the west and the extreme east. That vote does not appear in the estimates as they now are. It is my intention again to submit a $200,000 item to the treasury board and to the government in connection with our supplementaries this year in the hope that it will be continued. I am not now in a position to state whether it will
be continued or not. But there is an item, as has been suggested, of something over $325,000 in the Department of Trade and Commerce to carry on certain research. It is not this type of research: it is to try to find new uses, namely commercial uses, for different farm products, such as the utilization of wheat in the making of rubber. It may be that not much money will be spent on that particular object, but it will be things of that type- using wheat or grains for some other purpose -and a vote of that kind does not interfere with this one.


Gordon Graydon: The minister is satisfied that it should be left with the national research council?	'


James Garfield Gardiner: I am satisfied that some of it has to be. That which is associated closely with industry is probably better left with the national research council. Where .the question is whether one can produce some particular type of plant in a certain area of Canada, I think it should be investigated by the Department of Agriculture, and the same may be said of projects such as the crossbreeding of plants to determine whether one can get better varieties for growing in this country.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: A new type of experimentation has been going on in the preservation of meat and the sterilization of milk and so on by electronics. Is that being undertaken by the National research council? Probably the question would come under the item affecting the research council, not the Department of Agriculture.


James Garfield Gardiner: On all that kind of research we work in cooperation with the national research council. We ask them to do work for us and they do it. That was the intention in setting up the council, that all the research work which could be done by the ' research council would be done for all departments of government, and our department, in common with all others, gets as much done as we possibly can.


Gordon Graydon: Mr. Chairman, let us be clear. The item which was carried before was item 7, but the minister was good enough to allow me to ask a supplementary question. That item is carried, but not item 8. Item 7 having been carried, let us call it eleven o'clock.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Rules of the House
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, March 7, 1944