1944-04-27

[Stage Direction]
Mr. J. J. McCANN (Renfrew South) presented the second report of the special committee on radio broadcasting, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.
2374	COMMONS
Grain-Government Marketing Policy

[Stage Direction]
Mr. W. A. FRASER (Northumberland) presented the first report of the standing com-mitte on public accounts, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.

Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I desire at this time to make a brief statement in connection with some aspects of the 1944-45 grain policy.
The house will recall that last September a major change was made in wheat policy and a basis was established, effective until July 31, 1945, which of course includes the full crop year 1944-45. At that time the fixed initial price of wheat was increased to $1.25 per bushel for No. 1 northern wheat in store, Fort William, Port Arthur or Vancouver. This fixed initial price will be in effect for the coming crop year.
In regard to the wheat policy for 1944-45, the government has yet to determine the quantity of wheat which will be marketable in that crop year. Members will recall that for
1943-	44 the limitation was first placed at fourteen bushels per authorized acre and was later increased to eighteen bushels per authorized acre-the understanding being that about 280,000,000 bushels of wheat would be marketable in western Canada during the present crop year.
The government is not prepared at the moment to state the exact quantity of wheat which will be marketable in the coming crop year, owing to the uncertainties of the growing crop and uncertainty in respect to the volume of transportation which will be available for the movement of grains in 1944-45. In establishing the basis of marketings for the coming crop year, which will be announced at a later date, the government will take into account probable domestic and export demand in
1944-	45 as well as the volume of grain which the railroads and elevators can handle during the crop year.
I can say at this time that the demand for grain both in Canada and for export is now running at veTy high levels and that the volume of wheat which will be marketable in 1944-45 will be considerably larger than the limitation in effect during the past two crop years.
I might refer briefly to the present grain position. Accumulated stocks of wheat are

moving rapidly into consumption here and abroad and the main problem to-day is meeting demand with the transportation which is available for the movement of grain. It is estimated that the carry-over of wheat next July will amount to about 330,000,000 bushels as compared to over 600,000,000 bushels last July. Given adequate transportation the crop year 1944-45 will see our wheat stocks reduced to a nominal figure. Oats and barley are in good demand and there will be no difficulty in disposing of surpluses from the 1944 crop. The expansion in the acreage seeded to these grains in recent years has been more than justified by marketings and the Department of Agriculture is urging that seeding of at least as great an acreage as in 1944.
The government's policy in regard to oats and barley for 1944-45 will be the same as in 1943-44. Minimum prices for these grains will be. guaranteed on the same basis as in 1943-44. Equalization funds will again operate and the government will make advance payments free from the equalization funds at the time of delivery. The advance payments are ten cenits per bushel for oats and fifteen cents per bushel for barley.
The government has already announced that there will be a guaranteed price for flax of $2.75 per bushel for No. 1 CW flax, basis in store Fort William and Port Arthur or Vancouver. This represents an increase of twenty-five cents per bushel over the guaranteed price in effect in 1943-44.
Respecting sunflower seed and rape seed the government's policy for the 1944-45 crop year is to continue in effect the prices for these seeds established for the 1943^44 season. That is to say, the Canadian wheat board will be authorized to pay five cents per pound for sunflower seed and six cents per pound for rape seed, delivered f.o.b. shipping points to be designated by the board for the top grades.


Mr. DONNELLY:: The minister mentioned a quota for wheat of eighteen bushels per acre. Can he tell us the quotas for oats and barley?


James Angus MacKinnon: At
the present time the quotas are open.


Mr. PERLEY:: The minister has announced prices for all grains for 1944. Does that mean that this is to take the place of the proposed bill to establish floor prices?


James Angus MacKinnon: This has nothing to do with the legislation concerning floor prices which will be introduced by the Minister of Agriculture.


Mr. WRIGHT:: Has the government considered increasing the premium on malting barley?

Questions


James Angus MacKinnon: There is nothing on that point to be announced now.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weybum):: How soon does the minister expect to be able to announce what the actual quota will be for the 1944-45 crop?


James Angus MacKinnon: That matter has been the subject of a great deal of consideration, and it is receiving consideration at the present time. I cannot say now just when any definite announcement will be made.


James Lester Douglas: The quota will naturally affect the amount of grain which the farmer will want to store.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	How many income tax offices are there in Canada?
2.	Where are they located?
3.	How many employees are there in each of these offices?
4.	How many employees are there in the main office in Ottawa?
5.	What was the total salary of all these employees in 1943?
0.	What was the total amount of income tax collected in 1943?


Mr. GIBSON:: 1.	Nineteen district offices; six sub-offices.
2.	and 3.:
Halifax	 173
Charlottetown	 27
Saint John	 105
Quebec	 157
Montreal	 933
Ottawa	 482
Kingston	 39
Belleville	 52
Toronto	 800
Hamilton	 476
Sub-offices of:
Brantford	 5
Kitchener	 6
St. Catharines	 4
London	 244
Sub-offices of:
Stratford	 2
Windsor	 5
Fort William	 47
Winnipeg	 305
Regina	 91
Saskatoon	 69
Calgary	 120
Edmonton	 75
Vancouver	 512
Sub-office of:
Victoria	 12
Dawson	 2
4.	382.
5.	Calendar year 1943 - $6,232,608.27.
6.	Fiscal year 1943-44 - $1,635,494,706.37.


MILITARY DISTRICT NO. 3
Mr. DORION:: 1.	What territory comprises military district No. 3?
2.	What counties of the provinces of Quebec and Ontario are included in such military district ?
3.	What is the population of each of sue! counties?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: 1,	2 and 3:	Population
according to
In the province of Ontario	the 1941
County	census
Carleton	 202,520
Frontenac	 53,717
Haliburton	 6,695
Hastings	 63,322
Lanark	 33,143
Leeds and Grenville	 52,031
Lennox and Addington	 18,469
Northumberland and Durham .... 56,001
Peterborough	 47,392
Prescott and Russell	 42,709
Prince Edward	 16,750
Renfrew	 54,720
Stormont	 40,905
Dundas and Glengarry	 34,742
Victoria	 25,934
That portion of the district of Nipissing lying south of the Mattawa river (exclusive of the townships of Ferris and Bonfield and inclusive of the town of Mattawa)	 4,813
In the province of Quebec The area comprising the county, city and town municipalities as they existed on the first day of
April, 1939, as follows:
County
Gatineau	 29,754
Hull	 41,434
Pontiac and Temiscamingue	 60,323
City
Hull	 32,947
Town
Aylmer	 3,115
Mercier (annexed to Rouyn town April 28, 1939)
Noranda	 4,576
Rouyn	 8,808
Temiscamingue	 2,168
Questions


CHRISTIE STREET HOSPITAL
Mr. WHITE:: 1.	What is the total bed capacity a>t Christie street hospital, (a) for officers; (b) for other ranks; (e) for women?
2.	What is the largest number of patients at one time in the hospital since September, 1939?
3.	How many patients from the war of 1914-18 are now at this hospital?
4.	What is the total permanent staff, (a) medical officers; (b) graduate nurses; (c) nurses in training; (d) orderlies; (e) administrative staff; (f) other members of staff?
5.	Is there a temporary staff? If so, how many are on the temporary staff, and in what capacity?


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: 1.	(a), (b) and (c) The normal bed capacity, including the Red Chevron, is 1,370. No premises are specifically assigned for officers or women, but appropriate accommodation is provided as occasion demands.
2.	1,151.
3.	304.
4.	(a) full time, 15; part time, 9; (b) 36;
(c)	nil; (d) 59; (e) 14; (f) 45.
5. (a) full time, S; part time, 10; (b) 115; (c) nil; (d) 137; (e) 28; (f) 141. Classified as in 4.
Note.-The terms "permanent" and "temporary," as applicable to answers 4 and 5, are given the same meaning as in the civil service regulations.


WEATHER ANNOUNCEMENTS-NEW BRUNSWICK
Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	Are the restrictions regarding announcing the weather still in effect in New Brunswick?
2.	If so, why?
Mr. LaFLECHE:	'	-
1.	They are still in effect.
2.	Because this information would be of benefit to the enemy.


EXPORTS OF SPRUCE AND POPLAR PULPWOOD
Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	What quantity of spruce and poplar pulpvood was exported from the province of Ontario ;o the United States during the years 1942, 1943 and 1944?	[DOT]
2.	At what price per cord was this wood sold?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	Pulp wood originating in Ontario and exported to the United States was as follows:

Calendar Year
Spruce (rough cords)..,	1942 . 636,278	To Mar. 31, 1943 1944 491,039 29,198	Poplar (rough cords)..	. 155,112	129,367	28,137Jack pine (rough cords)..	. 125,915	34,030	2,453917,305	654,436	59,7882.	This information is not available. The prices paid by United States customers for Ontario pulpwood are not covered by Canadian price ceiling regulations and are the result of negotiations between the supplier and the purchaser.


AIR RAID PRECAUTIONS-NEW BRUNSWICK
Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	Does the A.R.P. still function in New Brunswick?
2. If so, who is the director in New Brunswick?
3.	How many blackouts were ordered in New Brunswick in 1943-44?
4.	By whom were the blackouts ordered?
5.	What was the cost of A.R.P. in New Brunswick, M.D. No. 7?


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: 1.	Yes.
2.	The chairman of the provincial civil defence (A.R.P.) committee of New Brunswick is Hon. J. B. McNair, K.C., premier and attorney-general of the province. The director of civil defence for New Brunswick is D. L. Maclaren, Esq., Saint John, N.B.
3.	Two province-wide and twenty-seven local or area blackouts.
4.	By the chairman of the provincial civil defence (A.RF.) committee, under powers delegated to him by the Minister of Pensions and National Health under authority of regulation 35, defence of Canada regulations.
5.	The cost to the dominion government of A.R.P. in New Brunswick during the fiscal year 1943-44 was as follows: Cash grant to province to meet costs of administration of civil defence (A.R.P.), $39,210.
Special equipment and supplies (including fire-fighting equipment, medical and first aid equipment and supplies, anti-gas protective clothing and equipment, and personal equipment for civil defence workers), the estimated total cost of which is $103,193.40, was issued on loan to the New Brunswick provincial civil defence committee for re-issue on loan to local civil defence committees in municipalities and

Questions
districts in which civil defence organizations have been established. This equipment remains the property of the dominion government and is subject to recall.


PARK STEAMSHIPS COMPANY-CARGO SHIPS
Mr. REID:: 1.	How many cargo ships have been turned over to the Park Steamships Company Limited?
2.	How many of these have been given out
te charter ?	_
3.	What companies, individuals or firms have
been allowed to charter these cargo ships, and what number have been given to each individual, company or firm?	_
4.	What sums of moneys have been paid up to the present time to the various charterers for the general supervision of these vessels?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 
TROOPS RETURNING FROM OVERSEAS
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What is being done within Canada to notify in advance next-of-kin of the arrival home of wounded soldiers and those on leave from overseas?
2.	Will some change be made in the "troop movement rule" now existing to enable next-of-kin to meet them at the station on arival home, as in the last war?
3.	Are arrangements being considered for the loan of military bands at depot, and any available motor vehicles to aid civil power taking them home on arrival?


William Chisholm Macdonald: I referred the hon. member for Broadview to answers which had been made by the Minister of National Defence to similar questions. Therefore, I ask that his question be dropped.
Question dropped.


SOLDIER SETTLEMENT BOARD-KENNETH ZINCK
Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	Is Mr. Kenneth Zinck, formerly of Lunenburg, Nova Scotia, employed by the government or by the soldiers' settlement board, with office at Kentville, Nova Scotia?
2.	If so, (a) for what period was he employed; (b) what is his yearly salary; (e) what were his expenses to March 31, 1944; (dj what duties does he perform; (e) what are his qualifications; (f) by whom was.he recommended?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	Yes, employed by Soldier Settlement and Veterans' Land Act.
2.	(a) Appointed April 3, 1944.
(b)	81,620 per annum, plus $221.04 cost of living bonus.
(c)	Nil; answered by (a).
(d)	Field supervision of settlers in a designated area; collections; leases; investigations and reports as required.
(e)	Long practical farming experience; experience as land appraiser with Canadian Farm Loan Board; qualified veterinary; returned soldier war 1914-18.
(f)	Appointed through Civil Service Commission eligible list following advertisement of position and competitive examination.


R.C.A.F.-WOMEN'S DIVISION-TUNICS
Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	Were certain tunics for the members of the women's division of the Royal Canadian Air Force discarded since the declaration of war?
2.	If so, when, and why?
3.	What is the quantity of such tunics, and the cost of each?
4.	Who was awarded the contract for the manufacturing of such tunics?
5.	What amount has been paid to such contractor by the government, to date?
Questions

6.	Were such tunics subsequently used by one or several cadet corps of the Royal Canadian Air Force?
7.	If so, why?
8.	Were the contractors ordered to refund to the government the money and material losses suffered by the government in connection with these tunics?
9.	In these tunics were there any manufacturing defects which rendered them unfit for use by the Canadian air force women?
10.	If so, what were such defects?


Mr. MACMILLAN:: 1.	No. The design of the uniform was changed but all tunics of the old design are still being issued for station wear. Each airwoman is issued with two blue uniforms. Since the change in design, one of old design, and one new has been issued. The old design is for station use, the new for walking out.
No uniforms have been discarded except after full period of wear.
2,	3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. Not applicable.


LIEUT .-COLONEL GRAHAM ELLIOTT
Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	Is it to the knowledge of the government that Lieut.-Colonel Graham Elliott, chief instructor at A-21, C.O.C.T.C., Barriefield, from the spring of 1943 to the following November, has said publicly and repeatedly at Barriefield: ''This government (meaning the dominion government) is rotten. We should have conscription"?
2.	Was he ever on any theatre of war and, if so, -where, and how long?
3.	Did he come from the war office?
4.	Where is he now?
5.	Are officers in His Majesty's forces in Canada allowed to use such language as mentioned in No. 1?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: 1.	No.
2.	Record not available.
3.	Lt.-Col. A. G. Elliott is an officer of the British army on loan to the Canadian army as an instructor.
4.	In the United Kingdom acting as chief instructor at No. 1 Canadian ordnance reinforcement unit.
5.	Officers are not debarred from expressing their personal opinions on public matters in private conversations.


HOUSING-TORONTO
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Did the government receive a deputation of the mayor, controllers and aldermen of Toronto this week regarding the housing situation?
2.	What action will be taken to provide houses in Toronto for, (a) soldiers' families; (b) civilians?
3.	What reply was given to the deputation, And will any action on their request be announced, and when?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	Yes.
2 and 3. The following letter signed by the Minister of Finance was sent to the mayor of Toronto:
"The city clerk's letter of April 19, 1944, transmitting the text of a resolution of the Toronto board of control, as well as the supplementary representations made to me and to my colleague, Mr. Howe, have been, carefully considered.
I must advise you that the government has come to the conclusion that no change can be made in the policy announced nearly a month ago and reiterated on several recent occasions. As indicated in the previous statements referred to, the government feels that the wartime prices and trade board has gone to the limit in imposing restrictions on the ordinary rights of an owner to obtain possession of his property.
Dealing with the specific proposal contained in the resolution adopted by the board of control, this proposal would place upon the wartime prices and trade board a responsibility which it should not assume and which it is not equipped to discharge.
Moreover, I question whether any county court judge should be asked to decide as to the respective needs of landlord and tenant in particular instances, and I would fear that the enactment of an order in council such as has been suggested would result in the courts being overburdened with applications by tenants-some good, some bad-which it would be quite impossible to dispose of within the period contemplated in the resolution.
As to the other recommendations contained [DOT]in the resolution concerning the provision of low-cost housing, while this does not affect the immediate problem of possible evictions on May 1, these recommendations are being given most careful consideration."



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. HANSELL:: .
1.	How many persons have been naturalized since the commencement of hostilities?
2.	What was their nationality, and the number of each?


Mr. McLARTY:: Return tabled.


NUMBER OF MEN REQUIRED FOR MILITARY TRAINING
Mr. DORION:: 1. Has the Minister of National Defence, since the 4th March, 1944, reported to the Minister of Labour that a definite number of men were required for military training?

Questions as Orders for Returns
2.	If so, (a) at what date was this information supplied; (b) what did such information contain ?


William Chisholm Macdonald: Return
tabled.
REHABILITATION GRANT TO OFFICERS [DOT] ON DISCHARGE


Mr. WHITE:: 1.	What is the present amount of the rehabilitation grant paid to officers on discharge?
2.	Is this grant subject to income tax?


PACIFIC COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAMME
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What government department was responsible for the building of the communication lines of the Pacific communications programme, including the telegraph (repeater) stations and the dwellings or living quarters provided for personnel operating the same?
2.	Who pays the wages of those operating the Pacific communications programme repeater stations?
3.	Who supplies fuel, light and water for these stations?
4.	What rent, if any, is paid for living quarters at these stations, (a) to wThom; (b) by whom?
5.	What amount per month do employees of Canadian National Telegraphs pay for living quarters provided by the system, and are such employees required to pay any additional amount for fuel?


Mr. MACMILLAN:: Return tabled.


SAINT PAUL L'ERMITE MUNITIONS PLANT
Mr. RAYMOND:: 1.	At what date did the government expropriate the lands required for the construction of the munition plant at Saint Paul l'Ermite?
2.	How many parcels of land have been expropriated for the construction of the munition plant at Saint Paul l'Ermite?
3.	How many owners have been affected by such expropriation?
4. How many persons have been awarded compensation as a result of such expropriation?
5. How many persons have not yet been awarded any compensation as a result of such expropriation; (a) what are their names; (b) for wdiat reasons?


AIR HOSPITAL AMBULANCES
Mr. CHURCH:: What has been done to provide hospital ambulances by air in Canada to transport those injured in training of the forces to proper hospitals where necessary, since the matter was raised in the house in 1942 and 1943 on the war appropriation bill?


Cyrus Macmillan: Return tabled.


POST OFFICE-TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT DURING CHRISTMAS HOLIDAYS
Mr. LACOMBE:: 1. How many temporary employees, residing in the county of Laval-Two Mountains, were employed by the Post Office Department during
the Christmas holidays, in the month of December, 1942 and 1943, and the month of January, 1943 and 1944?
2.	What are the names and places of residence, in the county of Laval-Two Mountains, of such temporary employees?
3.	Were these temporary employees recommended by someone, and if so, by whom?
4.	Have postcards been mailed by the Post Office Department, Montreal division, to applicants for temporary employment during the Christmas holidays?
5.	If so, by whom were these postcards sent and signed?
6.	W'hat wras the complete text appearing on such postcards?


PRODUCTION OF ICE CREAM-SUGAR AND GELATINE
Mr. SENN:: 1.	What was the total quantity, in gallons, of ice cream produced in 1943?
2.	What amount of, (a) sugar; (b) butter-fat; (c) gelatine, was used in the manufacture of ice cream during the year 1943?
3.	Is sugar and gelatine used in the production of glycerine and explosives?


COAL USED IN GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS OR FACTORIES
Mr. HANSELL:: 1.	How much coal was used in government buildings or factories during the years 1940 to 1943 inclusive?
2.	What portion of this coal was mined in Canada?


BARRIEFIELD MILITARY TRAINING CENTRE
Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	On each one of the following dates, September 1, 1942, August 1, 1943, and April 24, 1944, what was the total number of Frenchspeaking, (a) men; (b) n.c.o.s, and (c) officers at A-21, C.O.C.T.C., Barriefield, Ont.?
2.	What -were the rank and duties of the said n.c.o.s and officers on each one of the above-mentioned dates?
3.	What wras the total number of, (a) officers; (ib) n.c.o.s, and (c) men at that training centre on each one of the above-mentioned dates?
4.	Who were, (a) the commanding officers;
(b)	the second in command; (c) the chief instructor, and (d) the senior French instructor, if any, of that training centre since September 1, 1942, and for what period?
5.	What were, (a) the birthplace; (b) age;
(c)	military record of the officers referred to in No. 4, and (d) what was the technical experience of the chief instructors and of the senior French instructor?
6.	Was the said commanding officer absent from that training centre in 1943, and if so, from when to when?
7.	Who was the chief instructor during that period?
8.	Did the said chief instructor recommend one or several new establishments, and if so, (a) what were they, and (b) upon what grounds did he recommend them?
9.	Were such new establishments approved and ordered by the G.H.Q.?
10.	If so, was the minister, or the associate minister, or an acting minister in charge of the

Questions as Orders for Returns
Department of National Defence when the said new establishments were, (a) approved, and (b) ordered?
11.	On each one of the dates referred to in No. 1, how many men, and how many Frenchspeaking men were assigned to G.D. and that training centre?
12.	What was done for the coordination of technical courses in French at that centre since September, 1942?


William Chisholm Macdonald: This will be subject to the usual reservations as to the disclosure of confidential information.


MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT TRAVELLING OUTSIDE CANADA
Mr. ROY:: 1.	Since 1936, did any members of the House of Commons (ministers of the crown excepted) travel outside of Canada at the expense of the government?
2.	If so, (a) what are their names; (ib) at what dates, and on what occasions; (c) what were the duties or mission of each; (d) what was the amount of expenses incurred and paid for each of them?


POSTAL CENSORSHIP
Mr. RAYMOND:: 1.	What persons are employed in the postal censorship department?
2.	What is their country of origin?
3.	How long have they resided in Canada?
4.	How long have they been employed in postal censorship?
5.	What are their respective salaries?


CANADIAN ARMY-OFFICERS RETURNED FROM OVERSEAS
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	How many officers serving in the Canadian army overseas have been returned to Canada with a recommendation that they be discharged and not further employed, or with a recommendation of a similar nature?
2.	W'hat was the rank of each of these officers ?
3.	On what grounds were these recommendations made, and how many officers have been returned on each of these grounds?
4.	In how many cases have the recommendations been acted upon?


TEST DRILLINGS FOR OIL
Mr. HAZEN:: 
Mr. BENCE:: 1.	What officers who were stationed at Dundurn military camp on January 1, 1944, are being retired from the armed services?
2.	Why are they being so retired?
3.	What are the ages of such officers, and how long has each been a member of the armed services in this war?
4.	Which of said officers were engaged in the armed services of Canada or her allies in the war of 1914-18?
5.	Have such officers been replaced, and what are the names, ranks and ages of such replacement officers?
6.	Which of such replacement officers have served overseas in this war?
7.	Which of such replacement officers were overseas in the war of 1914-18?


NAVY AND AIR FORCE PERSONNEL RETURNING FROM OVERSEAS-REGULATIONS AS TO REPORTING
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Are the members of the Royal Canadian Air Force and of the Royal Canadian Navy arriving on leave in Canada or discharged from overseas allowed to go direct to their homes without first reporting at Ottawa?
2.	What are the rules of these two services in this connection?


ALLOWANCES TO EX-SERVICE MEN
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What is being done on this the forty-seventh day of the session as to increase allowances for civilian clothing of ex-service men honourably discharged from the forces after serving overseas, for soldiers, sailors and airmen, beyond $65 ?
2.	What amount of cash in addition to a grant for clothing is given to them?


ROBERT MITCHELL PLANT, SAINT LAURENT, QUE.
Mr. RAYMOND:: 1.	On the 1st March, 1944, who were the male
emplo}rees appointed to inspect production at the	Robert	Mitchell	plant,	Saint	Laurent,
Quebec, on behalf of the inspection board of United Kingdom and Canada?
2.	On the 1st April, 1944. who were the male
employees appointed to inspect production at the	Robert	Mitchell	plant,	Saint	Laurent,
Quebec, on behalf of the inspection board of United Kingdom and Canada?
3.	From the 1st March to the 1st April, 1944, did the general controller of the inspection board of United Kingdom and Canada, or his representative in Montreal, dismiss male employees appointed to inspect production at the Robert Mitchell plant, Saint Laurent, Quebec?
4.	If so, (a) at what date were any or all such male employees dismissed; (b) have any or all such dismissals taken place following complaints received or made to the knowledge of the general controller or his representative in Montreal on the ground of misconduct; (c) if any of such employees have been dismissed for misconduct, what are these acts of misconduct; (d) what are the names of the dismissed employees, and their address?

Housing


HOUSING
Thomas Langton Church: Mr. Speaker, I desire to ask leave to move, seconded by the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol), the adjournment of the house to discuss a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, the urgent need of houses in the city of Toronto and other places in Canada and for the purpose of calling the attention of the government to the urgent need of immediate emergency measures relating thereto.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Under standing order 31 a member has leave to make a motion for the adjournment of the house after the ordinary daily routine of business has been concluded and before notices of motions or orders of the day are entered upon. The ordinary daily routine of business has been concluded and we are now on another order-questions. The hon. member will have to present his motion on another occasion, since we have passed the stage where a motion for leave to adjourn the house can be made.


Thomas Langton Church: With great respect I would point out to Your Honour that there has been no substantive motion made in the house this session on the question of housing. Questions have been asked, and all that, but there has been no substantive motion moved on the subject.


Thomas Vien: Standing order 31 reads as follows:
Leave to make a motion for the adjournment of the house (when made for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance) must be asked after the ordinary daily routine of business (standing order 15) has been concluded and before notices of motions or orders of the day are entered upon.
We have already concluded routine proceedings and are dealing with questions.


Thomas Langton Church: I understand that such a
motion can be made up to the time the orders
of the day are called.


Thomas Vien: Routine proceedings under standing order 15, which is referred to in standing order 31, are dealt with in standing order 15 as follows:
(1)	Mr. Speaker shall read prayers every day at the meeting of the 'house before any business is entered upon.
(2)	The ordinary daily routine of business in the house shall be as follows:
Presenting reports by standing and special
committees.
Introduction of bills.
First readings of Senate bills.
(3)	The order of business for the consideration of the house, day 'by day, after the daily routine, shall be as follows:
Then follows the business with which the house may deal.


Thomas Langton Church: This morning I gave notice of my motion to Your Honour and to the acting head of the government and the leader of the opposition and others. As I read the rules, Mr. Speaker, a motion of this kind can be made after the daily routine of business has been concluded and before the orders of the day are called.


Thomas Vien: If the hon. member will look further at what business can be taken up after routine proceedings on Thursday, private members' day, he will find, at page 7, "Questions." We dealt with questions after the routine proceedings had been completed. I am sorry, but the hon. member will have to present his motion on another day.


Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, may I make one observation with the consent of Your Honour? This is a matter of urgent importance-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Gordon Graydon: I do not want to have to call for the protection of the Speaker, whose consent I received to. make an observation. I do not want to be interrupted. I will sit down for the Speaker but for no one else.


Thomas Vien: The position I have to take is in conformity with the standing orders. But when the leader of the opposition wishes to make an observation with regard to what I have said. I am always glad to listen to him because I do not want to do any injustice. In the circumstances there can be no question as to what our standing orders and routine proceedings are, and the fact that the hon. member for Broadview omitted to notice what is stated by standing order 31-


Gordon Graydon: I will bow to your ruling, Mr. Speaker, if I cannot say another thing, but the one thing I wanted to bring to your attention, and which I think should be brought to your attention at this time-


Thomas Langton Church: May I ask what your nding is, Mr. Speaker? Have you ruled the motion out of order?


Thomas Vien: I have ruled that the hon. member has not conformed to the standing orders of the house which I have read. Under standing order 31 a motion for the adjournment of the house can be made immediately after the routine proceedings of the house have been dealt with and before any other
Housing

matter of business has been entered upon. I therefore say that the hon. member is not in order.


Thomas Langton Church: I wish to appeal from your ruling, Mr. Speaker. I think there is an appeal under our procedure.


Thomas Vien: I am afraid that I must take the position that I was not deciding a point of order. I was simply pointing out what the rules are. They are clearly set forth, and I think there can be no difficulty about that. I was not dealing with a point of order.


Gordon Graydon: Would the Speaker ask for the consent of the house for the motion to be made?


Thomas Langton Church: We wasted six hours discussing the rules of this house on Tuesday.


Thomas Vien: There may be objection to the suggestion of the leader of the opposition. The remedy is for the hon. member for Broadview to present his motion to-morrow.


Thomas Langton Church: That ruling has never been given before since I have been in the house. It has always been possible to ask for leave to make a motion for the adjournment of the house on the orders of the day.


MONTREAL-INQUIRY WITH RESPECT TO USE OF BUNGALOWS FROM CLOSED AIR TRAINING CAMPS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. FRED ROSE (Cartier):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct the following question to the Minister of Finance. In view of the government's refusal to freeze leases temporarily, would the minister consider the possibility of installing in Montreal and vicinity, bungalows from closed air training camps as a means of immediate alleviation of Montreal's housing crisis, pending the commencement of a low rental housing scheme?


Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):: I am not sure whether the hon. member has directed his question to the Minister of National Defence or to myself. His question related to military bungalows, did it?


Fred Rose: That is right.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not know whether it would be possible or not. I will have to bring the question to the attention of my colleague.


EVICTIONS ON MAY 1-POSSIBILITY OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Langton Church: Out of the 1.155 families who must move on Monday, May 1, there will be many applications
[Mr. Speaker. J
to the local county court judges for ejectment under the Overholding Tenancy Act. Will the Minister of Finance instruct the housing officials in Toronto, who will be summoned before the learned county court judges, to tell the judge that they have been asked to request a stay of proceedings for one month, as they can do?
Hon. J. L. ILSLEY Minister of Fnance):
I could not give such an undertaking as that. It occurs to me if the city authorities wish to do that there is nothing to prevent them from doing so. I do not even say they should do it, but certainly it would be stepping well beyond our accustomed jurisdiction to make representations of the kind to any county court judge.


Thomas Langton Church: Could not the minister request his own officials there to act in the way I suggested? Could not he ask the Toronto federal housing officials summoned before the county court judge on these eviction notices to take the action I have suggested?


James Lorimer Ilsley: No.


Thomas Langton Church: I should like an answer to the question. Could not the officials ask the judge for a month's delay?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I answered the question the first time the hon. member asked it. As I suggested before, there is nothing to prevent the municipal authorities, who are more directly concerned with this matter, and who know the conditions, from making any representations they wish to the county court judges. In my judgment it certainly would not be appropriate for the officials of the housing administration at Ottawa to make such representations.


Thomas Langton Church: The housing officials here said the tenants were too choosy-"too choosy," when there are no houses left to be choosy about!


CANADIAN ARMY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. G. DIEFENBAKER (Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I have before me a questionnaire in reference to which I wish to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. This questionnaire is being circulated to-day among the various home defence units by officers apparently authorized by National Defence headquarters. In the questionnaire the various personnel are asked whether they will sign active, whether their family has been affected adversely or advantageously by the war, whether a civil job is held open for them

Army-Home Defence
after the war, whether they would consider signing active if service guaranteed under French-speaking officers and N.C.O.'s, and whether they have any other reason for not signing active. The questions I desire to ask arise in connection with that questionnaire and also in connection with the statement made the other day by General Pearkes, Y.C. Have instructions gone forth from National Defence headquarters that officers of the various units are to interview their personnel with a view to inducing or coercing them to enlist for overseas service? Have instructions been given to these officers to advise the men that unless fifty per cent of them are secured for active service, conscription for overseas service will be put into effect, and generally what is the situation with respect to reinforcements for the army overseas? These are matters which I think are urgent, having regard to recent statements that have been made.


Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to take the usual course and ask for time in which to answer the question asked by my hon. friend. This is the first I have heard of the questionnaire to which he refers. I have nothing to say with regard to the questionnaire; I presume it is being circulated by officers who desire to get that information, which I am sure would be very useful to the Department of National Defence.
The hon. member asks whether any instructions have gone forward for officers to interview personnel in the units with a view to inducing them or "coercing" them-I think that was the word he used-to enlist for overseas service, or with a view to threatening that if more than fifty per cent did not enlist for overseas service, conscription would be introduced. I want to say to my hon. friend and to the house that two or three weeks ago a meeting was held of the officers commanding the different districts for the purpose of discussing the matter of recruiting. The house knows, I presume-I have indicated this to the house previously-the sources from which overseas personnel come. They are the general service personnel in the units in Canada; the N.R.M.A. personnel in the units who may volunteer for general service; the general service personnel in the training centres, and those who are recruited from time to time. It was thought highly advisable that the army should do its duty with regard to the raising and maintaining of the volunteer army overseas of which Canada is exceedingly proud; and I have not heard anyone in this house or anywhere else suggest that 100-150
the volunteer army was not a desirable thing. I have indicated repeatedly that I prefer a voluntary army, and I think most Canadians will agree with me. In that connection the army has its duty to maintain, if it can, that volunteer army; and for that purpose the army has engaged in recruiting activities for the last three years. The activities which are referred to or which are implied in the questionnaire to which my hon. friend has referred I presume are the result of the conferences which have been held. No such questionnaire was authorized in express terms, but I do not repudiate it, nor do I see anything whatever wrong in it. The same sort of questionnaire might well be circulated to anyone who was being asked to subscribe for victory bonds. Persuasion is being used in Canada at the present time by way of meetings, by bringing very prominent people here, by way generally of persuading people to subscribe their money for a good three per cent security. It seems to me that the army is not only entitled to see to it, but it is the duty of the army to see to it, that the needs of the volunteer army are put before the people of Canada in exactly the same way. That is being done and will be done; and when my hon. friend uses the word "coerce" he uses a word which is not only unauthorized but is totally unjustified in any shape or form.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No, no.


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: There is plenty of coercion.


James Layton Ralston: I want to say to my hon. friend that I know of no coercion. I do not desire to cast any reflection at all upon the war loan campaign, but I say to my hon. friend that I do not think any inducement or any effort is being put forward in connection with recruiting that is comparable to the effort being put forward by citizens of this country to endeavour to induce and persuade their fellow citizens to subscribe their money. I make no apology whatever for asking men to enlist in the service, and I deprecate more than I can say the attempt which has been made to disparage recruiting activities in Canada. There has been a constant effort to do that. Only the other day the suggestion was made that because a great soldier went out west and addressed the soldiers there, indicating what the needs of the army were and what had been his experiences overseas, he was being humiliated. No such suggestion is made when great people come here and tell us of the need for money, and try to influence us to buy bonds. That is regarded as in every way desirable; we attend these meetings and

Army-Home Defence

rallies. But recruiting seems to be something which must be disparaged, and I can only think it must be because there is some sort of fetish on the part of some people for conscription. The objective is not to get men for the army; the objective is to get men, provided you get them by conscription; and I want to say that with these people it seems to be the method rather than the result which is important.
The army proposes to keep right straight on in connection with its recruiting activities. Right here and now I want to thank the citizens of this country who have helped so valiantly in connection with recruiting all over Canada, and I am going to ask those citizens to keep on, and not to be disconcerted in any way by the efforts which are being made in some quarters to suggest that recruiting activity is something in which it is unworthy to engage. That is all I have to say in answer to my hon. friend's question.
PRESS REPORT AS TO FORMATION OF VOLUNTEER BRIGADE OF 6tH DIVISION FOR OVERSEAS SERVICE
On the orders of the day:


Mr. H. C. GREEN (Vancouver South):: On April 24 I directed a question to the Minister of National Defence which the minister will find at page 2283 of Hansard, and which reads as follows:
Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Department of National Defence. A Canadian Press dispatch from Vancouver, published in Ottawa this morning, states that an attempt is being made to raise a volunteer brigade from the troops of the 6th division, which is composed largely of home defence troops, and that this brigade is to be sent to one of the fighting fronts. The Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) is out of the city to-day, I understand, but I would ask that the house be given a statement in regard to this matter to-morrow.
In reply to that question the Minister of National Defence for Air (Mr. Power) said:
We will take the question as a notice, Mr. Speaker, and I will advise the Minister of National Defence.
Could the minister make a statement to-day in reply to that question?


James Layton Ralston: Certainly. This question is along the same lines as the question to which I replied a few moments ago. In connection with the army's activities with respect to a volunteer army, I have told the house repeatedly that from time to time we withdraw general service personnel from the units in Canada in order that they may go overseas.

In this particular instance the general officer commanding out west suggested that instead of withdrawing, the general service personnel from the units and sending them overseas, it might be possible that quite a number of N.R.M.A. men in the units would volunteer if the unit could go overseas as such, without any undertaking that the unit would be preserved as a unit after getting overseas. That matter was taken up and discussed, with the result that the general officer commanding. General Pearkes, V.C., and his officers undertook to put the matter before the men of the units. The result was that in the particular units themselves, in which were included something like 2,700 N.R.M.A. men, some twenty-six per cent, or more than 700 N.R.M.A. men volunteered. In addition, about 400 N.R.M.A. soldiers, from other units in the Pacific command, volunteered, making about 1,100 N.R.M.A. personnel who volunteered in that way.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Over what period?


James Layton Ralston: Oh, I would say two or three weeks, or something like that; just a very short time. The result is that a certain number of these units will proceed overseas as units. I may add that as time goes on other units will be selected along similar lines as and when the situation permits.


Thomas Langton Church: Do I understand the minister to indicate that it is not now necessary to pass such an order in council?


James Layton Ralston: I am indicating to my hon. friend that what we are doing is getting volunteers along the lines which I have suggested, and in addition to that I may say that about 3,000 men a month are volunteering. That is in addition to the men who are on general service personnel who are being withdrawn. I hope my hon. friend will not be disappointed at that.


Howard Charles Green: Arising out of the statement made by the minister in answer to my question, are we to take it that there has been a change with regard to the policy of sending units overseas? The minister said on February 14, as reported at page 462 of Hansard:
Canada has reached the peak so far as the sending of new capital units overseas is concerned. A year ago we took that stand, and that policy was endorsed by this house. The suggestion has been made to me that I am simply crazy to build up the army, that the army overseas is big enough now.
I take it from the statement to-day that the policy is being changed. May I also ask

23S5
Flying Accident in Montreal
*whether there is any question of a change in the general policy of the government with regard to the use of men called up under the National Resources Mobilization Act? I ask that question because General Pearkes, in his statement to the troops at Vernon, is quoted in press dispatches of April 21 as using these words:
The decision has been reached by the government-[DOT]


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Thomas Vien: I think the hon. member has laid a sufficient foundation for his question to enable the minister to give an answer.


Howard Charles Green: It is simply a matter of completing the question.


James Layton Ralston: It is not a supplementary question, but I will answer it. My hon. friend asks whether or not there is any change in policy with regard to what I said on February 14 in reference to the increasing of the size of the army overseas. The expression which the hon. gentleman read to me was that we had reached the peak so far as sending units overseas is concerned.


An hon. MEMBER:: Tactical units.


James Layton Ralston: Perhaps that is unfortunately put-


Howard Charles Green: Capital units.


James Layton Ralston: -but he will see from the context later that what I was leading up to was that it was not expected to have an increase in the number of units overseas, that is to say, in the capital of the Canadian army overseas. What I have said does not indicate any change in that policy. I may say that from time to time units have been sent over. Sometimes they have been sent over and have replaced other units overseas, and at other times the personnel of these units have been posted for purposes of reinforcement or for reserves, but there is no change in the policy I referred to when I said that an increase in the units of the Canadian army overseas may be expected.


Howard Charles Green: The other part of the question was-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


James Layton Ralston: Will my hon. friend give notice?


Howard Charles Green: I also asked the minister at the same time whether we were to take it that there was any change in the general policy with regard to the use of men called up under the National Resources Mobilization Act.


James Layton Ralston: No.


Howard Charles Green: He did not answer that.


James Layton Ralston: No.


Mr. ROSS (Souris):: There never was a policy.


FLYING ACCIDENT IN MONTREAL IN QUIRT AS TO THE HOLDING OF AN INVESTIGATION AND THE PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION FOB DAMAGES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. LIGUORI LACOMBE (Laval-Two Mountains) (Translation):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the hon. the Minister of National Defence for Air (Mr. Power). Is an investigation now being held on the terrible accident that occurred in Montreal on Tuesday last, when a bomber crashed in the heart of the city, and will the government take action with a view to compensating the people who have suffered damage?
Hon. C. G. POWER (Minister of National
Defence for Air) (Translation): Mr. Speaker, I have had no notice of that question, but I have seen in the papers, this morning, that the Montreal coroner has just opened an investigation on that accident.. In the second place, an investigation is also being held by the R.A.F. in Montreal, at the headquarters of Aviation District No. 3; it is presided over by an officer of the R.A.F. and Aviation Inspector Blondeau, of the Department of Transport, and Squadron Leader Gobeil, of the R.C.A.F., are attending it. We are now considering whether those two investigations will be sufficient to satisfy the public and the government. If we find, as a result of an inquiry which is now under way, that it would be desirable to pursue an investigation more extensive than those that are now going on, the government will take a decision and inform the house.


Gordon Graydon: I desire to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence for Air (Mr. Power). I believe it comes within the jurisdiction of his department. May I inquire of him whether a board of inquiry has been set up in connection with the Liberator bomber crash which occurred on Tuesday? I was attempting to follow his answer to the previous speaker and I gathered, from my faulty interpretation of his answer, that perhaps my question was somewhat different from that asked by the hon. member for Laval-Two Mountains (Mr. Lacombe). I should like to know whether or not a board of inquiry has
23S3

War Materials
begun its investigation and whether or not that investigation is being carried on under the auspices of the Royal Air Force and of the minister's department.


Mr. POWER:: I am sorry that my faulty French was such that my hon. friend could not understand it. I answered the very same question in French a few moments ago. The fact of the matter is, as the house well knows, that this was an aircraft belonging to the United Kingdom government and was being ferried across by R.A.F. ferry command. An inquiry is now being held in Montreal under R.A.F. auspices.


Richard Burpee Hanson: R.A.F.?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes. It is being held in No.
3 Command, R.C.A.F. headquarters. Associated with the inquiry are Mr. Blondeau, of the civilian transport department, Canadian, and Squadron Leader Gobeil, of the R.C.A.F. There is also being carried on at the moment, ' I read in the newspapers, a coroner's investigation. We are considering whether or not these inquiries will be sufficient to satisfy public opinion and to reveal all the facts that should be disclosed. It may be that we shall decide to set up a board of inquiry under R.C.AE. auspices, and should that be the case the public will be advised.


WAR MATERIALS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: May I direct a question to the Minister of Munitions and Supply? Will , he kindly amplify the interview he gave the press, as reported on Tuesday last, in connection with the stepping-up of Canadian shell production, so that the house may have full information with respect to plans for increased production in certain lines of war materials?


Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):: The interview referred to was hardly a press interview. It was simply a question as to the accuracy of a newspaper article. I may say, however, that we are stepping up the production of heavy ammunition at the present time. In the early days of the war we had a large capacity for heavy ammunition. In time it was found that supplies in hand were adequate for that particular time and about two thirds of the capacity was closed. The tempp of the war is

now at a higher pitch. The requirements are therefore larger and we are opening all the capacity that we ever had in this country for the production of heavy ammunition.


Gordon Graydon: From the press reports I would not gather that the explosive industries are being opened up as yet.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The explosive industries are stepping up correspondingly. The two plants now in production will operate at full capacity. Whether or not production will be required from the plant at Nobel, which was closed, is a matter of doubt at the present time. There may be some small production required from there but it is not certain at the moment. The shell filling plants will also run at full capacity.


HIGHWAYS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. K. FRASER (Peterborough West):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. On March 2, 1944, at page 1053 of Hansard I asked the following question:
Has Canada accepted the invitation of Peru to send representatives to the fifth PanAmerican highways congress to be held July 15-25? If so, who will represent Canada at this congress?
The Prime Minister said that no official invitation had been received. I have since been informed by a very reliable party-and I know the information is correct-that some days ago the government received an official invitation. Can the minister now tell the house if Canada will accept the invitation, and if so, how many representatives will be going down there? As I understand it, Peru wishes as many delegates from Canada as possible. Who will those representatives be?


Hon. J. E. MICHAUD (Minister of Transport) :: The matter is still under consideration. As soon as a decision has been arrived at it will be made known.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Monday, April 24, 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.

War Appropriation-War Services

[Stage Direction]
Corps of (civilian) Canadian fire fighters for United Kingdom, $744,905.
Thomas Langton Church: This question of firemen
from Canada in the United Kingdom was up last year about a month after the minister took charge of the department-I think it was July. At that time the minister said he was going to look into it and make some changes, owing to the fact that the civilian fire fighters of England were assuming their regular duties and that the raids were few and far between. I appreciate what the firemen have done. I have some letters here from firemen who served overseas. I shall send them to the minister. One of them is from a fireman living at Billings avenue in Toronto in the constituency of the hon. member for Greenwood. This fireman has just returned from England. He points out that there is really nothing for them to do there. Efe says they are doing nothing in the line of fire duty as the regular fire services in England are looking after all the little bombings that are going on. The corps of Canadians in Southampton and Bristol have never been in a raid, according to this fireman. He never saw one while he was there, and he was there for two years. He says on March 10, 1943, he moved to Portsmouth and they had one small raid on August 16 of that year. He says that the group at Plymouth have had a little action. They are looking after their own camps and fields in England. He refers me to the fire chiefs of two large cities of Canada, one in western Ontario and the other in Halifax. He refers also to two officers in the Toronto fire department. He is asking for further information.
I appreciate what the minister has done in reducing the item. It has been reduced from $957,850 to $744,905. Are these firemen overseas working actively? There are practically no raids. The raids have been eliminated. Firemen may have been necessary in the first and second years of the war during the battles of London, Coventry and Cardiff. But because of the waj the raids have been reduced surely we do not need three-quarters of a million dollars in the estimates to cover this item when some of the firemen have returned home. When fire departments in the mother country are going back to their civil occupations, why should we have a large staff over there, when men are needed in Canada and in the forces overseas? After all is said and done we must not forget that wars are won by soldiers, sailors and airmen at the scene of combat. The same applies to firemen; they must work at the scenes of fires. That is where they are needed. They are not needed
at home when men are required in the army. Dear knows where we will be when the time for invasion comes.
As I have said, the time has come when we should give some consideration to the municipalities. Sitting here as a committee we should reduce the item by two-thirds. I be-believe good work was done over there by a splendid body of men. They learned a great deal about fighting fires. We know there was a time when Canada might have been invaded, because the enemy was pretty close to our shores.	[DOT]
In passing may I compliment the minister. I had much to do with him during the last war and I found him always to be an obliging official. Last session when we were talking about salvage he said he would look into the matter, with the intention of possibly reducing it.
The question now arises as to whether those men are or are not needed over there.
Hon. L. R. LaFLECHE (Minister of National War Services): I would remind the committee that a request for Canadian firefighters was made by the British government, and they were sent by the Canadian government in response to that request. At that time there was no question of our troops leaving the British isles. In those days the British isles were strictly on the defensive, and behind those defences preparations were being made to do what we hope may soon be done successfully. Up to now there have been tens of thousands of people in the national fire service devoting their time to preparing defences against enemy raids, and particularly defences against incendiaries. Our very brave fire fighters, each a volunteer, have been stationed in dangerous centres. They have been in raids-thank heaven only a very few have suffered from the effects of enemy bombing. But they stand on duty over there, and do suffer the monotonies connected therewith. We know that wherever we find a group of men who are not actively engaged against the enemy each day, or almost each day, they suffer from monotony. But so do the firemen in fire halls who stand by to save our dwellings and business places here at home.
May I point out that there has been a reduction of $212,945 in the vote. It is necessary to make provision for all the services, pay and allowances, lodgings, travelling expenses and everything else for that body of men, not knowing how long it will be necessary to keep the corps in the British isles. It was seriously considered during the early part of last winter whether the corps would be left in

War Appropriation-War Services
England. After taking the best possible advice, including the considered opinions of British fire fighting authorities and the British government, it was decided to leave them there. I believe those in England who gave us the benefit of their advice, knowledge and recommendations anticipated what we believe will take place shortly, when our army moves against the enemy, let us say on the continent of Europe.
We have had an intimation that possibly the imperial force, the national fire service of Great Britain, will offer an opportunity to some of the members of our corps to join them in certain extra duties which possibly would take them beyond the British isles. That matter is receiving attention to-day. No decision has been taken, because we have not all the information. I bring the matter to the attention of the committee because, there again, it may be that Canada will go along in the vanguard of the invading forces, in the defence of all we hold dear.
If the war ends quickly the corps will be brought back as 'quickly as possible. If the raids over Great Britain continue it will be extremely difficult indeed to bring them back until we have reached safety. That is the situation in regard to the corps overseas. I have had the very best reports about them- their lodgings, their meals, their equipment, and their clothing. I am extremely happy to say that upon reading the reports which come to us, the conduct and discipline indicated therein show that members of , the corps honour it, by their very good conduct, and thereby have gained esteem in the eyes of their neighbours in Great Britain. Hardly an offence worth mentioning has been lodged against any member of the corps.
May I repeat that I sympathize with men who must sit and wait until the enemy comes over to bomb them.


Mr. LOCKHART:: Have there been no definite transfers of men who went over with the corps? A letter which came to me yesterday indicates that transfers have been made. One man, I know, became tired of the monotonous life and, upon application, was transferred.
Mr. LaFLECHE: A small number have volunteered for Canada's fighting forces, and several have gone with the auxiliary services.


Howard Charles Green: How many are there remaining in Great Britain?
Mr. LaFLECHE: There are 362.


Howard Charles Green: How many went over?

Mr. LaFLECHE: In all, 417 were recruited. Only one is deceased, and his death was due to an accident over there. His widow is pensioned.	'


Mr. COLD WELL:: Where is the reduction in the amount? I must say I disagree sharply with the hon. member for Broadview. I receive numerous letters from London, the west of England and some from Yorkshire, and I know from recent letters that bombings in the last couple of months have been pretty bad. Many thousands of incendiaries have been dropped on some of the larger centres mentioned by the hon. member. I was just wondering what were the reasons for this reduction. I agree with the minister who said that while many of these men must of necessity be posted at points where conditions are monotonous, you cannot tell where a bomb is going to fall. At any moment they may be invaluable to the local community. Those of us who have visited the old country know that there are places which are under almost constant bombing. The hon. member for Parry Sound is in his place and he will remember that we visited one city which is seldom mentioned as having been bombed to any extent but which in fact was one of the worst-bombed places that we saw. Before I approve what the hon. member for Broadview has suggested, that this vote be reduced by two-thirds, I would want to be assured that there is a good and valid reason for any reduction that has been made already.
Mr. LaFLECHE: I shall compare the items in this vote with the vote of last year, and then I shall have another word to say about the necessity of keeping the corps together until we know more about the results of what lies ahead. There is a very definite connection between the two.
The items are:
	This year	Last year
Salaries 	$ 2,220	$ 2.850Pay	370,000	395,000Subsistence allowance	116,330	250,000Dependents' allowance....	150,000	172,000Clothing and equipment..	65.000	100,000Medical care and hos-	pitalization 	, 9,500	9,500Transportation 	25,500	15,000Printing and stationery. .	1,000	3,000Miscellaneous 	5,000	10,000Cost of living bonus	325	430Unemployment insurance..	30	70
The reduction in the pay item is brought about by the reduction in the force. Last year we provided for 400 men, and this year we are providing for 362 men, all ranks. The pay item of $370,000 is worked out by the financial officers. They know how many men of all ranks they must provide for, for 365
23S9

War Appropriation-TVar Services
days. This is the figure. The subsistence allowance is calculated for the full year and is in accordance with the number of persons to be provided for. This covers the cost of food and lodging. I have it on the best authority that these men have an excellent table. They are provided with the regular rations which can be improved with proper care and preparation. They are lodged in very comfortable buildings and they have upon them the benevolent eye of their fellow firemen in the national fire service. .
Some items of equipment were issued when the corps was set up and they need not be renewed, but clothing must be renewed regularly. Up to date we have authorized, as it became necessary in the eyes of the commanding and other responsible officers of the corps overseas, two and one half issues of clothing. The original clothing was purchased in Canada because the men were here. At a moderate cost each member of the corps was provided with a semi-fitting uniform which was then fitted to him by competent tailors. The same practice is being followed in England, and this corps is able to present an extremely smart appearance without its costing more than it should. The amount of $65,000 is considered sufficient to provide the necessary new shoes and clothing and equipment to the members of the corps.
The increase of $10,500 in the item for transportation reflects to some extent the possibility of bringing back to Canada a number of these men, buit, as I have explained already, circumstances which have been inquired into very carefully tell us that they should remain there because they are badly needed. These are gallant men and I am certain they do not want to come home until they have done their full job.


Mr. COLDWELL:: I did not catch the reduction in personnel overseas which the minister gave.
Mr. LaFLECHE: There has been a reduction of 38.


Major James William Coldwell: How did that occur?
Were men returned to Canada or transferred to other services? I know that one man died.
Mr. LaFLECHE: The reduction in personnel has been quite gradual. Casualties are always to be expected for one reason or another. All the reasons mentioned by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar can be offered for the reduction. Unfortunately one man was killed. The physical condition of others has deteriorated overseas, but this occurs in all groups of men.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Some have been brought home?
Mr. LaFLECHE: Yes.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: How many?
Mr. LaFLECHE: Since the beginning there have been discharged or struck off strength a total of 60 men. Twelve were discharged in Canada before the corps proceeded overseas; one died overseas; ten were discharged overseas in order to join active or auxiliary services, and thirty-seven were returned to Canada for discharge.


Mr. POULIOT:: Mr. Chairman, after the blitz in London, there was a campaign in Canada to send firemen's ladders to Great Britain. While that campaign was on, a firemen's convention was held in a United States city, which the fire chief of a Canadian city attended, and there he had a talk with the fire chief of that United States city and spoke about this campaign for ladders to be shipped to Britain. To his great surprise he learned that that very city had called for tenders for new firemen's ladders and that the lowest tender had come from Great Britain. That showed that the British people were not so much excited over the blitz that they were forgetting trade. They were asking us to ship them ladders and at the same time were offering to sell ladders at the cheapest price to that city in the United States. That I think is a lesson for all of us that we should not forget during the war.


Mr. MACDONALD (Brantford City):: I
listened to the hon. member for Broadview and I cannot find myself in accord with him. He stated that the bombing of Britain had ceased. I think probably, Mr. Chairman, we are taking too much for granted. The bombings may have ceased for the time being, but I do not think we should take for granted that the bombings have permanently ceased. Too often in Canada we are apt to feel that the war is getting away from us, too far away. I feel that we are very much in this war, just as much to-day as ever we were, and we are still a long way from winning it. It is possible that there may still be very heavy bombings of Great Britain.
I was glad the other day, Mr. Chairman, to hear the minister say that he hoped that the members of this fire fighting force would in time be entitled to the same benefits as the men who served in the armed forces. I do trust that such a regulation will soon be put into effect. These men went to Britain when there were heavy bombings and offered their lives in the protection of the persons

rrar Appropriation-TFar Services
and property of the people of that country, and they are entitled to the same benefits as the men who served in the armed forces.
There is one thing I should like to bring to [DOT]the attention of the committee as a matter of interest, and that is that when this fire fighting force was being organized the government looked over Canada for the best fire fighting chief in the country to head the force. Hon. members will be interested to know that in addition to selecting expert firemen from Brantford, the man who commanded that force, took it over to Britain and is still in command of it was the chief of the fire department of the city of Brantford.


Mr. MacNICOL:: Mr. Chairman, I have not heard anyone speak of what must have been the good effect on the morale of the people of England, if their morale could possibly have been improved, of the landing over there of firemen from Canada to assist them in putting out fires caused by bombings if they occurred. I am glad to hear that the fires did not occur to the extent that had been ahticipated, but that would not be any argument against sending the fire fighters over, because had another big blitz occurred our men would have been there to help put the fires out.
While the hon. member for Brantford City takes great credit for his city in the fact that the chief of this fire fighting force was selected from Brantford-it was an honour to his city, and I have no doubt that the chief was an expert fire fighter-I am happy to say that a very large number of the personnel of that force were recruited from Toronto. The fire fighters who went from Toronto, like those who were selected from other cities in Canada -because I am not going to claim more credit for Toronto than anywhere else-were all experienced and expert fire fighters. I have no doubt that all these selections were made because of the men's ability and experience in fighting fires. I knew quite a number of them who left Toronto to go over to Britain, and to my knowledge they were the very best men that could be sent.
Mr. LaFLECHE: My hon. friend will be interested to know that fifty-six came from Toronto.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I am proud to hear that fifty-six enlisted from Toronto. Whoever was responsible for recruiting that fire fighting force to aid the old country, which had gone through so much, deserves a great deal of credit for the formation of this force which consisted of the very cream of the fire fighters of Canada.


Howard Charles Green: When the estimates of the minister were up on the last occasion, a number of questions were asked which he could not answer at the time, and he promised to bring down the information when next his estimates were up. One of the questions had to do with the possibility of men in the hospitals in Great Britain, in the Mediterranean, and in Canada, getting the benefit of these educational courses. I pointed out that my information was that the courses were not readily available to the men in hospitals, and I thought some improvement should be made in that regard. Is the minister prepared to make any statement to-day?
Mr. LaFLECHE: I should have explained before we began consideration of this item to-day that the Canadian Legion educational courses may be arranged for members of the services. But if they are not begun before the men have been discharged from the army-


Howard Charles Green: They may not begin?
Mr. LaFLECHE: No, that has not yet been arranged. It is under consideration. But the courses may be completed after a man has been discharged. I have been advised that the men in hospitals overseas and here in Canada can have these courses, and it is desired that they should have them. The matter has been brought to the attention of the Department of Pensions and National Health and of the educational officers of the Canadian Legion. There was seemingly some misapprehension- but my departmental officials since we met last Monday have taken the matter up with these other authorities who are in very close contact with the men. My opinion is that these educational courses should be made available to all the men. Already nearly 200,000 members of the forces have enrolled in these courses. It may be that my hon. friend has in mind an odd case, or a few cases, perhaps in some isolated spot. But we have brought the matter to the attention of the other authorities and, as I say, I am all in favour of these courses being made available to all the men.


Howard Charles Green: I think that these courses should be made available to all the men in the forces. But the minister says that a man who has been discharged from the army cannot get these courses. As the minister knows, when these men are discharged from the army and go into a pensions hospital, they become charges of the pension department, and apparently under the present regulations they cannot take a course at that time. There is great need for facilities being provided to enable the man who is in a pensions hospital

War Appropriation-War Services
to get the benefit of these educational courses. He is there wounded, or perhaps ill, and he has more time to study than he would have on active service with the navy, the army or the air force. There is great need for these courses to be provided for these men. I am told definitely by people who have visited one of the Pensions and National Health hospitals that the men are not getting the courses, certainly not to any great extent. They are very much concerned about it, and would be greatly interested in getting them. I suggest that this comes under the minister, who should see to it that the necessary arrangements are made with the Department of Pensions and National Health for the men in these big hospitals to have the full benefit of the educational courses. Has the minister taken any steps to see that this is made possible?
Mr. LaFLECHE:	I am afraid my hon.
friend did not follow me when I said that men in civilian hospitals, after being discharged from the forces, may have the courses.


Howard Charles Green: You said " may not."
Mr. LaFLECHE: Just a moment; they may have the courses if they took them up before they were discharged from the army.


Howard Charles Green: But that does not meet all
cases.
Mr. LaFLECHE: Just a moment, please. Then a short time ago I added that we have again taken up the matter of allowing a man to begin a course after he has been discharged and is in a Pensions and National Health hospital. I may add that to my knowledge this situation has been under discussion with the competent authorities for at least two or three months, because we want these courses given to all the boys who desire them, whether before discharge or while in hospital following discharge. We believe in these educational courses; we think they are good for the boys. Therefore we have tried-and have not found any opposition-to open up a demand for these educational courses. This educational programme began, I would remind the committee, as something for the troops while in uniform; but as the war goes on men are discharged and are kept in hospital, and these courses are good for them. So that we are doing exactly what the hon. gentleman said would be a good thing.


Howard Charles Green: You are not doing it yet; you are trying to do it.
Mr. LaFLECHE: We are trying to popularize it.


Howard Charles Green: What are the obstacles to getting such courses started in these hospitals? Why have they not been made available before this?
Mr. LaFLECHE: I do not know. I explained earlier when we were on this item that my department fills requisitions made upon it by the defence departments. Naturally this is for men in uniform, but men are no longer under the Department of National Defence after they have been discharged. Of our own accord we have tried to follow this into another department, and discussions are going on in order to see whether the boys will want the courses and whether the departments can make the necessary arrangements to that end. Everybody is for it.


Howard Charles Green: Will that include handicraft and art courses?
Mr. LaFLECHE: They have those in the hospitals now.


Howard Charles Green: Then may we take it that these educational courses will be made available to men in the Pensions and National Health hospitals within a short time?
Mr. LaFLECHE: Yes, most assuredly, so far as the Department of National War Services is concerned.


Howard Charles Green: What about the Department of Pensions and National Health?
Mr. LaFLECHE: I cannot answer for that department, as my hon. friend knows.


Howard Charles Green: But it is a government responsibility.
Mr. LaFLECHE: While a matter is under discussion between two departments it is too early to announce any decision. I have told my hon. friend very carefully what we are trying to do; now let him wait.


Howard Charles Green: I do not mind waiting, but the men concerned should not be kept waiting.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I am keenly interested in the matter which has been brought up by the hon. member for Vancouver South, but without interrupting his line of thought or the minister's answers I should like to return to the matter under discussion previously, that is, the corps of civilian fire fighters overseas, in order to ask a further question. Apparently the minister is expecting these men to remain over there now. I want to associate myself with all the good things that have been said about them. Casualties of



War Appropriation-War Services
one kind or another have been suffered by some of these men, and I should like to know what is done for their families. What would be done for the family of a fire fighter overseas who became totally incapacitated, or eventually died, as the result of some injury?
Mr. LaFLECHE: I am happy to be able to tell the hon. member for Lincoln that if death occurs the family is pensioned.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: On the same basis as the family of a member of the overseas forces?
Mr. LaFLECHE: Under the same act. They are under the Pension Aot; that is the whole situation in a word.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Then if I may follow that up, eligibility for pension is worked out on exactly the same basis as in connection with soldiers who serve overseas?
Mr. LaFLECHE: Yes. If injury is suffered while on service overseas, the man is eligible for pension. As I said a moment ago the widow of one member of the corps, who was killed in an accident in Great Britain, is being pensioned.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Does the Canadian pension commission deal with these applications?
Mr. LaFLECHE: Yes, in precisely the same way as it deals with other applications.


Thomas Langton Church: I should like to say a word about these fire fighters. As I understand it, the minister is not responsible for this programme; he took it over from another minister last July. These are trained firemen whom we have sent overseas, but in many cases they are not needed there. The other day I received a letter from a fireman just back from England, in which he gave a list of the cities which said they did not need any help; they included Southampton, Bristol, Plymouth, and others. The fire fighters belonging to those cities have done the work, while, he says, the men we have sent over have not been asked to help at all. Then I should like to know where these men come from, by provinces. There is a third point. In a return brought down the other day it was stated that the loss from fire in army, navy and air force camps in Canada since the beginning of the war has amounted to about $4,500,000, with practically no insurance except what may have been taken out by a few contractors. As I said the other day, this war is a changing war; it changes from week to week, month to month and year to year, and in my opinion the need for Canadian firemen in Great Britain has practically vanished. If they should be needed there, let them stay, but in view of the letters I have received and
f Mr. Lockhart.]
the conversations I have had with some of the men who have returned, I do not believe they are needed any further in England. These men in their letters have said that they have little or nothing to do over there, and they might as well have been at home in Canada.
In this connection there is something I cannot understand at all. We have the army, the navy and the air force in Britain; they are on the job twenty-four hours a day, and they get no holidays. Right next door to them are these Canadian fire fighters, many of whom have very little to do and some of whom are given leave to come back home for a holiday. Some of the men in the forces have been over there for going on five years, but they have been given no holidays at all. The minister is a military man himself, having had a long and able career in the army, and he knows that civilian firemen receive some military drill and physical training, and he knows that under any modem fire chief there are competent instructors, so that altogether these men are hardy and quite fit for military duty. I have received, in the letter to which I referred, information that in four or five Canadian cities the chief thinks the work in England is over for these men, and I am led to believe that the men overseas, if they are kept there, should be transferred to the army. They should form as a fire unit and be a part of the army if they are to be of any use in Great Britain. I suggest that as a fire-fighting unit they should form a part of the army of invasion if we are to keep them there. We are spending three-quarters of a million on them and I fail to see the use of it. If it were necessary I would not say a word; I would go for it one hundred per cent. As matters stand, however, I do not believe it is necessary and I suggest that we should have some further explanation. The fire departments throughout Canada have suffered very considerably from a depletion of their forces. Firemen are needed in all our cities and towns because in many cases the new men are not as well equipped to fight fires as those who have had years of experience. There may be some merit in the retention of the men in their present capacity if they are to take part in a reconstruction programme in Britain, but so far we have not heard whether their duties will include the rebuilding of cities that have been bombed over there.
We wish to give the minister every encouragement in his work, and our criticism is intended to be constructive, but I suggest that this item should be cut down and as many of the men as possible drafted into the army as a fire unit. They should be transferred from the minister's department to the army. I

War Appropriation-IFar Services
understand that the civilian firemen in Great Britain are able to cope with the work they are called upon to do.
Mr. LaFLECHE: May I reassure the hon. member that if the corps is still in England it is there because the authorities there, after studying the question very carefully at our request, reported that it was necessary that they should remain there. The events of the near future may change the situation entirely, but at the moment I am quite satisfied that it is necessary that the corps should remain where they are, doing the work in which they are at present engaged until events take their course and we can see a little further into the future.


Mr. MARSHALL:: The majority will agree with the minister, I think, when he says that these fire fighters have a definite place to fill in the work in Great Britain. As he said, this request came from the British government, and so far as our information goes now that request still stands. There are one or two questions I should like to ask the minister. The auditor general's report for the year ended March 31, 1943, states that each member discharged for medical unfitness or other cause, after 183 days' service, receives a clothing allowance of $35. It is my understanding that the men of the fire fighting corps have the same status as the men in the various branches of the fighting service. If that is so I cannot quite understand why the clothing allowance for these men should be as low as $35. Why is it not $65? Is this an old regulation, and has there been a change since?
Mr. LaFLECHE: The hon. member has replied to his own question. He was reading from a report made at a time when the clothing allowance in the armed forces was $35. It was raised to $65 and it has been similarly increased in the case of members of the fire fighting corps.


James Alexander Marshall: There is another
question. There seems to be a difference of opinion between the auditor general on the one hand and the Minister of National War Services on the other with respect to the collection of income tax from members of the corps. On page 58 of the auditor general's report the statement appears that the minister instructed the comptroller of the treasury that these taxes should not be collected from members of the force. I wish the minister would enlarge on that and say whether or not authority has been given, by way of order in 100-151i
council for example, to exempt those men who are overseas from the provisions of the income tax act.
Mr. LaFLECHE: The auditor general's report from which the hon. member is reading is presumably up to March 31, 1943, a year ago. From the very beginning there was some difficulty about income tax. There has been of course a difficulty in that regard in other cases as well. From a very early date the matter was taken up with the competent authorities of other departments and recommendations were made that the members of the corps be not subject to income tax while overseas. As yet that has not been finally decided in their favour. By arrangement at the time of the report mentioned by my hon. friend, it was decided that the paymaster should not make the deduction. At present the point is again being taken up with the competent authorities. The great difficulty is that the Canadian corps is a civilian corps, not a military one. I even thought of giving them a status which would have been a military status, but we encountered difficulties there. It was not possible to do so. That would have solved that rather small problem, but it was not possible to do that. We then went back to the other authorities and we are still discussing the merits of the recommendations I have made on more than one occasion, namely, that income tax be not applied in the case of these men once they are overseas.


Mr. KNOWLES:: On that point may I
suggest to the minister that he look up what was done by the government in connection with the men who went to Kiska last summer. He is probably familiar with it anyway. According to the strict wording of the Income War Tax Act as amended last year, those men were taxed at the rate of fifty per cent while they were at Kiska. Following representations on the matter in the house the government decided to change the situation and did so by order in council. I suggest to the minister that he might use what was done in that case as an argument to support him in what he is trying to do for these men.
Mr. LaFLECHE: I am grateful for the . suggestion.


Stanley Howard Knowles: To follow the matter up I offer it as a suggestion.
Mr. LaFLECHE:	We are using it, but
again the position of the corps is not that of the units which went to Kiska. They were military units; the fire fighters are not. Nevertheless it is up to our department to bring it to a finality. We have to tell them finally

War Appropriation-War Services
"yes" or "no," and we are doing our very best to put the members of this corps upon the same footing in that respect as the members of the military corps.


Stanley Howard Knowles: As a further suggestion, may I point out it seems possible to do marvellous and wonderful things by order in council. For example, the order in council to which I refer read this way, if I recall it correctly: "For income tax purposes Kiska shall be regarded as outside the western hemisphere." As the minister knows, the phrase "for purposes of" so-and-so creeps into many orders in council. It does seem to me the minister should use that argument in this way:	For income tax purposes these men
may be considered as members of the military forces.
Mr. LaFLECHE: That argument is being used, and I think I used the best argument of all, namely, that these boys who went overseas went into an area of at least as great danger as did the members of any of the armed forces. For my own satisfaction I cannot find any better argument than that. I have used it and I am going to keep on using it.


Howard Charles Green: The auxiliary service groups do not get complete exemption from income tax. Why is that?
Mr. LaFLECHE: I do not know. I cannot answer for what- happens in another department. In a sense they have been given a military status and it is on that score that they receive the benefit. I attempted to attain that status for the members of the fire fighting corps but was unable to do so. Earlier this afternoon I said something about the possibility of some members of the corps being given an opportunity to go beyond the British isles presumably in the not distant future. So far as I am concerned I will not want them to go unless the matter under discussion is settled in their favour. Unfortunately if they go they will go as members of a civilian corps. I assure the committee the particular matter of military status or otherwise is the dividing point, or has been found to be the dividing point, and indeed a very high partition has been set up which we have not been able to hurdle in favour of these boys up to now.


Howard Charles Green: Why is there a difference in the case of the men in the auxiliary services?
Mr. LaFLECHE: Because the others have a semi-military status.


Howard Charles Green: Why do they not get complete exemption as do the men in the army?

Mr. LaFLECHE: I am not fully aware of the reason myself. They accompany the armies. I told a glorious story the other day of some supervisors of the auxiliary services putting their supplies of comforts in tanks. Those tanks were placed in ships and shipped to Sicily. The comforts were removed from the tanks and the tanks went on as fighting units. The auxiliary services took their cigarettes and chocolates and other things and went ashore for the comfort of our fighters.


Gordon Graydon: I presume the civilian corps of Canadian fire fighters take their places in some organization of United Kingdom fire fighters with like duties. If that is so, is there a distinction between the military and the fire fighters in so far as income tax in Great Britain is concerned? I have an idea that may have a bearing on the point. Has the minister made any inquiries in that regard?
Mr. LaFLECHE: In England the equivalent of our fire fighters corps is known as the national fire service. That definitely is a civilian corps. I happen to know that whatever may be projected over there in the distant future these men will maintain their status of a civilian corps. The workings of the income tax in Great Britain are different from what they are here. I cannot answer that part of my hon. friend's question.


Gordon Graydon: There would be this distinction and difference: the Canadian fire fighters who go over are sent overseas. The national service in Britain would be at home. Because of that I fancy our men would have a greater moral claim to exemption from the income tax provisions.
Mr. LaFLECHE: May I express thanks for the support I have received in this matter.


James Alexander Marshall: The minister has repeated on a number of occasions during the last few minutes that this is a civilian corps. I would deduce from that that little hope arises for these men getting very much consideration with reference to the matter of income tax. Yet from his own statement one learns that the comptroller of the treasury has been ordered not to collect taxes from these men. It would appear to me there is going to be trouble ahead unless some action is taken to clear up the matter, and clear it up very soon. It would not be a very pleasant thing for these men to be faced with the payment of at least two years' taxes if it is discovered that the Minister of National War Services cannot assist them. Would it not be better to collect the taxes and hold them

War Appropriation-War Services
until the point is decided one way or the other upon an official basis? From the way it is being done now, it looks to me as if there are' going to be breakers ahead.
Mr. LaFLECHE: I hope it will not come to what the hon. member for Camrose has stated. Instructions have not been given. But an understanding had been arrived at with the treasury officials, which took place before the date of the report mentioned by my hon. friend, in which it was tacitly agreed by all concerned that they would await a final decision in this matter. While I have not the figures here, the fact is that -in nearly all cases the amount of income tax is not great. The department will continue to try to find relief for these men.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Do
they live in barracks or are they boarded out?
Mr. LaFLECHE: They live in barracks. They are comfortably put up and, through their own exertions and care, they have a very good table.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Firemen who have gone from Canada to Great Britain will learn something over there about fire-fighting under difficult conditions, and will have experiences which they might not have in Canada. It would seem that when they return they would be even better qualified to put out fires in this country. So that their training over there will have been worth while.
Mr. LaFLECHE: The hon. member is quite right. While there is a certain amount of monotony, owing to their having to wait for the enemy to come, it is not that way all the time. Members of the corps' are continually being sent to training schools in the British isles operated by the national fire service. I am pleased to report that the performance of members of our corps at such schools has been very good indeed. They learn about that which has to do with fighting fires under conditions prevailing in the British isles, taking into consideration incendiary bombs, the possibility of asphyxiating gases, and they have to be, familiar with making rescues at sea. I would expect to see future chiefs of Canadian fire brigades drawn from members of this corps.


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: What are the hurdles which have prevented the minister's department for more than two years from arriving at a satisfactory solution of this simple problem?
Mr. LaFLECHE: I assure the hon. member it is not a simple problem, because it might run into many spheres of the civilian side of
war activities. A favourable decision would have to come from the Minister of National Revenue. But he cannot make his recommendation offhand, since he must take many factors into consideration. For instance, the relief recently given to supervisors of auxiliary services was under consideration for a very considerable time.


Howard Charles Green: Too long.
Mr. LaFLECHE: Perhaps. But due care and attention must be paid when something of that kind is undertaken. The action taken is hardly ever limited to the particular field one may have under survey at the moment.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Committee on cooperation in Canadian citizenship, $46,367.
Jean-François Pouliot: I have two or three questions to ask. First I would ask for a detailed account of the item.
Mr. LaFLECHE: That section of the Department of National War Services known as the committee on cooperation in Canadian citizenship had approved for it last year a total of $18,347, while this year the amount asked for is $46,367. The estimate is made up
as follows:
Salaries	 $33,892
Cost of living bonus	 1.100
Unemployment insurance	 75
Travelling expenses	 10,000
Printing and stationery	 300
Miscellaneous	 1,000
It may be known to only a few that this section has suffered in a. most noteworthy manner, in fact has suffered as no other organization of which I have known, from the crippling effects of illness and indisposition among the small membership of the staff. Each member of the staff has at one time or another been off work with what was certified to by a doctor as an ailment sufficient to put the employee on the shelf for the time being. The aims and objects of the branch are very high. They have to do with helping newcomers to Canadian citizenship to become better Canadian citizens. The aim is somewhat idealistic, but I have always felt that there is a definite place for it, and that people who come to live here should be assisted as much as possible.
I am certain it is not known that the recommendation was made to me, as minister, that this branch be done away with. I kept it on-nursed it, if you like-because I have always felt that we have to have some such organization. The past work of the branch has run pretty much on a level until recently.

War Appropriation-War Services
It has always done about the same thing; in fact, I do not think a graph would show much deviation.
Recently, however, it has been possible to obtain the services of a gentleman who, in my opinion and that of others, is highly qualified. I believe he will be able to lift up this work to that high level I believe it should occupy. I refer to Doctor Robert England, who has accepted a civil service certificate appointment to come to Ottawa to do this work. He will stay here for a few months, during which time I am sure that, not only will this branch show renewed strength, but its work will develop and become greater. So that we may have the extra staff required, I ask for an increase of $24,280 in the salaries item.


Mr. STIRLING:: What does it actually do?
Mr. LaFLECHE: It keeps in touch with groups of what are known as new Canadians. These are people who come from other lands to settle in Canada. My hon. friend knows there are many such persons. They are to be found everywhere. An attempt is being made to make these people feel at home.


Grote Stirling: How is the work carried out?
Mr. LaFLECHE: By personal contact at meetings of these persons, and by keeping in touch with the editors of what are known as the foreign language newspapers. Different matters touching on Canadian citizenship are brought to the attention of these people wherever possible through their own publications.


Jean-François Pouliot: Might we have the amounts paid to these employees?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Will the minister also state the number of employees there are this year? Last year there were four.
Mr. LaFLECHE:	Five, with Doctor
England, and we are increasing the staff. Last year Mr. Tracey Phillips received $4',392, and Doctor Kay, a foreign language newswriter, S3,000.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: That has been jumped by S500 this year.
Mr. LaFLECHE: On the recommendation of the civil service commission. There was an editorial assistant at $2,400, which is an increase. There was a stenographer at $1,200. Those are the four for last year. For this year there is a director at $4,500; one research assistant at $3,600; a liaison officer with the foreign language press, $3,000; a liaison officer

with the English and French press, $3,000; one editor at $2,800; two readers at $1,920, and two stenographers at $1,080.


Howard Charles Green: Are the present personnel being retained?
Mr. LaFLECHE: Yes, and there will be additions this year. As I see the picture, it is necessary to add to the staff. It was recommended that I disband this section, but I could not see my way clear to do so. I think we owe it to these newcomers to carry on this cooperation in this way.


Jean-François Pouliot: Some hon. members have complained about bureaucracy. Last year this item was $18,000 and this year it is $46,367, almost twice as .much. Time marches on, bureaucracy marches on. Doctor England is employed to teach something that is nonexistent, Canadian citizenship. We have been told that our nation is the equal of any nation in the world, but the fact is that we are just colonials. I have been criticized many times because I told the truth, because I did not want to feed people with words to make them believe that they were more important than they were. We have heard much about the progress that has been achieved by the enactment of the statute of Westminster, but that is just bunk. Mr. Chaloult, provincial member for Lotbiniere, has been arrested because he has expressed his feelings in public. If there are people who are called ultra-nationals in the province of Quebec, it is because some people have given more importance to the statute of Westminster than it deserves.
Over the radio we hear a silly programme called, "Metairie Rancourt". There are imperialists who want to have the union jack as our flag. That is their business, and that is our flag at the present time. Some people are for having a Canadian flag. I think the matter deserves consideration. But the fact is that our national flag is now the union jack, and we are the only country in the British empire without a national flag. We are asked to provide money to promote cooperation in Canadian citizenship. What is this for? Is it to put in the minds of the people who listen to the radio the idea that there is a Canadian flag?
As I say, I listened to a programme over the C.B.C. called, "Metairie Rancourt". I do not know who wrote this nor do I know how much was paid for it. I intend to quote from this programme in English as well as in French so that it may be understood by those who are bilingual as well as by those who are not. I had never heard of this programme before, but it was supposed to be a father

War Appropriation-War Services
talking to his children and telling them, "Nous avons notre drapeau, notre drapeau, c'est le drapeau fleur delise". I have not the proper translation of that, but in effect he was saying that we have a flag, that this is our flag, that this is the old French flag. That was what was going out over the national network. Someone was trying to fool the people who were listening to that programme. I object to that sort of thing most strenuously.
What we should do to have Canadian citizenship is a change in our passports; they should refer to us as Canadian citizens instead of British. But the minister would never dare to suggest that, and there are very few members who would dare to suggest it. Why talk of Canadian citizenship when we are still British citizens? I am not ashamed of being a British subject, but I would be prouder if I were a Canadian subject, if I were respected throughout the world as a Canadian subject. Hon. members should read the speeches made by Mr. Lapointe on two occasions during the first session of 1939. He was referring to citizenship, and he stated that a Canadian was a British citizen in this country as well as in the British isles, which was, according to him, another reason why we should not be neutral [DOT]during the war.
The Minister of National War Services will not increase the importance of his department by increasing the staff of such branches, which should not be there to fool the Canadian people. If someone says that I am against Canadian citizenship, that is untrue. But I want my people to be informed of the facts as they are. Instead of being giants internationally, we are dwarfs, and we are dwarfs just because of an inferiority complex on the part of these people who try to give the Canadian people the impression that they are international giants when they are not. Is that clear enough? And that is done in times of war when it is impossible to get a pension for our boys who! are wounded and for those who are discharged from the army. There will be all these doctors, the pests of the universe, who will come here to bring about "cooperation in Canadian citizenship". It is just a waste of time and money because, when it comes down to facts, nothing is done. It will not take $46,367 to give Canadian [DOT]citizenship to our own people. The only thing to do is for the Prime Minister, now in London, to say to Mr. Churchill: The Canadians want to be called Canadian subjects. And they will remain in the British empire just the same. That will be sufficient to give us Canadian citizenship and that will save $46,367 to the Canadian people.
Moreover, I cannot see why we talk about Canadian citizenship when not long ago Senator Robertson or Robinson-I am not sure of his name but he is the national chairman of the National Liberal Federation-dared to say in public that the Prime Minister would go to London as the leader of the small nations, and when Viscount Cranbome said in London the other day that everything would be decided by the big powers and that the small powers would have to listen to the big powers. How can we speak of Canadian citizenship then? We must tell the truth to the Canadian people, and if the wartime information board is the misinformation board, it is the duty of the members of parliament to inform their constituents and the Canadian people as to the real facts. That is my view, Mr. Chairman, and I cannot conceive that members of parliament will let this item pass.
Cooperation in Canadian citizenship! What is that? The worst thing for national unity is the campaign that is made for it. The Canadian people are under the impression that if somehting is done or is not done, it is to appease one of the provinces. How many are afraid to do the right thing and to tell the people that if conscription has apparently not been passed, it is not to appease the province of Quebec because man-power in that province is at rock-bottom just as it is in the rest of Canada, and that it would destroy the war effort of Canada to impose conscription. But no member of the government has the courage to say to the Canadian people that the man in overalls is doing as much to win the war as the man who carries a rifle. And so it all comes on the back of the province of Quebec. It is to appease the province of Quebec, forsooth, that we have not conscription! Is that not a shame? Why not tell the truth so that the people will understand? I am against the policy of appeasing this one Or that one, of not doing this thing or that thing for fear of displeasing someone. There must be a reason for doing a thing, and why not give the right reason? Then no money will need to be wasted on such an item as this. It is revolting to see how public money is wasted. Cents are economized and dollars are wasted, especially in this department, which I denounce with all the strength I have.
Then there are publications presumably to give out news. Little papers are sent out. It is like the images which supposedly would cure stomach ills if swallowed by a sick person. Probably "Nouvelles Catholiques" are got out to make people forget the distribution of condoms by the department of health-

War Appropriation-War Services
"Nouvelles Catholiques:' on the one hand and condoms on the other. It is sanctimonious. Religion itself is a very good thing and it would be excellent to have chapels for the soldiers in the camps. But those chapels are not built. We should have chapels for spiritual worship. Then "Nouvelles Catho-liques" are published and sent all over, while the young men in the camps very often have no place to worship. Instead of wasting time on these useless branches of the department, the Minister of National War Services, who has had good experience as a former deputy minister of the Department of National Defence, should say something to his colleagues, especially his colleague the Minister of National Defence for Air, to see to it that the bright young men in any branch of the army should have facilities for worship, so that each one can pray to God in his own manner. They must rely on the Divine Providence for help in their undertakings, and they must have the fullest support from the government in that connection. That is one thing.
Next, dispense with all these frills and get back to fundamentals. See that the people of Canada are not deceived by false propaganda. Then I hope that there will be a strong wind to dissipate all the clouds that prevent information from reaching the Canadian people. When one speaks as I do, if he does not commit blasphemy, he may be accused of being sacrilegious when he is throwing down false idols.
The only way to have true Canadian citizenship in this land is first to get rid of an inferiority complex as compared with any outsider. A Canadian, even if he is a British subject, does not have the official right to call himself a Canadian citizen. But first he must have pride in his own country, whether Canada is his native country or his country of adoption. A Canadian must be proud of being a Canadian. That is the first thing.
The second thing is that there should be no false representation to anyone. Then there must be no appeasement of any kind, and by appeasement I mean the abandonment of the rights of some people under the pretext of pleasing some other part of the population. These are most serious matters. When the right thing is done, no one is afraid to call it by its proper name; when the wrong thing is done, everyone is evasive.
Since there has been a denunciation of bureaucracy throughout Canada I hope the protests against this item will be so strong that the Minister of National War Services will cancel the engagement of Doctor England

and all his staff and wait until we are Canadian citizens in fact as well as in name before undertaking any further expenditures of this kind.


Thomas Langton Church: I should like to find out something about this famous committee. I believe it is a waste of money to have what appears to be a new item for $46,367 for a committee on cooperation in Canadian citizenship. We have so many committees that the House of Commons has very little control over expenditures. This committee is to consist of four men; soon there will be five, and it will be their job to try to improve the standard of citizenship among newcomers. I am absolutely opposed to this proposal. We had a gentleman named Professor Kirkconnell, who wrote a national war book for the government glorifying those who had been born in Europe, at the expense of the native born, the British born and the French who have been here for so many years. He was-engaged by the predecessor of the present minister. I do not blame the minister for these items, because most of the abuses which have been brought to his attention were there before he took over the department. This is an innovation.
The other day he discussed a charities committee headed by Mr. Charles Burton, who has done splendid work in connection with education, and in many public and private charities, and is a great citizen of Toronto and an outstanding Canadian. That committee includes men like Mr. F. K. Morrow, Mr. Gordon Perry and others, who have worked day and night and have effected large economies in the war charities branch. I have known the chairman of that committee, Mr. Charles Burton, for many years; he is a leading citizen of Toronto, a large employer of labour, who has rendered splendid service to the city, the province, the dominion and the empire. Now we are to have another committee of a different kind altogether appointed, which as I see it will be largely a political committee that will create more disunity than unity in Canada and do nothing but talk.
In the fifth year of the war why should it be necesary to appoint a committee to bring about cooperation in connection with Canadian citizenship? Why are these people admitted to the country unless they know all about citizenship and matters of that kind? This is just catering to a certain element in the country, many of whom have taken no part at all" in our war effort. Some of them are conscientious objectors. We are spending four billion dollars of the money of the taxpayers, and dear knows the time has come for retrenchment and economy. I said this long before the present minister was at the head of this department; I am sorry to have to say it

War Appropriation-War Services
again, because he is not to blame for a great deal of it. I do say this is appealing to sectional interests and will cause widespread disunity. There is no such thing as unity in Canada at the present time, and we might as well admit it. We had some evidence of that this afternoon in regard to the war. Wars are won b3r soldiers, sailors and airmen at the scene of combat. They do not need any committee to teach them cooperation in Canadian citizenship or to tell them what to do. I believe this new item should be struck out;
I do not want to take the government by surprise, but if this were estimates I should like to move that the item be reduced to $1. We must find some method of paring down these estimates, something similar to the system I have already mentioned. Before we know it they will have a hundred on this committee; it will be beyond comparison with the committee of one hundred. When I was head of the Toronto police commission there was a committee of forty and a committee of one hundred; I was asked what the difference was, and I said there were sixty more men on one committee than on the other. One committee looked after the theatres and endeavoured to censor programmes, while the other committee sought to get cooperation in other ways. When my leader was at law school he probabfy saw some of the work of those two famous committees.
This is an absolute waste of money. Where is the committee to' meet; how will it function; how many officials will it have? Is it a military body? I have referred already to one book which was written in connection with cooperation, by Professor Kirkconnell. What has he said? He got up in a lecture at the university of Toronto in January 1942, and said there was no room in Canada for the British-born. In his book for the government he glorified the Japanese, saying there were fewer Japanese than British-born in the law courts. Now he has changed his tune and is writing different pamphlets on communism all the time. I suppose this new committee on cooperation in Canadian citizenship will take university professors who are free in the summer months and have them write another book. Probably the committee will have secretaries, under-secretaries, managers, assistant managers, and so on; they will set up an office here in Ottawa; they will have regional committees all over Canada, and the thing will be ridiculous. I cannot find any such committee in England. This committee is to cooperate in connection with citizenship. What does citizenship mean? It means different things to different people. Some who come here will accept all the
privileges of Canadian citizenship but will do nothing to defend the country in time of war or to aid the government in prosecuting the most disastrous war the world has ever known.
We should cut out a great many of these frills. I predict that next year this item will be for 8100,000, and I think this is a great waste of money. I suppose there will be lectures all over Canada, radio appeals and all that sort of thing. I think it is just a lot of humbug; that word is very often used in the British parliament. You cannot fool the public this way, the taxpayers are getting sick of this sort of thing. All sorts of committees, control boards and so on have been foisted upon parliament, and we have nothing to say about it. I protest; I think the whole thing is becoming farcical; almost every day we are appointing another committee. I move that the item be reduced to SI; that is enough.


Mr. HLYNKA:: I happen to have followed the work of this branch perhaps a little more closely than some hon. members, and I feel that I may be in a position to say something which may throw some light on the subject under discussion. In the first place I wish to congratulate the minister upon having refused to do away with this branch of his department. In my opinion the personnel of this branch should be increased to at least fifty. I am not sure whether many hon. members know there is a similar department in the United States. Too many of us, I think, do not realize that some people who come here from other countries encounter certain special difficulties and problems in which they require assistance and guidance. This branch studies these matters and makes suggestions to various departments of government in regard to these problems.
I know personally some of the men in this branch, and I have had the privilege of appearing with a number of them on platforms addressing various ethnic groups and trying to bring them together in an effort to find a common ground upon which all of us could meet. In the United States there is issued a publication known as "Common Ground", and the title itself suggests the material it contains. This particular publication is devoted entirely to the problems which confront different ethnic groups, and those who contribute to it endeavour to point out to the people of the United States that unless they are ready to find a common ground, unless they do their best to unite on major issues facing their country, they cannot pos-

War Appropriation-War Services
sibly be a strong nation which should be united in regard to all matters that demand unity.
To many of us, it seems that there are no special problems of this kind in Canada. Let me say to the committee that in Canada we need not only a branch of a department of this kind to look after this particular work, but an entire department to handle the different groups and to iron out all the difficulties confronting them.
This committee studies the press in foreign languages and records certain valuable information, and if hon. members would care to drop into its office they would be welcome to all the material which they would care to have along the lines I have indicated. I know that had this committee been in existence at the beginning of the war, the government would not have made the blunder it did in putting the ban on all foreign languages with respect to radio broadcasting during the war.
Let us consider some of these groups. They have been exemplary citizens. Their sons are in the armed services and they themselves are doing their best to help Canada win the war. They have always been an ideal type of citizens. But what do we find? At the beginning of the war the government had not the proper information and advice and it refused radio services to any group which did not happen to speak English or French. In my opinion the government has done itself a lot of harm. Surely we should trust our citizens. We should be intelligent enough to be able to use to our advantage the various languages spoken. Why be afraid of them? As I say, the government made a mistake because it did not have the proper advice in these matters. It, therefore, clamped down on so-called foreign broadcasting in Canada. That, in my opinion, was definitely a mistake.
In the United States the government, if I remember correctly, is broadcasting in thirty-six languages. Why not? Why not use every language we know, and do so to our own advantage? It could not harm us at all. It surprises me to find that some hon. members take it for granted that this particular branch of the minister's department is useless, that it is not rendering any useful purpose to Canada. Personally, therefore, having the information which I have about the work of this department, I strongly endorse and support the government in its appropriation of this money for this particular branch and I should like to see the estimate increased and the personnel of the branch extended.
Let us, therefore, tackle properly the problem which we often call the "problem of unity". Well, you can tackle it only by
[Mr. Hlynka.}
studying it, and believe me there are in Canada to-day many problems that could be very well ironed out, resulting in unity.


Mr. BURTON:: When I noticed this item under this heading in this department I was at a loss to understand why it should appear there. However, after listening to the speaker who has just taken his seat, it has come to me that in all probability this is only a war measure, so to speak. That really astounds me. If it is so, then I would say that this work has been commenced fifty years too late; it should have been commenced years and years ago. I support the hon. member who has just taken his seat and urge that this work be continued, because I know it has great potentialities, and there is a big field for it.
Just how wisely or well the money has been spent I do not know, but I know the opportunities are there to do a really worthwhile work. I differ with the hon. member for Broadview, who I am sorry is not in his place at the moment, when he says that the item should be reduced to the sum of 81. There is great work to be done in this country. I urge the minister by all means to continue with that work. If I may be permitted I would suggest that not only is that work required among the so-called new Canadians but there is room for that education among other types of Canadians. Some of the things that people take exception to in so far as the new Canadians are concerned go back to the doors of those who in their smug complacency think they are the only ones on God's green earth.
Very often in the past new Canadians have been used when it has suited the advantage of others to do so. When times come along in which they do not need this help the new Canadians were simply no good. That does not tend to Canadian unity. It does not tend to build up Canadian citizenship. I wish to draw this to your attention, Mr. Chairman, and especially to the attention of people who hold that view. Some of us are new Canadians by choice. Many of us are Canadians only by accident of birth. Many of us are new Canadians because we came here prepared to do. our part as citizens of this country. We came here of our own volition appreciating the benefits and the opportunities of this land. We came here preparedto do our part in return for those opportunities. In this country of ours there is room for many, many more people; but we cannot build up Canada, we cannot build up a true Canadian citizenship so long as we have one section pulling here and another section pulling there. We must build upon a found-

War Appropriation-War Services
ation that anyone is prepared not only to accept the benefits and privileges of citizenship in this country, but to do his part in his community life as well. As citizens of Canada we must give equal opportunity to all who are willing to do their part. [DOT]
In conclusion, may I draw to your attention what I find in many cases to be a sore spot with the so-called new Canadian and in their offspring? May I draw to your attention the system that is followed out in the taking of the census in this country? When the census taker comes around he goes into the homes of these new Canadians and their descendants. He sits down and takes their names. He then asks for the racial origin. Let me give you an example of how it works. I know of a case-and there are many others of a similar nature-where the father was bom in the United States of parents who were born in the United States. The grandparents had come from the little duchy of Luxembourg. Later on, these people came to Canada. This man married a girl who not only was born, raised and educated in Canada but whose children to-day are the seventh generation Canadian-born on the mother's side. When they try to explain that situation to the census taker he writes down the racial origin as German. As I have said, on the mother's side these people were the seventh generation Canadian-born. Even the grandparents on the father's side had never seen the old country, much less Germany, and yet they are entered on the records as of German racial origin. I have nothing to say about any person's racial origin, but that is what happens in this country. You find cases where certain people's children and their children's children are bom and raised in this country and yet we have no Canadian racial origin.
I just leave that with you, Mr. Chairman, and with the hon. members of the committee. I realize that possibly it has nothing to do with the matter that is before us, but it is one part of the many problems that we have to face in this country. Many of th'ose so-called new Canadians are doing their part. I can take you to the constituency I have the honour to represent and show you sons of men who were born in Germany and who to-day are flying over Germany and dropping bombs on it. We have every race, religion and nationality represented in that constituency, and by and large every one of them is trying to do his utmost to be a true Canadian. Tet us forget these differences; let us pull together as Canadians and not one pull gee and the other haw.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Mr. LaFLECHE: This afternoon we heard something about Doctor Robert England. I think I owe it to that gentleman and to the committee to say something more about him. He is a distinguished gentleman in the scholastic field, a man who has devoted much of his time to a study of matters concerning the national welfare. But what perhaps attracted me. first to him was that he has a gallant record of service at the front in the last war. I note he was awarded the military cross, and was wounded at Vimy. I know, too, that Doctor England was overseas during this war. I honour him as I honour all those who have fought the enemies of Canada. I believe that with his assistance it will be possible to bring this branch to the point I should like to have it brought, one of very real service to the large numbers of those whom we now term new Canadians. There is good work to be done, and it is my intention to see that that work is done.


Howard Charles Green: I was surprised, and a little disturbed to hear the criticism levelled against this work this afternoon. My understanding is that this is really the nationalities branch of the Department of National War Services. The minister will corect me if I am wrong in that.
Mr. LaFLECHE: That is quite right.


Howard Charles Green: It is described in the vote as a committee on cooperation in Canadian citizenship. I also understand that this branch is comparatively new, having been established some time after the commencement of the war, with the objective of ironing out some of the difficulties arising among groups of people in Canada who, although Canadians, were of foreign birth, most of them having come from the continent of Europe.
My understanding is that the purpose of the nationalities branch is to help develop a Canadian outlook. It is to help Canadians of all stocks to meet understandingly on common ground. I believe very go'od work has been done along that line. Particularly was I impressed by the support given by the hon. member for Vegreville who is the only member of the house bom in the Ukraine. He is our only Ukrainian Canadian, and the house is -most fortunate in having him here as a member, because he brings us an outlook which perhaps most of us did not have. I thought his support of this work, which he indicated this afternoon, was most impressive and very much to the point.

War Appropriation-War Services
I hope the minister will not be downhearted or discouraged by the statements made this afternoon, because there is much to be done to build up a Canadian outlook, a Canadian, nationality. The work of the nationalities branch is a step in that direction. I suggest that eventually we shall have to have immigration; the work of this branch, which is that of making our people better acquainted; and the work of naturalization dealt with in one department. Immigration, the welcoming of people who come here, and eventually naturalizing them, whereby we accept them into full citizenship, should be handled by one department. I suggest that hon. members turn that thought over in their minds, because I believe in that way we would be able to build up citizenship in a manner which would be much more satisfactory than if the three different types of work continue to be handled in three different departments as at the present time.
I do think, however, that the minister should take warning from the criticisms offered this afternoon, most of which I believe originate in the thought that the nationalities branch might play politics. I do not know that that is so now, nor would I suggest it for a moment. However, that thought may be in the minds of some hon. members. They may feel that whatever government happens to be in power may, from time to time, use the nationalities branch to try to get votes from groups of Canadians of different stocks. For that reason I suggest that the work of this branch must be kept absolutely clear of the slightest suspicion of political interference.
I would warn the minister, too, against expanding the work of the branch too quickly. The vote this year is nearly three times that of last, and I believe it would be wise to make haste a lit tie more slowly. I would ask him, too, to give some further details of the work being dene. For example, Canadian clubs in Canada, from one coast to the other are deeply mlerested in this subject. They want the Canadian people to become acquainted with one another, so that they may help build up a Canadian outlook. Has anything been done by the nationalities branch to cooperate with those Canadian clubs? What other steps of that kind have been taken by the branch?
I am certainly convinced, however, that the objective is excellent, and hope that the work will be carried on. Let me repeat that the minister should not be downhearted or discouraged because of some of the criticisms levelled at the branch this afternoon.
TMr. Green.]


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Chairman, I have
only a few words to say. The question is not one of emouraging or discouraging the minister, but rather one of seeing things as they are-and no more than that. I would be the last to oppose any move toward Canadian citizenship, but we cannot have cooperation between things which do not exist. Obviously Canadian citizenship does not now exist, and if it is deemed advisable to have Canadian citizenship we must build it, before attempting any coordination. There are many newcomers in this country; there are many refugees, and every one should have the Canadian spirit. It is not enough to have Canadian citizenship; we must all have the Canadian spirit. What is that spirit? It is love of this country before anything else. Some people do not understand it in that way. One considers that love of this country precludes love for any other country. Some say, "We must have the empire first."
The empire is all right, but the imperialist in Canada is a man without a country. He is a colonial; he thinks first of the motherland. I do not say that in any offensive way, I say it in a realistic way. But we who are not imperialists are also colonials because Canada is just a colony in spite of the pompous designation given to this country. I want to make myself clear about this.
A lot has been said about Canada being autonomous, being the equal of the other countries in the British empire. That is the bunk, that is untrue. Whether imperialists are in the majority or not in this country, the password comes from London as far as they are concerned. Everything said in London impresses them to such an extent that they cannot have a really Canadian spirit. So long as there are imperialists in this country; so long as the imperialists rule this country, it will be impossible to have a Canadian spirit prevail. There may be some people who are imbued with the Canadian spirit, but that is not seen in our legislation. I think it should be easy to discuss this matter without offending anyone.
An imperialist has the right to be an imperialist, just the same as one who is not has the right not to be. It is simply a viewpoint. I shall not surprise the committee by saying that I am not an imperialist. I think of Canada before I think of any country in the British empire or anywhere else. But that does not mean that I am an anti-British. The point of view of some imperialists is to call traitor those who do not share their views. I respect the views of the imperialists even though I do not share them, and I ask

War Appropriation-War Services
for the same treatment. I do not expect them to share my views, at least right away, but I want them to respect my views.
How is it possible for one who is Canadian in spirit to show that he is faithful to his country? It is the simplest thing in the world. In the first place he should have no inferiority complex as far as any other country is concerned. He should consider himself equal to anyone in any other country, not superior but equal. He must not only consider himself so, but act accordingly. Then he must speak the real truth. Why are there difficulties between Canadians at times? It is because the truth is not spoken to all of them. The same gospel is not preached in all the provinces at the same time. There is one kind of thing for one province, and another for another province. Is it any wonder that when people from various parts of the country meet together they are like strangers?
They have not been fed with the same food. The people in Ontario have been told that the people of Quebec are rebels, that they are disloyal to the empire because they do not hold the same views about the British empire being their own country. We may be within the British empire, but we should be Canadians first. This fact is recognized by a large number of Canadians of British origin. Hon. members would be surprised at the number in the armed forces who hold this view. One of the most extraordinary things that has been said is that the French Canadians want to take possession of this country and impose their rule. That is not our point of view at all. All that the French speaking Canadians of Quebec or anywhere else want is to be at peace with their fellow citizens.
They lose no opportunity to help their fellow citizens in the other provinces in times of disaster or catastrophe. Quebec has subscribed very well to *all the victory loans. In this loan the village of Cabano, the birthplace of Major Paul Triquet, V.C., was the first place to reach its quota. If we are to have unity, we must act as we speak; we must tell the truth. We should have nothing to hide from our fellow citizens. There are ambitious people who try to create prejudice in order to make a personal gain, but that is all wrong. My hon. friends may go to Quebec at any time and they will see how well they will be received. Good roads have improved the national unity because they afford an opportunity to people from one part of the country to meet those in another part, to talk to each other and to find out that there is really no difference in their problems. There is no difference between a good Canadian farmer in the province of
Quebec and a good Canadian farmer in the province of Ontario, even though the one may be French speaking and Catholic and the other English speaking and Scotch Presbyterian or English Methodist or a good Irishman. There is no difference at all. The people should meet together and talk things over. We should not have to listen to such false stories as I referred to this afternoon, stories about the French flag being our flag when everyone knows it is not. That was not told in English, it was told in French. It was not sent over a private network, it was sent over the C.B.C.
Why tell lies? Why give people a false impression of other people? That is my view. That is why I object strongly to the statute of Westminster, which is an act of the imperial parliament. That statute was intended to give the dominions or the colonies-I am calling the dominions colonies on purpose-the impression that they were more important than they really are. We hear about the halibut treaty and things like that. We are told that England was not holding Canada by the hand when that treaty was signed. Why was that? We are not autonomous, according to the letter of the law. There are provisions for disallowance in the constitution of Canada, and those sections have never been repealed. But if we pass legislation for two consecutive years it cannot be disallowed by Westminster. I maintain that we shall have no true Canadian citizenship so long as those provisions in the constitution are not repealed. We are not masters of our own destiny, not even to stay within the empire. We are in a state of minority and of guardianship. That is why I cannot listen to anyone who says we are on an equal footing with the other nations of the British empire. That is my point.
To summarize what I have said, I do not want anyone to deceive the Canadian people. I hope that it will be possible to speak to them the plain language of truth, and the country will be so much the better for that.
The minister has said that the aims of this branch are very high. They are to help the newcomers to become better Canadian citizens. What does he mean by that? It is important that the minister explain what he means by good Canadian citizens. He said that it was an idealistic branch and that he had nursed it. I wonder why he cherishes it so much.
Then he said that Doctor Robert England had accepted a civil service appointment. He said that Doctor England had behaved well during the last war and during this war. That I do not deny at all. But once again, because a man has behaved well in a theatre of war

War Appropriation-War Services
he is not necessarily qualified for any position or to promote Canadian citizenship. He may be willing to do so but he might be unable to do so. I am all for helping the Canadian veterans, and I have proved it. Only recently the government acceded to my request in favour of a man who had the finest record in the last war. It was not a military organization that made that request but the member for Temiscouata, and I appreciate the fact that the government saw fit to grant my request and to honour this man who deserves public recognition. But that is not all. There is a feeling in this house that a returned man can fill any job in this country.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: Hear, hear.


Jean-François Pouliot: The hon. member for Fraser Valley, for instance, is a very clever member, but I wonder if he could perform the duties of astronomer at the experimental farm. He might be given a preference in such an appointment, but my fear is that he would see too many stars. What I also regret is that some people speak of the military preference in order to catch votes. I say that the returned men have done enough to deserve consideration by this country and to be helped by being put in a position where they can render the best service.
The minister also said that this branch keeps in touch with groups of what are known as new Canadians. Who are the new Canadians? Are they the refugees who come here by the shipload, or are they those who have been freed from anti-nazi camps? I do not know; we should be told.
The minister also said that people come here from other lands to settle in Canada and an attempt is being made to make these people feel at home. How is it done? Is it promoting good Canadian citizenship to make them feel at home?
The minister also said that different matters touching on Canadian citizenship are brought to the attention of these people wherever possible through their own publications. What are those publications? We have not been told.
I should like to have full information about Doctor Robert England, where he was born, how long he has been in Canada, and what his qualifications are for the post. I should like to, have the same information with respect to Mr. Tracy Phillips and Doctor Kay, a foreign language newswriter, and the same information with respect to the two editorial assistants. The stenographer was there last year, and I presume she is a good stenographer. But then a director has been appointed this year at $4,500 and a research

assistant at $3,600; also two liaison officers, one with the foreign language press and the other with the English and French press. These two are the niggers in the woodpile. I wonder how many liaison officers there are in all branches of the government. There are liaison officers here and liaison officers there. They are the ones who prevent the people from being informed. The press gallery was infested with some of them who were there all the time telling the journalists what to write and what not to write, that if they wrote such and such a thing there would be trouble with Washington or somewhere else. In that way they were trying to get the press gallery to cater to their own views by suppressing views of public interest. That was done by many of them. One of my good friends from Toronto asked a question about one of these men who was spending his time in the press gallery, and it was thought sacrilegious for him to ask that question. But this sort of thing continues and it prevents the Canadian people from getting the news. That is probably the work of liaison officers in the wartime misinformation board. It would be a good thing to know who they are and what are their qualifications. If a military preference is required for the position it would be interesting to know their military record in a theatre of war.
The minister said that Doctor England was a returned man. If one has to be a returned man to get one of these positions, what is the military record of these men, because the same requirement must apply to all? I will leave out the stenographers because' there is no conscription for women. A girl is not bound to be a C.W.A.C. in order to be patriotic. But it is important to have the information with respect to every one of these other positions. There is for instance an editor at $2,800; two readers at $1,920. They are pretty well paid for proofreading. I wonder if the proofreaders at the printing bureau are as well paid. Then there are two stenographers at $1,080, and it is stated that there will be additions to the staff this year. The salaries for the present financial year amount to $33,892; bonus, $1,100; unemployment, $75; travelling expenses, $10,000-$10,000 for these people to travel all over the country; printing and stationery, $300; miscellaneous, $1,000. I do not insist on details with respect to the item of $300 for printing and stationery, because that does not seem extravagant. On the other hand some explanation must be given in connection writh the $10,000, and we must know what are the directions given these men.

War Appropriation-War Services
What is meant by the minister when he speaks of Canadian citizenship? He must tell us if it exists and, if it does exist, since when; we must have some information about it. I am rather surprised that the hon. member for Broadview and myself should be the only members to protest against this extravagance, this abnormal increase in bureaucratic inefficiency. I wonder if other hon. members will not join us. I should hope that we might be joined by my hon. friend the leader of the opposition, my genial friend the Minister of Pensions and National Health, the Minister of National Revenue, the Minister of Mines and Resources, the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services, the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Munitions and Supply, my good friend the Ontario whip, and my good friend who defeated the former leader of the opposition. I hope they will all join me in telling the minister that this expenditure is extravagant and that we cannot go on like this. Before the dinner recess the hon. member for Vegreville 'made a very good speech. I do not agree at all with what he said, but he said it well. But I tell him that even though the intention is good he must not expect anything good to come from this branch. It is impossible, because these people are too clever to do a good job. They are the product of universities; they are the finest of intelligentsia; they are those who will mould the heads of the new Canadians, though I hope not to their liking.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: What is wrong with being intelligent?


Jean-François Pouliot: Not intelligence but intelligentsia, which is altogether different; intelligentsia is the excess of intelligence. We have it everywhere in the civil service.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Go right after him; tell him he will not be elected.


Jean-François Pouliot: The hon. member for
Fraser Valley is an example of intelligentsia. But it is more than intelligence; it is genius, though I can tell my hon. friend that the genius is not public-spirited. They think of themselves first; they have all sorts of nice little schemes to make a nice little bit, to speak to these nice Ukrainians and convert them to Canadian citizenship; to speak to our good French Canadians and make them still warmer toward Canadian citizenship; to speak to these good Hebrews who have come from the United Kingdom, 973 in one group, and tell them to shave off their beards and look like ordinary Canadian people who are clean shaven. They will tell people things like that, and for that the genius will have
two maids instead of one and will have a brand new car instead of his old Ford dating back to 1900.


John Ewen Sinclair: Are you talking about the genius of Fraser Valley?


Jean-François Pouliot: No, I am talking about the intelligentsia now. That is enough of that; there is no reason to go on with it, because at the present time it is ridiculous when we speak of it. As soon as they start their work they will be obnoxious, and there is no reason to pay out this amount of money. As a good Canadian, as one who is proud of his country, I hope the minister will change his view and get back to normalcy by removing this item from the estimates.


Mr. CRERAR:: .May I trespass upon the patience of the committee for a brief time to discuss some aspects of this vote, which has been under consideration since early this afternoon. I am afraid some hon. members who have spoken on this matter, including the hon. member for Temiscouata, are under a misapprehension as to the purpose of this estimate. Last November I was asked to address a rather unique gathering in the city of Winnipeg. A few public-spirited citizens, some of Anglo-Saxon origin and others not of Anglo-Saxon origin, undertook to organize what is known in Winnipeg as the Canada Press club. This club embraces not only representatives of the English language newspapers but also representatives of the twenty foreign language newspapers published in that city. It was the first time these gentlemen had been brought together; some of them had never met the others. Some had brought to Canada from Europe their old ideas, with perhaps some lingering traces of the old racial animosities. The effort that was made was simply to bring them together to promote understanding, to give them a wider view of Canada, its problems, institutions and form of government.
Well, I was asked to address these gentlemen at the initial meeting, and I was profoundly impressed by what happened on that occasion. I endeavoured to explain, I am afraid somewhat inadequately, some of the aspects of Canadian life that were new to many of these people, some of whom had come from Europe only recently or at any rate within recent years. Practically all of those who attended had a word to say. I recall that one was a Sudeten German refugee whom I had the pleasure of admitting to this country in the autumn of 1938. I was greatly impressed by the manifest desire of these gentlemen who were the editors or publishers of these foreign language newspapers to be identified as

War Appropriation-War Services
Canadians. During the debate to-day I have heard the term "new Canadians" used. It is rather interesting that this phrase was referred to by one of these gentlemen in his remarks on this occasion. He said, "Why should we be called new Canadians? We are no more new Canadians than are the people who have come in recent years from Scotland or Ireland or England or the United States. We are Canadians; Canada is our home. We want to be citizens of Canada. Some of us are citizens of Canada now. We look forward to having our children educated in Canada. We look down the vista of years when we and our descendants will be Canadians; not new Canadians but Canadians in the full sense of the word."
When I left the meeting I happened to walk out with the late J. W. Dafoe. I asked him, "What impression has this meeting to-night made upon your mind?" He replied at once, "The strong desire manifest in the minds of these gentlemen to be recognized as Canadians and to be recognized as taking their full part in our Canadian life."
There is not a member of this house; there is not a good citizen anywhere in this broad dominion who would not welcome that spirit, because it is upon that spirit that we are going to build our Canadian nation.
If the committee will bear with me, I should like to give another instance that happened within my knowledge. It happened less than ten years ago in a district that was almost solidly Ukrainian. Our Ukrainian people in Canada are fond of social life. In almost every rural Ukrainian district, at any rate those I have visited, one will find the Ukrainian community hall. Moreover they are fond of having picnics. Well, on this particular occasion a picnic was being held in this village. I was asked if I would address an assembly in the afternoon along with several other speakers. I demurred because I did not speak the Ukrainian tongue, but my Ukrainian friend said that would make no difference because they all understood English except perhaps a few of the older people who were well advanced in years when they came to Canada.
I should like to tell the committee about that gathering, if I may be permitted. There was a band composed of local people who gave music in the afternoon, and I may say it was an excellent band. After the speechifying was through I walked across two or three blocks to where a baseball tournament was in progress. The teams were wholly Ukrainian young men, but the jargon, if I may term it

such, on the baseball field was what one would have heard in any English-speaking community. Some were for killing the umpire-


Mr. MAYBANK:: If the hon. gentleman will permit me, on the first base line it is patter, not jargon.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am thankful for the
correction from my hon. friend the member for Winnipeg South Centre. At any rate, the point I wish to make is that the proceedings were all in the English tongue. In that gathering of over a thousand people I heard twice as much English spoken as I heard Ukrainian. In the evening a few youngsters of eight or ten years of age were playing on a vacant lot across from the little hotel where I was staying and they were carrying on their game wholly in English. That I think is a significant fact.
There is one other thing I would mention. The enlistment among all these Canadians who came from European countries has been admirable. I will speak particularly to-night of the Ukrainians. Ukrainians have enlisted in our armed services, not in hundreds or in thousands but in tens of thousands. They are to-day on every battlefront where Canadian troops are engaged. Some were at Hong Kong, many are in Italy, many are in Britain, and some are still in Canada. Why did this happen? These young men were glad of an opportunity to serve their country in the highest form of service that any individual can give.
We have, therefore, no reason to complain of the vote which the Minister of National War Services is presenting to the committee. Those of foreign extraction, if we may use that term, are of all professions in Canada, they are in business in Canada; they are on the farms of Canada; they take their place in rural municipal councils and in our legislatures, and I am very happy to say, and I am sure the committee share the sentiment, that we have in this house a member of the Ukrainian race. I do not altogether agree with his political theories, but I wish to say that he is an acquisition to the house. In the Manitoba legislature, with which I am more familiar, there are seven Ukrainian members, one of whom is the deputy speaker in that legislative body. There is no one who knows the facts who will deny that they are making just as fine and full and useful a contribution to the public business of the country as any other group in our population, and I do not except even those of Anglo-Saxon origin like myself.
The purpose of this vote is simply to broaden the knowledge of the place that our Ukrainians

War Appropriation-War Services
and others as well, Germans, Czechs, Poles, Hungarians, have in the Canadian mosaic of our citizenship. I cannot see why that is not well worth while. I have some personal knowledge of the benefits that have flowed from the work done under this vote, and I would be very sorry indeed if the judgment of the committee was adverse to it.
I am sure it will not be. I am sure there will be general recognition that the vote is serving a very useful purpose.
After all, these Canadians, I care not from what country of continental Europe they came, are making their contribution to our Canadian life. They are making their contribution in agriculture, in the ranks of labour, in our factories, in the professions and in the arts. I believe they have a great contribution to make in what might be termed the aesthetic side of our life, a side often neglected and overlooked. In the arts, and particularly in music, these people have distinguished themselves and have made and are making a splendid contribution to our culture.
I merely wished to make these few remarks in the hope that the committee will agree to the passage of the vote.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am so delighted with the Minister of Mines and Resources, who is now leading the house, that I will not insist any further on the point.


Fred Rose: I agree that we need such a committee because we have in this country people of various nationalities who have to be drawn closer to what we would call the Canadian ideology, people who do their utmost for the war effort. If you go to the steel mills and the aircraft plants, if you go to the factories around Montreal, you will find people who have come from Europe who are producing the weapons of war and who are subscribing money generously to every war loan. They want to do their best for Canada, but it is not very easy for them at times. I have come across Canadians who have come from Europe who, when they had gone to look for a job, were asked what nationality they were. One of them was either Ukrainian or Polish, and somehow or another that fact did not go over very well. They had very great difficulties in procuring employment. I have had people come to me with compensation claims. Everyone of them claimed they could not get the same type of justice as others did. They could not explain themselves very well. They needed somebody to help them.
I would say that the committee as at present constituted is not the best committee that we
should have. We have an advisory committee. That advisory committee is composed of English- and French-speaking Canadians. Why should not there be Canadians of European extraction on the advisory committee, people who have been in this country for a long time? They know something about their people; they know something of their problems. If we must have an advisory committee we should have on it representatives of at least the larger groups of European origin in Canada. There is one man on this advisory committee with whom I want to deal to-night, namely, Watson Kirkconnell. I should say from the start that Professor Watson Kirkconnell cannot make good Canadians. Watson Kirkconnell could advise nobody on how to integrate those people into the war effort. Watson Kirkconnell does not possess the spirit of the united nations. Watson Kirkconnell is at war with the members of the united nations. Those charges may sound drastic. I do not resort to them often, but in a corner store on Sparks street I picked up a little booklet cynically called "Seven Pillars of Freedom". Here are some extracts from that book, and I say to you, Mr. Chairman; that a man who writes this type of material to-day can only do harm to the war effort, to Canadian and united nations unity. He cannot advise anybody on how to be a good Canadian. Speaking about terror, Watson Kirkconnell says the following:
As for the continuing terror, Hitler's concentration camps and party purges have taken at least five million lives (quite apart from the vast destruction of the war); while the Soviet regime, in maintaining its iron rule oyer the Russian people, has done to death in the neighbourhood of twenty-five millions.
Stalin, according to Kirkconnell, is five times as bad as Hitler. This is said by a man who is going to educate the people to be good Canadians and good followers of the united nations:


Mr. GAUTHIER:: What is the truth?


Fred Rose: We shall discuss that at some other time.


Mr. JAQUES:: It is true.


Fred Rose: I am not surprised at the hon. member making this statement.
Then a little farther on, Watson Kirkconnell makes the following statement:
It is little wonder that the Finns have so long been staging their queer sit-down strike on the frontiers of Russia, since they know all too well the probable results of "unconditional surrender" and the occupation of their country by Soviet troops.
Hitler said the same thing a few weeks ago in an interview with Stockholm correspondents.


Mr. HANSON (Skeena):: What is the hon. member reading from?
IMr. Rose.l


Fred Rose: A book entitled "Third Year
of Guerilla," by D. J. Tosevic, with a foreword by Watson Kirkconnell. Again I say that it is impossible for a man like Kirkconnell who thinks as ne does, not to be partial, not to play with a small group of Ukrainians who happen to fall in line with his ideology', not to play with a small group of Yugoslavs who think as he does. That is not unity. That is unity with small groups, small cliques. I would say that. Watson Kirkconnell must go from that committee. He has no place on it. A book like the one I mentioned, "Seven Pillars of Freedom," should not be tolerated at the present time in this country. What is more, I should think that article 39-A of the defence of Canada regulations is a good article with which to deal with Mr. Watson Kirkconnell.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: I do not intend to follow the bon. member who has just spoken. I am sorry to think the hon. member for Temiscouata has an inferiority complex and considers he is still a colonist. I do not think I am colonist. I do not think Canadians are colonists. I think it is all nonsense to talk as if we were colonists. We are not colonists. We are a free and sovereign country. We ought to be proud and should not have that inferiority complex attitude. As long as we have that kind of thinking, as long as we think we are inferior, Canada will never take her place as a great nation in the commonwealth of nations. I visualize Canada not as a nation of 11,500,000 people, but as a nation of 25,000,000 to 50,000,000 some time. We shall never get there if we continue thinking with an inferiority complex. We all know that we rule ourselves, that we make our own laws and can do just as we like. What is the use of talking such nonsense?
We want to think about the British empire and the British commonwealth of nations, not of the mistakes which have been made but of the great things that the empire has done. It has been the greatest force for freedom the world has ever known, the greatest force for liberty, the greatest force for the institution of self-government, the greatest force for freedom of speech, as illustrated in our parliament, and as we have just heard.
I am in favour of setting up this board and, provided it operates in the right way, I believe a great deal of good work can be done. New Canadians want to be Canadians. I have known many of them, and I know of the good work being done by those men from various European countries. As a matter of fact, the forbears of many' of our people came from the British isles. Some of my forbears came

War Appropriation-War Services
from Scotland, and others from England. People who come from the British isles may be called new Canadians. When they come here they are Canadians, I do not care what anybody says.	,
Difficulties in connection with racial prejudices and religious prejudices must be ironed out. If we are to have unity in Canada we must do something to iron out those prejudices. Let us keep our traditions; let us remember the past; but for goodness sake do not let us always be harping on the mistakes made hundreds of years ago. Let us think of Canada as a Canada in the great British empire; let us remember what that empire has stood for in days past.
To do its best work for Canada this board must work in cooperation with the educational institutions of our country. It can do much in guiding the work of our schools. Whether we have national unity or do not have it depends upon the work of those schools more than upon what is done by this board. It depends upon what our schools are going to teach our people, and upon whether they are going to teach the best and not the worst of our history', the best of the history of Scotland and the best of the history of Canada. But do not let us have any inferiority complex; do not let us always harp back to some grievances which took place many, many years ago. If we do that we shall never have national unity.
Let us think of Canada as a country of great possibilities; let us think of it as a country in which fine citizens of the future may be made, the same kind of citizens who in the past carved their livings from the woods of this country. Let us not forever have an inferiority complex, expecting the government to do everything for us; rather let us recognize the spirit of free enterprise and democracy. There is lots of room for a great Canada, and that is the way we are going to get it. A board of this kind can be very useful. I have not mentioned one class specifically as being new Canadians, although there are plenty of them. There are Ukrainians, and many other groups. I know what fine citizens they are, and the work they have done in this time of war. Those, like our pioneers, are the people who will help make this country great, and I believe this board can render great service in straightening out the little difficulties and misunderstandings which might arise in our dealings with those new citizens. It could be of great assistance.


Mr. BRUCE:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words at this time. I was called out of the chamber a few days ago on official
business when the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar spent some time in trying to disqualify' Mr. C. L. Burton as a suitable chairman of the war charities committee. In other words, the hon. member thinks Mr. Burton is not competent because of views he expressed in an interview, based upon his experiences when he was compelled to earn his own living at the age of fourteen, and the fact that he could not afford a university education.
May I point out to the hon. member that all education is not necessarily obtained in classrooms; rather, only a very small part of it is obtained there. Some of our most highly educated and cultured men in Canada to-day, of whom Mr. Burton is one, left school in their early years, even as early as the age of fourteen. It is Mr. Burton and men like him who have been responsible for creating the great industries in our country which, with the loyal help of labour, have made possible Canada's great contribution to the winning of the war. But Mr. Burton needs no eulogium from me; his work speaks for itself.
I am afraid this bad habit to whieh I have referred has been spreading of late. When I find that Mr. J. W. McConnell is on this committee I recall that on another occasion the hon. member for Lethbridge made some uncomplimentary and, I thought, entirely unjustified remarks about him. Mr. McConnell, like Mr. Burton, started life as a poor boy. His parents could not give him the advantages of a university education; but because of his natural ability, his great energy and splendid character he attained his present position as one of the great industrial and humanitarian leaders of Canada.
The habit of men like the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar and others of besmirching the character and integrity of our leading citizens tends to discourage such men from giving public service, and is therefore much to be regretted.


Mrs. NIELSEN:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to assure the minister that I support the idea behind the committee now under discussion, provided that committee is really promoting the national unity which we all so much desire. For my own part, I think that in addition to the work of such committees, the best thing we could do to promote national unity and to give people in Canada who come from other countries a sense of being truly Canadian would be to see that they have equal opportunities for education, for employment and for all the other amenities of life in Canada.
I myself was not born a Canadian. Those of us who were bom in other countries must naturally take an interest in the countries

War Appropriation-War Services
sorry to think the minister of this department would share anything with this man Kirkconnell.
I can only say in closing, Mr. Chairman, that any man who does as this man Kirkconnell deliberately does, distort the truth, should suffer as Mr. Churchill says all people should suffer who seek to destroy the unity of the united nations. Speaking in the House of Commons at Westminster, Mr. Churchill once said this of people who try to destroy unity, and I stand by these words:
Whoever by word of mouth or by written statement attempts to destroy the unity of the united nations, it were better for him that a millstone was hung about his neck and he were cast into the sea.
Mr. LaFLECHE: Mr. Chairman, we have heard this evening what I really think is a pity. We have heard one person after another disparaged for something that has no connection with the item before the house. I would much rather listen to a discussion for the development of Canada or for our own edification and happiness. I would much prefer to hear the hon. member for Parkdale speak as he did this evening. We' all know many men who give of their time and their strength and, though not as important, of their money, to work for Canada. They are men of good will, and when I think of those gentlemen, whether it be Mr. Burton, Mr. J. W. McConnell or anybody else, however powerful or however humble, who gives of himself for Canada, particularly at this stage of , the world war, I cannot help being reminded of what the angels sang, when our Saviour was born: "Peace on earth to men of good will". There are many men of good will. Let us honour them.


Mr. REID:: The setting up of this committee has given rise to quite a number of speeches this afternoon and evening, and as I listened to them I could not help coming to the conclusion that this subject is of great interest to each and every member of the house. The hon. member for Vegreville spoke particularly well. During his speech he asked why people like him who were born in European countries and came to Canada should be called new Canadians. As one who was born, not in this country, but in Scotland and came to Canada in 1909, if I give to him and to the house the viewpoint I had before coming here, it will perhaps answer his question why those from European countries who come here are looked upon as new Canadians rather than those of us who come from England. Ireland or Scotland.
When I left Scotland in 1909 to come to this country I felt that I was coming to a part of my own country because, whether we

like it or not, the fact remains that Great Britain had at one time conquered this country and at the time I came here Canada was looked upon as a colony of Great Britain. It vras a British country, so that when I came here as an immigrant in 1909 I felt that I was coming to a part of my own country where the language I spoke and the life I had led in Scotland would be understood and find a ready response. When I say, Mr. Chairman, that I knew the language or tongue I spoke would be understood in Canada, it may interest the house to know that I have at various times been called a foreigner, and when I first came to the House of Commons it was said that I spoke neither of the two official languages here. But I would have you bear this in mind, that nevertheless I was always able to make myself distinctly understood, and when I read my remarks in Hansard I am sure they compared favourably even with those of members who had won a Rhodes scholarship in Canada. So that I have no apologies to offer in that respect. I well remember the hon. member for Comox-Alberni and myself going before a committee of this house to oppose a certain group from the province of British Columbia. We went before that committee to oppose the Japanese delegation who also appeared before it; and I remember that the reporter in Ottawa for the C.C.F. newspaper wrote what I thought was a rather cheap criticism of our attempt to do some good, when he referred to the hon. member for Comox-Alberni and myself as two foreigners who were more or less on a par with the Japanese. However, the Scottish people always have been of a very forgiving nature and we just let that remark slide.
With regard to this committee and the work it will have to do in Canada, it seems to me that very often the emphasis is placed upon what Canadians should do for the various groups in this country. During the years I have been in this country I have come to the conclusion that perhaps we should ask the groups who come here to do something for themselves. It may -well be that we are suspicious of them, that we are somewhat jealous of them and perhaps do not welcome them into the community as cordially as we should. I for one, however, do not see how we can ever become a united country, and a great nation if we allow certain groups within the country to live off by themselves, speak their own language and practically carry on as they did in the country they left. Something has been said recently about Russia and the communists. I am not going to enter into a discussion of those matters to-night, but I have heard a great deal of talk by people who have come from Europe and who belong to the

ITm- Appropriation-TFar Services
communist organization, on the subject of what a great country is Russia. I well remember that during the unemployment years from 1930 to 1938, when people were on relief, I found upon investigation that not one of these Europeans was willing to return to Russia or any other European country, but I learned that some 60,000 people had made application to be returned from Canada to Great Britain, and I say that with a great deal of pride. There must have been something worth while in the British isles when 60,000 people in this country would request that they be returned there during those trying years, while none of those who were condemning the country, the government, the system and everything else, requested that they be sent back to the land of their forefathers.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I say in future we shall have to be more careful than we were in the past in admitting people into this country; and I do not say that from any wish to put up the bars against immigration. In the past, however, we have permitted to enter this country certain races who can never become really true Canadians. There is the question of blood. I do not see how you can ever mix Asiatic blood and our blood and make a better race. We must face these facts. We had nothing to do with making the black man, the red man or the white man, but the facts are there; and from my reading I have come to the conclusion that wherever the experiment of mixing oriental and white blood has been tried, the resulting progeny has not contributed to the uplift of the race but rather has been a retrogression. So that I say that in future we shall have to give more careful consideration to the kind of people we permit to enter our country for permanent residence.
Then there are the classes or groups of people who have come to Canada and successfully defied our laws. I do not know how this problem can be met. We have in British Columbia a group known as the Doukhobors, who were brought here under order in council. We in British Columbia seem to be alone in our troubles in that regard; at least no other province has the same problem to face. These people do things which are contrary to our laws; they do things we believe to be disgraceful, but notning has been done to make them obey the law. If any group from the British isles, a group of Scotsmen or Englishmen or Irishmen, had undertaken to disobey the laws of this country, strong measures would have been taken to make them obey; and no matter what it cost I would see to it that every citizen of this country obeys our laws. Until we face actual facts and make up our minds that this must be done, I believe we shall always have trouble. I do not think the fault is
altogether ours. These people are living their own lives, speaking their own language and going their own way. They are doing well, far better than, they would have done in Russia. They are living much happier lives than they would live in the country they came from; at least that is what I have- been told by those to whom I have spoken; yet they are not willing to obey the laws of Canada. This is one of our great problems. If this committee can solve it they will receive all the encouragement and support I can give. This problem has faced every government in the past, however, and is likely to face our governments in the future unless something quite different is done.
I rose particularly to mention these groups within our country and to say to the Minister of National War Services and the Minister of Mines and Resources that those who wish to come to this country after the war will have to be more closely scanned. I for one would not permit any large number of people to take up permanent residence in this country if they could not be assimilated. From some quarters we have heard criticism of the Jews. I do not suppose any country on earth has treated these people better than they have been treated in the British isles, where they look upon those of other racial origins in a different way. We are a little jealous of the business acumen of the Jews; we back away from them, but the Jews who have gone to Great Britain have spurred the British people on to greater efforts in the way of business, and they have been accepted in that country as in no othet country on earth. I think we can learn a great deal from the British method of handling these people, notwithstanding Lord Vansittart's statement that the British have been the most foolish of alt nations in the handling of foreigners.
A little later in the session I intend to deal with the oriental question, but this is all I have to say at the moment.


James Arthur Ross: In view of certain statements made during the debate this afternoon, I should like to say just a word in support of this item for cooperation in Canadian citizenship. I was greatly impressed with the remarks of the hon. member for Vegreville this afternoon, the only person of Ukrainian nationality in this House of Commons, and a very worthy member who on many occasions has contributed greatly to the debates of this house. In the province of Manitoba from which I come, some seven members of the legislative assembly are of the same racial origin, and on various occasions these members have made worth-while contributions not only to the debates of that chamber but in various

War Appropriation-War Services
other ways. In the prairie provinces we have many citizens of various racial origins, and I have been surprised at the extent to which they favour an all-out war effort, giving a lead in this respect to many of our citizens who were born in this country. We may well be proud of these people.
For some years I have been concerned over the lack of pride in Canadian citizenship exhibited in certain sections of Canada. This, I believe, has been due principally to lack of leadership in certain high quarters of this country during the past generation. I cannot help thinking that. One probably should not make comparisons, but that great cosmopolitan nation of various racial origins, the United States of America to the south of us, does exhibit far greater pride in national citizenship in its country than we find throughout the Dominion of Canada. For some reason or another that is the fact, and I think we should try to find out just what that reason is and do something to foster greater unity of pride in the citizenship of Canadians. I believe that all our people should unite in a much greater feeling of pride in Canadian citizenship and in all the worth-while successes of this nation. As was pointed out this afternoon, I think something should be done, in the taking of the census in Canada, whereby persons born in this country might be regarded as Canadians rather than as entirely of the racial origin of their father's side of the house. I am sure this would add greatly to pride of citizenship on the part of people of different racial origins. There should be an amendment in this direction.
I suggest also that there should be some amalgamation of the various services which are split up at present under four departments. We have under the Department of National War Services this item that we are now considering for cooperation in Canadian citizenship. This is something that appears as well in the civil estimates. We have in the Department of Mines and Resources the matter of immigration to Canada. Then we have under the Secretary of State the matter of naturalization, while we have under the Department of Trade and Commerce the taking of the census once in so many years. It seems to me that sound business suggests that these four matters should be consolidated under one department which might be designated the nationality branch.
I am one of those who think that in a country such as Canada, with our vast undeveloped natural resources, our very cheap electrical power and the possibilities for the development of cheap electrical power, we

might well expect, during the generation following the cessation of the present war, a population of from thirty to fifty millions. That being so, it means that we shall have to have far greater immigration on a selective basis, which is a matter that the authorities must take into account and to which they must give a great deal of thought.
I simply want to add this word in support of the vote before us. I do not think the vote for the work that is being done in this regard is enough. In the public accounts, if I may be allowed to refer to them, there is an item of expenditure for the year ended March, 1943, for a gentleman named Simpson, who comes from Saskatchewan, and who has done splendid work in cooperation in Canadian citizenship. I am informed that though these people have been doing great work during the past year, there has been a cessation or a let-up in their activities. That should not have been permitted, and I should like to have an explanation from the minister. I think he should let us know why there has been a let-up.
In my opinion this vote is well worth while. Indeed, I think there should be a great deal more work in this connection. I simply want to add my word in favour of the work that is being done in this regard. Many of these people do not like to be called new Canadians. Many of them are younger people who were born in the country and they make splendid citizens. I think we should have a greater mixing of racial origins throughout the country. We should put ourselves out to bring about a greater assimilation in various districts throughout Canada. I would appreciate it if the minister would explain the let-up in the work in the past year.
In conclusion, may I express, on my own behalf and, I believe, on behalf of my colleagues, our appreciation of the work that is being done, and urge that it be augmented.
Mr. LaFLECHE: There was less of a let-up than is supposed, in that it did not grow as I had desired. This afternoon I explained how this particular brandh, in an extraordinary manner, had been held up by the sickness of the members of the small staff. There were other reasons why it did not grow faster. There was the difficulty of getting proper staff, the difficulty of getting a man to head the branch such as we have now. The increased vote is the measure of the importance I attach to the matter, taking into consideration that one cannot overnight increase the branch several times over with any degree of efficiency. One cannot grow too fast.

War Appropriation-War Services


Olof Hanson: At the outset, Mr. Chairman, I wish to assure you that I am very much in favour of the vote and I regret that it is not a good deal larger, because it is time that some work was started along this line. May I give you my observations. I am one of the new Canadians. I came here before Tom Reid and Ian Mackenzie, but I am still a new Canadian. When I left my own country to settle elsewhere I read about Canada, about its resources and possibilities, and I read that there was room for everyone who was anxious to work. I came to Canada and was told that Canada was a nation composed of two nationalities that were working together, the French Canadian and the Anglo-Saxon. I came to this country forty-four years ago; I have lived here since that time, and I still find that Canada is trying to build up a united nation, while having, not two nationalities but, so to Speak, three; because we have approximately 5,000,000 Anglo-Saxons, approximately 3,000,000 French Canadians, and approximately 2,000,000 so-called foreigners. Consequently, we have to reconcile, both outside this house and inside as well, French Canadians, British Canadians and so-called foreigners.
How are we to make a united nation out of this mixture? It is forty-four years since I came here and I find that we are still struggling to bring about unity. In the country to the south of us do you ever hear of anybody being a Swede or a Frenchman or a Scotsman? No; they are all Americans. When the minister is setting up a committee to study this matter he is doing something which is at least one-third of a century behind the times. If we are to have a united nation in Canada we have to forget the various nationalities I have mentioned.
When I first came here there were many Europeans in the country, most of them good people. They came to Canada hoping to find unity, but what did they do? They went to the United States. Many good native Canadians did the same. Now the United States is filled up and is not asking for more immigrants, whereas we are asking for immigrants, and we need immigrants to develop our resources, which are second to none in the world. As long as we squabble among ourselves, however, French Canadians, British Canadians and foreigners, we shall never get anywhere. If this committee that is set up to study this question can do something we shall be accomplishing a great deal to help unite our country and make a nation out of it. I do not intend to take up any more time, but I give that as my observation in 100-152
support of this committee and this vote. It is a vote that should have been presented to the house at least one-third of a century ago.


Mr. McIVOR:: As I have listened to this debate I have learned much. Of course I have been in this country longer than the hon. member who has just taken his seat. I came to Canada from the land of the green isle. I came here because I felt it was the best place on earth to which to come and I have never changed my mind. I have not very much patience with any man who leaves a country and then talks about the great things there were in the country he left behind. If he is any good he will bring some of those things with him.
As I listened to the debate I thought of the words of Sir Wilfrid Laurier when he was addressing the youth of Canada and giving them some advice. He said:
You will be face to face with race prejudice, religious prejudice, class prejudice and nationality prejudice. But I would advise you to understand that love is stronger than hate and faith is stronger than doubt.
When I think of the tie that binds us to the old land-and by the old land I mean England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales-I think the 'tie is the affection of a mother. You cannot break it. What is the tie that connects ' us with the country to the south of us? It is the tie of another member of the same family. A neighbour is not strong enough, and we have to be careful to treat both as they ought to be treated. When I hear people speak of their nationality I ask myself, What good are they? What can they do for their country? What can they produce for Canada? What are they thinking about and what is their character worth? I remember when a great artist was asked to paint a picture in support of the text where Christ said:
Suffer the little children to come unto Me.
When the canvas was removed, those children were not all white; they were not all black; they were not all red; they were the children of all nationalities. I remember when I came by the Canadian Pacific railway in 1894. I was expecting great things from my first view of Canada. I was convinced when coming along the Canadian Pacific railway, I looked at the rocks, that this was a rocky country. When I came to Winnipeg and heard the different expressions of speech, heard men saying, "You bet"; "that makes me mad"; "that makes me crazy," I wondered what use Canada was making of the English language. But, of course, you may not agree that I come from that green isle in which is spoken the best English the world over. When I heard



War Appropriation-War Services
a Scotsman use the Scotch accent I used to sit back and wonder how he was able to do it, but he could with comfort, as shown by the hon. minister for New Westminster.
I agree with the hon. member for New Westminster when he says that when we came to Canada we came not only because she spoke the same language but because there were the same sentiments, the same branches of the Christian church to which we could send our children if we were so blessed. When we think of Canada to-day we should be proud of the fact that she is not all British, not all French, and that she does not belong to any other nationality in the world, but that we are a mixture. Look at our position to-day. Over yonder in the west is Russia; to the east is Great Britain; to the south the United States and Canada" in the centre is the heart and soul of the world to-day. There never was a nation that had such opportunities as we have. We have to keep the right things first. I have never considered the right thing to be the dollar yardstick. Leave God out of your nationality. Worship Him as you will but do not leave Him out, and then the peoples who come to this country will get a taste of something which will give them heart to go on.
What about those young Canadians who fall in love with English girls? There have been about three thousand of them. What is to be our reception of them? Are we to tell those little lassies, those young wives and their little ones, when they come, that we love them too; that we are going to see that they get fair play, and that we shall allow them to develop Canada in a way which will beat anything that they have ever seen in the old country? This is a live question and I support this vote wholeheartedly. Let us be men; let us forget narrowness of religious and class bigotry. Let us keep the Almighty first, and then, according to His own statement, all other things shall arrange themselves in rightful order.


Anthony Hlynka: I just wish to add a few words to what I have said this afternoon. In the first place I believe I should not allow the remarks of the hon, member for North Battle-ford and the hon. member for Cartier to pass unchallenged. I refer to the remarks which they directed against Professor Kirkconnell. Professor Kirkconnell is not in this committee to defend himself. The very booklet which the hon. member for Cartier and the hon. member for North Battleford quoted contains the following words on its first page:
To my four children for whose sake I covet a democratic and Christian Canada.

In his preface Professor Kirkconnell has this to say. When he undertook to write this booklet and others of similar nature he states that he chose the subject:
For or against Canada?
He then, goes on to state:
On that score, the communists were found guilty of treasonous activity against our country at war, their organization was banned, and many of their leaders were interned. After the Soviets had been attacked by Germany in 1941, our communists professed that the war had now become a holy one-
I believe that Professor Kirkconnell can speak for himself, but he has not the opportunity to answer the remarks which have been directed against him to-night. The hon. member for North Battleford said that she hated to call him "professor" because he degraded the very word. I feel that the hon. member of this committee using such extreme and vitriolic language is really casting a reflection upon herself. It is always the best policy to criticize others, if we choose to, but at the same time reserve our tempers to ourselves. So I say the hon. member for North Battleford, who has been in the house as long as I have, could have chosen her words a little more carefully when speaking of a man who is a fourth generation Canadian and who has written in the neighbourhood of thirty books.
This is what appears on the inside of the cover of the little booklet which was quoted:
Watson Kirkconnell, the author of this volume, is a Scotch-Canadian of the fourth generation, born in 1895 in Port Hope, Ontario. He was educated at Queen's university, Kingston, and at Oxford university; and is now Professor of English in McMaster university, Hamilton. He is the author of some thirty .published works, more than half of them written in the interests of inter-racial understanding, and was awarded in 1942 the Lome Pierce Gold Medal of the Royal Society of Canada "for distinguished contributions to Canadian literature."
- During eighteen years in western Canada, he acquired by close study a unique familiarity with the languages, the press and the political affiliations of the Canadians of European ancestry.
And this is what is found on the back cover:
Professor Kirkconnell has profound admiration and gratitude for the military prowess of our Soviet allies. He insists, however, that we are being flooded with -false propaganda regarding the Soviet Union's economic and political system, and that the exploitation of Russia's war record by our Leftists is part of a revolutionary offensive that has been actually intensified since the dissolution of the Comintern.
That is all I wish to quote from the book.
In addition to that, I should like to quote from a pamphlet written by Professor Kirk-

War Appropriation-War Services
council in which he gives us information about a similar branch in the United States. He says:
The most important single body set up was the foreign nationality branch of the ofhce of strategic services. This branch has a paid staff of forty, under a director with long foreign service in east-central Europe. There are also some sixty voluntary consultants in the universities of the armed services.
In Canada, when this pamphlet was written, there were only four on the paid staff.
Professor Kirkconnell sets out four reasons for the organization of this branch. He states that some of the methods used have been as follows:
(1)	Discrimination against these groups in Canadian industry has been combatted toy the initiation of directives to employers throughout Canada and by constant field work toy Doctor Philipps.
(2)	A major task was the mobilization of European-Canadian communities behind the war effort. This must not toe misunderstood. There was no desire to call new "nationality organizations" into existence. The aim was rather to call for a truce on the old political quarrels and hatreds that so often split up these groups into warring factions, and to associate them rather in a single "holding committee" pledged to the support of Canada at war. All this called for the greatest patience and diplomacy. Sometimes the political fires that were thought to be banked down for the duration showed signs of flaring up. But on the whole, there has been a striking development of conscious "Canadian thinking ' in the communities that have been thus coordinated.
(3)	There has been continual close cooperation with the armed services on the subject of recruiting. In order to encourage this by a recognition of equal rights, steps were taken to have eminent war services toy members of New Canadian groups brought to newspaper notice, to have chaplains of their churches appointed to the forces, and to select promising young soldiers of their groups to training as Canadian officers.
(4)	The foreign language press is being supplied with a regular mimeographed service of war news and articles from a Canadian point of view. A typical contribution, with a view to encouraging a Canadian consciousness based on knowledge, has been a series of biographies of prominent Canadians, including Sir Frederick Banting, Vihjalmur Stefansson, Sir John A. Macdonald, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, and J. S. Plaskett. This material is being supplied by the Writers' War Committee of Canada

Under the chairmanship of Professor Kirkconnell.
One last word. I am not sure whether Professor Kirkconnell gets any remuneration for what he is doing in connection with this committee; but I am sure that it takes hours of his time daily, and I know he is best qualified for the job. He is the only man in Canada who commands over forty languages. He has an opportunity to read newspapers 100-152J
and appear at different functions organized by various groups. Undoubtedly he is in a position to know whether he should or should not make certain recommendations to this branch. He acts in an advisory capacity. I may say, too, that no one man could swing the entire branch his way, if there were not enough grounds for his views.
I wish to reiterate what I said previously, that Professor Kirkconnell in these trying years, when it is pretty difficult for some Canadians to know and understand the mental attitude of each and every group within our boundaries, has given much valuable service to Canada. What has been said has shown that sometimes, instead of receiving credit for public service rendered to the people, one receives blame. Evil is thought of him because he does not happen to suit the wishes of one or another group. Instead of that, I should like to see manifested in Canada a spirit whereby we would be ready to give credit to anyone who has done his best in these times to help Canada. I do not think Professor Kirkconnell deserves the remarks which have been levelled against him to-night.


Mr. WOOD:: Mr. Chairman, it has been
refreshing to me to hear the hon. member for Vegreville come to the defence of Professor Kirkconnell, who is a personal acquaintance of mine. The hon. member has done credit to himself by the gracious attitude he has taken toward this distinguished gentleman. At a time like this when we should be attempting to develop national unity it is unfortunate that the hon. member for North Ba'tleford and the hon. member for Cartier should see fit to refer to this distinguished gentleman in the way they did simply because he happened to write something which did not agree with their own political philosophy. We must adopt a different attitude if we are to have national unity in a country like this where there are so many nationalities.
I am one generation removed from the old country. My grandfather brought my father over to this country from Scotland. My people had the blessing of poverty. I am told that my grandfather's income was $25 a year; yet he raised a family of eight children, educated some of them, and landed in Canada in 1852 with approximately $800. I cannot boast of having been born outside Canada, but I am proud of the type of people my ancestors were and that they had courage enough to come to this land in order to create greater opportunities for me.
We cannot expect to hold this great expanse of country on the northern part of this continent with but 12,000,000 people. I agree with the hon. member for New Westminster, who

War Appropriation

War Services
said that when we bring people into this country it is not only to our own interests but to theirs as well that there should be a reasonable amount of selection. We should try to be sure that they will assimilate Canadian ideals.
I regret that anti-Canadian feelings should be expressed within the walls of this building. I believe that if in the past our immigration authorities had showed more care in selecting those who were permitted to come to Canada it would have been better for all of us. If these people have not been able to accept Canadian ideals, they must be very unhappy. They are not contributing anything to Canadian citizenship by advocating their particular philosophy of life. While I have always believed in a selective system of immigration, I have also believed that we should try to maintain a certain standard of Canadian citizenship. People who desire to come to this country should be subject to the scrutiny of our immigration officers. An attempt should be made to see that they are ready to accept the blessings of this country, accept our ideals. If they are not ready to do that, they should get out of the country.
I rose for the purpose of defending Professor Kirkconnell because of the vilification he had been subjected to to-night. I was proud to follow the hon. member for Vegreville. As he has said, he is one of our new Canadians, a Ukrainian, and he has exhibited a high degree of Canadian idealism even though we may not all agree with his particular political philosophy. He has shown the spirit of toleration which is the only thing that will make Canada a great country.


Ralph Maybank: I should like to take part in this debate for a few minutes. Along with other hon. members, I am glad to see this vote in the estimates and I think it would be better if it were a larger vote than it is. I am in agreement with several hon. members who have spoken, because I believe the work of a committee such as this can create tolerance in this country. Tolerance is necessary in Canada and also it is badly needed. Tolerance leads to harmony and there can be no progress in a country without harmony or a reasonable approach to it.
Two hon. members who represent a small minority in this country have spoken tonight, the hon. member for North Battleford and the hon. member for Cartier. In words they advocate tolerance; yet they have given a very poor exhibition of that quality. The hon. member for Vegreville referred correctly to the addresses as being vitriolic. For my part I could not help thinking that the spirit of tolerance shown by these two members

was like the quality exhibited by a certain Irishman. A shoemaker who wanted to set up a business was on the road on the way to Antrim, when he met an Irishman. He inquired about the characteristics of the people in that city, the division as between Protestants and Catholics and so on. The man replied that he would find them pretty well divided, and he added that he got along pretty well with both sections. The shoemaker asked him how he did it and he said it was because of his tolerance. But when he described his tolerance it was somewhat of the quality exhibited to-night by these two members. He said, "On the 17th of March I wear an orange ribbon and on the 12th of July I wear a green shamrock, and if anyone asks me where I hang my hat of a Sunday, I tell him to go to hell and punch him on the jaw."
As I listened to the attack by these two hon. members upon an outstanding Canadian citizen I could not help thinking they have no understanding whatever of the quality which they would like to see current in this country. I do not think there should be any multiplication of words on my part in supporting what has been said by the hon. member for Vegreville and the hon. member for Brant. Professor Kirkconnell was for a long time a citizen of my city and one of our most honoured citizens. The people of my city are a discriminating people, and the fact that Professor Kirkconnell was a particularly honoured citizen of Winnipeg is itself a passport that will carry him anywhere in this country or in any other country.
I had the honour of knowing him slightly, not nearly as well as I should have desired. From all that I have known about him I regret that I was not personally better acquainted with him. My chief reason for rising is that I did have some slight acquaintance with him and I have been able to watch his work over a number of years. He came from my city, and for me to have sat silent when there were ill-tempered outbursts against him would, in my opinion, have been to condone a wrong. I shall say no more than that in characterizing these attacks.
I only hope that the minister will never see fit to deprive himself of the benefit of the advice of that kind of man. If we had many more men like Professor Kirkconnell in this country Canada would be a great deal the richer for it, and I am sure that the few members who have attacked him, when they stop seriously to think this over, will be found to agree with me. The man is doing a great service and has been doing a

War Appropriation-War Services
great service for many years, and it is very cheap stuff to come into this house where he cannot reply and from this safe place be a detractor.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: Mr. Chairman, I
should like to support this vote. In view of the fact that the amount asked for by the minister is only twelve and a half dollars for every million dollars we are voting, the hon. member for Broadview is not on very sound ground when he complains of extravagance.
I wish to present a point of view which has so far not been advanced in the debate and suggest that the department should pay some attention to the older Canadians. We have heard a good deal to-night about the new Canadians. Nothing has been said about the responsibility of the department for the old Canadians.
For some fifteen years I have lived in a community in northern Saskatchewan where I have belonged to a minority group. Like the hon. member for Brant, I happen to be of Scottish racial origin and people of Scottish racial origin are in the minority in that community. The 1941 census shows how very cosmopolitan a community Mackenzie is. The largest racial group there is the group to which the hon. member for Vegreville belongs, the Ukrainians. I should like to say, in passing, that I envy the hon. member for Vegreville his ability to speak so fluently in the English language. If the old Canadians would make some effort to become familiar with the language of other peoples-I refer especially to the English-speaking in this country who refuse to become familiar with the French language, and as we know a great many of our old Canadians refuse to make any effort to become familiar with any of the languages spoken by the peoples who come to this country-it would be very much better for us all. The hon. member for Vegreville puts us to shame when he speaks the English language as very few of us are able to speak it.
I was saying that the largest racial group in Mackenzie is Ukrainian, numbering 18,334. The next largest is the Scandinavian group, numbering 8,424; then English, 6,979; Polish, 5,097; Russian, 4,664; Scottish, 4,025; Irish, 3,955. As a member of one of the minority racial groups in that community I wish to say that it has been a great privilege to live with peoples of so many different nationalities who have made a contribution to this country which has been very valuable indeed. So that I hope that the department will not pay too much attention to the suggestions coming from the hon. member for Brant and the hon. member for New Westminster, that at this
stage time should be lost in worrying about whether these people conform to the standards that prevailed in Scotland fifty or sixty or a hundred years ago or conform to the standards which prevail in New Westminster.
I should like to make reference to the valuable contribution which the largest racial group in my community, the Ukrainian group, has made to Canada. They have settled in the northern part of the province where years and years of hard work were required. Many of them went a long distance back from the railway and worked from early morning till late at night, making a great contribution in building up this country. In this time of war, as the Minister of Mines and Resources has said, they have responded in a remarkable way. The man who brings the milk to our home every night is a Ukrainian who has earned his living in a hard way. He has two sons in Italy with the Canadian Army, \ one being a major and the other a lieutenant. The father and mother, so-called new Canadians, have made a valuable contribution to Canadian life.
In some parts of the country criticism is made of our Jewish Canadians. I have a very small number of Jewish citizens in my riding, some 178 persons, but they responded at the earliest moment in the war and have performed distinguished service. Just the other day I received from the headquarters of the Department of National Defence for Air a photograph of Flying Officer Gelmon, from Preeceville, Saskatchewan, who is in service at Ceylon. This young man who is in charge of flying a Catalina observed a ship that had been torpedoed by a Japanese submarine. He landed his flying boat on the water and rescued all the members of that disabled ship's crew. His record was mentioned over the BBC some time ago, and it was not until his parents drew attention to the fact that he suggested it was all part of the day's work. So that I urge that the minister consider increasing this vote and have some regard for the old Canadians and their responsibility, as citizens in a democracy, to their fellow Canadians who do not speak their language.
Just one final word regarding our responsibility to our Chinese Canadians. It is almost a year now since members of this house heard one outstanding woman of the Chinese race, Madame Chiang Kai-shek, address this House of Commons. We were all deeply moved by the message she brought on that occasion and by the leadership she and her distinguished husband have given. We have all been inspired by the contribution which the Chinese people have made in saving democracy for the

War Appropriation-War Services
world. Yet in Canada we refuse to consider the Chinese born in Canada as fellow Canadians should be recognized when we have the four freedoms at stake. Just this week I had occasion to take up with three departments of government the case of a young Chinese Canadian in British Columbia who has been given the run-around in connection with his offer to do his bit in an important public service. We make it very difficult for those who do not fit into the conventional pattern to make their greatest contribution both in war time and peace time. Therefore, I hope the minister will not be unduly influenced by those who have suggested that this vote should be reduced to $1, or who complain about any expenditure of this kind.
In conclusion, I wish to congratulate the minister upon having secured the services of Robert England who, as the minister pointed out, has a distinguished record in the last war and in this war and who during the years has demonstrated that his viewpoint will inspire confidence and good will among the peoples who have come to Canada to make their homes.


Mr. ROEBUCK:: I could not permit this debate to conclude without expressing just a word of approval to the minister for having placed this item before us. It seems to me that if there is any criticism of the amount it is that it is too small, not that it is too large. Earlier in this debate various hon. members have been able to speak as newcomers to this country and to tell of their experiences in coming to Canada from some other land, either a part of the empire or a part of Europe. I am not able to express myself along that line, because I am the fourth generation on both sides of my house to call Canada home. I think I am thoroughly acclimatized as a Canadian, and if anyone, other than my French Canadian friends, some of whom have been here for three or four hundred years, has a right to call himself a Canadian, I think I have that right.
With some deference and some humility, I say that it takes time in order to understand Canada and the spirit of Canada. That understanding is not readily acquired. Canada is different from many other countries of the world, because here there is no dominant religion, no dominant race, no dominant nationality other than Canadian. We have been very fortunate in this country in the development of a broad and sympathetic attitude toward others. Tolerance consists for the most part of good manners. Intolerance always expresses itself in unkindness and bad

manners. In our early days we were forced to get along one with the other. I think the French Canadians frequently fail to realize how much in their culture, their diversity of life, their general happiness and well-being they owe to the English-speaking portion of our population. And I can say definitely that we of the English-speaking portion of the Canadian population seldom realize how much we owe to the French. Each owes to the other a .great debt of gratitude, if only for the one thing, that we have been forced to live together and to get along with our neighbours. So that we have developed in this country a constitution and society broad enough to tolerate somebody other than ourselves.
Then, following that experience as between the English and the French, we have had the inestimable value of the introduction into our society of people from other lands, chiefly central Europe. I cannot speak too highly of those people whom we somewhat wrongly call new Canadians. They are not much newer than many of the rest of us, but the term designates them and it will do. I come from a riding which is probably as cosmopolitan as any in Canada, and I have always been proud to claim to be a representative of these various groups. For instance, I have a very large Polish vote, and I am pleased to say that it supported me very generously. My heart bled for these people in 1939 when the German mechanized machine overran their country. We of the English race frequently refer to Great Britain as the motherland, but we fail to realize that Canadians have many motherlands. To a great many Canadians Poland is the mother country, and the Polish people in Canada were sorely hurt when Poland was conquered by Germany. I look forward to the time when I can rejoice with my Polish friends, when once more Poland will be free. On many occasions I have joined in the pledge given to the Polish people by the Prime Minister of Great Britain, the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of this country, that we of the united nations will never sheathe the sword until Poland shall be free. Poland has contributed something to Canada by supplying us with a portion of our population from that bold, fighting race which has struggled for freedom as heroically and as long as any other nation on earth.
I have always been happy to think of myself as a representative of the Ukrainian people of my riding, and I wish to join in the compliments that have been expressed to the hon. member for Vegreville. I was sorry, however,

War Appropriation-War Services
that in his recent speech he discussed personalities. I am not much interested in persons, either in attacking or in defending them, for usually they can look after themselves, and that is particularly so in this instance. It is unfortunate that personalities should have been brought into a debate so lovely as this. We are struggling for unity among these races, and you cannot get unity by bringing up here the divisions that you may find in the old land. That is an unfortunate thing that is happening in Canada. These various groups of our population should divide now upon Canadian questions, not upon European matters. So often I find that various portions of the same racial group hate each other because of imported divisions, not because of Canadian divisions. I have been proud to represent the Ukrainian people, whom I have found to be of sterling good character, industrious, strong, healthy, vigorous both in mind and body; a kindly people, very much like ourselves. I have been proud to represent the Italian people of this country, of whom I have a considerable number in my riding. My heart bled for them when we declared war upon Mussolini and left them in a most unenviable position. They are a kindly people thoroughly Canadian, as has been proved by their actions during this war.
Fortunately I come from a riding in which there is not one dominant religion but which is fairly equally divided as between the Catholic, Protestant and Jewish faiths. I feel sure that if more people enjoyed the advantages I have bad they would recognize the virtues of these different groups, and there would be less anti-Semitism and fewer antagonisms over opinions on religion.
I welcome this vote. I know it is not necessary to defend it, but I do want to express my approval of it and I hope that every dollar will be spent wisely, as I am sure it will, in developing the idea of a Canada different from most countries, as I have said, not of one race, not of one nationality, not of one religion, but rather a collection of groups each with a respect for the rights of the others and each with sufficient good manners to get along with the rest. Let us have in Canada a nationality broad enough to include within the folds of our common flag men of all races, of all religions, of all nationalities, yes, and of all political opinions.
It is not necessary that men who come from other countries should forget the country of their origin. I have always thought and have preached to those various groups that they are doing a favour to Canada when they maintain their ancient traditions and teach
[DOT] $
their children the language of their own country. True, it is necessary that they should learn English because that is the language of the dominant language group. It is the dominant language. They will be handicapped if they do not know English. At the same time, they will lose the culture of their own country unless they teach their children the language of their birth.
It is wise that the Polish Canadian should remember the Polish language, its customs and its glorious history. It is wise that Ukrainian Canadians should remember the history of the Ukraine and rejoice that the foreign invader is being chased out of the Ukraine. It is wise that the sons of the Italian Canadian should know the music, history and literature of Italy, and that his children should carry on that glorious inheritance. Canada has been the gainer by the culture, the language, the knowledge and the diversity that these people have brought to our shores. Canada will be a great nation when finally we unite all of these nationalities and groups into one great united and homogenous people.


Stanley Howard Knowles: There is one note of warning in connection with this vote which I should like to sound, but before I do so I wish to say that I agree with those who feel that the amount is far too small for the purpose to which it is to be devoted. I am sure it is significant that there has been a debate of this length on an item relatively so small. It indicates that the members of this house feel the importance that attaches to any effort to develop the consciousness of Canadian citizenship among all our people and the sense of unity throughout our country. I feel, too, that I should add to what some other hon. members have said by way of commendation in connection with the securing of Robert England to head this work. I was disappointed and a little disturbed some months ago when Mr. England's resignation was announced from a post in another department of the government, and therefore I was pleased to learn that he had been secured for this very important work.
The minister, speaking earlier this evening about Mr. England's qualifications, mentioned a number of points. I am not sure whether he referred to the fact that his interest in this kind of thing is by no means new. I happen to know Mr. England personally and I know that his interest in the matter we are discussing extends over a number of years. In fact, several years ago he produced a very worth-while book on the subject of central

War Appropriation-War Services
European immigrants in Canada, and I am sure he brings to this task not only the kind of interest that one needs to further this sort of work but the knowledge, ability and experience that are also very necessary. I hope, therefore, that the government will be able to secure, in addition to Mr. England, others who will likewise add to the calibre and quality of the work of this branch, and I hope it will be recognized by the government not just as a branch for which money should be voted in a time of war but rather as a phase of work that should be established on a permanent basis.
I said when I rose to my feet that there was one note of warning I should like to sound. I understand that part of the work of this committee is to feed to our foreign language newspapers material which will enable readers of those papers to get the best ideas about the country in which they are now living, and I may say to the minister that certain eom-. plaints have come to me from time to time. I am not sure whether the material that is complained about results from the work of this committee, but it sounds as though it does, from what the minister said earlier to-day. The complaints have been that the material, while it seemed to be boosting Canada and our institutions and form of government, did seem to flavour of propaganda for the government of the day. I sound that note of warning not out of any sense of jealousy. My point is that if anything of that kind does creep in ' it will defeat the very purpose of a vote of this kind, and I hope the minister will see to it that in so far as it is the job of this committee to feed to the foreign language press of the country articles that boost Canada, to sell to our people the glory of Canadian citizenship and of our institutions, he will see to it that this work is kept free from anything that could be labeled as partisan propaganda.
With that note of warning I wish to repeat what I have already said, that I not only support this vote, but commend the minister for having secured the services of Mr. England to head this work, and I hope that the government will see to it that it is established on a permanent basis.


Dorise Winifred Nielsen: Some remarks have been passed this evening regarding what I said on the matter of Mr. Kirkconnell. I think the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre stated that I was a little intolerant and a little vicious in my remarks, and so on. I am intolerant, toward one thing, fascism, as I would be intolerant toward any foul and evil thing. I am intolerant, too, of those who by their
fMr. ICnowles.]
activities over a period of years have striven to misrepresent to the people of this country fascism and the forces which have fought against it. Although some hon. members of this committee may have personal relationships with Mr. Kirkconnell, that is not the question. It is his work over a period of years, which can be traced very distinctly from his writing, that I am concerned with. The hon. member for Vegreville states that he speaks forty languages. He read out some of the publisher's remarks. That does not say anything to the man's credit at all. Because he speaks forty languages it does not mean to say that he promotes unity. It is a very nice thing for the hon. member for Vegreville to speak about unity and tolerance. You see, the spectacle of the hon. member for Vegreville supporting Mr. Kirkconnell is quite simple to understand. I understand it perfectly. They have had a relationship over a period of years, and it is a case of the two of them being very like-minded. Naturally the hon. member for Vegreville thinks Mr. Kirkconnell is all right. I have in my hand a series of small magazines. They are printed in Ukrainian. The name is "The Call". A series of them have been translated for me. I find in them some of the most vicious and intolerant statements that I have ever found anywhere. Here you will see a gruesome picture and underneath a series of statements, vicious anti-Semitism. The editor is the hon. member for Vegreville. It is very nice for certain people these days to turn around and speak about tolerance. I have no tolerance for fascists and for those who have promoted disunity in the past in this country. I want unity against fascism, and whoever likes to disagree with me let them take their stand. I am against fascism. That is all I wish to say.
Mr. LaFLECHE: I wish to say a few words before the vote carries. As we all know, there are groups of people whom we term new Canadians. They are found nearly everywhere in Canada. I take it from the excellent speeches made this evening that this committee is definitely of the opinion that these new Canadians shall not remain strangers within our gates; that there is a widespread desire, as represented by what has been said in this committee, to do our share to help these men, women and their children to love Canada more because they will know Canada better.
I must say that I am tolerant, although in some respects I find it extremely difficult to be kind even in thought to certain kinds of people. But those who live in Canada, those who during this war have done good work, have my appreciation. I certainly am tolerant

War Appropriation-War Services
toward them, and in saying that I have in mind the gentlemen who have been taken to task this evening altogether too harshly. In my opinion that is the case. I do not know Professor Kirkconnell very well, but from my point of view and my knowledge of the work he does for my department I have every reason to believe he is an excellent gentleman. What other people may think of him I do not know, because I do not know their relationship with him.
At any rate, Mr. Chairman, this has been a very encouraging day to me. Whilst our boys are fighting for our safety we at home should work at national unity. I think this has been a good day in that regard.


Thomas Langton Church: I wish to say that in so far as Professor Kirkconnell is concerned I reaffirm what I said this afternoon. He was engaged by this government to write a book to which I objected in this house in 1940 and 1941. The book dealt with the British born and the foreign born. It was the glorification of the foreign born as against the other. From the information contained in the immigration figures at the time I say the information contained in his book was wrong. In this book he said that the British born had more cases in the law courts than the Japanese. I opposed it at the time and called the attention of the committee to the booklet. It was circulated in England and did a lot of harm to immigration. He made a speech at the university of Toronto in January, 1942, in which he said there was no more room in this country for the British born. He said there was no land available. That was after the battle of London. I looked into the book. It was a glorification of one section of the country against the other. He has changed it all now. He seems to be writing books the other way at the present time. He seems to be writing books on communism now. I have expressed no opinion about what he said, but I have been an opponent of that particular system for many years. My views are well known to this committee. I reaffirm and reassert what I said this afternoon. I believe there should be equality of treatment for all classes. I believe there should not be race or religious jealousy in this country. I have never had any and I have not had any at any time in this committee. That is all I wish to say regarding that professor. He goes on to refer to other component races who have been here for generations. I obtained the booklet at the time it was printed. Large numbers of copies 100-153
were distributed in England at a grave time of the war in 1941 and did great damage to immigration from the British isles and from other places.


Anthony Hlynka: I wish to take a minute or two to correct the impression which perhaps may have been left by the remarks of the hon. member for North Battleford. It seems that the hon. member is making a habit of attacking certain individuals. She made a statement to the effect that some of my writings which appeared in the publication which I published in 1935 contained writings which were anti-Semitic. I wish to state, here and now, that at no time in my life have I ever written anything or said anything which was anti-Semitic. I wish to add also that just because I was the publisher of the magazine it does not necessarily mean that I wrote every word that appeared on the pages thereof. Certain individuals contributed to my publication and I published the things which I felt would be of interest to my people. One of the writers who came from Europe and who was a witness of conditions there, and who knew the history, wrote an article which condemned certain leading men of Jewish nationality in . the Soviet Union. That was all. Therefore the article was not mine at all. There were two articles altogether on this subject. The other article which appeared was a translation by another man also. He asked me to publish it and I did. I published not only articles that were anti-this or anti-that, but articles that were of various natures, articles which gave information on various topics
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I wish to correct this propaganda which has been circulated and levelled at me personally for many years of being anti-Semitic. I never have been and I never intend to be, because I have not the reason for it, and it is not in my make-up. So I just wish to correct the remarks which the hon. member made to-night.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. RALSTON moved the adjournment of the house.
Gordon Graydon: What is the business for to-morrow?


James Layton Ralston: As business for to-morrow we propose to continue with the war appropriation resolution, but it is proposed to suspend consideration of the item under the Department of National War Services and take up the items under the Department of Labour.

Business of the House

If that should by any chance be finished, we shall resume with the Department of National War Services.


Gordon Graydon: I wish to lodge a protest to the acting leader of the government with respect to this change in the order of business in connection with the war appropriation resolutions. There was a definite arrangement made both last session and this session that these departments would be taken up, one department after another, and when one department was finished another would be commenced. This is the first time in two sessions that the government has asked for a change in that arrangement, which was entered into at the time at the instance of the government, if I may say so. I wish to protest. I do not know how far my protest will go, because I recognize the government has some powers in these matters. However, we are not in favour of it.
Unless there is some extraordinary circumstance of an emergent nature we do not wish to have the order changed, because this procedure establishes a change not only now, but also establishes a precedent which perhaps might be carried into another session as well. I think our rights must be protected, and for that reason I rise to protest, and ask the government not to make the change which is suggested.


James Layton Ralston: I say to my hon. friend that I would be the last to attempt to break any arrangement which has been made. I am not conscious of any arrangement such as my hon. friend suggests. We do this in connection with other items; that is to say, on the estimates. We take up one department and do not finish it, and another department may come in next. My hon. friend is quite right when he says it has been the custom to continue with one department and go through with it before another is reached, under the war appropriation measure.
However, in this instance, the circumstances happen to be special, and I would hope that my hon. friend would so consider them. They happen to be of a special nature. My colleague the Minister of Labour will have to leave to go back to the conference at Philadelphia very shortly and he is anxious, and I believe the house and country will be as anxious as he is, that the items under his name might be taken up-and I hope finished-before he goes.
In connection with the length of time which has been taken in the discussion by the estimates of the Department of National War Services, I may say, without any criticism whatsoever, that they have been considerably

longer than was anticipated. It is necessary that the committee should at least begin the discussion of the items under the department of the Minister of Labour, because there are one or two other matters of very important business which necessarily will have to be brought in next week. And it may be that if this procedure is not followed the items under his department may not be finished before he goes. That is the special circumstance under which this is being done.
I join with my hon. friend most heartily in the desire to finish one department before another is brought on, because I think that is the easiest way to do business-certainly it is the easiest for the government. Then, members of the cabinet are not kept waiting for their estimates, and they are not so uncertain as to when they may come up. But this is a special case, and 1 trust hon. members, including my hon. friend, will so regard it, having regard to all the circumstances.


Jean-François Pouliot: How long is the Philadelphia conference supposed to last?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot tell my hon.
friend that.


Gordon Graydon: May I say to the leader of the government that there is no guarantee, as I see it, that the Minister of Labour will be allowed to proceed during the next week to a point where he would finish his war appropriation estimates. That puts it in a very awkward position, so far as we are concerned. I believe we are perhaps going to find ourselves with the estimates of the Department of National War Services unfinished, with those of the Department of Labour unfinished, and with certain new legislation which it is expected will be taken Monday in an unfinished state. That is the position.
For these reasons we protest against the change. As I say, perhaps the government has the right to set the programme, and to make a change in a succeeding session; but I must confess that I am very much disappointed that the government has taken this position. It has upset, and will upset the arrangements which were arrived at and which, I repeat, were not arrangements entered into lightly. They were arrangements which definitely formed part and parcel of the whole war appropriations resolutions debate structure.


James Layton Ralston: I am sorry my hon.
friend has repeated what he said, because I think he will find there was no arrangement that each department would be taken through to the last item. In the second place I sub-

Housing
mit to the house that the circumstances which I have mentioned- are extraordinary and should be taken into consideration. I hope the house will do that.
Third, may I say I do not quite share some of the apprehensions entertained by -my hon. friend with respect to the -fact that there is more than one item of unfinished business before the house. With all due respect, in my fourteen years in the house I have not seen -much evidence of the house going right through with any important item before taking up anything else. The house has been anxious to put its business forward one or two stages at least, and then proceed to the discussion of some other item.
That is what is being done here, and I do not think there is anything very shocking about it. I do trust that the result will show that nothing has been done to interfere with the rights of hon. members, and I hope it will be found that this procedure will expedite public business.
And last, but in my mind not the least, the items standing in the name of the Minister of Labour are extremely important. I have been anxious particularly to see to it that the service departments, and the departments more vitally connected with the war, should be before the house as soon as possible. I hope the house will enter upon the business to-morrow as I have outlined it.


Jean-François Pouliot: Would the Minister of
Labour be kind enough to say how long that conference is intended to last?


Mr. MITCHELL:: I do not know.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the house adjourned at 11.10 p.m.
Friday, April 28, 1944