1945-04-03

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):: I desire to direct to the Prime Minister certain questions of which I have given him notice to-day. They are these:
Has Canada been fully informed of every decision reached by the three great powers at the Crimean conference? If so, when was this government informed of the proposal to give Russia and the United States of America additional voting power in the assembly of the united nations?
Has Canada expressed any opinion to any of the powers as to our reaction to this proposal and, if so, what opinion was so given?
Also, has Canada been consulted relative to the proposed participation of Poland and Argentina in the San Francisco conference; and in addition to that, has the Prime Minister received any intimation from other powers which would indicate that the San Francisco conference will be postponed?


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: I might answer my hon. friend's questions in the order in which he

has raised them. To make the statement clear I shall repeat the questions as they have been presented by him.
First: "Has Canada been fully informed of every decision reached by the three great powers at the Crimean conference?"
My answer is: I cannot say.
"If so, when was this government informed of the proposal to give Russia and the United States of America additional voting power in the assembly of the united nations?"
My answer is: As stated by President Roosevelt, the question was not one of giving three votes in the proposed general assembly to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics but of admitting the Ukrainian and White Russian republics as separate members of the united nations.
I might say to my hon. friend that word has now come from Washington that President Roosevelt has decided that the United States will not request additional votes in the assembly to be proposed at the San Francisco conference. The President's decision was announced this morning by Secretary of State Stettinius.
The next question is: "Has Canada expressed any opinion to any of the powers as to our reaction to this proposal and, if so, what opinion was so given?"
That is the proposal about extra votes. The answer is: No opinion has been expressed by Canada.
The next question is: "Has Canada been consulted relative to the proposed participation of Poland and Argentina in the San Francisco conference?"
The answer is: No; this would be a matter solely for the inviting powers.
The final question is: "Has the Prime Minister received any intimation from other powers which would indicate that the San Francisco conference will be postponed?"
The answer is: No.


Mr. COLDWELL:: With regard to the second question, I do not think the Prime Minister gave-at least I did not hear him- an answer as to when this government was informed regarding the request for greater representation at the San Francisco conference.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I do not know that I understand my hon. friend's question.


Major James William Coldwell: When did the government first learn that a request was to be made by the United States and Russia for larger representation? I understood what he said about the United States just now.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The answer is that the government had no information about it at all. The information the government

War Appropriation
had was as to the possibility of the Ukrainian and White Russian republics becoming separate .members of the united nations by decision of the San Francisco conference.


Major James William Coldwell: When was that information received by the government?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I cannot answer that offhand. My impression is that it may have been in some communications relating to the Crimea conference.



POWELL RIVER WHARF


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. A. CRUICKSHANK (Fraser Valley):: Mr. Speaker, the Acting Minister of Fisheries on Thursday .last kindly said that he would accept the notice of question I asked the Minister of Fisheries regarding the Powell River wharf. I have had several more wires in regard to it and I should like to know why the question has not been answered. May I repeat the question? I should like to ask the Minister of Fisheries or the acting minister whether any request has been received from the fishermen of Powell River for suitable docking facilities.


Hon. ERNEST BERTRAND (Minister of Fisheries):: This question does not come
within the jurisdiction of the Minister of Fisheries. The question of wharves falls within the jurisdiction of the Minister of Public Works.


George Alexander Cruickshank: He knows nothing about it


Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works):: The question has been placed on the order paper and I expect to have an answer to-morrow.



COMMODITY SUPPLIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: A press release has been
given out this afternoon1 with respect to a conference that has been held in Ottawa during the last two or three days between two members of the British government and members of the present administration in relation to the question of the supply of essential commodities, particularly food. I thought it would be proper if this intimation were given to parliament in the first instance.
Mr. Lyttelton, Minister of Production, and Colonel Llewellin, Minister of Food in the United Kingdom, have spent three days in Ottawa and have discussed in detail with the Canadian government the question of the supply of essential commodities, particularly food. Special attention was given to the pressing needs of the liberated areas of Europe and to the supply of those foodstuffs which are in world-wide shortage, such as meat, fats and oils, dairy products and sugar. These meetings were preliminary to discussions which are to take place in Washington shortly. The President of the United States has invited Canadian ministers to take part in the Washington discussions, and the invitation has been accepted.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide, inter alia,
1.	That sums not exceeding $2,000,000,000 be granted to His Majesty towards defraying any expenses or making any advances or loans that may be incurred or granted by or under the authority of the governor in council during the year ending March 31, 1946, for-[DOT]
(a)	the security, defence, peace, order and welfare of Canada;
(b)	the conduct of naval, military and air operations in or beyond Canada;
(c)	promoting the continuance of trade, industry and business communications, whether by means of insurance or indemnity against war risk or in any other manner whatsoever;
(d)	the purposes of the War Appropriation (United Nations Mutual Aid) Act, 1943, as amended by the War Appropriation (United Nations Mutual Aid) Act, 1944; and
(e)	the carrying out of any measure deemed necessary or advisable by the governor in *eonucil in consequence of the existence of a state of war.
2.	That the governor in council be empowered to raise by way of loan under the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, 1931, such sum or sums of money, not exceeding in the whole the sum of $2,000,000,000 as may be required for the purpose of defraying such expenses or making such advances or loans, the principal and interest of any such loan to be a charge upon and payable out of the consolidated revenue fund.
3.	That the governor in council be empowered to reexpend, advance or loan moneys that may be received by way of refund or repayment of advances, loans or expenditure under the War Appropriation Acts of 1939 (second session), 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 and 1944.
War Appropriation
[Stage Direction]
He said:	This resolution seeks authority
to introduce a measure which, if enacted by this Parliament, will be entitled The War Appropriation Act No. 1, 1945.
I wish first to say a few words in regard1 to the form of the bill. Apart from the necessary changes in amounts and dates, and with two exceptions to which I shall refer later, the bill is in exactly the same form as that of the main War Appropriation Act passed last year. Its essential features, therefore, are the following:
(1)	A grant of authority to expend, subject to allotment by the treasury board, for various enumerated war purposes, the sum of two billion dollars, together with any moneys received as refunds or repayments of advances, loans or expenditures made under the authority of previous war appropriation acts;
(2)	Continuation of the grant of certain powers to the government to perform certain functions connected with the war as agent for the government of any allied country, and, in the exercise of these powers, to make certain expenditures or assume certain obligations temporarily; and
(3)	The grant of authority to the governor in council to raise, if necessary by borrowing, the moneys required for the purposes of the legislation.
I said a moment ago that there had been two changes made in the form of the bill, as compared with the form of earlier measures of the same kind. The second of these is the addition of a new paragraph (d) to section (2) of the bill which provides that one of the purposes for which the appropriation may be used is the giving of Mutual Aid assistance to other united nations in accordance with the provisions of the War Appropriation (United Nations Mutual Aid) Act 1943 as amended by the War Appropriation (United Nations Mutual Aid) Act 1944. Thus, we are proposing to ask parliament for only one appropriation to cover the whole of the expenditures on Canada's war effort, both direct and indirect, during the next few months. In other words, the two billion dollars which we are requesting will cover not only the expenditures in respect of our own armed forces and other direct war activities, but also the expenditures necessary to carry on the functions of the Mutual Aid board. There has been no change in the functions and powers of that board and there is therefore no necessity for any change in the legislation.

The first of the two changes to which I have referred is a very minor one, but it draws attention to the essential nature of the bill, that is, the fact that it is an interim appropriation only. This change is to be found in the preamble to the bill, which points out that the term of this parliament will have ended on the 17th April next, and that therefore it is expedient to provide funds for the continued prosecution of the war until the new parliament assembles.
I need not emphasize that this parliament is now meeting for its sixth and final session, which must terminate by April 17. It will therefore be a new parliament, newly elected by the people of Canada, which will be responsible for supervising the affairs of this country and shaping Canada's war effort during at least the major part of the new fiscal year. It will be a government, responsible to that new parliament, which should have at least the major responsibility for formulating not only the nature and extent of Canada's continued war effort during that period but also the financial policies and programmes necessary to carry on. that war effort. Therefore it did not seem appropriate that the government at this stage should bring down plans for the new fiscal year as a whole, or do anything that might even appear to commit the next parliament to a precise and definite programme covering the period for which it alone will have jurisdiction. On the contrary, all considerations seemed to point to the desirability of limiting our actions regarding war financial programmes in this parliament to the granting of an appropriation intended only to cover the period up to the time when the next parliament can take over, and further to the desirability of not embarking on any major changes in policy at this time.
Hence the appropriation which is now being requested is an interim appropriation designed to cover our estimated expenditures, during approximately the next five months, for war and Mutual Aid purposes on the basis primarily of the policies and commitments now in effect. This seemed to be the minimum period for which it was reasonably safe to provide. It may, of course, be that the new parliament may assemble before September 1, but if so it will do no harm to have an appropriation that will extend a few weeks beyond its assembling and will therefore give some time for a new interim war appropriation measure to be passed.
Hon. members may be interested to know how we arrived at the figure of two billion dollars. I will now try to throw some light on -this point. Needless to say, any forecast of war expenditures covering any future period

War Appropriation
must necessarily be attended by a very considerable margin of error. On repeated occasions in the past I have called attention to the difficulties we have faced in making such forecasts and to the hesitation with which some of them have been advanced. At the present time, however, the difficulties are abnormally great. We now know that victory in Europe is certain, and most of us believe that it is also reasonably near, but no one can tell whether that means one month or three months or six months hence. And certainly it would be a mistake to take too optimistic a view. If we relax or "let down", we may be sure that we shall prolong the war's duration. Even if we assume that the war against Germany will be over by some specified date, it is going to take a considerable time to repatriate our men from overseas and to demobilize them, and there are necessarily still many uncertainties as to the nature and course of the war in the far east and the share which we can most effectively take in bringing it to an end. Providentially, the course of developments in that theatre of war during recent months has outrun the expectations of most of us, and, it would appear at least to a layman that the forces of our allies under General MacArthur are considerably ahead of their schedule. Nevertheless war is dynamic and unpredictable. We have had surprises and disappointments before, and we may have them again in both Europe and Asia. With such factors in mind, we have gone on the general principle that the only safe thing to do was to assume that our direct and indirect war expenditures would keep up during the next five months at approximately the rate at which they have been running during the last five or six months.
That is how we arrived at the figure of two billion dollars. We have simply projected into the next five months the rate of expenditures of the last five or six months, assuming no changes in major policies and no fundamental changes in conditions. As I shall explain later, we are estimating that the books for the fiscal year 1944-45, when they are finally closed, will show our total expenditures for war and Mutual Aid during the year at approximately S4,652 million. Five-twelfths of that sum would be SI,938 million. But, of course, expenditures during the last few months were higher than during the early months of the fiscal year. If we assume that the forecast I have just given for the full year is correct and deduct therefrom the expenditures recorded by the comptroller of the treasury for the first seven months adjusted to correct the effect on the monthly distribution of expenditures of certain temporary
accounting advances, then the expenditures during the last five months of the fiscal year would work out at $2,282 million. Another basis of calculation would be to take five-sixths of the estimated expenditure during the last six months of the last fiscal year; this would give a figure of $2,218 million. However, the two amounts just mentioned are higher than the expenditures are likely to be during the first five months of this fiscal year, because expenditures for the closing months of any fiscal year always include a certain amount of clearing up of outstanding accounts. Under all the circumstances, therefore, it seemed to the government that the appropriate size of the appropriation which should be requested from parliament at this time was two billion dollars. I trust that this will carry the judgment of the house.
As I have already indicated, we have tried to make a forecast of probable aggregate expenditure for war and Mutual Aid purposes during the fiscal year ending March 31, 1945, and have arrived at the figure of $4,652 million. Even though it was estimated at a late date in the fiscal year, that figure may be subject to some adjustment when the books for the year are closed but it is likely to be somewhat too high rather than too low. The chief explanation for any such possible variation is, of course, the difficulty of getting the necessary bills rendered and completing the necessary checking of vouchers and other details. This difficulty is particularly great in the case of purchases from, and activities in, other countries where our troops may be located or from which we may be purchasing supplies. However, I would not expect any variation from the figure given to alter the foregoing general conclusions regarding our requirements for the next five months. I believe it will facilitate the understanding and discussion of our current war programmes if lion, members have before them the breakdown of this estimate of our expenditures during the fiscal year 1944-45. With the permission of the house I shall, therefore, place on Hansard a table showing the estimated total expenditures for war and Mutual Aid purposes during the fiscal year 1944-45, classified by departments and major functions. For comparative purposes the corresponding figures for actual expenditures during the fiscal year 1943-44 are also given in the table, although these are to be found as well, of course, in the public accounts for that year which were tabled on the first day of the session.
War Appropriation
[Stage Direction]
Forecast of War Expenditures (including Mutual Aid) for the Fiscal Year 1944-45 Compared with Actual War Expenditures for 1943-44
Estimated
expenditure
Actual
expenditure
Agriculture	
Auditor General's Office	
Civil Service Commission	
External Affairs, including Office of the Prime Minister	
Finance-
Comptroller of the Treasury	
Housing Conversion Programme	
Wartime Prices and Trade Board	
Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation Ltd	
Canadian Wool Board	
Old Age Pensions	
Payments to millers and other manufacturers of wheat products
for human consumption, etc	!	
Payment of the premiums on the purchase of Dominion of Canada
registered stock	
Contribution to the Unemployment Insurance Fund	
General	
Fisheries	
Justice	
Labour	
Legislation-
Senate	
House of Commons	
Mines and Resources-
Immigration	
Lands, Parks and Forests	
Mines and Geology	
Surveys and Engineering	
Munitions and Supply
[Stage Direction]
Administration	
Expansion of Industry and Production of War Supplies	
National Defence-
Army Services	
Naval Services	
Air Services	
Sundry Services	
National Revenue	
National Health and Welfare	
National War Services	
National Film Board	
Post Office	:	
Privy Council	
Wartime Information Board	
Public Works	
Royal Canadian Mounted Police	
Secretary of State	
Soldier Settlement of Canada	
Trade and Commerce (including National Research Council)	
Transport	
National Harbours Board	
Veterans Affairs-
Treatment-Defence Forces	
Pensions-Defence Forces	
War Service Gratuities (Statutory)	
War Service Reestablishment Credits (Statutory')	
Civil Defence	
Sundry	
Total War Expenditures	
Active Assets:
Loans and Advances chargeable to the War Appropriation	
Mutual Aid expenditures	
Total: War and Mutual Aid expenditures plus loans and advances chargeable to War Appropriation	
(000 omitted)
$	95.839	$	64.293
275	196
541	496
342	661
9,258
4,122
13,400
110.468
8,750
19,700
940
636
24,086
73
432
1,698
3,719
9,500
205.000
1.355.000
407.000
1.325.000 60,000
1,536
25,072
1,260
1,347
2,185
7,024
3,885
35
11,549
36,599
11,000
13.000
18.000 2.000
8,973
[Stage Direction]
[Mr. Ilsley.l

War Appropriation
The total, it will be noted, is a huge figure. It is very close to the peak of S4,679 million which our direct and indirect war expenditures reached during 1943-44, a peak which reflected the costly process of providing initial equipment for our armed forces, completing defence construction and providing capital for war production. However, it is only natural that our war expenditures should be high in a year in which we have reached the climactic phase of the war against our No. 1 enemy and during which our armed forces on land, at sea and in the air, have been almost constantly engaged in active warfare. This involves, of course, the consumption on a colossal scale of the equipment, materials and supplies of war. When I introduced t'he War Appropriation bill last year I had expected that the reduction in the year 1944-45 would be somewhat greater than the $27 million now estimated, but a few months later when I brought down the budget I took occasion to warn the house that not only our cash requirements but probably our actual expenditures as well would be higher than our original estimates. Increased costs of maintaining our armies in active warfare and the assumption of responsibility for the cost of advanced training of, and reserve stocks for, our R.C.A.F. squadrons overseas were the chief factors responsible for the increase.
In case the house may be interested in receiving a preliminary forecast of the grand total of expenditures on all accounts for the fiscal year, 1944-45 I may add that ordinary expenditures are now estimated at $754 million, capital expenditures at $3-9 million, special expenditures at $7-6 million, expenditures resulting from government-owned enterprises at $1-4 million, and other charges at $47-8 million, making a grand total of $5,467 million. This compares with the budget estimate of $5,152 million and with actual expenditures of 1943-44 of $5,414 million (including in all cases the increase in active assets) chargeable to the war appropriation.
Returning now to the breakdown of war expenditures for 1944-45, I may be permitted to call attention to a few of the more important items.
In the service departments, army expenditures are now estimated at $1,355 million as compared with' the original estimate of $1,535 million and with actual expenditures of $1,312 million during 1943-44. Naval services expenditure is estimated at $407 million as compared with the original estimate of $410 million and with actual expenditures during 1943-44 of $370 million. Air services are now estimated at $1,325 million which represents an increase of $235 million over the original estimate and of $394 million over actual
expenditures for 1943-44. These variations are mainly due to increases in the costs of overseas operations. As compared with 1943-44 there has been a substantial increase in the number of R.C.A.F. squadrons and as well a larger proportion of the more costly types of squadron. The increase as compared with the original estimate has been due primarily to the inclusion of the costs of advanced training overseas of aircrew for R.C.A.F. squadrons and the cost of reserve stocks held for these squadrons overseas. Canada has undertaken to bear these costs as they are properly part of the cost of operating a Canadian air force on the fighting front. Sundry national defence services, which now include the cost of military relief, a new item which was explained to the house last summer, are estimated to account for $60 million as compared with the estimate of $22 million, excluding military -relief.
There has been a substantial reduction in the expenditures of the Department of Munitions and Supply. The total for this department is now estimated at $215 million, which compares with the original estimate of $183 million and with actual expenditures during 1943-44 of $688 million. The sharp reduction from the fiscal year 1943-44 reflects lower requirements for the construction and equipment of war factories and the disappearance of requirements for funds to be used as working capital in war production. In fact, we expect to have a credit available on working capital account and under the terms of the act these repayments form a part of the war appropriation.
For the war activities carried on by all other departments or agencies of government the probable total expenditure for 1944-45 is now forecast at roughly $440 million as compared with an original estimate of $375 million and with actual expenditures of $358 million in 1943-44. I shall mention a number of the factors responsible for this increase.
War expenditures of the Department of Agriculture are now estimated at $96 million for the past year as compared with the original estimate of $74 million and with, actual expenditures of $64 million during 1943-44. The increases are due to the higher cost of subsidies to encourage the wartime production of agricultural commodities. Under the finance department, subsidies paid by and other activities of the commodity prices stabilization corporation, an agency of the wartime prices and trade board, are expected to cost $110 million as compared with the estimate of $140 million and with actual expenditures of $82 million in 1943-44. Labour department war expenditures, largely connected with the
War Appropriation
[Stage Direction]
national selective service and the war emergency training programmes will be approximately equal to the estimate originally submitted but will exceed actual expenditures of the year 1943-44 by nearly $5 million. War expenditures of the Department of National War Services are now estimated at $26 million, up substantially from the original estimate of $16 million and the 1943-44 expenditures of $15 million. These increases are due almost wholly to increased requirements of the war auxiliary services and the inclusion of an allotment of $5 million as a government contribution to the cost of sending a much larger number of food parcels to prisoners of war in Europe and the far east. The only other significant increase as compared with 1943^44 is one of nearly $37 million shown in the expenditures of the Department of Veterans' Affairs. Costs of treatment and of pensions for veterans of the present war and sundry charges are up substantially and in addition, as a result of the passing of the War Service Grants Act at the last session of parliament, the government expects to pay $20 million for war service gratuities and reestablishment credits during the fiscal year, 1944-45.
The only other item to which I think attention need be called is Mutual Aid. We now estimate that total ' expenditures under this heading for the year 1944-45 will approximate $815 million. The available appropriation, it will be recalled, was $887 million, including $S7 million carried over from the previous year. In 1943-44 Mutual Aid expenditures amounted to $913 million. Much larger Mutual Aid expenditures during the fiscal year just closed were made on behalf of the U.S.S.R., Australia, India, France, China and TJNRRA, while the amounts required by Britain as Mutual Aid were reduced temporarily because Britain was able to pay for a larger proportion of her requirements from1 the abnormally high British receipts of Canadian dollars last year arising from the payment of the costs of Canadian forces overseas.
In this summary I have limited myself to the merest reference to the more significant categories of expenditure during 1944^45. In view of the method we have used in determining the amount of the interim appropriation being requested, these 1944-45 expenditures appeared to offer a better basis on which to organize1 the questioning and discussion by hon. members than any attempted break-down of the estimate of two billion dollars for the next five months. We have, therefore, not attempted to allocate this figure to departments and it would be difficult to do so at present with any degree of precision because

of the current uncertainties in the war situation, but if the house should desire to have some forecast of how this total might eventually be divided, each of the ministers concerned will be able to discuss the probable requirements within his field of responsibility.
When hon. members have had an opportunity to study the table I have placed on Hansard, they will be in a better position to select the items which are of special interest to them, and I have no doubt that my colleagues who are responsible for administration of the particular departments or agencies will be happy to give any additional information and such explanation as the house may desire.
Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, I shall not speak
at great length in discussing the subject now before the house, but there are some pertinent observations I desire to make in connection with certain general matters relating to the war appropriation resolution, and the situation generally.
The task of governing a nation at war is a heavy and exacting responsibility. The governing of a nation at war by a one-party administration cannot fail in the very nature of things to bring added difficulties to those in power. Nor can it fail to bring as well corresponding difficulties to those in opposition. I have always contended that His Majesty's Loyal Opposition, in a war-time period, has a serious and difficult role to play. In discharging our responsibility, in accordance with practice in democratic institutions, I have never conceived it to be the function of an opposition to criticize the government only for criticism's sake, a procedure which does justice neither to the opposition nor to the government. Our job is to cooperate with the administration, where to do so is clearly in the national interest. Our job, too, is to meet the government in head-on collision when we feel that their policies are no longer consonant with the best interests of the people of Canada.
Our duty never lies in surrendering to the government, although at times there seems to be a feeling across the house that any course other than complete surrender indicates a lack of cooperative spirit on the part of the opposition. Following that policy this party can properly claim that not a single vote for war purposes has been opposed by us since war broke out. True, we have criticized, and that is not only our privilege, it is our bounden duty to the public. But we have never obstructed, and this policy we shall pursue with respect to the war appropriations on this occasion as well.
Cooperation, however, cannot be a one-way street. We do not receive at all times from

War Appropriation
the present government the measure of cooperation to which we feel we are justly entitled. In between sessions of parliament we are largely ignored, but in that respect we are no worse off than the public generally. The circumstances with respect to the calling of parliament for the present session indicate clearly the fashion in which this government, on occasion, treats the opposition, this parliament and the people of Canada. Let me make the position clear.
At the close of the session on December 7 last, the Prime Minister adjourned parliament until January 31. When I inquired as to whether a new session would be convened at that time, the Prime Minister was rigidly noncommittal. Nobody-' heard anything more till the Prime Minister began to have a lengthy correspondence with the citizens of Greyi North in January. While he intimated he needed his Minister of National Defence in the Commons to take part in the parliamentary debates, he failed even then to make clear to those electors whether or not he intended to call parliament. On January 31 we met and prorogued until February 28. Nobody heard anything more until February 28, when the silence of the east block was broken long enough to say that prorogation had been extended to March 31. Two days later the Prime Minister went on the air and indicated that parliament would meet for a new session on March 19. The whole procedure seemed to lend some support to the view that the government was pushing parliament and the people around, and, what made it look worse, at a time when everything indicated, including the Grey North byelection, that the government had lost the confidence of the people, had lost confidence in itself, and held only the artificial confidence of a parliament elected five years ago.
Either this parliament should have been convened in the middle of January or a general election should have been called. The failure of the government to call a general election and its failure to do more than have a token session of parliament leaves the government open to the suspicion that it was reluctant not only to face the people but to face a full session of parliament.
The government knew that parliament's tenure expired on April 117. They knew because time after time the Prime Minister pledged himself against an extension of parliament's term. Still they allowed two solid months to go by without calling parliament and attempted to squeeze three months' national business into a little more than three weeks. That is the answer to the following questions which are being universally asked
to-day: first, why was there no debate on the address? Second, why there is so little time to discuss the war and civil estimates? Third, why are business and the taxpayers generally denied a budget until next September or October?
Parliament now finds itself with only about ten sitting days to discuss, criticize and pass over $500 million of civil estimates and $2,000 million of war appropriations as well. This strait-jacket session gives the opposition an opportunity to do no more than lightly touch upon some of the more outstanding subjects of criticism. The public will have to understand that because of the time element we are unable to do the job that we normally would be expected to do.
We shall not hold up the appropriations for either peace or war. So far as it lies within the power of the opposition so to do, we shall see that this supply is granted the government before parliament expires. But, in following this course, this party does so on the clear and definite condition that we are not necessarily committed either to the polciy or to the amounts involved when the Progressive Conservative government comes into power and compiles both the war and civil appropriations for submission to the next parliament. As in the case of interim appropriations and supply in other sessions, all our rights are hereby reserved and none surrendered by1 virtue of the passing of these interim appropriations. In saying that I am only making the reservations that have been normally and customarily made on previous occasions when interim appropriations have been before the house.
As a party we have given careful consideration as to how the remaining few days of this session can best be utilized in the public interest in connection with the war appropriations. In view of the fact that the present proposed appropriations are of an interim character, I believe the minister will agree that it may not be possible to follow rigidly in every respect the procedure adopted when the war appropriation resolution was before the house in previous sessions. Some hon. members may desire to speak to the resolution while the Speaker is still in the chair, in order that some special point in which they may be interested shall not be excluded from debate in committee by the possibility of there not being sufficient time to cover all departments before the parliamentary term expires. I suggest to the minister that the proceedings when we go into committee be so adjusted and arranged that this possibility shall be removed, so far as possible. I think the minister will understand the point I am trying to
War Appropriation

make clear-that such provision be made as will ensure that important departments of government may not find that they have not been dealt with before the session finally ends.
Such a situation, of course,' could not and never did arise in an ordinary session, for the very simple reason that the committee took the necessary time to examine all the war departments of the government. I should like to emphasize that it is important that the most be made of the limited time we have, and that the public may not have occasion to feel that any department is being neglected. The public will understand that within such a short period of time only the highlights of the expenditures can be touched at all, but on the other hand they will expect that as few of the highlights as possible be omitted. With this in mind our party will facilitate the passing of the appropriations, as well as the civil supply. At the same time we shall require the fullest possible information during the discussion.
Before I conclude I desire to make one further observation. A substantial part of the war expenditures of this government is raised by way of loans sought from the people. In the coming month Canada's eighth victory loan will be launched. The campaign will be ushered in amid circumstances which will require a clear understanding on the part of the public that this above all other times is no time to let up. The European straggle is not yet over, as the minister pointed out this afternoon. I was glad he did not take too optimistic a view in that regard. The Pacific war still has to be won. A let-up to-day means a let-down to-morrow for those who on the war fronts of the world have never let us down. We cannot, we must not, we will not let them down.
Canada, up to the end of December last, had lost in this war more than 30,974 dead and 41,540 wounded. Let us therefore not forget the part which every dollar lent will play in hospitalization of the wounded and reestablishment of our armed forces generally. They did the job for us; now we must do the job for them. Let Canada's eighth be Canada's most outstanding and successful victory loan achievement. In that achievement this party, as in previous loans, offers its wholehearted and unstinted support.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Speaker, until the members of the house receive the break-down which the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) has placed upon Hansard this afternoon, it is difficult to discuss these war appropriations in anything like detail. The minister has already stated that the government is asking for five-twelfths of an

annual appropriation based upon the expenditures of last year and the experience of the past few months. In that I think that the minister and the government are wise, because, as the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon) has stated, emphasizing the remarks of the minister, while the European war looks to be close to a victorious conclusion, it may nevertheless drag on for some time in guerrilla fashion, if not in an organized way, and consequently Canada's participation in the war may last longer than the period by which many of us dared to hope it might be shortened, if I might put it in that way. Hence it is that the appropriations before the house should receive the support of all the members, reserving as we do our rights to discuss any particular item and to scrutinize the expenditures to be made by the war departments for war purposes.
I should like particularly to emphasize the importance of making ample provision for economic aid. I note that provision is being made for Mutual Aid for the united nations. No matter what we may be called upon to do within the next few months in the actual field of warfare either in Europe or in the Pacific, it is certain that Canada will be called upon to do a great deal in the provision of food and other supplies for the peoples of the United Kingdom and the occupied areas of Europe. Consequently it seems to me that this appropriation, based, as the minister has said, upon the expenditure of last year and the experience of the last few months, i? founded upon an assumption that is fundamentally sound.
This parliament is nearing its close. In ten sitting days its life will have ended, and it is therefore appropriate that in the circumstances in which we meet there is the hope, which has I think been constant throughout the course of this war, in spite of what has just been said, that we would not be engaged in an election controversy in this country during a period of grave fighting overseas. I am hoping that we have now reached the stage when an immediate general election, for such it is that faces this house and country, may be fought on issues that are wider than the single purpose or in that sense the narrower issue of winning the war. For after all, when the budget is brought down by a government newly elected, whatever may be its political complexion, its principal function will be, not as it has been in the past five years-the provision of huge money appropriations and the making available of vast supplies for the conduct of the war-but rather the making available of appropriations for the post-war period. Consequently to the extent that the measures

War Appropriation '
covered by this war appropriation also look to the conversion of Canada to peace-time economy, I think that all members of the house should agree to give them their utmost support.
We shall have, we hope, before another year is past-indeed let us hope even before the first session of the new parliament is called-a number of our men and women returning to us from overseas. We have to make careful plans and adequate appropriations to bring about the rehabilitation of these men and women, who have performed a service to our country which I believe everyone recognizes and which has never been surpassed in our history, in order that we may find useful jobs, useful places, useful opportunities for them all. These appropriations do provide for that to some extent.
Thus there is our own domestic field; a wide field of international relations; the necessities of looking towards the nations beyond the seas and providing Mutual Aid. For let us bear this in mind, Mr. Speaker, that this country has been united for a single purpose, the purpose of winning the war, and so far as we are able we must remain united for the purpose of laying the foundations of an enduring peace. I am of this opinion, that the post-war period upon which we are about to enter will be in many respects a greater challenge to democratic peoples than even the war itself has been, and that the problems which we shall have to face, and which in a measure are dealt with in this appropriation for the next five months, will challenge our finest statesmanship, as it will in every one of the democratic countries.
And so, Mr. Speaker, speaking for this party in this house, we are prepared to facilitate the passage of these estimates in every respect consistent with proper inquiry into the expenditures that are to be made. That is what the country expects of us. That is what we desire to do. We therefore reserve further comments until we receive the breakdown of the expenditures by departments.


Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):: Mr. Speaker, as everyone knows, Canada is still at war, and wars cost money-much money. Social Crediters are determined to win that war. They realize that the government is charged with the responsibility of conducting the war. We assume that the government know how much money they need. They have told us what they need, and Social Crediters propose to back the government in voting the necessary supply of money.


Mr. H. C. GREEN (Vancouver South):: Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I propose to say a few words about veterans' affairs. I do so because it is altogether likely that that particular department will not be under consideration until the dying days of the session, and in fact there may be no adequate time for the consideration of the various problems having -to do with the men and women who are representing Canada on the field of battle.
I do hope that the government will see fit to bring down during this session certain legislation dealing with veterans' affairs. While I realize that is askjng a lot, there are nevertheless certain defects in our present veterans' legislation which might very well be remedied nt this session; defeats which will be recognized by members of the house on all sides, so that I am quite sure there would be very little delay in putting through the necessary amendments. At any rate it is vital that action should be taken on these questions before the fall. The new house will probably not sit until after a lapse of six months, or perhaps longer, and the intervening delay may very well mean great injustice to many thousands of our young men and women.
During these last five years the main job of Canada and of the Canadian parliament has been to wage war; but complementary to the waging of war there is always the care of those who are doing the fighting, and- care for their dependents. I suggest to hon. members that the time will be here very soon when the first concern of the Canadian people and of the Canadian parliament will be the care of these young men and women and their dependents.
In meeting these problems we are against a time limit. There is only so long in which to make the necessary changes. In a few months' time thousands upon thousands of our young men and women will be coming back to their homeland andl we must be prepared to see that they are properly treated when they do come back. The Canadian people are uneasy about the whole question of absorbing the young men and women back into our national life. There is great anxiety and determination to see that they get a proper start. People are asking that these young men and women be given fair treatment and that there be no delay.
To show members of the house how far civilians have gone in some parts of the country, I would point out that in my home city of Vancouver there has been set up a rehabilitation council of greater Vancouver made up of leading citizens of all parties and occupations. I believe that the government has agreed to the setting up of such a council, but the people who comprise the council have
War Appropriation

not been willing to accept any money whatever from the government. They are raising funds by private subscriptions, believing that if they carry on in that way they are far more likely to get the good will of the men coming back from the forces, and will be much freer to make suggestions, as well as complaints to whatever government may be in power. The Minister of Veterans' Affairs no doubt knows whether similar councils have been set up in other cities; I presume so.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: I think it is a very good idea, because after all the whole question of looking after the people who come back can be adequately handled only if there is cooperation on the part of the people throughout Canada.
And now to come down to suggestions as to changes that should be made, my first suggestion is that there be a change in our approach to the whole problem of the young men and women who are 'returning. Our approach at the present time is to talk about rehabilitation, to talk about putting them back into jobs. It is of course very good to put these young folks back into jobs, but there is the danger of our looking back to the year 1939. Perhaps it can best be described as trying to set up a 1939-model Canada. I do not believe that is what these young men and women want at all. I do not think they want a 1939 Canada, but something far better They want a 1946-model Canada. You see' Mr. Speaker, they have developed. They have had a great deal of training in the forces. There has been far more training given in all three forces in this war than there was in the last one. These young people have travelled widely. Sometimes people have complained bitterly about the troops and sailors and airmen travelling back and forth from one side of Canada to the other. At least it has had the advantage that hundreds of thousands of our young people know far more about different parts of Canada than many members of parliament.
Many of these young people have travelled abroad and all have developed a fitness, a keenness that they would not have acquired' in the ordinary course. Take the case of a young lad of eighteen or nineteen who went from school into the air force. He had a wonderful course under the air training scheme and has risen to be perhaps a Wing Commander. That young man is now in a position to accept great responsibility. He is not coming back to his old position. He is coming back a trained, responsible citizen of Canada, able to undertake great responsibilities. And that is true

in practically every case. I do not suppose there are many young men or women in any of the three forces who have not developed a great deal during their service. I suggest therefore that the better approach to the problem is not to talk so much about rehabilitation or putting these people back in jobs, but to regard these young men and women as a great asset and to realize that we must seize the opportunity to get their services in agriculture, labour, industry, business, in the professions, in public life and in every other field of endeavour in Canada.
We should grasp this chance to get in new blood, to bring in these young men and women. For a short time, a year or two, they may be inexperienced in the line they undertake. No doubt they will be restless at first; they may be impatient, and it may be a little hard to cooperate with them. But they will bring to any business or profession new ideas and a broader vision as well as a finer spirit. They have therefore a valuable contribution to make, and eventually they will be of great assistance to any firm that gets their services.
I suggest to the Minister of Veterans' Affairs that he try to direct his publicity in this way. Let him have some of his advertisements take that approach. Point out to the Canadian business men, to the Canadian people generally, the great value of these young men. Point out that the people at home should be on the alert to get the services of young men and women coming back into civilian life.
The same thing might be done by members of the house. Most of us will be fighting an election in a few weeks' time. We shall be campaigning for several weeks, speaking, I hope, to many thousands of people, if we can get so many to listen to us. Well, here is one thing on which there need be no division. Every one of the members of the house during the election campaign could very well point out to his listeners the great value there is in these young people. If that is done it will be rendering a great service not only to the young men and women themselves but also to the nation.
To sum up, I suggest, first, that here is an opportunity to strengthen and improve the nation by getting these young people into our national firm, Canada Unlimited, not as beginners but as full-fledged partners.
Other suggestions come to mind, but I propose to mention just two or three to-day. One is that these new partners in our Canadian national life should1 be given the maximum in training. I believe there is some disappointment that such a small number of the men and women who are being discharged are

War Appropriation
taking vocational, technical and school training. Might it not be worth while for us to provide that vocational training can be taken without interfering with the reestablishment credit or the land settlement plan? At present the AVar Service Grants Act reads differently. I refer to section 8. Reestablishment credit is only given to those who do not elect to take benefits under the Veterans' Land Act or any vocational, educational or technical training benefits. I think it would be a good investment for us to allow every young man or woman who wants to take this type of training to get it, and in addition to give them the full reestablishment credit.
I can see that many of them would not want to take the vocational training, because they would prefer to get the reestablishment credit. These credits are for such purposes as helping to buy a house, helping to buy furniture, working capital for one's profession or business, purchase of tools or payment of premiums on a returned soldiers' insurance policy and1 for other similar purposes. Men who take university or vocational training want to be able to establish homes too, and they want to be able to take out this insurance, buy furniture and so on. Therefore I suggest that the restriction contained in section 8 be removed. Of course that would mean an amendment to the AVar Service Grants Act.


Mr. ILSLEY:: What would the hon. member think about discrimination that would arise as between one soldier who got $6,000 or $7,000 worth of reestablishment benefits as against another who could not avail himself of more than $500?


Howard Charles Green: I think that any man or
woman returning from the forces who wants to take vocational training or training in a school or university should be allowed to do so, and that he or she should also get the reestablishment credit. The fact that they take training should not interfere with the reestablishment credit. At the present time too few are getting the training. I think it would be a very' good investment for Canada if the wider provision were made.
I do not wish to deprecate the work that has already been done. A great deal has been done in the way of reestablishment, but there is more to do, and the new government of Canada, no matter what its complexion may be, must continue the present plans, and greatly expand them.
I suggest that all handicaps to the establishment of these young men and women should be removed. For example, I hold in my hand the report of one which came up in Vancouver
just about two weeks ago. The heading of the dispatch is as follows: "Prices board order holds up rehabilitation of air veteran." This veteran wanted to go into the taxi business. He had been a taxi proprietor before he enlisted. He had two or three cars operating and when he came back he tried to open up the same business, but there was an order of the wartime prices and trade board, administrator's order A-58, issued March 31, 1942, which provided that no new taxi or U-drive licences can be issued. Perhaps by this time that obstacle has been removed.


James Lorimer Ilsley: For a year.


Howard Charles Green: But there are so many
thousands of these orders running around loose that some provision should be made by the government to make sure that these veterans are not handicapped or prevented from becoming reestablished in business.


James Lorimer Ilsley: AVould the hon. member give me the date of that clipping?


Howard Charles Green: It is from the Vancouver Province of March 16, 1945.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: In the city of Vancouver?


Howard Charles Green: Yes.


James Lorimer Ilsley: People have been free to start new businesses for practically a year now.


Howard Charles Green: This was the hold-up; city council was advised it could not issue a licence because of that order. It is particularly important that the men coming back should be encouraged to enter into their own businesses. They have shown great initiative, just as the Canadian troops did in the last war, and there must be no obstacle whatever placed in the way of their starting up a business of their own.
Another difficulty that has come up is in connection with supplies. Take the purchase of vacuum cleaners or washing machines for the home. They are in short supply at the present time. Firms are taking lists of prospective customers. Well, a firm may have several hundred people on the list. An airman comes back and wants to set up a home. He finds he is No. 600 or -No. 700 on the list, which means he will have very little chance to get that equipment for his wife. Some provision should be made to enable returned men to get a fair proportion of these supplies.
There should be a speeding up in the payment of gratuities. I realize that it is a big job. There are many thousands of cases involved, yet sometimes they do get horribly
War Appropriation

held up. A case came to my attention just recently in which, a man applied in October of Last year and up until last week the gratuity had not come through. He cannot get his reestablishment credit until he gets the first gratuity cheque. That means holding up his whole reestablishment and the result is discontent in many parts of the country. If there is not a big enough staff available at the present time, then the staff should be increased. In any event there has been too much delay in getting out these gratuity cheques.
I believe provision should be made for the payment of a gratuity to the mothers and fathers of men who lose their lives. Take as an example parents who are getting on in years-wh.o have reached the age of sixty-nine or seventy. They may not have been actually dependent on their son when he enlisted five years ago, but they had every reason to expect that he would be helping them in their declining years. Under the present law there is no possibility of that gratuity being paid to them because of section 4 of the War Services Gratuities Act. The whole basis is dependency. Unless the parents are dependent upon the man they cannot get any gratuity. A change should be made there. I am not asking that the gratuity be paid to a distant relative or to anyone really not directly affected, but I do think it should be payable to the mother and father. I suggest that the government give consideration to this change, which should be made without further delay.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: If I may ask my hon. friend a question on the point he has been discussing, would he recommend paying the gratuity to the mother and father as against paying it to the estate of the deceased, as has been recommended under the English gratuity system?


Howard Charles Green: There was some discussion about this the other day. At the moment I am not prepared to go so far as to say that in every case the gratuity should be paid to the estate. That may be the fair way; there are strong arguments in favour of it, but at the moment I am confining my submission to the payment to the mother and father. In many cases the mother and father would not want it; to get the gratuity of their dead son would be the last thing they would want. But there are cases where the gratuity is badly needed and should be paid. Another case I have had is where the boy has been assigning pay to his father to help pay for the home. That was not regarded as dependency and therefore the gratuity could not be paid.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Just to help along the discussion, would my hon. friend recommend that the parents make application for the gratuity or that it be automatic?


Howard Charles Green: I should think it would be
better to have them make application. That is only my personal opinion, without giving that particular point very carefuL thought. Another suggestion is that we should make certain that the men and women coming back disabled to civil life get adequate compensation. There is no such certainty under the present law. A man is discharged and the pension commission rules that his disability was a pre-enlistment condition. This applies to men who have served overseas as well as to men who have served only in Canada. That has been the decision in many cases. I believe the pension commission have been very unwise in their rulings along this line, and I suggest that a change should be made in the Pension Act by inserting a new provision to this effect-and I am quoting now a proposed amendment :
It shall be presumed that an arrplieamt's condition as recorded on his admission to the service was in fact his condition at that time, and that any subsequent deterioration was due to his service.
In this war men joining up have been examined very carefully, far more carefully than we 'were in the last war; yet perhaps two or three years later, upon discharge, they are given this ruling: "Oh, you had this condition before you enlisted, and therefore you are not eligible for pension." I had the case of a man who had been an outstanding logger in the interior of British Columbia. He enlisted in the forestry corps; he was hurt overseas and was finally discharged, totally disabled to the extent that he is unable to carry on his previous work. In his case a finding has been made that he had a preenlistment condition, aggravated on service and therefore is not eligible for full pension. That injustice would be removed if some provision such as I suggest were inserted in the act.
Then I believe there should be an amendment to the act to make the insurance principle apply to all those serving in Canada who enlisted to fight. That point has been raised in the house many times during the last five years; at every session of parliament there has been a fight about it. The insurance principle did apply prior to May 21, 1940, but since then the applicant for pension who has served only in Canada must show that his disability arose out of or was directly

War Appropriation
connected with such military service. In connection with disease it is almost impossible to show this, with the result that many thousands of young Canadians who were not able to get overseas, though quite willing to go, have been disabled and now can get no recompense. That provision should be changed. The insurance principle never should have been taken out of the act. As hon. members know, as a sort of substitute, subsection 3 of section 11 was passed, providing for hardship cases; but it involves all the ignominy of a means test and is really just an escape clause from the obligations of the state. I have no objection to subsection 3 being retained for the hardship cases, but certainly the other provision should be made by reinserting the insurance principle.
In any event, whether or not the government is willing to reestablish the insurance principle, provision should be made for treatment for disabilities incurred during service. If a man cannot qualify for pension as a result of the insurance principle having been wiped out, when he is disabled during service, he cannot even get treatment except for the first year after discharge, unless again he is able to show that he is practically eligible for relief, that he is almost in the bread line in which event provision is made for a cheap kind of treatment; where men have been disabled during service they should be entitled to treatment as long as they live. Certainly that provision should be inserted either in the act or in the regulations.
Then there is the dual service pension. Last fall, after the house had adjourned, an order in council was passed providing for what is know as a dual service pension. It was for the members of the veterans' guard, a basis being the fact that the recipient had served in two wars. That is a very good principle. There is no doubt that these men, who have given perhaps ten years to the service of the state, should receive a pension; but unfortunately the payment is not made in the form of a pension. It is rqfilly just a war veterans' allowance and again is based on a means test. Unless the applicant is very hard up he cannot get that pension. I suggest to the ministry that the basis for this payment should be the service of the man; that it should be a reward for service, or in other words a service pension, just as we pay a service pension to General McNaughton or any other man who has served in the permanent forces of Canada. That should be the basis for the payment. I am not making any submission to-day as to the amount that should be paid, but it should be a service pension. The present provision means that a man's earnings are restricted. If he
goes out and gets a job and earns more than a very small amount, I think about $10 a month if he is single, then he loses the allowance or has it reduced. The whole principle is wrong; payment is made on the wrong basis. In addition, I understand that it does not apply to a member of the veterans' guard who served in the imperial forces during the last war. He cannot qualify for the dual service pension. I suggest that this restriction should be lifted. I am told that quite a large percentage of the men in the veterans' guard served in the last war not with the Canadian forces but with the imperials. I see no reason why they should not be eligible for this pension.
The recipients of the war veterans' allowance, both men and women, should be allowed to receive or earn higher income, without having their allowances cut. At the present time a single person can earn only $10 a month, approximately, in addition of course to what we call casual earnings, without having a reduction made from the allowance. During the war many of them have been working, and they should be encouraged to do so in the post-war years. I believe it would be a great help if that earning allowance or income allowance were increased. The war veterans' allowance should certainly be extended (to cover those men who served with the imperial forces in the last war and were domiciled in Canada, say, prior to the outbreak of this war.
I have only one other suggestion, which has been offered at other times, and particularly I believe by my good friend the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis). It is that the men who served in the merchant navy, in the fire-fighters corps, in the auxiliary services overseas such as the Y.M.C.A., the Knights of Columbus, the Salvation Army and the Canadian Legion, should be treated in exactly the same way as the men in the army, the navy, and the air force. These men have undergone great risks. Really they have constituted another arm of the services, and should be treated in the same way.
There are several other suggestions which could be made, but I shall not place them before the minister to-day.
I repeat that a delay of six months or perhaps more in facing these problems would be very unfair to the young Canadians who, of all people in this nation, should surely be the last to be treated unfairly. I ask the ministry to consider these questions and to bring down legislation during the present session to remedy some of the defects to which I have referred; or, in any event, to make a statement before the house dissolves and to take action at as
War Appropriation

early a day as 'possible. Let us always remember that these young men and women who have served are Canada's greatest asset. No matter what we do we can never adequately repay those who have suffered, and the dependents of those who will not return, for the sacrifices they have made for this nation.


Mr. W. GARFIELD CASE (Grey North):: Mr. Speaker, this is the first opportunity I have had to convey my greetings to members of the house. You may be sure I have formed many impressions. No moment can be greater in any man's life than that which I experienced when I was officially presented to parliament by my hon. friend the house leader of the Progressive Conservative party (Mr. Graydon) and the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson). Indeed I felt both humble and proud: humble, because it was a momentous occasion in my life to march down the aisle, as it were, in full view of all those who have been playing their part in seeking to mould history in this great nation; proud, because I was elected by a majority of the people in a riding which will forever remain historic; elected by a majority of the people in Grey North to serve in a free parliament, the one great institution which remains the real prize for all freedom-loving people.
The people who sent me here are watching. They are interested in the course I pursue. They expect me to play my part, and within the limits of my ability I address myself to that task, confident in the hope that reasoned judgment of men of good will and purpose will prevail, that we may keep abreast of the times, and that our nation may play its full part in the onward march of civilization.
I am pleased that my first recorded vote in this assembly was cast to indicate my hope that a formula may be found to guarantee the peace of the world. What a great moment!
I should like to tell you something about my people and about my constituency. Sometimes I feel we are all too prone to forget the people who send us here. Blit I shall not forget that in the face of terrific odds, in an atmosphere of confusion and doubt; as it was intimated that the by-election might be called off; that there was no issue save one, a seat for my honourable opponent, the Minister of National Defence, Mr. McNaughton. In this arena of doubt and confusion I presented as clearly and forcibly as possible the stand my party had taken during the special session of this parliament. The stand was weighed by my people of Grey North, not in any partisan sense, but in its broadest application. Thus. Mr. Speaker, I come to the house with

a definite mandate direct from the people- a mandate which says in clear and unmistakable language that this government will be held strictly to account for any policy which fails in its objective to provide for equality of sacrifice and equality of service. My people have said that they do not believe the government has provided such a policy; they have said they believe the government's manpower policy is weak, that it is a half-hearted, piecemeal, unsatisfactory, makeshift man-power policy.
The history of the world is- indeed the history of the world's great men, and my highly honoured friend, the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) will find his place in history among the great men of his generation; but he would have found a greater place in the hearts and minds of the Canadian people if he had given effect to the people's will as expressed at the polls. This would have meant a great deal to the troops overseas, as evidenced by the scores of messages I received from them. They expected this, I can assure you.
War, of necessity, places a great strain upon democratic institutions. Surely, we have slipped-indeed, as the hon. member for Trinity (Mr. Roebuck) would say, we are bordering on fascism. One thing I do hope and pray and that is that after San Francisco we may with dispassionate minds determine our future manpower policy so that all those who enjoy Canadian citizenship within the British commonwealth of nations will be taught to realize that they must share its responsibilities. Reward seeks sacrifice and sacrifice seeks reward. 'You cannot have your cake and eat it", said the sage. Neither is it fair that the burden of responsible citizenship should bear more heavily upon one class or section than upon another.
My constituency is vast in area and populated by people ninety per cent of whom are English, Irish and Scotch. The other ten per cent are the salt of the earth, the best citizens in the world, with a keen sense of their responsibility. They are just as much devoted to British ideals and institutions as are those of direct British stock and origin. A large percentage of my people make up the farm and rural population. During the war this great county of Grey has produced more live stock than any other in Ontario. Our field crops are of a character and quality which makes their contribution effective and worth while. Grey county apples enjoy a world-wide reputation. Their texture and flavour are unequalled anywhere.	,
Yet our farmers have suffered because of this government's ineffective manpower policy. Farm women and children in Grey county are

War Appropriation
entitled to my highest commendation. They have worked hard under great handicaps while their sons have gone forth to war. They sought to produce from the fertile lands of Grey, food in abundance to feed the masses, and the fighting forces of Canada and her allies. My riding boasts of three Victoria Cross winners, namely Billy Bishop, V.C., Tommy Holmes, V.C., and David Currie, V.C. It is to the credit of my people and the soldiers of Grey that not one man was marked A.W.O.L. or listed as a deserter. Our industries are working at peak capacity in war production and the men who man these factories are loyally devoted to their task. Many are unionized, with very happy relations between the worker and management. The products of our factories, as the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) knows, are vital to our war effort.
All in all, I can be most proud of my riding and the folks back home. Farmers, labour, leaders of industry, merchants and all others have played their full part in this war. Every victory loan, as the Minister of Finance knows, has been oversubscribed and will be again. Every Red Cross and other war charity appeal has been properly and fully provided for, as witness our most recent appeal on behalf of the Red Cross-the largest quota we have ever had went better than 133 per cent over the top. We are a people, serious in our purpose and determined to play our full part in bringing this conflict to a victorious conclusion.
Then, when peace comes, we want to face the. problems of peace. We desire most to have our service personnel properly rehabilitated, secure in a job, but I hope a grateful people will not be niggardly with the rewards they have earned, and which are justly theirs. Do not give all the money to top-ranking generals; save some for the boys over there. God knows we will never discharge our debt to them, and to their interests I address my best efforts. There must be no repetition of 1919, when service men threw their badges away in order to get a job. If necessary we may have to humanize the rehabilitation problem by encouraging employers to adopt a most sympathetic understanding and give these men a chance to adjust themselves back to normal life. I have been more than impressed by the manner in which private enterprise is playing its part. Industry is indeed to be congratulated, and many have been making a tremendous contribution to soldiers' families by maintaining their wages on a level equal to the soldier's pay before he enlisted.
It is easy for us to talk "justice" and "generosity" in connection with our plans for the rehabilitation of these men and women. But
we must go farther. We must see that those two principles are practised. And, if we have to err, we must err on the side of generosity rather than on the side of a too strict interpretation of what is "justice".
Let me give an illustration of what I mean by showing the type of injustice which is perpetrated by narrow rules and regulations. It will be remembered that the totally inadequate discharge clothing allowance which was in effect at the beginning of the war was, after members of the opposition, veterans and their associations and members of the public had brought the strongest pressure to bear, raised from $35 to $65, an amount which was still insufficient to reclothe a discharged man properly. Further pressure resulted in the amount being raised to the present sum of $100, a sum which I do not even yet regard as adequate. On the occasion of each increase in the discharge clothing allowance it was not made retroactive. Consequently we have cases such as those of which I have been informed, of men who lost limbs at Dieppe and were unfortunate enough to be discharged from the army a few days before the new allowance came into effect instead of a few days afterwards. All they got was the lower allowance, whereas men who had never left Canada and were lucky enough not to be discharged until the higher rate was in effect, received a larger sum. You are going to find it hard to convince those Dieppe veterans and others who are in the same position as themselves that "justice" and "generosity" have been practised in their cases.
Then take those men who deserve every consideration we can give them, the men who twice in a lifetime have put on uniforms to help their country in its hour of need, the veterans of both the first and the second great war. In mentioning these men, Mr. Speaker, I desire to pay special tribute not only to those who are with the armed forces at home and abroad in the regular services, but particularly to the members of the veterans' guard1 of Canada who, it must be remembered, have been of ail our men and women on sendee longest in contact with the enemy.
I do not think that the people of Canada have a full and complete realization of the arduous task which these two-war veterans have performed and of how well it has been done. Since, years ago, the first German prisoners were brought to Canada, the members of the veterans' guard have been in charge of them. Their duties have been carried on under difficult conditions. They have had to be on the alert every minute of the day and night, watching over an enemy whose cunning and determination are of the highest order.
War Appropriation

Their job has been done, not in the comparative comfort of camps such as Borden, Debert and others, but away in the wilds far from home, with much less opportunity than the average service man of seeing their own folks because of distances and difficult travelling conditions. They have carried on uncomplainingly in 40 below temperatures and in blazing wilderness heat. They have set up a magnificent record, in far-away desolate spots such as Angler and Neys, for keeping our enemies committed to their charge under control. They have been, in practically every sense of the word, and certainly in the spirit, front-line troops again; and I believe these men should be paid exactly the same gratuity for their service in Canada as the men on service overseas receive, rather than the lesser sum due for service in Canada.
The rehabilitation of these men will not be easy. Many of the plans which have been evolved will be of little use to them. You cannot expect the man of fifty-five to take advantage of the educational opportunities which are open to the younger men. It is of no use to put a man of fifty-five on the land, under the Veterans' Land Act, with a twenty-five year contract to work out. It is asking too much even of a group of men who have proved their toughness and, let us not forget, men who did not get any too good a break after the last war, before Canada had learned how to treat her men returning from service against the enemy.
The Department of Veterans' Affairs has not given adequate study to the problems of these men, who in all justice and common sense deserve all the consideration which this country can give them. It is true that the dual service pensions act has been brought into being for their benefit, but what is this act? It is nothing but the War Veterans' Allowance Act dressed up under another name. It is nothing but a species of relief, sugar-coated. It is, in plain English, relief. It has created a very great deal of resentment among the members of the guard, who, seeing it for what it is. are properly resentful of the fact that their long service is being recognized by what is nothing better than a hand-out- something just enough to keep body and soul together.
I repeat that their problem is a special and a pressing one. The ages of these men prohibit them from taking advantage of many of the provisions of our rehabilitation plans. The same factor will be a serious disadvantage to them when they have to compete in the labour market against men many years their junior. Passing a relief bill is not good enough. The Department of Veterans' Affairs must give
(Mr. Case.]
much deeper study to their problems, must formulate plans to fit them into our national economy. They have given many years of useful service to this country, have many years ahead of them. They must be given employment-not the dole.
There is one more class of those to whom we owe so much for whom I feel little is being done. I refer to the men of the mercantile marine, the men without whom our armed forces and our allies could not have gone very far. They have, in every sense of the word, been on active service. I have heard from many of these men and they are much disturbed at the lack of recognition of what should be accorded in respect of their future. I know it has been said on many occasions that this subject is being studied. We need study all right, but we need some action too. Our talk of rehabilitation, of justice, of generosity, has a hollow ring to men of the groups of whom I have just spoken.
Let me add one more word to say that in the matter of gratuities a deceased soldier's next of kin, his beneficiaries, executors or administrators, should receive the gratuity he would receive if he had lived. Surely this is reasonable and fair; and I think the basis of settlement should be his length of service to the end of the war just as though he had lived.
Again, may I say I have been greatly impressed by the House of Commons. Yet I am asking myself a question having to do with San Francisco: How can the government or Canada's delegates speak for Canada when we shall have no parliament? To whom will the delegation report? The Prime Minister has no right, to anticipate the personnel of the next parliament; he may not be a member of the next parliament. Many of the delegates may not be members of the next parliament. Parliament is supreme; parliament must answer to the people. I submit, Mr. Speaker, that the Prime Minister has placed Canada in an untenable position. We should have had a general election earlier, so that whatever government was elected would have a mandate from the people. Now, at the most formative period in the history of the world, Canada will be without a parliament, Recently the Prime Minister drew a parallel comparing our position with that of Great Britain. I submit that there is no comparison. There they have a national government whose term of office is protected. Our parliament, this parliament, will never assemble again after April 17. I cannot imagine Mr. Churchill dissolving the British House of

War Appropriation
Commons and then going to San Francisco- certainly not; he would want to report to the parliament which authorized him to attend the conference.
I should like to think also of the unlimited possibilities my riding offers in the post-war future. I hope I can persuade the government not to spend all its money elsewhere, but to survey carefully our possibilities.


Mr. ROWE:: They did spend a lot in that riding in the recent by-election.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: Our hundreds of miles of streams offer a fisherman's paradise. Our inland lakes and the great Georgian bay likewise offer respite to the busy man. In fact, we are a great tourist centre through which passes the Blue Water highway from Sarnia to Orillia, and we would like to improve our facilities to provide for the great friendly army who will invade our area for their holidays. Part of my riding is included in historic Huronia now being rapidly developed as an outstanding tourist attraction-more will be heard of Huronia soon. Tourists provide us with the greatest possible export market, an export market which brings the money into our centre, yet the goods and produce are consumed right at home.
I have in mind an immense conservation and reforestation scheme for my county. I should like to see a national park and game preserve developed. Reforestation provides a self-liquidating debt-and our possibilities are unlimited. However, we want better transportation facilities. In fact, as quickly as time will permit I hope to have a complete superficial survey of all our potentials.
I shall always remember my municipal experience. Municipal governments are indeed the bedrock of democracy-they are close to the people, they can interpret and anticipate the people's wishes, their desires and their needs. I intend to work closely with every municipal council in my riding. I can rely on their advice, and in a spirit of cooperation we will build for the future, sincere in a desire to leave behind something for which future generations can be grateful and proud.
May I venture the hope that we may all look beyond the immediate horizon, that we may appreciate how compact the world has become by modem communication and transportation, that we are citizens of that world society, and that we must accept certain obligations if we are to reap our fair reward.
An airport is very necessary somewhere in the vicinity of Owen Sound or Meaford. We must be on the air map of the future. In the meantime, Owen Sound has had completed on its own initiative a survey of a possible
aiport site. This area offers tremendous possibilities of national importance, as it will accommodate land, amphibian, and sea planes. We also need improved railroad facilities. I look upon our railroads as a national necessity, particularly in time of war; and surely in view of our experience in the past our future development should have the defence of the nation in mind. A great improvement could be secured by an outlet between Owen Sound and Meaford. Being the end of the line has restricted and hampered the development of both of these centres.
It was always difficult for me to understand why some naval training stations were located in rather unusual areas when we have such splendid natural facilities at Owen Sound, Meaford and Thornbury. Owen Sound boasts of one of the finest natural harbours on the great lakes. It is the last to freeze up in the fall and the first to open in the spring. This year set a record when boats cleared on March 24. However, the harbour facilities have been neglected. We need improved retaining walls and docking facilities. I propose to ask the department to make an inspection of both Owen Sound and Meaford harbours, so that a proper sum may be placed in the estimates to maintain and improve this great national asset.
Owen Sound, the scenic city, the city of the Greys, has a rehabilitation committee composed largely of veterans of the first war. They are seeking to provide for the rehabilitation of our armed service personnel, and the local branch of the Canadian Legion is doing a commendable piece of work. Wherever the legion have club house facilities, I would urge the government to seek their full cooperation. They understand the veteran's problem, and the government could quite properly designate certain legion members as agents of the department, and pay them accordingly.
Owen Sound also has a post-war planning committee to programme public works and civic improvements. However, like most planning bodies, they are looking to the government for over-all leadership. The government of Ontario-now appealing for a new mandate-has already consulted municipal authorities about post-war planning. They now await a dominion-provincial conference to coordinate plans. This conference is long overdue, yet I am sure hon. gentlemen opposite will appreciate how necessary it is if our planning is to be effective and to avoid overlapping. The county of Grey has also named a rehabilitation committee, having as its object the restoration of our armed service personnel to normal life and activity.
War Appropriation

I hope, Mr. Speaker, my reference to my riding has been reasonably interesting. After all, I represent North Grey-the only voice they have-and while I shall willingly address myself to problems of national concern, still I must not forget the people who sent me here. No organization is stronger than its weakest link, and I want our link strong and virile.
The town of Meaford is one of the prettiest in Ontario. There is where they hold fishing derbies. Their great fleet of fishing boats attracts thousands of tourists and visitors annually; indeed the industry is of national importance. Meaford is also the centre of apple growing and the home of thriving industries, all working, I am happy to say, at full capacity. In nearby St. Vincent township is the tank range, with a terrain said to be more suitable for this type of training than any other in Canada. Thus my riding has provided the facilities to train men for a most vital and important type of warfare.
Owen Sound has a civic auditorium arena. It is a centre for young people, and has played a great part in minimizing juvenile delinquency. I recommend to all hon. members that they do all they can to promote healthy play-centres in their communities. It will pay big dividends in citizenship. Give the young people an opportunity to expend their pent-up energy in good healthy sport and recreation. A strong, healthy, robust child is indeed an asset to the nation. Keep them playing at good clean sport; teach them to play the game. Life's problems will not be so great if they are healthy in mind and body.
Thornbury, surrounded by Collingwood township, is the centre of Ontario's finest orchard district. They have storage facilities for the product, and at both Thornbury and Clarksburg are processing plants. This to my mind is important, as we should constantly seek to process our natural products at home. Processing the product provides work for local people, and the finished product is more easily stored and can be marketed more regularly than in its more perishable state.
Owen Sound is flanked by Sydenham, Keppel, Sarawak, Derby and Holland townships, and by the village of Shallow Lake- once the centre of a sizable cement industry. Euphrasia township boasts of the Eugenia electric power development, with head water three times the height of Niagara Falls. Osprey township rounds out a great riding, of which I am justly proud-thirteen municipalities in all, in twelve of which the Progressive Conservative stand on man-power was endorsed by majorities.

I should like, Mr. Speaker, to make a passing reference to Poland, as a matter of record. In the years 1941 and 1942 we had stationed in Owen Sound the Polish Legion. We grew to have a very fine impression and appreciation of these splendid people. Everyone knows how much they have suffered, and surely they have steadfastly sought to contribute their all. I sincerely hope that the post-war world1 settlements arrived at will be to the satisfaction of all concerned, and I have faith and confidence to believe that it will be so.
No remarks from a newly elected member of a great party would be complete without some reference to his leader. I want to say that I believe that John Bracken has sought to prepare himself for a great task as has no other leader before. His contacts from coast to coast in Canada have surely fitted him for the high office of prime minister, and I do believe that he will discharge his duties with honour and distinction to himself and to the people of Canada.
As one who has a deep appreciation of all those who seek to serve in public office, may I say that I know my immediate predecessor from North Grey was respected by all members of this house, just as we at home respect and honour him. I know that you will all regret that his health has not shown the improvement his friends had hoped for, but I feel I can carry from this chamber the best wishes of all for his future comfort and1 happiness. Mr. W. P. Telford served North Grey for a total of almost fifteen years, and his late father was one time a member of parliament for our constituency. I should like to pay just tribute to one who has served so long and who enjoyed in marked degree the confidence of his fellowmen and women.
I have appreciated, Mr. Speaker, the many courtesies extended to me by members and officials of this house, and I hope they will bear with me while I find my way about and seek to discharge my duties to my constituency of North Grey and to the people of Canada.


Mr. J. W. NOSEWORTHY (York South):: I wish to speak for a little while on the subject raised by the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Green), but before doing so I should like to make a brief comment on the speech to which we have just listened. As one who took some part in the campaign referred1 to by the hon. member for Grey North (Mr. Case), I can well understand his sense of pride in winning that election. I am quite confident that either of the other two contestants in that election, and the

War Appropriation
3S3
parties that they represented, would have felt a similar sense of pride in having won the election.
With what the hon. member has said about his people and' his constituency, I am in agreement. I had the good fortune to enjoy their hospitality for four or five weeks. Concerning the issue on which the people cast their votes in that election, I am inclined to agree with the hon. member for Grey North. I have no doubt that the people who went to the poles in that election had one thought in mind only, namely, whether the government's policy had provided ample and adequate reinforcements for their kin who were serving overseas.
I was interested in the hon. member's reference to his leader, but I noted that not much was said about the part which, that leader contributed to the hon. member's election. I had in mind particularly a statement made by the hon. member's leader just on the eve of the election, too late to be refuted by anyone taking part in that campaign, a statement that was no credit either to the member elected, to the leader himself, or to the party that he represents.
I wish to deal briefly with a number of items raised by the hon. member for Vancouver South, particularly the question of education in relation to the men who are returning from overseas. I have said in this house on. numerous occasions that every possible opportunity should be afforded any man or woman who has served in this war, on his return, of securing or improving his education. I am confident that Canada can make no better investment than to give, without stint and without limitation, every man or woman who has served in the forces an opportunity to pursue his education in so far as he has ability or the desire to do so.
I have had occasion to learn that a considerable number of those whom I have met have refrained from taking vocational education or education in any other form because by accepting it they will deprive themselves of further credit and financial assistance. I would urge the government to. consider seriously the possibility of removing any restriction that may hamper or prevent any man or woman who has served in the forces from taking vocational or any other form of education.
These people, particularly the young men and women, have given up the very best years of their lives. They have given up, many of them, the years during which they would normally have acquired education. There is nothing this government or this country can do that will fully compensate them for the loss of those years. I suggest that the
least we can do for them is to make available to them every opportunity to gain as much education as they desire and are capable of acquiring.
On the question of gratuities I shall comment- briefly. I fail to see why the government. has refrained from paying a soldier's gratuity to his next of kin. after his death. I have in mind a number of cases where the father and mother were not declared dependents by the soldier who served overseas and yet they made great sacrifices for many years in order to educate that youth. Unquestionably they looked forward to the day when they could expect some reward or when such boys and girls might in- turn be able to help them for all they had done for their children in their youth.
Some of these people are in need of the gratuity which, the son would have received had he not died before the gratuity could be paid. I have in mind one case which is now under consideration by the' department, the case of a boy who had spent a year in Christie Street hospital and received word from the government just a few days prior to his death that he was entitled to a $400 gratuity. The mother applied to the officials soon after the boy's death, hoping that she would receive that gratuity. She was informed, of course, that because she had not been declared a dependent the gratuity must be returned to the government.
It seems rather unfair that because that boy died a few days before it would have been possible for him to receive that gratuity his parents, who would otherwise have come into possession of it, were not permitted to receive it I think there is good reason for a revision of the regulations.
While I am on that point I would mention once more the position of dependent mothers. I find there is still discrimination, against, these mothers as compared with wives. I have spoken on this matter a number of times in the house, and I would ask the government once more to consider a revision of the regulations which limit both the amount received and the amount which may be earned by dependent mothers without affecting their dependent's allowance.
Other questions pertaining to the veterans returning from the war have been raised. I should like to ask the minister, who possibly will speak on this subject, to explain to the house quite clearly just what are the factors which qualify a veteran, for assistance under the Veterans' Land Act,
I hadl brought to my attention yesterday the case of a man who has served in the two
War Appropriation

wars. 1 think he was overseas for two years in the first world war and received an honourable discharge after four years in this war. He sought assistance to enable him to buy a small holding of land adjoining the city of Toronto. After he had made application it was some five months before he received any further news from the veterans' land officials. Five months after he had made his application he was asked to appear before a committee. He had been given every reason to believe-


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: What was the date of that letter?


Joseph William Noseworthy: He first applied and was asked to submit details last September. He next heard from the officials on March 12 of this year.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Would my hon. friend be kind enough to give me the name privately?


Joseph William Noseworthy: I will, gladly. He
had1 been given to understand by the qualifications committee before which he appeared -he had been given no assurance, but he had reason to believe-that his qualifications were satisfactory; that he would have no difficulty in securing assistance to purchase this small holding on which to grow berries and raise chickens. The small holding consisted of one and a half acres of land and a three-room cottage in the suburbs of Toronto. It was to cost $2,500. On March 28' he received notice-I have the notice before me-informing him that he did not possess the necessary qualifications to warrant assistance under the act for the purpose which he desired. When he got in touch with the officials again and asked for details he was informed that the job he was holding at present is not a permanent one. Apparently that was the reason why he was to be disqualified from receiving assistance. The man is employed at present by a manufacturer in Toronto. To all appearances his job is a permanent one. He had intended to remain on that job for about a year, after which he had hoped to be able to earn his living on this plot of garden land.
Two questions arise. This man is just over fifty years of age, and I am wondering whether the question of a veteran's age and the nature of the job on which he is employed are factors of importance in determining whether or not he is to qualify to secure assistance under the Veterans' Land Act for the purchase of a small holding adjoining a city.
There is another matter that I want to bring to the attention of the minister. Last week I met in the country a veteran of this war who had lost a leg and had been supplied with

an artificial one by Christie street hospital. When I saw the man he was limping around and complaining of great discomfort. He told me that he had applied to the hospital a number of times and a number of attempts had been made to improve the limb that he was wearing. I suggested to him that he should get in touch with the' officials again; that I was confident they would do everything within their power to see that he was given a limb that he could wear without discomfort. He was so disgusted that he told me he fully intended to discard the limb which had been provided by Christie street hospital and to purchase a limb at his own expense from a private company. In conversing with him and others I find that a number of veterans of this war have discarded the limbs which have been provided by the hospital and the government for what they claim to be more satisfactory or better limbs made by private companies. If the minister has information on that I should like him to make a statement because there is an impression abroad among veterans who are wearing artificial limbs-I have talked with several of them-that they are getting from Christie street hospital an inferior quality of limb and that private companies can provide them with a superior or better quality of limb.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: May I interrupt the hon. member? I shall be very glad to have the names of those war veterans to whom he refers. May I say at once that Christie street hospital stands the highest of any hospital supplying artificial limbs anywhere. That is not the verdict of Canadians only but of others in other countries. I shall be very glad to give the hon. member written testimony to that effect.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I am not giving this information in criticism of the department. It may well be that there are those who are seeking to exploit the great war veterans.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: That is quite correct.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Or attempting to
persuade them that they have-


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: May I assure my hon. friend that this is no new story?


Joseph William Noseworthy: -a superior limb. I think it should be made abundantly clear to the Canadian public and to the great war veterans concerned that this government is providing them, as it has every right to do, with the very best that can be procured in the way of artificial limbs.

War Appropriation
A number of references have already been made to the question of the merchant marine.
I should like to refer to that branch of the service now. I have before me a letter written by an officer serving on board the SS Coronation Park. The letter is dated "Somewhere in the south Pacific", and is from a member of my own constituency, one with whom I am acquainted and in whose integrity I have every reason to believe. Several points are raised in this letter which I think need some clearing up. The first question raised is whether or not any provision has been made whereby the merchant marine may be able to vote in the forthcoming federal election. This letter was written on March 12. On that date the members of the crew on board this particular ship had not heard any word whatever of any provision being made for their voting. At that time they had heard from the Tokyo radio that there was likely to be an election in Canada about April 17 or soon after, and they were quite concerned because so far as they knew no provision had been made whereby they could register their vote.
The second point raised in this letter that I wish to call to the attention of the government is that this officer claims that the crew on board this ship sailed from Vancouver into the southern Pacific, into areas where white men had scarcely been able to live in pre-war days, into an area where they were exposed to the various epidemics that are prevalent in that climate, such as malaria, yellow fever, cholera and the like. Not one of that crew received before sailing, an inoculation of any kind or was given any protection whatever against such diseases as were prevalent in that area. There appears to have been gross neglect on the part of the medical authorities in that case. The men on this ship I am told, had to provide their own safeguards, and neither before nor after they sailed, up .to the date of this letter, were they given anything by way of inoculation.
The third question, is as to the nature of the contract made by the government, or those responsible for government ships, when those ships are chartered to the war department or the wartime shipping board at Washington. These men are serving on a Park ship, a government ship, which had been operated by a private company in Vancouver. They were chartered by that private company to the wartime shipping board at Washington. They are engaged in carrying materials of war to United States soldiers in the southern Pacific. They are working under exactly the same conditions and doing the same type of work as United States seamen on board liberty and victory ships; yet I am informed that they receive a 32283-25
war risk bonus of 144.50 a month, while Americans, taking the same risks and doing that particular job, receive a war bonus of $5 a day over and above one hundred per cent of their basic wage; and that American seamen have an income five to seven times that of Canadian seamen doing the same work on very much the same type of ship.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Did my hon. friend say five to seven times the amount?


Joseph William Noseworthy: From five to seven times.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Surely that cannot be right.


Joseph William Noseworthy: That they receive in wages and bonus from five to seven times the amount received by Canadian seamen.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Has my hon. friend concrete figures to substantiate that statement?


Joseph William Noseworthy: The figures quoted by this officer for some of the Americans indicate that they receive as much as $350 a month, inciuding their bonus, while serving in that particular war zone.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: May I ask where that is published?


Joseph William Noseworthy: Those are figures
given me in this letter from an officer serving on a Canadian ship in that zone. Someone in the department responsible might indicate just what, is the nature of the wage contract with Canadian seamen working for the war shipping board at Washington, carrying war materials to United States soldiers and running the same risks as United States sailors, and how their wage scale compares with that of the United States sailors.
Those are the points to which I wanted to call the attention of the government at the present time. I have others which will come up when the estimates of the various departments are under review.


Mr. J. A. ROSS (Souris):: I am one of those who believe this house should have been called together two months ago in order to examine these huge expenditures now before us. We realize that the interim budget presented to-day is on the same scale as that of a year ago, which was the largest in the history of this country. Although we sat for some seven months last year it was impossible to get all the details we would have liked in connection with that budget. Therefore I believe the public will realize that with less than ten sitting days before us it will be impossible to obtain all the information we

War Appropriation

But when the war is won, we shall be faced with the all-important problem, of reconstruction, I do not think this government has a proper reconstruction policy for the country. In this respect I am sorry the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) refused to hold a dominion-provincial conference, because I am one who believes, rightly or wrongly, that you cannot have a proper reconstruction policy in Canada without consulting the provincial governments. In my view it would be impossible to do so. I have discussed the matter with provincial and municipal officials, and they all feel that we cannot have a sound reconstruction policy for the future until such time as a dominion-provincial conference has been held, and some discussion has been had on the matter.
Coming back to the matter of the present man-power policy, I was amazed to-day to hear the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar <(Mr. Coldwell) talk about the lesser issue of winning the war. I believe that was what he *said this afternoon, when discussing this subject. To my mind that is the all-important issue before this country and the world to-day. I am sure there is no one in the house who would feel very happy about the solution of our post-war problems if we did not first win the war, and do everything we can for those gallant men and women who have played their parts, and many of whom have given their all, in this greatest issue of all time for our nation.


Mr. MacINNIS:: The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar did not use the word "lesser" at all. He used the word "narrower" which, in the circumstances, was the proper word.


James Arthur Ross: I stand corrected. He referred to a narrower issue; that was his exact wording. I do not think it is a narrower issue, at all. I say the winning of the war is the greatest issue. However, I simply refer to that in the thought that our post-war period plans would not mean much to the country, if the winning of the war were not the first and greatest issue. To my mind we owe a great debt of gratitude to those men and women who have won the war for us, and who make our post-war plans possible.
Then, speaking again of man-power, in my view the Department of National Defence should tell us about the man-power situation in the armed services, and bring that information up to date. I have referred to two questions which have been before-


Mr. ABBOTT:: The reason why the question to which' the hon. member refers has not been answered is that it requires obtaining a good

deal of information from England. We hope to have it almost any day. There is a great deal of information asked for in that question, as my hon. friend will notice upon looking at it. It has not been possible up to the present time to get all that information. However as soon as it is here I can assure my hon. friend that his question will be answered.


James Arthur Ross: But it was asked sixteen days ago, and I remember a period only last winter when it was possible to gather information on very short notice-hours or da.ys- to tell the people of this country that the shortage of munitions and equipment was more important at that time than the manpower question. On instructions of the Department of National Defence a censorship was placed upon any reference in newspapers to the man-power situation at that time.
I should like to have from the department the number of men who have been A.W.O.L. or who have deserted up to date. I am satisfied1 that the figure will be greater than the figure of 16,000 given in the order in council with reference to N.R.M.A. men.


Douglas Charles Abbott: You may be surprised.


James Arthur Ross: I may be, but I say that I fully believe the figures for the Canadian army to date will be greater than those we have had. The parliamentary secretary has given the answer right now when he says that I may be surprised.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have not the figures with me, but the hon. member may be surprised when he gets them.


James Arthur Ross: I still make the statement that they will be greater than the 16,000, that is all told to date.


Mr. ROSS (Moose Jaw):: Do you mean for the whole five years? Do you mean every one who has gone absent without leave since the beginning of the war?


James Arthur Ross: I say that many of these men would not now be deserters if it had not been for the half-hearted, piecemeal policy which has been applied to the army to date. You people are much concerned about the throwing away of rifles and so on, but I want to tell you that many of these troops have thrown down their rifles and deserted-[DOT]


Mr. GIBSON:: Throwing some more mild.


James Arthur Ross: 
Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, we had intended to
make what remarks We wanted to make when this figure had been broken down under the different headings, but since we seem to have got into a debate there are a few remarks I should like to make. The hon. member who has just taken his seat (Mr. Ross, Souris) misinterpreted what the hon. member for Rose-town-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) had to say. That sort of thing is becoming a habit in the house. I was sitting behind the hon. member and I do not think there was any possibility of misunderstanding him.
He referred to the narrower issue of the war-


An hon. MEMBER:: Winning the war.


Clarence Gillis: The narrower issue of winning the war in the sense that it related to the over-all picture of establishing a proper peace. The building up of a world organization was a much broader matter than that of discussing Canada's contribution to the war. In dealing with the war we would be dealing only with the internal problems of this country, assisting as best we can with outside problems. In considering the other picture we are dealing with an organization which we hope will embrace the whole problem and make the world safe in the future. We hope it will attain the objectives for which we are fighting. I do not think there could be any misunderstanding on that.
I do not wish to be critical of my hon. friends, but after listening to some of the discussion here one is led to believe that some people are afraid that the war might end
because they would then have nothing to talk about. I sympathize with them. To say that no reconstruction programme is possible without consultation with the provincial governments does not agree with my conception of this matter. I contend that no adequate reconstruction programme is possible under private enterprise. There will have to be definite and fundamental changes in the whole economic set-up before there can be any possibility of a proper reconstruction programme.
I should like to deal briefly with a few matters that come under the Minister of Veterans' Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie). I think it is right here that we find the basic necessity for reconstruction. The hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Green) made an excellent presentation and brought to the minister's attention many matters with which I am in accord. I am going to try to miss those if possible because I do not think repetition adds very much to the discussion.
At the last session we set up a ministry which I understood was to look after the problems of the returned service personnel. I thought it was an excellent idea to bring together the problems of the service personnel and place them in one department to be presided over by a minister who I felt was sympathetic and knew the problems. However, I am afraid that he is not presiding over the department as I should like to see him preside over it.
I refer particularly to the decisions being made in connection with gratuities. These are not being made by the Minister of Veterans Affairs or the Department of Veterans Affairs; they are being made by the Department of National Defence. In my opinion that is not what was intended when the Department of Veterans' Affairs was set up and I believe that is something that should be corrected by this house. I think attention should be focused on it at this time.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: May I interrupt just to clarify the situation? Gratuities as such are being paid by the paymasters general of the various districts, whereas the reestablishment gratuities as such are being paid through the Department of Veterans' Affairs after we are notified what the amount of the gratuity is to be.


Clarence Gillis: The cash grants are being paid by the Department of National Defence?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: That is right.


Clarence Gillis: And the decision as to who is to get the gratuity is also made by the Department of National Defence. I do not think national defence should have anything
War Appropriation

to do with that particular matter. That is a veteran's problem and it should be dealt with by the Department of Veterans' Affairs. I remember when the Veterans' Grants Act was tabled in the house a question was asked of the minister in connection with the dependents of service personnel who had died or been killed overseas or during service, whether such grants would be paid to the next of kin. The minister replied that these would be paid if there had been an assignment of pay.
The first intimation I had that this was not being applied in that way was when I received a letter from a woman who had had two sons killed. In the case of one boy there had been an assignment of pay from 1939 to December, 1943, but his pay had been stopped just a few weeks before he was killed. Because the assignment was not in effect at the time of his death, then ipso jacto no gratuity was indicated. That was discussed backwards and forwards, and a change was made. The decision then was that unless they were wholly or partly dependent no gratuity was indicated. That decision was made in the house and the members left this house with the understanding that an assignment of pay to the next of kin, not necessarily specifying father or mother, was all that was necessary. .But then the Department of National Defence or some brigadier who is administering the regulations took it upon himself to change that. My conception of pension, legislation is that everything depends upon its administration. You can write the law as you like in this house, but if you appoint people to administer it who are not sympathetic and handle the regulations to suit themselves, they can make quite a mess of it, and I contend that that is what is taking place on this particular angle of gratuities.
The minister asked the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Green), first, if he thought that the gratuity should go to the estate of a deceased soldier. I say, yes, it should. It belongs to him, and it should be part of his estate. The minister's next question was: Should the next of kin have to apply for the gratuity or should it go to them automatically? I say that it should go automatically.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: If it goes to the estate it would go automatically.


Clarence Gillis: That is right, but I am saying that it should go automatically because the minister asked that question.
Another badly treated section of the service about which I am going to say a few words is the merchant seamen. I believe that something has been done to broaden the scope of the rehabilitation regulations, and I am not

going to touch on that angle until we have the break-down and the presentation of the minister. But I say to the minister who is handling pensions and national health and has supervision over the hospitals that something should be done for merchant seamen who are injured on service. I know one who was in hospital in Sydney for four months *with a fractured vertebra and both legs broken. He was in hospital there for four months, a long distance away from home, and while in hospital there he got no pay and allowances, no compensation-nothing.	He
wrote to everyone he could think of for help of some kind but the answer was always the same-there is no provision. Whether he will get any pension or not when he leaves the hospital is still being probed.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Was he a Canadian merchant seaman?


Clarence Gillis: Yes.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Serving on a Canadian ship?


Clarence Gillis: Yes. The man filled out a lot of forms, but nothing was done for him and he lay there in hospital for four months without even money enough to buy cigarettes. He was injured on service. He fell into the hold of a ship out on the high seas. Under those circumstances when a merchant seaman is placed in the hospital some provision should be made whereby he would be granted an allowance or compensation of some kind to help him along while in hospital. But there is nothing at the present time. That is something that should be taken care of, and taken care of as soon as possible.
Then there is this business of a dual pension. That is an old, old story. The Canadian Legion has been fighting for the last twenty-five years to have the legislation in Canada made applicable to the imperial veteran residing in Canada who enlisted in the British army. As I say, it is an old story and I do not need to elaborate upon it because every member has received long memoranda and resolutions on the subject which have been passed by the veterans guard of Canada right across the country. What they are asking for is that any veteran of both wars who resided in this country in 1939 shall have the dual pension order made applicable to him if serving in the veterans guard and if he was domiciled in Canada at the time of enlistment. The minister who has been dealing with veterans' problems for a long period of time knows more about that story perhaps than any other member of the house.

War Appropriation


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: In which province was the seaman my hon. friend spoke of hospitalized?


Clarence Gillis: Nova Scotia, at the naval hospital at Sydhey.
I wish to say a few words on the matter of discharges. There are six different types of discharges, and they are all indicated by code numbers. There is a discharge known as 1029 (12)-"services no longer required." There are certain limitations attached to it. I cannot figure out that type of discharge myself. I have written to the Department of National Defence several times about it, but apparently they are stuck on centre-"that is the form"- "that is how the discharge works"-"there is no reason to change it," according to National Defence. I. met a young man about twenty-eight years old who had been overseas for three years and who came back to his military district in Canada and was discharged, and the type of discharge he got was 1029 (12) -"services no longer required." Anyone reading that man's discharge papers who does not understand the set-up immediately concludes that it was a dishonourable discharge because the man is, to all appearances, physically fit, the war is still on, they are scraping the bottom of the man-power barrel for men, and here is a pretty husky-looking fellow with all his limbs who is let out of the army because his services are no longer required. I cannot understand it, andl that type of discharge militates against the man's prospects in many ways. When he goes to an employer seeking work and the employer sees that he was discharged from the army because his services were no longer required, and can 6ee that he is a husky-looking fellow with apparently nothing the matter with him, he concludes, "he would not be a very safe person for me to employ." I have never been able to understand why a man is let out with that type of discharge.
When a man is let out because he is medically unfit, that reason is given on the discharge papers. If he is let out for misconduct, that is written in so plainly that no one can miss it. But what is the explanation of letting a man out who is physically fit? I have never been able to get it straightened out in my mind. I have got in touch with the department and they say that it is not a dishonourable discharge. They say, "We have to let him out," but they do not say why they have to let him out. The man cannot get a pension. He has difficulty getting into hospital. I am not sure whether he gets rehabilitation benefits or not. I think that type of discharge should be discontinued, and the real reason for
discharge definitely stated on his discharge papers. I should like the Minister of National Defence or his representative in the house to check up on this type of discharge, 1029 (12), and tell the house why they let out a man who to all intents and purposes is physically fit, a man who is not discharged for medical reasons, who looks all right, with only the reason given "services no longer required." I should like to know what is wrong with him.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Clarence Gillis: When the house rose at six o'clock I was dealing with the question of discharge. There is another type of discharge which I think should be examined into and some latitude allowed. I refer to discharge because of misconduct. This applies to both sections of the army and air force, male and female. Any service personnel discharged because of misconduct immediately lose all the rehabilitation benefits, gratuities, et cetera. I have no objection to its being applied in that way to the habitual deserter, the man who goes absent without leave and who generally misconducts himself to such an extent that he deserves to get a discharge of that description.
I have in mind, however, boys who went into the service at the age of eighteen or nineteen, being away from home for the first time, and who commit their first infraction of the regulations as a result, perhaps, of taking a few drinks of beer. In consequence they become involved with the civil authorities and receive a sentence in the civil courts, and they are immediately discharged after two or three or even four years of good service to the country. That classification is immediately cut off.
I think there should be some latitude where the age of the person concerned might be taken into consideration, the number of times he has committed an infraction of the rules, and some compensation allowed him for the service he has rendered the country. I look at it in this way. The average civilian becoming involved with the civil courts receives a sentence and when he is released his debt to society is paid. But any service personnel committing a similar infraction of civil law, in addition to receiving the full sentence that applies to civilians is also sentenced in the form of a fine to the extent of the rehabilitation he may be losing, his gratuity, and in addition to that there is handed him a discharge certificate that reads in bold letters,
War Appropriation

"misconduct". Wherever such a boy or girl goes looking for employment the question is asked: "Were you in the service?" "Yes". Then, "Where is your discharge certificate?" And immediately on the production of that certificate employment is refused. I submit that we are giving these young people something they will carry with them for the rest of their natural life, a discharge that precludes the possibility of employment.
I have seen discharge certificates of two girls, just young kids, who had committed some slight infraction of military law, and I am>
thinking that the system we have to-day of employment agencies across Canada will be carried forward into the post-war period so that these young girls-and young men too- from the service, in addition to suffering the penalty imposed by military law or by the civil courts, will carry with them something that the ordinary civilian does not bear for a similar infraction. This will militate against them for the rest of their natural lives.
It is necessary in some cases, but there are extenuating circumstances and some latitude should be allowed the military authorities who are handling matters of discipline in the way I have outlined. I am not going to go further than that because I believe that the question will be given some attention. Certainly it is a terrible way to send a young girl out of the service. It is perhaps not so bad for the boy, although he is certainly getting a sentence that is not imposed upon civilians for similar infractions of law.
There is another matter I have not heard touched upon. This has to do with a forgotten section of our service. When the commonwealth air training plan was first established it was difficult to get trained personnel to give the necessary instructions in elementary flying, and I believe that schools were started across Canada, largely by commercial pilots, men who had paid for their education and had a licence to carry cm that kind of work. I understand there is a ruling that when the war is over the only people who will be allowed' to do commercial flying in Canada will be the personnel who have seen service in the air force overseas. They will have priority and that rules out completely the men who gave up their vocation in order to establish the commonwealth air training plan. I have here a brief from a group of pilots and I presume the minister and other members of the house as well have received it. I will not go into this matter to any extent, but I think the government should consider carefully the contribution which that particular classification made. The commonwealth air training plan was perhaps Canada's greatest contribution to the war, and the [DOT]Mr. Gillis.]
men who really started it off and in consequence were precluded from going overseas or engaging in the regular activities of flyers of the type they were turning out, should be given full consideration.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Is my hon. friend referring to the civilian flying clubs?


Clarence Gillis: Yes. I say, that classification should be given full consideration along with the air force who are doing the flying, because in my opinion they did an essential job at the beginning of the war, and, for that matter, all through the war. We can do nothing but sing the praises of those men for the flyers they turned out, carrying the banner of Canada in the air overseas.
There is another angle to this matter of allowances which I would bring to the attention of the minister. I mention most of these questions because I have tried to straighten them out with the department and have not been successful. There are many cases where two or three boys out of one family are in the service. The mother died some years ago, and in the case I have in mind two boys have been overseas for approximately four years. Their sister had been keeping house for them for twelve years. The home is their own and the boys were maintaining it. She tried to establish a claim for allowance but was not successful. She has no income except the assigned pay of the brothers, but the income is not sufficient to pay the taxes on the property, with the result that year by year the taxes are getting into arrears and the town threatens to sell that property.
Those boys left their jobs and they are fighting for their country and for their home. The chances are that when they come back that home will be gone for taxes and the sister, who had kept house for twelve years, may be in a boarding house somewhere.
I have tried with the dependents' allowance board to get the allowance but have not succeeded. I tried the dependents' allowance advisory committee to see if some provision could be made to protect that property, but the board ruled it out on the ground that there must be an allowance before action can be taken. There the matter stands. There are three years' taxes owing on that property. The sister cannot keep it up; the brothers arc liable to lose it and they are in the service. I think there should be some provisions whereby the dependents' allowance advisory committee could have the necessary latitude to protect the property of the boy in the service under circumstances such as I have described. That is not an isolated case; I myself have had several of them.

War Appropriation
I should like to say something directly to the Minister of Veterans' Affairs with respect to the hospitals that come under his department. I am going to mention Camp Hill hospital in Halifax particularly. There is an excellent hospital there. There are a lot of patients in it but the personnel of the hospital is completely inadequate. The medical staff leaves much to be desired. I go in there occasionally. I visit around. I know the personnel well and I know they are doing a good job with what they have, but from what I have seen there the hospital is completely understaffed medically. Second, the hospital itself leaves much to be desired with respect to treatment for personnel who may have serious operations. There is no place to which patients may be moved so that they can be quiet and be by themselves. Wards are large. Take an amputation case or a man with a serious abdominal operation. He is put in one of those big wards. He might as well be put in a machine shop. There is a lot of noise going on and all that kind of thing.
I suggest that small private rooms be provided in these hospitals where men who are seriously ill can be segregated and given an opportunity to rest. I believe that if the medical staff is not augmented there the two doctors who are looking after the patients will be in hospital themselves. Perhaps there was an argument two or three years ago that the medical personnel was not available. I do not think that holds good to-day because air force hospitals, army hospitals and the like are being maintained all across Canada. I think sufficient personnel can be taken from these hospitals to maintain the regular permanent establishments such as national defence hospitals will be in the future. I myself believe that these are the hospitals that should be properly staffed and every facility provided now so that they can do the job which they will have to do in the future.
I look upon the other hospitals as merely temporary establishments to take care of emergencies and the like. I believe that in so far as the regular national defence hospitals are concerned the whole matter of maintenance personnel and rehabilitation personnel necessary to implement the programme that the government has outlined such as gratuities, vocational training, out-of-work benefits, and the like, needs to be jacked up a hundred per cent. When the minister replies he will likely say that the personnel is not available. I do not believe that holds good in Nova Scotia. Before coming into the house I made a check with the national selective service offices in the area from which I come. I
found some eight hundred registered unemployed in the area. Many of them were service personnel. Many of the service personnel were good material for civil service positions. In fact some of them had applied and I believe that the personnel necessary to put the machinery in operation could be found among veterans of this war who are seeking employment.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: In what area is that?


Clarence Gillis: In the Cape Breton area, on the island of Cape Breton. When one considers the position of the war in western Europe to-day one feels that one of the most immediate needs of the country is the perfecting of the personnel who are to look after demobilization; the business of rehabilitation, placing of men back in work, vocational training and the like, is the immediate problem that should be taken care of. The machinery to do that job should be perfected now instead of waiting for demobilization when there will be a lot of confusion, misunderstanding and so on.
There is another thought that I wish to leave with the minister, and it is an old) one. I refer to the problem of returned service personnel coming back to heavy industry. I had a lot of experience with this after the last war, having worked on boards, tribunals, and the like. Men are discharged with a ten per cent disability. To all intents and purposes that is their medical disability. They go back to a city where there is available employment in offices and the like and perhaps they are handicapped only to the extent of ten per cent; but if they go back to an area where there is nothing but heavy industry such as steel plants, coal mines, farming and so on, while they may have only a ten per cent medical disability, they are disabled a hundred per cent in so far as employment in those industries is concerned. They cannot take employment in heavy industries. That is what is happening in many sections of Canada. The men are returning to sections of the country where there is no employment except in the industries I have mentioned. While their disabilities are not great from the medical point of view, nevertheless they find themselves, when they go to selective service, a hundred per cent disabled, because they cannot take employment.
Another thing I would urge upon the minister is to fight with everybody in his department for the immediate establishment in Canada of the necessary vocational training schools to put the vocational training end of rehabilitation into operation. I consider the

:94
War Appropriation

most important part of rehabilitation the routing of men into a school where they can take a course for employment for which they have an aptitude in order that they may be sent to something where they can be permanently rehabilitated and take their place in society. Gratuities are fine, but they last only a short time. When the gratuity is spent the man is in exactly the same position he was before he received it. It is necessary that he should have it in the first five or six months to relieve his mind and give him a chance to look around; but it is also necessary to establish these schools so that when the gratuity is spent he has grounded himself for some kind of employment. In the earlier stages they are receptive to that kind of thing. But when they drift around for five or six months it will not then be so easy to get a man back to school. If these advantages are available when they come back first they will take advantage of them. If they mill around for a few months they are likely to become discouraged and it will then not be so easy for them to do the job. I just leave these thoughts with the minister because I consider them necessary in the immediate post-war period.	.


Mr. F. D. SHAW (Red Deer):: There are several matters to which I should like to refer while the debate is in its present stage. I think we are all conscious of the fact that we have a great many veterans returning to Canada at the present time. We know they are all facing the problems of rehabilitation. In my part of Canada it is recognized that while many are being successfully rehabilitated there are a great many who are still encountering considerable difficulty. Members should, and I believe do, appreciate fully the magnitude of the task which is confronting not only the government but all the people of Canada. In connection with this matter I think veterans and their relatives look to parliament and to the government for guidance. In the matter of rehabilitation they are quite justified. I say, too, that they expect to see through the actions of the government and of parliament a reflection of the appreciation which I think they believe we should see in their heroic achievements.
Reference has been made during this debate to the payment of the war service gratuity in the case where the serviceman becomes a casualty. As yet no one from this group has expressed an opinion on this matter; therefore, to strengthen the hand of the minister, who I believe will fight to have the gratuity paid to the estate of the deceased service man, I should like to put our stand on record. Recently the legislative assembly of Alberta yVTr. Gillis.]
passed a resolution with respect to this matter. We endorse the resolution. It was considered purely from a non-partisan point of view. The resolution was sponsored by Mr. Williams, veterans' candidate in the provincial legislative assembly, and seconded by Mr. Ward, one of the service representatives. I should like the house to bear with me while I read this resolution, which received the unanimous endorsation of the provincial legislature: Whereas under clause 1, the War Service Grants Act, 1944, which provides for payment of war service gratuity to members of the armed services on discharge, it is set forth, that if a member of the armed services dies on service or after discharge, before he has been paid war gratuity in full, payment of gratuity or the unpaid balance thereof shall be made only to a person to whom or in respect of whom, dependents' allowance was payable on behalf of such member immediately prior to his death, And whereas a large number of men and women in the armed services have dependents to whom or in respect of whom, they are unable to have dependents' allowance established, Therefore be it resolved that we, the members of the Alberta legislature assembled here, do hereby request the dominion government to amend the said bill so as to provide for war service gratuities being paid to the estate of all members of the services who die on service or after discharge before said gratuity has been paid in full.
. Let me emphasize that this resolution was unanimously endorsed by the members of the legislative assembly of Alberta. It may have come to the attention of the minister prior to this time.	[DOT]
One case comes to mind when I speak of this matter and, without mentioning any names, I think I should give one or two details in connection with it. A young lad was enabled to attend university only because his father mortgaged his business. After completing either two or three years of his university course this boy joined the Royal Canadian Air Force and later was killed overseas. The agreement with his father-understood, of course-was that upon the completion of his course he would pay back to his father the money raised through the mortgage. While overseas he did make certain payments to his father; but the long and the short of it is that after the lad died nothing could be claimed by his father, with the result that the business is still mortgaged and a real hardship has been caused. That boy's father does not look upon the gratuity as compensation for the loss of his son. Never; but I do believe that in fairness the gratuity should certainly be made part of his estate and paid to it upon the serviceman's death.
The next matter to which I should like to refer is the granting of the Memorial Cross

War Appropriation
to the widow or the mother of a member of the service personnel who lost his life while on duty. I understand that regulations governing this award were established by order in council P.C. 4210, dated August 27, 1940, as amended by order in council P.C. 2135, dated March 28, 1941. These regulations define a mother as follows:
"Mother" means the woman who gave birth to the sailor or soldier or airman or seaman.
Let me point out what has happened. Two cases in my constituency have come to my attention in which lads were adopted when very tiny babies and lived with their parents, so-called, for a period of twenty-five to thirty years. They then enlisted and lost their lives. Under this regulation those mothers are refused the Memorial Cross. It is not as though that cross cost very much. Those boys never knew any other mothers. They called them "mother"-; those women looked upon the boys as their sons, and it is easy to understand their feelings when they receive word that because they did not give birth to those boys they are not entitled to the Memorial Cross.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: What is the number of the amending order in council?


Frederick Davis Shaw: It is P.C. 2135 of March 28, 1941. I may say that the correspondence with this one mother occurred during recent weeks. In this case this woman has given two other sons to the service. They have not lost their lives, but they are serving overseas. Her husband operated rather an extensive farm but he died about a year ago, and she feels that his death resulted from overwork caused by losing the help of the sons and inability to obtain adequate help to enable him to carry on. I urge whoever may be responsible for this to consider favourably the amendment of these regulations. I could understand opposition if a pension were involved or if the cost were very great, but this is just a cross showing that the mother has given a son, and should apply, whether it be an adopted son or any other.
The next matter to which I wish to refer is the so-called disembarkation leave. It is my understanding that when a service man has been injured during the performance of his duty and is sent back for later discharge he is entitled to one month's leave, provided he can take that leave within a period of three months. This has caused a good deal of hard feeling, if I may call it that, among service personnel, because a service man who has been severely wounded and has to be hospitalized for a period of more than three 32283-26i
months is not entitled to that disembarkation leave. As a matter of fact I have a letter from a service man, and it might be of interest if I were to read just one paragraph from it. This lad served overseas for three years. As a consequence of his service he was very severely wounded and is now back in Canada. He has been deprived of that thirty days' disembarkation leave, and he says:
There seems to be some misunderstanding amongst the service men in regards to cancellation of disembarkation leave after three months back in Canada. It appears that discrimination is shown, that a fellow hit with a big shell loses his leave due to the fact that he spends three months or more in bed; whereas a fellow who is hit with a small shell is in a position to enjoy this privilege. We feel that you should suggest to the house that in the next war, or in continuing this war, all shells be made the same size, so that there is no cause for this discrimination.
Of course there is some sarcasm there; in fact he adds:
Perhaps Mr. King would be pleased to take this matter up at the San Francisco conference.
Anyway I think it indicates that there is unfairness there. Those boys are bound to place considerable emphasis upon things which to some here at home may appear to be of little consequence.
I have had many communications from service personnel holding lance ranks in the field1. I refer to lance-corporals and-I did not know such a rank existed-lance-sergeants. The man in question was a lance-sergeant and was injured while on the battlefield. In fact the jeep upon which he was riding disappeared, as a result of the explosion of a land mine. He is back, but I doubt whether they have found the jeep or the other soldiers involved.
This man held lance rank on the field1, but when sent back to England, and before being returned to Canada, he was automatically forced to revert to the lower rank, and draw the lower pay. He feels the government is doing that only because of the dollars involved between the rank of corporal and that of lance-sergeant. With those thoughts in mind, his feelings are understandable. I maintain that in all fairness the higher rank should be recognized.
I have another case in mind, but I shall not give much detail, because the minister has been most kind in connection with it. He is working on it right now, and I am hopeful that a satisfactory conclusion may be reached. At this time I wish to deal only with the principle involved. This young man, the father of two children, enlisted for service overseas. He had not been there long when his wife-well, I presume one would say she went
War Appropriation

berserk, I am not sure whether that would be the proper expression. However, the fact is that she deserted her children, with the result that an aunt was obliged to take them. (Later on, the father was killed on the battlefield.
Is there any specified sum to which these children are entitled? In this instance the commission granted a pension of $27 a month for the two children, to remain in effect until they reached the age of sixteen years. I should hate to think that $27 was anything other than an arbitrary sum decided upon by the pension commission. I cannot understand why those children should not be entitled1 to something almost approximating what the wife would have received, had she remained with the children, and had her husband been killed. My understanding is that her pension *would have been considerably more than $27.
I am not criticizing the minister, because I must point out that he has been cooperative in the matter, and I am hopeful that a satisfactory solution will be reached. However, the inspectors of the commission are going back to try to determine what it actually cost to keep those children. I should have thought that would have been done before the sum of $27 was arrived at. Any of us who have had the privilege of providing for children-food, clothing, shelter, medical, dental and optical attention, educational and other services- realize how preposterous the sum of $27 actually is. I hope they will not go to that mother and say, "You have several children of your own; therefore you can keep these two for a few extra dollars." I hope that will not be the method of approach. Certainly somewhere there must be some indication as to what the proper amount should be. When I record these facts I speak for all those who find themselves in similar difficulties. I have heard many complaints from returned servicemen, those who have come back on the so-called rotation leave after spending a number of years overseas.
We understand that they receive a month's pay and allowances plus fifty cents a day. Those men say, "For those of us who have homes to return to, the fifty cents may be quite satisfactory. But how about those who have not homes?" The man who asked me that question had been overseas for five years, and had shown himself to be a capable man and a first-class soldier. He told me that during the victory loan campaign he was organizer in his unit, and used every persuasive measure to get the boys to contribute. He told me that they did so, most generously, but that he felt ashamed of himself when he realized that some of the boys, from whom he had secured almost

their last dollar, had to go back on their rotation leave, and were limited to only a few dollars, worked out at the rate of fifty cents a day.
I have no particular recommendation in this connection, but merely wish to say that I run into these cases all too frequently. Then I have one other matter in mindC I do not know how often this condition arises, but when a set of circumstances is drawn to my attention two or three times in a month I am obliged to conclude that the condition described is general. I have in mind a gentleman fifty-two years of age, a farmer, who enlisted almost immediately at the outbreak of war, proceeding overseas with the first division. He fought with distinction through North Africa and Sicily, and into Italy, having been wounded four times and mentioned in dispatches. This man returned on rotation leave. During his absence he had hired a man and his wife to manage his farm, and it took about every dollar he could get, in addition to what the farm produced, to meet his agreement with that couple.
Upon his return he applied for discharge or return to the battlefield. Now, let me emphasize that this man had been in the army for more than five years, of which four years had been spent overseas, that he had been wounded four times and was mentioned in dispatches. This man was fifty-two years of age, and yet his application for discharge was refused. Instead, they took him to Calgary and gave him a job-I do not know what else I could call it-of carrying afternoon tea to the officers and to some of the C.W.A.C.'s.
I would not mention a case of this kind, were it not for the principle involved. Hon. members know how that soldier feels, and what he would be bound to say in his community. Yet he is no different from any of us or from the minister himself. I am sure the minister would feel that to have to perform a task of that kind is not a fit and proper reward for the service that man has rendered to his country.
I believe I have dealt with almost everything I had in mind. While I am not permitted to ask a question at this stage of proceedings, I should like to learn from the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) if the eight-cent excise tax charged against cigarettes sent by the Red Cross to soldiers in the service also applies to cigarettes sent overseas? The package with which I was furnished was one provided to a member of the services here in Canada. This lad has unusual ability to express himself, and I should think the minister would be interested in hearing what he has to say. Incidentally, he was severely wounded and, while back

War Appropriation
in Canada, is unfortunately still confined to hospital but hopeful that he will soon be out. This is what he says:
I am sending a .package of cigarettes to illustrate the point I am drawing to your attention, and I feel it would be quite fitting during this particular time, since this Red Cross appeal to the public for voluntary contributions.
And he has underlined the words "voluntary contribution." He continues:
You will notice an eight-cent excise stamp which is found to be on every package issued. It would appear as though the government were trying to balance the budget on these voluntary contributions, which to me seems most unfair. The cigarettes inside have the Red Cross insignia which is proof that they were intended for this purpose.
The public contribute generously to the activities of the Red Cross, and rightly so. We hear reports from overseas and from returning service men about the excellent work being done by this fine organization. But I wonder how many contributors realize that the minister involved-it may be the Minister of National Revenue; perhaps I am referring to the wrong one, but they are all in the same family-is right there to get his eight cents from each package of cigarettes purchased with the money which the public have contributed to the Red Cross believing that it was all going to provide comforts for the boys in the services. I should like to have the minister give some attention to this matter.
These boys who have been in the service for a long time have had a most difficult time. They have acquitted themselves most magnificently and, as I said earlier, while these may seem to be little things to us they possibly take on much larger proportions to these lads.
I feel that none of us should endeavour to make political capital when dealing with service men and the affairs of service personnel. I said in my opening remarks that these boys are looking to us as members of parliament; they are looking also to the government to do the right thing, to do the fair thing, at least to show through what they do for the personnel the appreciation which these boys rightly feel we should hold for their heroic accomplishments.


Mr. L. A. MUTCH (Winnipeg South):: Mr. Speaker, the turn which this debate has taken toward matters affecting the reestablishment and rehabilitation of our service personnel prompts me to say a few words, because in the nature of things I have had fairly close association with the rehabilitation programme as it is being carried out in connection with the more or less piecemeal demobilization now taking place. It seems to me that if we approach the problem of the rehabilitation of
our service men from the point of view that the rehabilitation legislation is an attempt to reward those who have had active service, no matter what we do we shall fall far short of what would be the natural objective of those who understand and appreciate the contribution to our safety, indeed to our very existence, which these serving personnel have made.
Consequently I think the members of all parties, as well as the government, who share in the responsibility to the returned service personnel would be on sounder ground if they would regard all rehabilitation efforts and legislation, not in the nature of a reward for service but rather as something designed to help the service personnel who are to be demobilized to help themselves.
I have made some study of the rehabilitation legislation which is currently on the statute books and which is currently being put into effect in connection with those returning from active service. I am satisfied that the one idea which runs through it all is a desire to assist those, who have made a sacrifice for which we cannot presume to pay, to drop back into their place in the community with the least possible further sacrifice as a result of their service. When you come to look at the actual legislation you realize -that, designedly no doubt since it is so consistent, it does achieve that objective.
To begin with, when the soldier returns after having served overseas he is given a month leave of absence as quickly as he can be moved from the depot in order to provide him with some little period of time in which he can adjust himself to family and civilian conditions before it is necessary to make anything in the nature of a decision as to just what his place in civilian society will be. Under the present set-up, on his return there are facilities, within the Department of National Defence itself, to make him fully aware of the opportunities which lie before him. Every inducement is made to help him understand his own capabilities. In few, if any instances, is there an attempt made to shuffle him off to the first available job at the first opportunity -Rather there is a desire to encourage him to seek to go back into civilian life, not on the basis of something as good as he had before, but on the basis of what his capabilities show he will have a chance to achieve.
Those of us who went through the last war and the period of rehabilitation afterward will remember the disadvantages suffered by all returned service personnel when they came back into civilian society. Where the returned man had to enter into competition with a man who had been working at his trade throughout the period of the war he was at a
War Appropriation

disadvantage in that he had, perhaps, lost something of his skill. If he had had no opportunity to accumulate savings, if he had gone away as a boy and came back as a man he found it almost impossible to assume the obligations of a home, in many instances for years to come.
The personnel returning at the present time have an advantage, first of all, by reason of the fact that their gratuity is paid out in periods varying on the average from four to seven months. They are thus able to seek the place in society where they desire to be without having to make a hasty decision. If they have lost skill during the period of their service they may take a refresher course and thus be able to go back into their trade on a competitive basis with men whose service has been rendered at home.
If they have been married during the period of their service or if they desire to marry shortly after coming home they have the advantage, if employed in an insurable trade, of having their unemployment insurance taken care of as though they had been working. Within a couple of months they will have the advantage of the family allowances. Both of these pieces of legislation tend, not to reward them for what they have done, but to reduce the discrepancies between their position in society and the position of those men whose service has been given at home.
Under the provisions of the insurance legislation it is possible for a soldier who has suffered some disability in service to secure the same degree of protection for his family by taking insurance and at more reasonable rates than his more fortunate brother has been able to secure during the period of his service in civilian occupation.
Members of parliament are fully aware of the legislation designed to protect the man who desires to return to the job he left before he enlisted. They know also of the training being provided for those who had no jobs before they went to war but who have shown some aptitude for a particular job or trade and desire to fit themselves for some specific occupation.
Most of the complaints which have been made with respect to vocational training have arisen because to a considerable degree the training scheme was conceived on the basis of there being a mass demobilization. At the present time, when demobilization, extensive though it is, is only a small fraction of what it must eventually become, and before too long we hope, it is not always possible to take individuals in certain selected communities and provide for them that type of vocational training which they desire, unless it is possible for them to train on the job to which 
they hope eventually to go. The facilities for vocational training have been seriously overtaxed both by civilian needs and by the use which has been made of these facilities by the armed services to train technical personnel. It is because it is realized that it is not possible to grant to every returned soldier, immediately upon discharge, the type of vocational training that he desires at the place where he desires to take it, that the legislation permits him to elect to take that training over a period of some fifteen months after his discharge or after the end of the war, whichever be the later. In the majority of instances this would not work a hardship because in almost every area in Canada to-day there are opportunities for temporary wartime employment to fill in the intervening months.
I should not like the impression to go out from the debates in this house that the somewhat vexed question of the payment of a deceased soldier's gratuity to his estate or his family has been brought to the notice of the government only by members of the opposition group. I can say with some authority that the weight of pressure upon the minister and the government to deal more generously in the matter of paying the gratuities to the families of deceased soldiers has been approximately in proportion to the percentages represented by the opposition and government groups in the house. It is not always either desirable or effective to exercise whatever weight a member may have through the medium of public debate. I know from many conversations that I have had with members of the government, the pressure that has been upon them with respect to this matter. I am aware of how helpful some of the comments of members of the opposition have been to the ministry, who realize the need of some provision of this kind. I should like to say on my own behalf that the imperfections which exist and which we shall experience from time to time with new situations, are not the discoveries of individual members or individual parties, and it seems to me that the best hope of achieving those changes which from time to time will be necessary, lies in the type of cooperative and explanatory discussion which has taken place so far in this debate.
There is in the minds of some people throughout the country, and it is implied in the expressions of some members of the house, a consuming fear that we shall again run into problems of rehabilitation paralleling those which occurred not immediately after the last war but which accumulated with varying intensities in the ten or twelve years following

War Appropriation
the last war. I should like to suggest in that connection that many of us have I think been overlooking at least this one consideration which I believe will go a long way toward lightening the shock of rehabilitation which was felt after the last war. I am reminded that something over ninety-five per cent of the men and women serving in the Canadian armed forces to-day are Canadian born. They come from communities throughout the length and breadth of Canada, and they will return in the first instance, at any rate, to the communities whence they came. There they have in their parents, in their families, in their friends, in the businessmen of their communities-and this has been exemplified over and over again in the activities of civilian committees throughout the country-a degree of contact which did not exist for the veterans returning from the last war because, as we remember, only about 225,000 out of some
600,000	Canadian soldiers in the last war happened to be Canadian born. Thousands of men who fought in the Canadian army and brought distinction to Canada and returned to Canada to make their contribution to this country from then on until now, were men who had been but a short time in Canada prior to the last war. They came back to a country which they knew but ill, but a country to whose glory and prestige they had contributed so much. There is a vast difference between^ going home to a community in which you have a place with your family by right of birth, and in going back, not to a home, not to a position, not to a particularly well-established place in the community, but to a country which was glad to see you but which did not have that personal interest in your welfare which the parents and families and friends of the veterans of to-day's armed services will have.
Therefore, we should look upon rehabilitation not just as something to be manufactured by members of this House of Commons, not something which is to be a governmental reward for service, but as something, once the war is out of the way, which is worthy of the greatest cooperative effort which the people of Canada can make. It seems to me that if we go forward in that spirit we do not need to be fearful of the problem of rehabilitation. But neither have we the slightest justification, because the boys and girls will be going home to their own communities to a place which is theirs by right of birth, to feel that we are absolved of responsibility. If by our speeches here or in the campaign which is to come we give or seek to give, even unconsciously, the impression that we intend entering into a competition in offering rewards, then much of
the thought and foresight which have gone into the planning and preparation of our rehabilitation programme will be undone and we , shall be in danger of creating another migrant body of dissatisfied people, this in spite of the chance we now have by cooperative effort to bring back into the communal life of this country our own sons and daughters and make them feel, not that we are rewarding them, but that we are determined that they shall not suffer further for that which they have done.
It will not be good enough to say to these people, "Here is a job which gives you economic independence."	It will not be good
enough to say to them, "You went to do what was no more than your duty," because they concede that. It will not be good enough to say to them, "Now that you are back and are none the worse for it you can fend for yourselves." That will not be good enough. What is required of us in this house and in the whole country is that we keep before us what I believe the conception of the department to be, that it is the obligation, the duty and the high privilege of all of us to help these people to help themselves, to find within the structure of our community and of our social and political life their rightful place. Keeping that in mind, then I believe these inequities, inequalities and discrepancies which arise from time to time, tackled in that spirit, will not present any permanent difficulty.


Mr. ROBERT FAIR (Battle River):: Before allowing the motion to pass, I should like to say a few words in connection with some of the legislation passed since the war broke out. Since springtime is about here, and is indeed here in several parts of Canada, and since a number of veterans of this war will soon settle on the land and go to work under legislation, recently passed, I feel it my duty to say a few words in that regard. Before I deal further with that, however, there is another matter which. I think should be considered, and that is in connection with similar legislation passed at the close of the last great war.
This matter has been taken up on several occasions but I am sorry to say it has not had very much favourable consideration by the government, either this or previous administrations. We have on several occasions brought to the attention of the house the situation of the soldier settlers under the old soldier settlement board. During 1944 the soldier settlers were very active, going so far as to send a delegation of nine to Ottawa to present their case. At that time we were not given any satisfaction as to w'hat the government's
War Appropriation

answer would be to the request of the old settlers, that request being, of course, that clear titles to their land be given them.
Eary this year the Minister of Veterans' Affairs replied to me that the government would not grant these clear titles, and as a result the soldier settlers' association sent a delegation of two, whom I accompanied here, to place before the minister a further brief. In order to give the house some idea of the standing of these settlers, I feel I can do no better than read that brief so that it may appear on Hansard. The brief was presented by the president and secretary of the Soldier Settlers' Association of Canada. Mr. Harold Baker is president and Mr. Alfred J. Sibley secretary, and the brief was presented on March 5 last as follows:
March 5, 1945.
To the Honourable Ian A. Mackenzie,
Minister of Veterans Affairs,
Ottawa, Ont.
Sir: As representatives of the Soldier Settlers' Association of Canada, we have the honour to present this further brief of our requests to the government made on May 23, 1944. We still, as before, ask for a clear title to all lands held by soldier settlers as at March 31, 1944, under the Soldier Settlement Act of 1919.
Practically all of these settlers are now over 60 years of age, indeed some are beyond the 80-year mark. Because of information given in your letter of the 3rd of February to Robert Fair, M.P., we have again come to Ottawa, driven by necessity, to arrive at a definite decision acceptable to those old soldiers whom we represent. As at March 31, 1944, there were 6,153 soldier settlers still holding contracts on their farms and who owed a total of $7,715,954.01.
The average indebtedness of all soldier settlers under the scheme was $4,358, and the average indebtedness of those still holding contracts is $1,254 as at March 31 last.
This represents 29 per cent of the average original loan. In spite of the fact that several reductions were made in the original debt, and of the fact that the settlers, their wives and families have worked for the past 25 years, only 4,130, or 16 per cent of the original number have acquired titles and 6,153, or 25 per cent of the original number are still holding contracts, while almost 60 per cent have either quit voluntarily or been forced off their farms. In connection with the above figures, it must also be understood that many settlers who have acquired titles or kept their contracts in good standing have used up money that should properly have been used for the proper maintenance of the settler and his family and the upkeep of his buildings, machinery and other equipment, and also includes sums of money that have been returned to the farms by the members of the settlers' families who have worked in war industries or have enlisted in the services. The average annual cost of the administration of the scheme is approximately $1,100,000 or I of the total amount owed by the settlers as at March 31 last. Plainly speaking, seven years of this administration would eat up the whole of the present debt.

Taking the foregoing into consideration we are convinced that the government would actually save money by granting clear titles now without any further payments. Failure to do this will force a number of the present settlers to apply for war veterans' allowance benefits which will cost the government $720 a year for the settler and his wife, and in two years the government will have paid more than the present average indebtedness of the settlers, whereas, if clear title is given, many of the settlers will not apply for the allowance.
The V eterans' Land Act is now becoming operative, and many of the contract holders under that act are sons and daughters of the old soldier settlers. If the present plight of the old settlers is allowed to continue, the effect on the morale of the new settlers might well be disastrous, as the unjust treatment and sufferings of the old settlers are well known throughout the country. Under the Veterans' Land Act the settlers get a grant of 38 per cent of the original loan. The amount now owing by the old settlers is only 29 per cent of their original loan. The rate of interest under the Veterans' Land Act is 3J per cent; under the Soldier Settlement Act the rate of interest on current accounts was 5 per cent and 7 per cent on arrears.
Because the Soldier Settlement Act legislation was enacted for the rehabilitation of veterans of great Avar 1, and because economic conditions that existed during past years made it impossible for the settlers to pay, we believe our request is reasonable and just. Our request has the support of thousands who signed a petition early last year, as well as the Alberta legislature, the 20,000 members of the Alberta farmers' union, the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities, the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, the United Farmers of Canada Saskatchewan Section; the United Farmers of Alberta, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture and the Executives of the Alberta and British Columbia commands of the Canadian Legion. We believe that our request for clear titles for all holders of contracts under the Soldier Settlement Board Act, as at March 31, 1944. is reasonable and just, and your immediate favourable consideration will be appreciated.
Respectfully submitted by
Harold C. Baker, President Alfred J. Sibley, Secretary. Soldier Settlers' Association of Canada.
I may say that during the present year the Saskatchewan legislature has joined in with those who have already signed and the Alberta legislature and the Alberta farmers' union have also once again endorsed this request. I have the resolutions here, but I do not think it is necessary to read them because they have been in the press and have been discussed all through western Canada and in many parts of eastern Canada.
After presenting this brief we had a very nice talk with the Minister of Veterans' Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie). I feel quite satisfied that the minister is sympathetic. If that is not correct perhaps the minister will contradict me. I also feel that several members of the

War Appropriation
cabinet are sympathetic, and I only wish we could have an opportunity of giving the members of the house a chance to vote on this question. If that were done I believe we would have a very large majority voting in favour of it. But I am sorry that we have some men in this house-men who apparently have quite a little power-who do not want this to go through. I see one of them sitting here now. The Minster of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) is not favourable to this going through. He feels that we are now making good collections from these men, and he also feels that contracts should be honoured. All of us are in favour of contracts being honoured, but when an unjust contract is made then I think some adjustment should be made even to civilians. I believe that is only right.
Debt adjustment legislation has been passed and has been in force over the years; and because the farming community as a whole all throughout Canada has been at a disadvantage over the years, particularly between 1930 and 1940, I feel that something drastic should be done in connection with these contracts. Had the government of the day-and I am including both Conservatives and Liberals in this- seen to it that farmers received their proper percentage of the national income during the years that these contracts have been in force then there would be no need for me to be pleading again on behalf of the old soldier settlers to have clear titles granted.
During the depression years we had at least thirty-three per cent of the population of Canada living on the land, and when that portion of Canada's' population received no more than five per cent of the national income I ask the Minister of Finance if the government was honouring its contracts and its obligations? Why did not they step in then and do something about it They did not. The farmers were taking the rap, and that was quite all right. When we go back to 1932, five per cent of the national income was all that the farmers had, and yet the settlers and farmers in general were expected to pay up their debts.
I could, if I wished, name others who are not treated in this way. To go back to the Minister of Veterans' Affairs, I said a moment ago I believe he is sympathetic, but he has as director of the soldier settlement board and the Veterans' Land Act a gentleman who apparently is not sympathetic. If that director is not sympathetic, then I feel we have other men who are sympathetic to the soldiers and who are just as efficient as he is, and I believe in the interests of the success of the Veterans' Land1 Act a change should be made in the department.
The arguments presented by the Minister of Veterans Affairs-and I believe the arguments were passed on to him by the director of that department-are that payments and pre-payments are being made. I will admit frankly that farmers are in a better position to-day to make payments than they have been for quite a while, but I think the price that we are paying in flesh and blood and sacrifice is much too high. We had to have a war before farmers could be prosperous enough to pay off their debts, and that is no credit to this or any other country. Payments are also being made because members of the old soldiers' families are working in war industries to-day and some of them are in the services. Payments are also being made because a number of these old soldiers are afraid of being put on the road, as numbers of other soldiers have been, and when their families come back there will be no roof for them to get under. Some say we are not turning any soldier settlers off the land, or at least very few. Very recently I had a return brought down which I believe justifies what I have said. During the years 1930-31 to 1943-44, a fourteen year period, we had no less than 2,064 of these old soldier settlers sign quit claim deeds. That means an average of 147 settlers in these fourteen years signed quit claim deeds. Why did they sign quit claim deeds? Simply because they could not make their payments. We also had during that 1930-31 to 1943-44 fiscal year period 934 of the old veterans of great war one kicked out on the street, and in many cases with no place to go. Why were they served these thirty-day notices? Simply because they could not pay. That is an average of 67 of our old veterans kicked out every year from 1930-31 to 1943-44.
There is one thing I should like the house to take particular notice of. In 1938-39 we had 143 of these old veterans kicked off the land; in 1939-40 at the time the war broke out we had 162 kicked off and in 1940-41 no fewer than 192 kicked off.
We have passed a lot of legislation here that deserves favourable comment, but the Veterans' Land Act may turn out, unless something is done, which I intend to suggest before I sit down, to be a repetition of the old soldier settlement board legislation. After what our men and women have gone through over the years I do not think we should ask them to go through the treatment endured by the old soldiers.
Another argument passed on to the minister from the director, I believe, was that if these clear titles are granted now to the old veterans of great vrar one the soldiers under the new Veterans' Land Act, will not pay, but will demand the same treatment. I see in that an
402	COMMONS
War Appropriation	___________
admission by the government that the Veterans' Land Act is going to be a failure. If these men are given proper conditions there vvill not be any need for them to ask for dear titles without making full payment. To my mind this argument is an admission by the government that we are going to have a drop in the price of farm products that will not allow these new settlers to make their payments.
Before going on to deal with the Veterans' Land Act, may I say that when this scheme was started we had 25,017 settle on the land. On March 31, 1944, 4,130 or sixteen percent, had clear titles after twenty-five years labour on the land, 6,153 still held contracts. That amounts to twenty-five per cent, leaving almost sixty per cent who had deserted their farms or were forced off. Is that a bright future for those who intend to settle under the Veterans' Land Act? In order to make the Veterans' Land Act a success I believe we should have it administered by an efficient and sympathetic director. I have already dealt with that but I again wish to make it plain that we must have a different head in that organization. An increase in the amount provided for live stock and equipment should be made. It is only $1,200 at the present time and that would pay about two-thirds of the price of a tractor.
I do not care how good a farmer a man may be; unless he has sufficient equipment he cannot make a success on the land. In the past we have spent millions of dollars in training these men efficiently to destroy human life and property. Why not provide a few millions now to set them up in business, so that they can make a living on the land? Those settlers are bound by contract; and I say "bound by contract" because they have signed up for land, live stock and equipment based on to-day's prices for farm produce. If those men are. to make a success; if they are ever to get clear title to their land, I feel that the government is duty bound to guarantee them similar prices for their products during the period they are paying back that loan. By that I mean that if wheat is worth $1.25 a bushel to-day and later on those settlers have to sell it for seventy-five cents a bushel, then the government should give them a book credit of fifty cents a bushel, if they, are ever to get title to their land. I do not care if we give them all their land, live stock and equipment free; if we compel them to produce at below the cost of production there is only one thing ahead of them a little later on; that is to be kicked

off their land by a dictator director, as has been done with a number of the settlers of great war No. 1.
I suppose that suggestion will be met with the reply that we have passed legislation providing that prices of agricultural products will be maintained at certain levels. I am quite ready to admit that such legislation has been passed; but I think the government also will admit that we have not been given any figure on which those prices will be stabilized, and the success of this legislation will depend entirely on the level that is set for prices of farm products. Between 1930 and 1940 the farmers received 9-4 per cent of the national income. If prices of agricultural products are fixed on that basis, then the legislation will not be worth the paper it is written on. If prices of farm products are brought up to such a level that the farmers of Canada will receive their proper percentage of the national income, then the legislation will be successful.
I do not want to take up very much more of the time of the house, but I would remind hon. members that the governments of Alberta and British Columbia have made provision for grants of land to men who enlisted from those provinces and who wish to return to the land there. I will let some of the British Columbia members give the details of their legislation, but in the case of Alberta a man who enlisted from that province will receive a half-section of land in a soil-tested district. During the.first three years he will not be asked to pay one penny. During the remaining seven years he will be required to turn in one-eighth of the returns from his crops. The government 'has gone farther and suggested to the dominion government that if they will pay half the cost of clearing and breaking forty acres of land after the settler goes in, the Alberta government will pay the other half. Then, at the end of ten years, instead of the bailiff being sent there to kick the man off the land, he will be given clear title to that half-section. In the long run I believe this will be cheaper, and I think we owe it to the veterans of this war.
Then, in order to clear a blot from the statute books of this country I suggest that even before the next election the government make available some $8,000,000 or even less to clear off the indebtedness of those old soldiers who are still working under the soldier settlement board legislation. This war is costing us something like $16,000,000 a day. Can we not afford to spend half of that amount to' free these old soldier settlers of the past? Once more I ask the government to give this matter favourable consideration, because what has been done is not good

War Appropriation
enough. I do not wish to see the veterans of this war getting at our hands the kind of treatment that has been handed out to the soldier settlers of the last war.
Mr. WILFRID LaCROIX (Quebec-Mont-morency) (Translation): Mr. Speaker, we are being asked in this resolution to vote two billion dollars for the conduct of naval, military and air operations beyond Canada; the greater part of that appropriation will be for the war against Japan. I wish to voice at once my objections against conscription under any form for the dispatch of soldiers, sailors and airmen for service in the war against Japan, which Canada declared before the United States had itself decided upon it. I take this stand for the following reasons:
Firstly, the costs entailed by the dispatch of such forces will cause the maintenance of the present taxes in this country, and I think that our industry and commerce which will be called upon, after the war with Germany has ended, to proceed with the reorganization of their business with a view to their conversion to peace-time activity, will not be able to do anything along those lines so long as taxes have not been lowered. Secondly, our population of 12 million, which is now greatly reduced through our war effort, will not be able, in view of the extent of our territory, to plan for the development of our natural resources so as to compete with those countries which, not being at war with Japan, will necessarily have forged ahead by taking advantage of the period during which war with that country will last, and this to our detriment on world markets, because that war can still last for one or two years.
Thirdly, it will be contrary to all promises previously made by the Liberal government to the people of Quebec to send against his will a single one of our fellow-citizens to fight outside this country and especially against Japan, whether it be under the form of a voluntary system involving a hypocritical and disguised conscription, as was shown by the administration of the National Resources Mobilization Act, or by virtue of an act establishing outright conscription for overseas service, as happened in the ease of bill 80 passed by this house a short time after the resignation of the hon. member for Richelieu-Yercheres (Mr. Cardin) from the cabinet, and under which the order in council of last fall was passed.
Why should we let our country fall more deeply into debt when the whole world recognizes that we have done more than we were humanly able to do? No one can foretell how much longer the war with Japan will last. President Roosevelt himself has stated
that the road to Tokyo would be much harder than the road to Berlin. Why should we not avail ourselves of the opportunity offered, based on common sense and good logic, to show that we are able to act independently without submitting to the dictates from London?
The other day, I heard the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie (Mr. Raymond) state, in a speech, that the San Francisco conference would stand as an affirmation of our independence. However, the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has taken upon himself to refute him most emphatically, when he stated, right after the speech of the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie, as reported in Hansard on Wednesday, March 28, 1945:
Hon. gentlemen opposite will find out when the opportunity comes-and I am thankful to say it will be given fairly soon-for them as well as the government to appear before the people of this country, whether or not the people of Canada feel that I have done my duty by the British commonwealth of nations, by the British empire, through every hour of the time I have been serving as Prime Minister of this country.
There is also this other statement of the Prime Minister of Canada, made on the previous day and also reported in Hansard. I quote:
Why does my hon. friend say that Canada will not do her full part in the British commonwealth, .after what she has done during this war ?
That is to say Canada will continue to be a colony of the empire as heretofore.
Besides, the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie said, in his speech, that our group had always hoped that Canada might participate in previous conferences, such as those held at Dumbarton Oaks, Bretton Woods, Yalta, et cetera; this, he claimed, should be a reason to incite us to take part in the San Francisco meeting. However, it is precisely because our country has not taken part in any of these other conferences, and this in spite of our protests, that we are justified in refraining from cooperating in the San Francisco meeting ; for, at all these previous conferences, decisions have been taken without our consent, such as the dismemberment of Poland, the right to veto, and the three votes granted to Russia, the assumption of control over our economic set-up by international finance following the decisions taken at Bretton Woods. All these decisions will be ratified by the San Francisco conference, as the Prime Minister has frankly admitted in his speech.
Why should we pay the price of secret or public agreements to which we have never
TVar Appropriation

given our approval? Why should we allow our country to be drawn into another conflict following decisions which we have never concurred in?
I am not surprised by the stand taken by the hon. member for Beauharnois^Laprairie, for he did not vote against the act mobilizing our human and national resources which has resulted, for our people, in a hypocritical and disguised conscription and the setting up in our country of an economic dictatorship which has sounded the death knell of small businesses and small industrial plants by denying them the quotas of goods and materials to which they were entitled for the benefit of large trusts which, owing to the National Resources Mobilization Act, had representatives on all government bodies who were known as dollar-a-year men.
I respect the views of the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie, but by his stand in regard to the National Resources Mobilization Act he has contributed in setting up in our country the worst economic dictatorship in- our history, the repercussions of which will be felt long after the war is ended.
The representative of a newspaper expressed the wish, in his daily column, that the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie be chosen as one of Canada's representatives to the San Francisco conference. I sincerely believe that he deserves this appointment and I trust that this time he will be more successful than in 193S when he was mentioned for appointment as Canadian- representative in Paris, at the very moment when he voted for the war appropriations which involved our country into a disastrous participation in the war.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr. Bradette):: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


Mr. ROY:: On division.
Motion agreed to on division and the house went into committee, Mr. Bradette in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE FOR NAVAL SERVICES

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ANGUS L. MACDONALD (Minister of National Defence for Naval Services): Mr. Chairman, the estimated amount required by the Department of National Defence for Naval Service for the five months, April to August, 1945, is §140,043,500.
Before the committee comes to consider the naval estimates I shall try, following the practice in previous years, to give a general account of the work of the Royal Canadian Navy during the past twelve months.

In some respects I feel I could do no better in this regard than to invite the committee to read an article that appears in the Canadian Geographical Journal, for November, 1944, from the pen of Commander William Strange, R.C.N.V.R., brilliant radio writer and journalist, Commander Strange styled his article "The Wonderful Year", taking -his title from the lines of the two-hundred-year-old naval march, "Heart of Oak":
Come, cheer up, my lads, 'tis to glory we steer,
To add something new to this wonderful year.
The last year has been truly a wonderful year of achievement for the Canadian navy. -
Ships. When I last spoke to the committee, just a little over a year ago, when the estimates of this department were under consideration, I said that the number of fighting ships in the Canadian navy was roughly 250. To-day our fighting ship strength stands at about 370. Thus, we have added some 120 fighting ships to our navy in the past year. Included in the number are a cruiser, several destroyers, many'- frigates, corvettes, minesweepers and smaller fighting craft. Besides the fighting ships more than 550 patrol and auxiliary vessels now fly the white ensign, an increase of more than 100 of such craft during the year.
Personnel. Personnel of the Royal Canadian Navy now number more than 95,000, included in which figure are nearly 6,000 members of the Women's Royal Canadian Naval Service. This represents an increase of about 15,000 over the figure of one year ago. The navy has now virtually reached its contemplated full strength in personnel. Recruiting from now on will be limited to the numbers necessary to replace casualties and discharges.
While on the subject of personnel, Mr. Chairman, I should like to say that no fewer than six of my colleagues in the cabinet have sons in the Canadian navy, and, in addition, many other hon. members in the House of Commons have sons and daughters in that service.
By provinces, enlistments in the navy have been as set out in the following -tables:
	Officers	Ratings
Prince Edward Island..	. . 55	1,368Nova Scotia 	. . 626	6,515New Brunswick	. . 162	2,570Quebec 	.. 1,280	11,792Ontario	. . 2.284	41,218Manitoba	. . 281	8.110Saskatchewan	. . 185	6.782Alberta 	.. 218	7.792British Columbia	. . 1,126	11,868
I take now the next matter, that of operations. particularly of convoys. Our main task in the past year has remained the task of convoy work in the north Atlantic. It was to

War Appropriation-Naval Services
that task that we bent our energies from the beginning of the war, and it is to that great task that we must devote almost entirely our efforts until the war with Germany is brought to a successful conclusion. The importance of the Atlantic lifeline, the great ocean highway which links the British isles and the American continent, has been stressed' so often and by so many people that I need not at this time emphasize its significance.
In the early autumn of 1940 one of our first corvettes was putting out on her maiden voyage from the harbour of Halifax. She was commanded by Lieutenant George Hay Stephen, R.C.N.R., a native of Scotland, but for many years a resident of Montreal. Lieutenant Stephen is now Commander Stephen. He is a winner of the O.B.E., the Distinguished Service Cross, Bar to the Distinguished Service Cross and a Mention in Dispatches. It was felt that some sort of ceremony should be arranged for an occasion that seemed historic and accordingly a band was stationed on one of the great piers of that harbour. As the little ship sailed out from the safety of her port into the perils of the great Atlantic, the band, at the request of the Scottish-Canadian captain of the corvette, played that widely known and justly popular air, "The Road to the Isles". That little ship was indeed taking the road to the Isles. Not, it is true, the road of the song, but the broad high road of ocean that leads to the great isles themselves, the great isles that in those days stood alone in Europe against the might and savagery of German attack.
I may tell the committee that since September, 1939, more than two hundred million tons of cargo have been moved over that road. Without that vast amount of food and war material and without the troops which crossed the seas in safety, it is not too much to say that the fight in Europe could not have been carried on. If the nazis had been successful in blocking the great ocean paths to Britain, the liberating armies of the Allies would not be in western Europe at this hour. The invasion, and all events that have followed, were made possible-and let us never forget this- only by the fact that throughout the dark and terrible days when enemy submarines threatened to overwhelm us, the men of the sea held the ocean lanes clear, fought the convoys through, fed and supplied the island fortress of Britain, cheerfully bore the fierce hardships of the North Atlantic, died like heroes when their hour came, and earned the gratitude of all civilized people for their efforts.
The task of convoying on the North Atlantic has been one of tremendous greatness and I would not have it understood that the Canadian navy alone has been entirely responsible for its execution. British ships and United States ships have contributed mightily to the success of this vast operation. On the other hand, I am proud to point out that at certain periods within the last few years more than one-half of the entire burden of transatlantic escort work fell upon the shoulders of the Canadian navy. At one stage, during the summer of 1944, Canadian ships did one hundred per cent of close escort work on the north Atlantic and at the same time they formed thirty per cent of the striking forces in that area. Last summer the largest convoy ever to sail the Atlantic, a convoy of 167 merchant ships, carrying more than one million tons of cargo, sailed from North American shores and reached its destination without the loss of a single ship. The protection for this great armada was provided by the escort vessels of the Canadian navy.
Invasion. I recall that two years ago when the naval estimates were under discussion some regret was expressed by an hon. member that the Canadian navy did not have ships capable of taking part in an invasion of Europe. That hon. gentleman, I have no doubt, was thinking of larger types of ships than we had in operation at the time. I can say now, however, that when the great assault on nazi held territory was opened on June 6 last the Canadian navy, in addition to all its convoy duties on the broad Atlantic, was able to supply more than 100 ships and nearly 10,090 naval personnel for the task. We allocated for this purpose two fleet destroyers, nine escort destroyers, two support groups of frigates, nineteen corvettes, two flotillas of minesweepers, two flotillas of motor torpedo boats, two landing ships, fourteen assault craft and thirty landing craft for infantry.
At the same time, and for some time before, our four tribal destroyers the Iroquois, Atha-baskan, Huron and Haida were engaged with four like ships of the Royal Navy in assault work in the British channel and the bay of Biscay. These ships were all grouped in what was known as the tenth destroyer flotilla and from April to September of last year this flotilla compiled one of the most remarkable records of the entire war. In a little more than four months these eight ships sank thirty-six German ships, including destroyers, minesweepers, trawlers, armed merchant vessels, tankers and) a submarine and damaged fifteen other enemy ships, with the loss of only one of their own ships, the Canadian ship Athabaskan.
It is difficult to single out any particular persons for special commendation but the commanding officers of these ships, perhaps, deserve to be particularly mentioned:-Cap-
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation-Naval Services
tain H. G. DeWolf of the Haida who, for his gallantry and skill, was awardted the D.S.O.,
D.S.C. and four Mentions in Dispatches; Captain Rayner of the Huron, who received a bar to his D.S.C. and two Mentions in Dispatches; Commander J. C. Hibbard of the Iroquois who received a bar to his already won D.S.C.; and Lieut. Commander John Stubbs of the Atha-baskan, who had won his D.S.O. two years before, who received the D.S.C. for preinvasion work and who unfortunately is still missing.
I should like to make some mention of the great successes enjoyed before, during and since the invasion day by our two flotillas of motor torpedo boats. These small but extremely fast and effective ships have been operating with coastal forces in the United Kingdom for several yearn. Their work is hazardous and exacting. They operate mainly at night and when they engage the enemy they do so at very close range. These ships are not named but are given a number. I should like to put on the records of this house the name of Lieutenant Commander Anthony Law of Quebec city, who has been awarded the D.S.C. and a Mention in Dispatches, who commands one of the flotillas, and the name of Lieutenant Commander James R. Kirkpatrick of Kitchener, Ontario, who commands the other flotilla, and who also has received the D.S.C. and a Mention in Dispatches.
Enemy losses. Since I last spoke to the committee about a year ago Canadian ships have destroyed or shared in the destruction of ten submarines and in the probable destruction of six submarines.
Since the beginning of the war Canadian ships have destroyed or shared in the destruction of twenty-two enemy submarines, have probably destroyed eight submarines, and probably damaged seven more submarines.
In the same period, that is, since the beginning of the war, our ships have participated in the sinking of forty-four enemy surface vessels, in the severe damaging of twenty-six enemy surface vessels, and in the capture of one enemy surface vessel. The enemy vessels sunk or damaged included destroyers, minesweepers, trawlers, E-boat9 and merchant ships.
Add these two achievements together and you will see that Canadian ships of war have sunk, either by themselves or in company with other ships, a total of sixty-six enemy vessels of various types, have damaged twenty-six others, have captured one, have probably sunk eight and probably damaged seven more.
Enemy devices. The Atlantic campaign, for it is a campaign rather than a battle, is still being fought out. In recent .months the enemy has adopted certain new tactics and made cer-
/Mr. A. L. Macdonald.]
tain improvements in his submarines, mention of which has been made several times in official statements as well as in press dispatches. One of the significant new developments is that of the "Schnorkel," or breathing device which enables the submarine to get air and to charge its batteries without coming to the surface. This apparatus makes detection of submarines a great deal more difficult. There is no doubt that the enemy's construction of submarines is still continuing despite air attacks on submarine yards. There is also reason to believe that some of the German submarines have a greater under-water speed than formerly. In recent months enemy submarines have concentrated their efforts, to a greater degree than formerly, in coastal waters. Under a tactic of this kind there is no reason to believe that Canadian coastal waters will be free from these underwater marauders. It may well be that we shall have submarine attacks in Canadian waters on an increased scale. I do not wish to alarm the committee or the country, but I remind the committee of what was said a few days ago by the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Great Britain in their joint monthly statement on submarine warfare, that an enemy with a large number of submarines is always a threat to our shipping. Where that threat may be manifested in future months no one can predict, but we have no reason to assume that our waters will be immune, and therefore we cannot accept any relaxation in our anti-submarine measures.
Merchant ship losses. It may be said now, that in the years 1940,1941 and 1942, the enemy was able to sink more merchant ships than could be replaced. We had not yet gathered our full strength either in escort ships or in merchant ships, but in 1943 the tide turned. In 1943 the united nations' losses of merchant ships were only about one-half of what they had been in 1942. In 1944 merchant ship losses were about one-third of what they were in 1943. These figures prove that our warship strength was growing and that we were able to offer greater protection to our convoys.
The year 1943 was remarkable for another fact and it is this; not only were our sinkings of merchant ships less than they had been in the year before, but our construction of merchant vessels was much greater than it had been in the previous year. The same comment may be made about the year 1944. Our merchant tonnage at the end of that year was considerably greater than it was at the beginning.
For the present year, 1945, while it 'is true that the enemy has shown greater activity than in the months immediately preceding, nevertheless the loss of merchant tonnage this

Naval Services-Awards for Gallantry
year is not such as to. cause alarm, and at the same time our successes against enemy submarines last month were satisfactory.
Losses of Canadian warships. I regret to have to report that from the time of my last statement to this committee and up to February 28, 1945-that covers a period of nearly one year-we have lost as a result of enemy action the Tribal destroyer Athabaskan, the frigate Valley field, the corvettes Regina, Al-berni, Shawinigan and Trentonian, the minesweeper Clayoquot, and two motor torpedo boats.
From the beginning of the war up to February 28, 1945, we lost twenty ships by enemy action and twelve from other causes.
Casualties. Our casualties from the beginning of the war up to February 28, 1945, are:
Killed on active service	 1,498
Other deaths	 224
Wounded or injured	 388
Prisoners of war	 87
Missing	 44
The sympathy of the committee and of the house will be with the relatives and friends of these gallant men who have given their lives in their country's service.
Decorations. On the other hand, I am proud to say that since the beginning of the war 1,168 Canadian naval officers and men have been recognized by His Majesty the King, and by foreign governments, for their gallantry and devotion to duty. Last year I placed on Hansard a list of those so honoured, and it included some 519 names. In the past year the number of decorations won by the Canadian navy amounted to 649 and therefore surpassed the total number won in all the previous years of the war. This fact alone indicates the growing size and the increased operational scope of this navy. With the consent of the committee I should like to place on Hansard, without reading it, a list of the men so honoured from the time of my last report up to and including March 20 of this year.
Operational Honours and Awards Operational awards granted to personnel of the Naval Service from March 7, 1944, up
to and including March 20, 1945.
Distinguished Service Order	 1
Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the
British Empire	 5
Distinguished Service Cross	 56
Member of the Most Excellent Order of the
British Empire	 5
Conspicuous Gallantry Medal	 1
George Medal	 1
Distinguished Service Medal	 57
British Empire Medal	 22
Mention in Dispatches-
Officers	 174
Ratings	 261
Foreign Awards	 5
Total	 588
[Stage Direction]
DeWolf, Harry George, Captain, R.C.N., 123 Range Road, Ottawa, Ont., 3 May, 1944.
[Stage Direction]
Carter, Roderick Chrysler, Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N. V.R., Ottawa, Ont. (Toronto), 1 January, 1945.
LePage, Theodore Nelson, Lieut. Cdr.. R.C.N. V.R., 2592 Nelson Ave. W., Vancouver, B.C., 3 May, 1944.
Palmer, Ivor James Llewellyn, Lieut. Cdr. (E), R.C.N.R., Montreal, Que., 14 November, 1944. Pickard, Anthony Fenwick, Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.R., South Porcupine, N.S., 8 June, 1944. Rankin, Angus Hetherington, Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N. V.R., Vancouver, B.C. 8 June, 1944.
[Stage Direction]
Balfrey, Charles Patrick, Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.R., 165 Longueil St., St. Jean d'Iberville, P.Q., 20 March, 1945.
Benoit, Cecil Julian, Lieut., R.C.N., Halifax, N.S., 14 November, 1944.
Bishop, Lennox Craig, Lieut., R.C.N.V.R., Sherbrooke, Que., 14 November, 1944.
Bishop, Lennox Craig (1st Bar), 26 December,
1944.	_
Boulton, Angus George, Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.V.R., Russell, Man., 1 January, 1945.
Bradley, James Richard, Lieut., R.C.N.V.R., Cayuga Avenue, Port Credit, Out., 20 March,
1945.
Brock, Frederick, A/Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.V.R., Rothesay, N.B., 6 March, 1945.
Budge, Patrick David, Lieut., R.C.N., Halifax, N.S., 29 August, 1944.
Burk, Charles Arthur, Lieut., R.C.N.V.R., 43 Gormley Avenue, Toronto, Ont., 2 May, 1944. Burk, Charles Arthur (1st Bar), 14 November, 1944.	,
Burk, Charles Arthur (2nd Bar), 26 December, 1944.
Burke, Cornelius, A/Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.V.R., 1290 Robson Street, Vancouver, B.C., 30 May,
1944.
Burke, Cornelius (1st Bar), 26 January, 1945. Campbell, Hugh, A/Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.R., Toronto, Ont., 26 December, 1944.
Cosh, DigbyRex Bell, A/Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.V.R., 316 O'Connor St., Ottawa, Ont., 30 May, 1944. Coughlin, Clifton Rexford, Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.
V.R., Ottawa, Ont., 18 July, 1944.
Davie, John Chapman, Lieut., R.C.N.V.R., Duncan, B.C., 14 November, 1944.
DeWolf, Harry George, D.S.O., Captain, R.C.N., Ottawa, Ont., 29 August, 1944.	„ m
Draney, Robert William, Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.R., New Westminster, B.C., 12 September, 1944. Fraser, James Philip, Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.R., Halifax, N.S., 4 July, 1944.
Fuller, Thomas George, D.S.C. (1st Bar), A/Cdr., R.C.N.V.R., 300 Somerset St., W„ Ottawa, Ont., 4 April, 1944.
Fuller, Thomas George (2nd Bar), 5 September,
1944.
Gooderham, William George, Lieut., R.C.N.V.R., Vancouver, B.C., 18 July, 1944.
Groos, David Walter, A/Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N., Victoria, B.C., (Surrey, England), 1 January',
1945.
Hadrill, Peter Geoffrey, Lieut.. R.C.N.V.R., Montreal, Que., 28 November, 1944.
Heslam, Richard Murray, Lieut., R.C.N.V.R., Halifax, N.S., 14 November, 1944.
408	COMMONS
Naval Services-Awards for Gallantry
D.S.C.-Con.
Hibbard, James C., D.S.C. (1st Bar), Cdr., R.C.N., Halifax, N.S., 14 November, 1944. Howitt, David Mickle, A/Lieut.. R.C.N.V.R., Kings Bridge Road, St. John's, Newfoundland, 20 March, 1945.
Kelly,	George,	Lieut., R.C.N.R.,	Northumberland, England, 1 January, 1945.King.	Clarence	Aubrey, D.S.O.,	D.S.C.	(1st
Bar), Cdr., R.C.N.R., Oliver, B.C., 24 October, 1944.
Kirkpatrick, J. R. H., Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.Y.R., 128 St. George Street, Toronto, Ont., 7 March,
1944.
Ladner, Thomas Ellis, Lieut.. R.C.N.V.R., Vancouver, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Ladner, Thomas Ellis (1st Bar), 26 January,
1945.
Lavr,	Charles	Anthony, A/Lieut.	Cdr.,R.C.N.V.R., 220 Grande Allee,	Quebec,	Que.,29	August, 1944.
Lincoln, John Hobart, Lieut., R.C.N.V.R., Calgary, Alta., 4 July, 1944.
Mackay, Thomas Colson, Lieut., R.C.N., Victoria,
B.C., 15 August, 1944.
Maitland. John	Douglas,	A/Lieut.	Cdr.,
R.C.N.V.R.. 1277 West 33 Avenue, Vancouver, B.C., 30 May, 1944.
Maitland, John Douglas (1st Bar), 26 January, 1945.
Martyn, W. H., D.S.C. (1st Bar), A/Lieut. Cdr., (A), R.N., Calgary, Alta., 5 September, 1944. Mawer. Charles	Needham, Lieut.	Cdr.,
R.C.N.V.R., Calgary, Alta., 29 August, 1944. Parker, Charles Rodger, Lieut., R.C.N.V.R.. 76 Weyburn Crescent, Toronto, Ontario, 30 May, 1944.
Pavillard, Louis Raymond , A/Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N.R.. Halifax, N.S., 19 December, 1944. Plomer, James, D.S.C. (1st Bar), A/Commander, R.C.N.V.R.. 593 McMillan Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba, 18 April, 1945.
Prentice, James Douglas, D.S.O., A/Captain, R.C.N., Victoria. B.C., 28 November, 1944. Prentice, James Douglas (1st Bar), 5 December, 1944.
Rayner, Herbert Sharpies, D.S.C. (1st Bar), A/Gaptain, R.C.N., Bedford, N.S., 29 August,
1944.
Stacey, William Roland, Lt. Cdr., R.C.N.R., 2045 Whyte Avenue, Vancouver, B.C., 20 March, 1945.	.
Stead. Gordon Wilson. D.S.C. (1st Bar), A/Lieut. Cdr.. R.C.N.V.R.. 2908 Oak St„ Vancouver, B.C.. 30 May, 1944.
Stephen, George Hay, O.B.E., D.S.C. (1st Bar), A/Cdr., R.C.N.R., Montreal, Que., 15 August,
1945.
Storrs, Anthony Hubert Gleadow, A/Com-mander, R.C.N.R., Victoria, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Storrs. Anthony Hubert Gleadow, (1st Bar), 13 February, 1945.
Stubbs, John Hamilton, D.S.O., Lt. Cdr., R.C.N., Kaslo, B.C., 11 July, 1944.
Wadsworth. Rein Boulton, Cdr.. R.C.N.V.R. (ret'd), 6 Castlefrank Road, Toronto, Ont.,
30	May, 1944.
Webber, Reginald Arnand, Lt. Cdr., R.C.N., Vancouver, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Willson, William Herbert, A/Lt. Cdr., R.C.N., Calgary, Alta., 5 December, 1944.
Campbell, Ross, Lieut., R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 15 January, 1945.
[Stage Direction]

Arsenault, James William, Mate, R.C.N.R, Grindstone, Magdalen Island, Que., 8 June,
1944.
Baker, Herman, A/Skipper Lt., R.C.N.R., Yarmouth North, N.S., 8 June, 1944.
Darrach, Claude Kenneth, Skipper Lieut., R.C.N.R., Herring Cove, N.S., 8 June, 1944.
Forster, Dennis Thompson, A/Lt. Cdr. (E), R.C.N., Enderby, B.C., 26 December, 1944.
Idiens, Leonard, Sub-Lt., R.C.N.V.R., Campbell River, B.C., 8 June, 1944.
C.	G.M.
Kerwin, Michael Roderick, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-32313, Billings Bridge, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
George Medal
Robertson, Owen Connor, Captain, R.C.N.R., Halifax, N.S., 8 June, 1944.
D.	S.M.
Abbott, Douglas, C.P.O., R.C.N., 2479, Victoria, B.C., 11 July, 1944.
Abbott, Douglas. D.S.M. (1st Bar), Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N.,	2479, Victoria, B.C.,	29
August, 1944.
Babineau, D. B., C.P.O., R.C.N., 2857, Halifax, N.S., 3 October, 1944.
Badger, Edward, P.O., R.C.N.V.R., V-7899, Toronto, Ont., 18 July, 1944.
Barker, Douglas William, C.P.O., R.C.N., 2827, 961 Cowiclian St., Victoria, B.C., 20 March,
1945.
Bedard, Paul. C.P.O., Writer, R.C.N., 40828, Greenock, Scotland, and Mattawa, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Bloomfield, G. H., Yeo of Sigs., R.C.N.V.R., V-9856, Winnipeg, Man., 3 October, 1944.
Boyle, James, C.P.O., R.C.N., X-1918, Canaan Station, Westmorland County, N.B., 1 January, 1945.
Brewster, Bernard Edward, Leading Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-17355, Woodstock, Out.. 1 January, 1945.
Brown. Ernest Thomas, A/Leading Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-23731, Lachine, P.Q., 5 December, 1944.
Bushfield, William Arthur, Able Seaman, R.C.N., 4657, Stratford, Ont., 29 August, 1944.
Candy, George Watson, C.P.O., Torpedo Gunner's Mate, R.C.N. 2360, Victoria B.C., 28 November, 1944.
Carroll, George Alvin, P.O., R.C.N., 40563, Bagot. Man., 14 November, 1944.
Craig. Frances Dudley, Able Seaman, V-32905, Kamsack, Sask., 18 July. 1944.
Deane, Robert Crothers, V-50218, Able Seaman (ty) R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 3 October, 1944.
Dublaclc, William, V-47341, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., Vancouver. B.C., 29 August, 1944.
El well, J. B., Ord. Art. II, R.C.N.V.R., V-30802, New Westminster, B.C.. 3 October, 1944.
Emberley, Percy, E.R.A., 2nd Class A-2290, R.C.N.R.. Halifax, N.S., 28 November, 1944.
Firkins, Whitney, V-30236. C.P.O.. Cook (S), R.C.N.V.R.. Victoria, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Forrester, Thomas Houston, V-50539. A/Ldg. Stoker (M) R.C.N.V.R., 164 Street, Nanaimo, B.C., 20 June, 1944.
Gill, Leslie Francis, V-30176. A/Chief Ordnance Artificer, R.C.N.V.R., Victoria. B.C. 14 November, 1944.

Naval Services-Awards for Gallantry
D.S.M.-Con.
Goodhew, W.J., M.M., R.C.N.V.R., V-39152, Halifax, N.S., 3 October, 1944.
Gravelle, Joseph, P.O., Steward V-12603, R.C.N.V.R., Edmonton, Alta., 1 January, 1945.
Haagenson, Lloyd Palmer Ambrose, A/Ldg. Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-11712, Sanctuary, Saskatchewan, 20 March, 1945.
Haywood, James Mervin, 40727, A/Chief Ordnance Artificer, R.C.N., Port Arthur, Ont., 29 August, 1944.
Kaminski. John Joseph, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R.,	V-38104, Stettler, Alta., 19
December, 1944.
Lipton, John Francis, C.P.O., R.C.N., 2851, Stellarton, N.S., 10 October, 1944.
Longbottom, Arthur, E.R.A. Ill, V-10650, Moose Jaw, Sask., 18 July, 1944.
MacIntyre, Roderick James, Acting Petty Officer, R.C.N., 3137, Bawlf, Alta., 24 October,
1944.	.
Mackenzie, James Wilson McLeod, Leading Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-24415, 758 Whytold Road, St. James, Man., 20 March, 1945.
Masters, F. A., A/B, R.C.N.V.R., V-49589, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ont., 3 October, 1944.
Montgomery, William Merrill, C.P.O., R.C.N., 2561, Victoria, B.C., 14 November, 1944.
Moon, George Cyril, P.O., R.C.N., 3134, Victoria, B.C., 15 August, 1944.
Nunn, Allen, A/B. R.C.N., 4118, Vancouver, B.C., 11 April, 1944.
Pederson,. Magnus, V-11549. Ordnance Artificer II, R.C.N.V.R., Victoria, B.C.,	29
August, 1944.
Perkins, Elwyn, Petty Officer, R.C.N., 3449, Victoria, B.C., 15 August, 1944.
Reid, William Wilson, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N.V.R. V-32837, Calgary, Alta., 29 August, 1944.
Richards, Harold Douglas, Chief Stoker, R.C.N., 21925, Victoria, B.C., 15 August, 1944.
Richards, Harold Douglas, D.S.M., (1st Bar), 14 November, 1944.
Rickard. John Herren, A/B, V-16076, R.C.N.V.R., Port Arthur, Ont., 4 July, 1944.
Royds, William Edward, Ldg. Smn., R.C.N.V.R., V-27580, 127 Eastbourne Ave., Toronto, Ont., 20 March, 1945.
Salsiccioli. Peter Paul, C.E.R.A., R.C.N., 21602, Trail, B.C., 28 November, 1944.
Saunders, Frederick William, C.P.O., R.C.N., 2614, London. England, 14 November, 1944.
Starr, John, Ldg. Signalman, V-24919, R.C.N. V.R., Winnipeg. Man., 18 July, 1944.
Steen. Charles Scott, A/P.O., R.C.N .V.R., V-24734, Dauphin, Man., 12 September, 1944.
Stephenson, Thomas, A/B, V-17675, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ontario, 4 July, 1944.
Stone. Daniel George. A/B, R.C.N.V.R., V-9998, 693 Jessie Ave., Winnipeg, Man., 20 March,
1945.	.
Stone, Leonard Sidney, C.P.O. Tel., R.C.N., 2178, Victoria, B.C., 29 August, 1944.
Stoner, Beverley Murray, A/B, V-48169, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 4 July, 1944.
Stubbins, Albert George, Ldg. Smn., R.C.N.V.R. V-40004, Humberstone, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Taylor, David Swanson, C.P.O., R.C.N., 3393, New Westminster, B.C., 29 August, 1944.
Tennant, D„ A/B, R.C.N.V.R., V-31723, Hamilton, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Walker, Murray Hutchinson, A/P.O., R.C.N., 4019, London, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Watson, William James Brown, A/B. R.C.N. V.R., V-23372, Rosemount, Que., 5 December, 1944.
D..S.M.-Con.
White, Robert Edward, Ldg. Smn., R.C.N. 4127, Orillia, Ont., 15 August. 1944.
Wispinski, Peter Paul, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N. V.R., V-43955, Haight, Alta., (Edmonton), 29 August, 1944.
Wright, James Bernard, A/A.B., R.C.N.V.R., V-26288, New Glasgow, N.S. 29 August, 1944.
[Stage Direction]
Allan, Peter Christie, C.E.RA., R.C.N.V.R., V-10347, Weyburn, Sask., 8 June, 1944.
Aves, Franl? Edward, C.P.O., R.C.N., 2617, Preston, Ont. 8 June, 1944.
Ball, James Ramsay, Chief Shipwright, R.C.N. V.R., V-25218, Halifax, N.S., 26 December,
1944.
Baulne, Joseph Emile Rene, A/B. R.C.N.V.R., V-6893, Hull, Que., 5 December, 1944.
Biddle, Henry, C.P.O., R.C.N.V.R., V-10186, Regina, Sask., 8 June, 1944.
Blandin, Rene Alex, A/Stoker, P.O., R.C.N.R., A-1273, Dartmouth, N.S., 12 September, 1944. Boyd. Alfred Albert, E.R.A. IV, R.C.N.R., A-5361, Montreal, Que., 1 January, 1945. Butland, Clarence, A/P.O., R.C.N.V.R., V-5308, Verdun, Que., 1 January. 1945.
Campbell, Albert Bruce, A/B., R.C.N.R., (F.R.)
F.R. 244, Victoria, B.C., 8 June, 1944.
Carson, William Spence, C. Stoker P.O. (F.F.), Toronto, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Cox, William John, Shipwright III, R.C.N.V.R., V-40761, Montreal, Que. 12 September 1944. Curtis, Edward George, Shipwright R.C.N. 2nd Class 40811, Victoria, B.C., 19 December, 1944. McNally, Robert Vardon, A/Able Seaman, R.C. N.V.R., V-62756, Toronto, Ont., 6 February,
1945.
Pickering, William Clifton, C.P.O., R.C.N.R., A-2654, Toronto, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Roberts, Allen John Ldg. Cook (S), R.C.N.V.R., V-36211, Pov'ell River, B.C., 8 June, 1944. Rowe, John Joseph, Chief Stoker, R.C.N.V.R., V-23454, Cornwall, Ont., 27 February, 1944. Sainsbury, Edward Stephen, C.P.O., R.C.N.V.R., V-959g, Halifax, N.S., 19 December. 1944. Scott, Peter Wilson, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N.V.R., V-7623 Toronto, Qnt., 12 September, 1944. Smith, William C.P.O., R.C.N., 2333, Winnipeg, Man., 1 January, 1945.
Tait, John Rowan, A/Elect. Art. IV, R.C.N.V.R., V-13882. Calgary, Alta., 26 December, 1944. Wenzel, William Max, Able Seaman, R.C.N. V.R., V-38269, Elk Point, Alta., 1 January, 1945.
Wilson. Frederick William, A/Ldg., Smn., R.C. N.V.R., V-24839, Transcona, Man., 12 September, 1944.
Mention in Dispatches-Officers Annesley, John Crispo Leekie, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N., Montreal, Que., 29 August, 1944.
Annesley, John Crispo Leekie, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N., Montreal, Que., 15 August, 1944.	.
Arnason, Steinthor Arni, Warrant Engineer, R.C.N.R., 54 Bloomfield Street, Halifax, N.S., 1 January, 1945.
Atherton, Thomas Herbert, Lieutenant, R.C.N.
V.R., Parry Sound, Ont., 18 July, 1944. Audette, Louis de la Chesnaye, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Quebec, Que., 1 January, 1945.	[DOT]	_
Baird, Samuel Lawson, A/Lieutenant Commander (E), R.C.N.V.R., Winnipeg, Man., 28 November, 1944.
410	COMMONS
Naval Services-Awards for Gallantry
Mention in Dispatches-Officers-Con.
Barrett, Raiffe Dillon, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.R., Glyn P.O., Victoria, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Barrick, Geoffrey Herbert, Gunner, R.C.N., Victoria, B.C., 14 November, 1944.
Bauld, H. S. D., Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Halifax, N.S., 3 October, 1944.
Bell, Gordon, Commissioned Engineer, R.C.N.R., Sudbury, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Bell, Ian Hunter, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Vancouver, B.C., 8 June, 1944,
Berry, Peter Cushing, A/Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Ottawa, Ont., 28 November, 1944.
Biggs, Jeffrey Reginald, Lieutenant, R.C.N.R., Montreal, P.Q., 1 January, 1945.
Blanchard, Henry Blair, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., 362 Morris Street, Halifax, N.S., 20 March, 1945.
Bolus, Hal Baldwin, Lieutenant (E), R.C.N., Ottawa, Ont., 11 July, 1944.
Boyer, Frederick John, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., 257 Inglewood Drive, Toronto, Ont., 23 May,
1944.
Boyer, Frederick John (Posthumous), Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R. 21 November, 1944.
Boyle, Douglas Seaman, Lieutenant, R.C.N., Revelstoke, B.C., 18 July, 1944.
Brock, Jeffry Vanstone, Commander, R.C.N.V.R., 75 fiavard Avenue, Winnipeg, Man.
Brooks-Hill, Frederick Bancroft, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Burk, Charles Arthur (D.S.C. and 2 Bars), Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 30 January, 1945.
Burke, Cornelius, D.S.C., A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Vancouver, B.C.,	11
July, 1944.
Burrows, Freeman Elkins, Lieutenant, R.C.N. V.R., Toronto, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Buxton, Sydney William, Lieutenant, R.C.N. V.R., Vancouver, B.C., 8 June, 1944.
Campbell, Gordon Duncan, Lieutenant, R.C.N. V.R., Victoria, B.C., 8 June, 1944.
Chaffey, Charles Donald, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Montreal, Que., 26 December, 1944.
Charles, D'Arcy Allen Adsit Hughes, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., North Hattig, P.Q., 26 December, 1944.
Charles, John Alexander, Lieutenant, R.C.N., Rouleau, Saskatchewan, 2 January, 1945.
Chenoweth, Richard Cassels, Lieutenant, R.C.N. V.R., Montreal, Que., 1 January, 1945.
Chipman, William Pennock, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R.,	173 Stewart Street,
Ottawa, Ont., 13 June, 1944.
Clarance. Charles Douglas, Lieutenant, R.C.N. V.R., Vancouver, B.C., 3 October, 1944.
Coates, John Jeffery, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Paris, Ont., 10 October, 1944.
Conrad, Ralph Anderson, Commissioned Engineer, R.C.N.R., McNab's Island, Halifax, N.S., 1 January, 1945.
Corbett, John Harper, Lieutenant. R.C.N.V.R., 10951-123 Street, Edmonton, Alta., 20 March
1945.
Cosburn, Ronald Thomas, Prob. Sub-Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Cosh, Digby Rex Bell (Deceased), A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., 316 O'Connor Street, Ottawa, Ont., 30 May, 1944.
Coughlin, Clifton Rexford, D.S.C. (Deceased), Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Ottawa, Ont., 14 November, 1944.

Cuthbert. James, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.R., Vancouver, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Davis, Donald, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Victoria, B.C., 26 December, 1944.
Davis, James Sinclair, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Oakville, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
De Wolf, Henry George, D.S.O., D.S.C., Captain, R.C.N., Bedford, N.S., 10 October, 1944.
De Wolf, Henry George, D.S.O., D.S.C., Captain, R.C.N., Ottawa, Out. (Bedford, N.S.), 14 November, 1944.
Dolmage, Wilfred Gordon, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., 1835 Barclay Street, Vancouver, B.C., 3 May, 1944.
Donald. James Olouston, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., 79 Main Street, Winnipeg, Man., 3 May, 1944.
Dunn, James Alexander, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Vancouver, B.C., 4 July,
1944.
Earnshaw, Eric Phillip, Lieutenant, R.C.N., Ottawa, Out., 1 January, 1945.
Easton, A. H., D.S.C., Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.R. (T), London, Ont., 3 October, 1944.
Edwards, Gordon Cheeseman, A/Lieutenant Commander (A), R.C.N.V.R., Montreal. Que. (Southsea, Hants, Eng.), 1 January, 1945.
Edwards, Thomas Bottrell, A/Lieutenant Commander (T), R.C.N.R., Cornwall, England, 28 November, 1944.
Ellis, Martin Henry, A/Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Halifax, N.S. (Victoria, B.C.), 1 January.
1945.
Evans, Philip Cabell, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.R., Miami, Florida, 8 June, 1944.
Everett, A. W„ Lieutenant, R.C.N., Winnipeg, Man., 3 October, 1944.
Farmer, James, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., London, Ont., 4 July, 1944,
Ferguson, Alexander John, Lieutenant, R.C.N.R. Hantsport, Hants Co., N.S., 8 June, 1944.
Flitton, Ralph Johnston, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R. Mount Royal, Que., 5 December, 1944.
Fowler, Frederick Knight, Lieutenant. R.C.N. V.R., St. John, N.B., 2 January, 1945.
Freeman, Russell, Gunner (T), R.C.N., Hamilton, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Frewer, John De La Fosse, A/Lieutenant Commander R.C.N.V.R., 196 Indian Road, Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Frewer, Philip George, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 15 August, 1944.
Fuller, Thomas George. D.S.C. and 2 Bars, A/Commander R.C.N.V.R., Ottawa, Ont., 5 December, 1944.
Gardner, Alan, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Calgary, Alta., 8 June, 1944.
Gibson, William Simpson, Lieutenant (E), R.C.N.V.R., 86 Cheritan Ave., Toronto, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Gladwell, James William, Lieutenant, R.C.N. V.R., 1 Surrey Gardens, Montreal, Que., 30 May, 1944.
Goad, James Barclay, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 26 December, 1944.
Godfrey, Valentine Stuart, Captain, R.C.N., Victoria. B.C., 14 November, 1944.
Godwin, Donald Harold, Probationary SubLieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Hamilton, Ont., 5 December, 1944.
Goodwin. Geoffrey Lionel, Electrical Lieutenant (R), R.C.N.V.R., R.R. No. 3, St. Catharines, Qnt., 8 June, 1944.
Gould, Grant Allenby, Surgeon Lieutenant (T), R.C.N.V.R., Winnipeg, Man. (Uxbridge, Ont.) 17 October, 1944.

Naval Services-Awards for Gallantry
Mention in Dispatches-Officers-Con.
Grant, H. T. W., D.S.O., Captain, R.C.N., Ottawa, Ont., 28 November, 1944.
Gray, Robert Hampton, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Nelson, B.C., (Transcona, Man.), 16 January, 1945.
Groos, David Walter, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N., Victoria, B.C., 14 November, 1944.
Groos, David Walter, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N., Victoria, B.C., 3 October, 1944.
Groos, Harold Victor William, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N., Victoria, B.C., 18 July,
1944.
Hall, George Stanley, A/Commander, R.C.N.R., Esquimalt, B.C. (Halifax, N.S.), 1 January,
1945.
Hall, Kenneth William Newman, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.R., Westmount, P.Q., 26 December, 1944.
Harding, John, Lieutenant Commander, R.C. N.R., Montreal, Que., 1 January, 1945.
Harley, Frank. Lieutenant (E),	R.C.N.R.,
Glasgow, Scotland, 18 July, 1944.
Harris, Herbert Cecil, A/Warrant Engineer, Moncton, New Brunswick, 8 June, 1944.
Hart, Richard Wallace, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R. Belleville, Out., 8 June, 1944.
Hayes, William Prine, Lieutenant, R.C.N., Swift Current, Saskatchewan, 14 November, 1944.
Heayberd, Valentine Maxwell, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Montreal, Que., 14 November, 1944.
Heslam, Richard Murray, Lieutenant, R.C.N V.R., Montreal, Que., 11 July, 1944.
Hill, Henry Knox, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Kingston, Ont., 4 July, 1944.
Hill, Henry Knox, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Kingston, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Hinehcliffe, Cecil Irving (R.D.), Commander (E), R.C.N.R., Victoria, B.C., 26 December, 1944.
Hunter, Robert Laird Borden. Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Kamsaek, Sask. (East Florence Ville, N.B.), 1 January, 1945.
Jackson, Thomas James, A/Pay Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Jeffreys, David E., Lieutenant, R.C.N.R. (discharged), Swansea, Wales. 14 November, 1944.
Jess, Robert Edmond, D.S.C., Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Quebec, Que., 1 January, 1945.
Johnson, Rendell James Godschall, A/Com-mander, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Jones, Lloyd Irwin, Commissioned Gunner (T), R.C.N,, Vancouver, B.C., 15 August, 1944.
Kaizer, George Murray, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.R., Centreville, Kings Co., N.S., 1 January, 1945.
Karr, Sand on Alexander, Warrant Engineer, R.C.N.R., Chemainus, B.C., 8 June, 1944.
King, Clarence Aubrey, D.S.O., D.S.C., Commander, R.C.N.R., Oliver, B.C., 15 August, 1944.
King, Dudley Gawen, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Victoria, B.C., 8 June, 1944.
Kirkpatrick, Archibald Miller, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Windsor, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Kirkpatrick, James Ralph Hilborn, D.S.C., Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Kitchener, Ont., 3 October, 1944.
Knight, Vadim Michael Shaligo, Lieutenant (g), R.C.N.V.R., Halifax, N.S., 20 February, 1945.
Kyle, Lome Samuel, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Vancouver, B.C., 14 November, 1944.
Ladner, Thomas Ellis, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., 4850 Connaught Drive, Vancouver, B.C., 30 May, 1944.	„	,
Ladner, Thomas Ellis, D.S.C. and Bar, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Vancouver, B.C., 20 February, 1945.	,
Lamb, James Barrett, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 26 December, 1944.
Law, Charles Anthony, A/Lieutenant Commander R.C.N.V.R., 220 Grand Allee, Quebec, P.Q., 30 May, 1944.
Lay, Horatio Nelson, Captain, R.C.N., Walker-ton, Ont., 26 December, 1944.	'
Layard, Arthur Frank Capel, D.S.O., Commander, R.N. (On loan to R.C.N. (St. John)), 27 February, 1945.
Little, Fred, Gunner, R.C.N., Victoria, B.C., 15 August, 1944. _ _
Lucas, Francis William Tindall, Lieutenant Commander (s), R.C.N.V.R., Victoria, B.C., 27 February, 1945.
McCully, W. S. T„ Lieutenant, R.C.N., London, Ont., 3 October, 1944.
McKenzie, Ronald Orr, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.R., Victoria, B.C. (Auckland, N.Z.), 1 January, 1945.
McPhillips, W. C., Sub-Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., London, Ont., 3 October, 1944.
McQuarrie, John Glover, Lieutenant, R.C.N.R., New Westminster, B.C., 8 June, 1944.
MacLeod, Donald MacGregor, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Miami, Florida, 25 July, 1944.
Mabee, Oliver Band, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 3 October, 1944.
Mahoney, Richard Alexander, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Winnipeg, Man., 5 December, 1944.	1
Maitland, John Douglas, D.S.C., A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Vancouver, B.C., 12 September, 1944.
Mawer, Charles Needham, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Calgary, Alta., 11 July, 1944.
Maxwell, Herries Stirling, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Montreal, Que., 1 January, 1945.
Mayne, Arthur Hugh Shaw, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Westmount, Que., 8 June. 1944.
Meredith, Ralph Morton, Lieutenant. R.C.N.R., Dartmouth,. N.S., 26 December, 1944.
Milburn, John Edwards. Lieutenant (T), R.C.N.V.R., Vancouver, B.C., 24 October, 1944.
Miller, Jack, A/Warrant Engineer, R.C.N., Halifax, N.S., 18 July, 1944.
Minogue, Howard Douglas, Lieutenant (E), R.C.N.V.R., Outremont, Que., 12 September,
Moffat, William Purvis. Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Montreal, P.Q., 18 July, 1944.
Monteith, Donald Joel, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Aylmer, Ont., 19 December, 1944.
Naftel, Frederick Robb Knyvet, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Chateauguay Basin, Que., 8 June, 1944.
Nixon, Charles Patrick, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N., Victoria, B.C., 5 December, 1944.
Nixon, Charles Patrick, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N., Victoria, B.C., 18 July, 1944.
Noseworthy, Frank George, Commissioned Engineer, R.C.N.V.R., Kenora, Ont., 19 December, 1944.
O'Brien, John Barry, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Ottawa, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
412	COMMONS
Naval Services-Awards for Gallantry
Mention in Dispatches-Officers-Con.
Osborne, Fred Francis, Lieutenant, R.C.N.R., Guysboro, N.S., 8 June, 1944.
Percy, James Leslie, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 8 June, 1944. Petersen, Charles, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.R., Victoria, B.C., 5 December, 1944. Phillips, Geoffrey, Lieutenant (E),	R.C.N.,
Ottawa, Ont., 29 August, 1944.
Phillips, Raymond, Lieutenant, R.C.N., Ottawa, Ont., 29 August, 1944.
Pickard, Hervert Marquis, Lieutenant, R.C.N. V.R., 297 Yale Ave., Winnipeg, Man., 30 May, 1944.
Platt, John Cleveland, A/Lieutenunt, R.C.N.
V.R., Toronto, Out., 10 October, 1944.
Pratt, James Charles, A/Lieutenanit Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Windsor, Ont., 8 June, 1944. Pringle, Roderick John Cornell, A/Commander (n) R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont. (Halifax, N.S.),
I	January, 1945.
Quinn, Howard Lee, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Victoria, B.C., 1 January, 1945. Rayner, Herbert Sharpies, D.S.C. and Bar, A/Captain, R.C.N., Bedford, N.S. (St. Catharines), 10 October, 1944.
Rayner, Herbert Sharpie®, D.S.C., A/Capbadn, R.C.N., St. Catharines, Ont. (Bedford, N.S.),
II	July, 1944.
Robarts, John Parmenter, Lieutenant, R.C.N. V.R., 931 Waterloo St., London, Ont., 23 May,
1944.
Robinson, Stephen Clive, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Duncan, B.C.. 13 March, 1945.
Ross, John Donald. A/Warrant Engineer, R.C.N.V.R., Fort William, Ont., 1 January,
1945.	_
Ross. James Findlay, Sub-Lieutenant, R.C.N. V.R., 30 Willow St., Truro, N.S., 16 January, 1945.
Russell, P. F. X.. Lieutenant, R.C.N., Halifax, N.S.. 14 November, 1944.
Russell, P. F. X.. Lieutenant, R.C.N., Victoria, B.C. (Halifax, N.S.), 3 October, 1944.
Scobie, Thomas Keith, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Ottawa, On,t., 14 November, 1944.
Shaw, Harold Campbell, Lieutenant, R.C.N.
V.R., Westmount, P.Q., 26 December, 1944. Spicer, William Wright, Lieutenant, R.C.N. V.R., Calgary, Alta. (Regina, Sask.), 1 January, 1945.
Spinney, Charles Wallace, Lieutenant (SB), R.C.N.V.R., Kentville, N.S. 8 June, 1944. Stacey, William Roland, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.R., Vancouver, B.C., 8 June, 1944. Sutton, Arthur William, Lieutenant (T), R.C.N.V.R., Saskatoon, Sask., 31 October, 1944. Sylvester, Roy Howard, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Charlottetown, P.E.I., 1 January, 1945. Taylor, James, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Montreal, P.Q, (Ottawa, Ont.), 1 January, 1945. Thompson, Tbeo Walter, Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Halifax, N.S,, 12 September. 1944. Thomson. George Alexander Victor, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Victoria, B.C., 26 December, 1944.
Thomson, Walter Herbert Bruce, A/Lieutenant Commander. R.C.N.V.R., Hamilton, Out. (Kingston. Out.), 1 January, 1945.
Timbrel], Robert Walter, D.S.C., Lieutenant (A/S) R.C.N., Hollybum, B.C. (Vancouver, B.C.). 5 December. 1944.
Todd. Terence Charles, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., 18 Julv. 1944. Victoria. B.C.
Ward. Walter George, Elect. Lieutenant (R) R.C.N.V.R., Peterborough, Ont.. 14 November. 1944.
TMr. A. L. Macdonald.]
Watson, Alan Graeme, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Out., 29 August, 1944.
Watson, John Manuel, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.R., Owen Sound, Ont., 15 August, 1944.
Welch, Albert Gordon, Lieutenant (N), R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Welland, Robert Philip, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N., McCreary, Man., 14 November, 1944.
Weyman, Ronald C., A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 7 November, 1944.
Whiting, T., A/Warrant Engineer, R.C.N.V.R., Brantford, Ont., 3 October, 1944.
Williams, John Elliott, A/Warrant Engineer, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 18 July, 1944.
Williams, Norman Lindsay, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., Winnipeg, Man., 1 January, 1945.
Willson, William Herbert, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N., Calgary, Alta., 28 November, 1944.
Wilson, Harry Parks, Lieutenant. R.C.N.V.R., 21 Brant Street, Orillia, Ont., 30 May, 1944.
Woods, John Robinson, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., 30 Avondale Road, Toronto, Ont., 2 May, 1944.
Woods, John Robinson, Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R., 30 Avondale Road, Toronto, Ont., 20 June, 1944.
Wright, Charles Edmond, A/Lieutenant Commander, R.C.N.V.R., Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Mention in Dispatches-Ratings
Adams, John Sylvester, A/Leading Cook (s). R.C.N.R., A-2077. St. Peters, Richmond Co., Cape Breton, N.S., 1 January, 1945.
Alerie, John George, Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-5626, Pte. St. Charles, Montreal, P.Q., 8 June, 1944.
Allan, John Neil Murdoch, Ldg. Sick Berth Attendant R.C.N.V.R.. V-4720, Hollyburn, B.C. (Vancouver), 1 January, 1945.
Anderson, Charles Malcolm, Sto. Petty Officer, R.C.N.R., A-2436, Owen Sound, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Anderson. Frank Philip, Sailmakers Mate, R.C.N.R., A-1241, Burgeo, Newfoundland, 26 December, 1944.
Andrews, Alfred John, Yeoman of Signals, R.C.N., 2946, Calgary, Alta., 29 August, 1944.
Armstrong, Frederick Thomas, A/Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-61371, Utterson, Ontario, 29 August, 1944.
Armstrong, Robert Edgar, Petty Officer, R.C.N., 4022, Trenton, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Artmont. Peter, A/Ld. Smn.. R.C.N.V.R., V-17281, London, Ont., 10 October, 1944.
Artmont, Peter, London, Ont., 29 August, 1944.
Aveling. William Haig, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2908, Burnaby, B.C., 14 November, 1944.
Baker. Robert Reginald, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-18007, Kingston, Ont., 15 August, 1944.
Baleh, Kenneth James, E.R.A., 3rd Class, R.C.N.V.R.,	V-37499, London. Ont., 26
December, 1944.
Barker, Robert Alexander, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2112 Esquimalt, B.C., 29 August, 1944.
Barrett, Fred, Chief Petty Officer, Cook (s), R.C.N., (Official Number 40455), Victoria, B.C. (Eburne, B.C.). 26 December, 1944.
Bazley, Albert Samuel, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-37024, Toronto, Out., 29 August, 1944.	.

Naval Services-Awards for Gallantry
Mention in Dispatches-Ratings-Con.
Bell, Clifford John, Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-531G, Montreal, P.Q., 1 January, 1945. Bell, Percy Alexander. A/C E.R.A., R.C.N.V.R., V-25470, Saint John, N.B., I January, 1945. Belliveau, Joseph Gerald Bernes, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-50977, Campbelltown, N.B., 26 December, 1944.
Berryman, John Desmond, A/Leading Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-17162, London Ont., 15 August,
1944.
Bingham, Harold Wesley, A/Petty Officer Coxswain R.C.N.V.R, V-24409, Indian Head, Sask., 1 January, 1945.
Blackburn, James William, A/'Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-49988, Ottawa, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Blair, Douglas Duncan, A/Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-43301, Oshawa, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Bland, James Gordon, Petty Officer Cook (s), R.C.N.V.R., V-30186, Simeoe, Ontario (Grand Forks, B.C.), 1 January, 1945.
Bockus, Donald Roland, Stoker Petty Officer, R.C.N.R., A-4117, Montreal, Que., 26 December, 1944.
Boniowski, Bert Thomas, Leading Sick Berth Attendant, R.C.N.V.R., (Official Number, V-37064), East Kildonan, Man., 27 February,
1945.
Bourne, Leslie Norman, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N., 4023, Vancouver, B.C., 18 July, 1944. Boutilier, Clyde, B.E.M., E.ll.A. 2/c R.C.N.V.R., V-25257, Halifax, N.S. (Bridgeton, Maine,
U.	S.A.), 14 November, 1944.
Bowden, James, Chief Petty Officer (T.C.) R.C. N.R., (Official Number A-4787), Windsor, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Bowyer, M. II., Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R.
V-10607, Hazlet, Sask., 3 October. 1944.
Boyd Clifford Douglas, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N.
V.	R. V-2741, Saint John, N.B., 18 July, 1944. Brace, Ernest Robert, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N.
V.R. V-23145, Verdun, Que,, 18 July, 1944. Brown, Alexander, Stoker Petty Officer R.N., (Official Number D/KX 81709), Winnipeg, Man,, 4 April, 1944.
Brown, David Edgar, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-51452, Eburne, B.C., (Posthumous), 5 December 1944.
Brown, David Henry, Leading Seaman, R.C.N. V.R., V-19206, Roseland, Ont., 5 December, 1944. (Posthumous).
Brown, Earl Clarence, Petty Officer Steward, R.C.N.V.R., V-25256, Endaka, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Brown, Ernest Thomas, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N. V.R., V-23731, Lachine, P.Q., 28 November, 1944.
Bryne, John Eugene, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-49186, Toronto, Ont., 26 December, 1944. Bungay, Creighton Benjamin, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C. N.R., A-5101, Cape Breton, N:S., 15 August, 1944.
Burch, Charles Philip, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., X-2016, London, England, 29 August, 1944.
Butler, Edmund Harold, A/Ldg. Telegraphist, R.C.N.V.R., V-7054, Toronto, Ont., 18 July, 1944.
Cameron, Chester Henry, Ldg. Smn., R.C.N.R., A-2352, Port Colbourne, Ont., 28 November,
1944.
Carey, Arthur Rutherford, Stoker, 1/c R.C.N. V.R., V-40856, Winnipeg, Man., 1 January,
1945.
Carrington, Arthur John, Chief Petty Officer, Tel. R.C.N.V.R., V-13194, Calgary, Alta., 18 July, 1944.
Chapman, Francis Reginald, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 3165, 26 December, 1944, Edmonton, Alta.
Chipperfield, Walter Francis, Electrical Artificer 4/c, R.C.N.V.R., V-46377, Calgary, Alta., 26 December, 1944.
Coke, Robert Henry, Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-6699, Toronto, Ont., 19 December, 1944.
Cole, James William, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-89S9, Hamilton, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Coleman, Charles Robert, Stoker 1/c R.C.N. V.R., V-46725, Victoria, B.C., 5 December, 1944.
Connolly, James Francis, Able Seaman, R.C.N., 4264, Vancouver, B.C., 24 October, 1944.
Cowan, Ronald, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2670, Winnipeg, Man., 1 January, 1945.
Crossi, Jack Alexander, Petty Officer Telegraphist, R.C.N.V.R. (Official Number V-30004), Victoria, B.C., 5 December, 1944.
Cummings, William Alfred, A/Ldg. Stoker, R.C.N.V.R., V-947, Toronto, Ont., 15 August,
1944.
Cundell, D'Arcy, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-6607, Ottawa, Ont., 28 November, 1944.
Cuthbert, Thomas Frederick, A/Leading Seaman. R.C.N.V.R., V-24058, Winnipeg, Man., 10 October, 1944.
Dann, George William. Able Seaman (Radar I) R.C.N.V.R., V-17463, London, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Davey, John Henry, Petty Officer R.C.N.V.R., V-1071, Charlottetown, P.E.I., 1 January,
1945.
Dempster, Lawrence Atherton, Petty Officer, R.C.N., 3782, Calgary, Alta., 11 July, 1944.
Desrochers, Gabriel Symon, Stoker Petty Officer R.C.N.V.R.,	V-7976, Houston, Texas
(Penetanguishene, Ont.), 1 January, 1945.
Dibnah, Quentin Harold, Chief Petty Officer Writer, R.C.N., 40895, Winnipeg, Man., 1 January, 1945,
Doyle, D. F., Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2204, Halifax, N.S., 3 October, 1944.
Drew, Gordon Albert, A/Ldg. Smn. R.D.F. 3, R.C.N. 3877, Victoria, B.C. (Calgary, Alta.), 1 January, 1945.
Dryden, Albert Gordon, A/E.R.A. 4/c R.C.N. V.R., V-24854, Rainy River, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Dryden, Henry Norris, Chief Stoker, R.C.N., 21304, Halifax, NjS., 12 September, 1944.
Duncan. George Edward, Shipwright 3/c R.C.N.V.R., V-39965, Lachute, P.Q., 14 November, 1944.
Dunphy, Harold Edward, Chief Stoker Petty Officer, R.C.N.R., A2047, Kingston, Ont., 1 January, 1945,
Eakins. John Smiley, Prob.-Sub-Lieutenant, R.C.N.V.R.,	V-34738, Toronto, Ont., 5
December, 1944.
Earthv. Bernard Alfred, Stoker Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-30278, Victoria, B.C., 26 December, 1944.
Easter, Kenneth Lome, Stoker 1/c R.C.N.V.R., V-63523, Prescott, Ont,, 5 December, 1944.
Edge, Harry, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-12551. Edmonton, Alta. (Victoria, B.C.), 1 January, 1945.	*
Erriekson, Leonard Gustave, Chief Stoker, R.C.N.V.R.. V-12381, Edmonton, Alta., 1 January, 1945.
[Stage Direction]
Naval Services-Awards for Gallantry
Mention in Dispatches-Ratings-Con.
Evans, Frank Stanley, Ldg. Signalman, R.C.N., 3909, Nanaimo, B.C., 2G December, 1944.
Evans, William Thomas, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N. V.R.. V-45046, Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Kairnie, James Suttle, Ldg. Smn., R.C.N., 4091, Ottawa, Ont., 5 December, 1944.
Faulkner, Richard Albert, E.R.A., 3/c R.C.N.R., A-4678, Owen Sound, Ont., 15 August, 1944.
Fennell, Marcus Buller, Ldg. Signalman, R.C.N. V.IL, V-11682, Saskatoon, Sask., 1 January, 1945.
Ferrier, Louis Rose, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N.Y.R., V-10S44, Regina, Sask., 24 October, 1944.
Finch, John Ray, Leading Seaman, R.C.N., 3840, New Westminster, B.C., 15 August, 1944.
Fleming, Alexander Hay, Chief Stoker, R.C.N.R., A-1354, Montreal, Que., 1 January, 1945.
Fleming, Joseph Keith, E.R.A. 4/e R.C.N.V.R., V-55387, Malartic, P.Q., 8 June, 1944.
Fletcher, Arlington George, A/Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N.R., A-1455, Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Fletcher, Robert John, Stoker 1/c, R.C.N.Y.R., V-6670, Ottawa, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Foley, A., Stoker Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-31892, Glace Bay, N.S., 3 October, 1944.
Ford, James Thomas, Stoker Petty Officer, R.C.N.R., A-2796, Channel, Newfoundland, 14 November, 1944.
Fortune, John Terrence Martin, A/Petty Officer H.S.D., V-15166, Prince Rupert, B.C., 4 July, 1944.
Fox, John Hamilton, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-52123, Toronto, Ont., 27 February, 1945.
French, Cyril John, Ldg. Smn., R.C.N.V.R., V-11558, Saskatoon, Sask., 14 November, 1944.
Friest, Howard Kenneth, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-495G8, Riverside, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Fryer, James Nolan, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-5172, Montreal, Que., 3 October, 1944.
Fuller, Bernard George, E.R.A. 3/c, R.C.N.V.R., V-1282G, Edmonton, Alta. (Winnipeg, Man.), 1 Januarv, 1945.
Gander, G. I., Stoker I (M), R.C.N.V.R., V-45526, Blenheim, Ont., 3 October, 1944.
Garand, Leo Robert Omer, Petty Officer Motor Mechanic, R.C.N.V.R., Official Number V-53424, Dunrea, Man., 13 January, 1945.
Gardiner, George, Electrical Artificer 2/c, R.C.N., 40814, Victoria, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Ger.rie, Francis Davis, A/Petty Officer (T.C.), R.C.N.R.,	A-4257, Owen Sound, Ont.
(Toronto). 1 January, 1945.
Gibson, William John, Leading Stoker, R.C.N.R., A-1495, Montreal East, P.Q., 1 January, 1945.
Gosnell, Henry William (Posthumous), A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N., 2791, Saint John, N.B., 11 July, 1944.
Grange, A. E., Petty Officer Cook (s), R.C.N.V.R., V-17386, Goderich, Out., 3 October, 1944.
Grant, Ronald, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-4779, Norham, Out., 1 January, 1945.
Grantham, William Hugh, Yeoman of Signals, R.C.N.V.R.,	V-9532, Winnipeg, Man., 14
November, 1944.
Gray, David, A/Petty Officer (T), R.C.N.V.R., V-23092, Lachine, P.Q., 1 January, 1945.

Green, Virgil, A/Ldg. Stoker, R.C.N.V.R., Y-54G09, Guelph, Ont., 8 June, 1944. Halliday, Ronald Laurence, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-38193, Vancouver, B.C., 20 December, 1944.
Hanley, Daniel James, Leading Supply Assistant, R.C.N.V.R., V-2962, Saint John, N.B., 1 January, 1945.
Hannivan, J. J., Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.E., V-39781, Mimico, Ont., 3 October, 1944. Harrietha, Michael Angelo, Sto. Petty Officer, R.C.N.R., A-4664, Passchendale, Cape Breton, N.S., 1 January, 1945.
Harrison, William J., Petty Officer Tel., R.C.N.V.R., V-25129, Parrsboro, N.S.,	14
November, 1944.
Hatchwell, Norman James, Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-22410, Mount Dennis, Ont.,
I	January, 1945.
Haugen, Gerald Ludvig, Stoker Petty Officer. R.C.N.R., A-764, 10 Albro Lake Road, Dartmouth, N.S., 8 June, 1944.
Haywood, James Mervin, A/Chief Ordnance Artificer, R.C.N., 40727, Port Arthur, Ont., 11 July, 1944.
Hemsley, Benjamin, E. R. A., 3/c R.C.N.V.R., V-19282, Windsor, Ont., 1 January, 1945. Hockley, Ronald Charles. Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2188, Dartmouth, Halifax Co., N.S., 14 November, 1944.
Honsinger, Benjamin Paul, Able Seaman, R.C.N. V.R., V-19515, St. Thomas, Ont., 29 August, 1944.
Honsinger, Benjamin Paul, St. Thomas, Ont.,
II	July, 1944.
Houle, Romeo,, Chief Motor Mechanic, 3/c R.C.N.V.R., V-4196, Montreal, Que., 1 January, 1945.
Houston, Reginald Strachan, C.E.R.A., R.C.N. V.R., V-7820, Toronto, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Howitt, John William, A/Leading Stoker (M), R.C.N.V.R., V-25836, Alberni, B.C., 2 May, 1944.
Hughes, George Frederick Arthur, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-14227, New Westminster, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Hurtubise, Albert Joseph, A/Ldg. Smn. (T), R.C.N.V.R., V-6971, Ottawa, Ont., 24 October,
1944.
Hutchinson, Leon Gordon, Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-233, Sydney, N.S., 14 November, 1944.
fmrie, Dinnie Donald, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-45103, Lachine, P.Q., 3 October, 1944. Irving, George Quinney, Chief Stoker, R.C.N., 21328. Simcoe, Ont., 14 November, 1944. Jeannotte. R. J. (Posthumous), Telegraphist. R.C.N.V.R., V-11421, St. Walburg, Sask., 3 October, 1944.
Jodoin, Lawrence James (Posthumous), A/Able Seaman. R.C.N.V.R.. V-57427, Edmonton, Alta., 2G December, 1944.
Johnstone, David, Petty Officer Steward, R.C.N.V.R., V-12503, Edmonton, Alta. (Scotland), 1 January, 1945.
Kaplan, Irving Jack, A/Yeoman of Signals, R.C.N.V.R.,	V-23343, Montreal, P.Q.,	14
November, 1944.
Kaplan, Irving Jack, 5 December, 1944. Kataberg, Henry, E.R.A.,	4/e,	R.C.N.V.R.,
V-46233, The Pas, Manitoba. 1 January,
1945.
Keep, Albert John, A/Regulating Petty Officer. R.C.N.V.R., V-10168 Esquimalt, B.C. (Regina, Sask.), 1 January, 1945.

Naval Services-Awards for Gallantry
Mention in Dispatches-Ratings-Con.
Keleher, Francis, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-7776, Toronto, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Kelly, William Ambrose, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2740, Victoria, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Kenelce, Kenneth Richard, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N.V.R., V-12424, Edmonton, Alta., 19 December, 1944.
Knight, Robert Dell, Ordinary Seaman, R.C.N. V.R., V-53675, Cranbrook, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
La Belle. Rowel Joseph. Petty Officer Telegraphist, R.C.N.V.R., V-6282, Ottawa, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Laderoute, Norbert Joseph, C.E.R.A. R.C.N.R., A-16G6, Fort William, Ont., 18 July, 1944.
Lang, George Pryce, Chief Stoker, R.C.N., 21372, Montreal, Que., 11 July, 1944.
Lauder, Lester John, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N. V.R., V-5731, Montreal. Que., 18 July, 1944.
LeBeau, Cyril Arthur, A/E.R.A. 4/c, R.C.N.V.R., V-42389, West Kildonan, Man., 20 March, 1945.
LeBlanc, Hubert, Chief Motor Mechanic, R.C.N.R., A-1960, Cape Breton, N.S.,	13
March, 1945.	.
Liabo, Halvor Vilhelm, C.E.R.A., R.C.N.R., A-2604, Haugesund, Norway, 20 March, 1945.
Liddell, Robert, Able Seaman, R.C.N.R., A-4701, Kingston, Ont., 26 December, 1944.
MacKenzie, Ian Daniel, E.R.A. 3/c, R.C.N., 21684, Toronto, Ont. (Halifax, N.S.), 1 January, 1945.
MacLeod, Robert Haig, A/Able Seaman, R.C.N. V.R., V-34148, Saskatoon, Sask., 10 October, 1944.
MacNair, George Malcolm, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-50984, Bathurst, N.B., 12 September, 1944.
Maloney, James Wilbert, Leading Seaman, R.C.N.R., A-2873, St. Andrews West, Ont., 26 December, 1944.
Mann, Clement Cecil Wallace, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2609, Victoria, B.C., 14 November, 1944.
Mann, Lawrence Pentreith. A/P.O. Telegraphist, R.C.N., 3361, Victoria, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Manning, John, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-18448, Oshawa, Ont., 29 August, 1944.
Mannix, George Henry, Signalman, R.C.N., 4760, Saanich, B.C., 29 August, 1944.
Markle, John William, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N. V.R., V-7909, Swansea, Ont., 5 December, 1944.
Marshall, Robert, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 4775, Regina, Sask., 8 June, 1944.
Martin, Lloyd Angus, A/Leading Stoker (M), R.C.N.V.R., V-1603, Hopefield, P.E.I., 1 January, 1945.
Mason, Cecil, Chief Stoker, R.C.N.,	21418,
Ottawa, Ont. (Canning, Kings Co., N.S.), 1 January, 1945.
Mason, Charles R. (Posthumous), Leading Seaman, R.C.N., 3884, Vancouver, B.C., 3 October, 1944.
Matthews, John Leslie, C.P.O. Tel., R.C.N., 2559, Victoria, B.C. (Swift Current, Sask.), 1 January, 1945.
Maxwell, Gordon Douglas, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N. V.R., V-27130, Mount Dennis, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
McAuley, Edwin Benedict, A/Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-59006, Oshawa, Ont.. 14 November, 1944.
McCabe, John, E.R.A. 4/c, R.C.N.V.R., V-38932, Windsor, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
McCarthy. Ramon Bruce, Motor Mechanic, R.C.N.V.R., V-72290, Vancouver, B.C., 14 November, 1944.
McCartney, John Lockhart, Supply Assistant, R.C.N.V.R., V-43125, Saint John, N.B., 11 July, 1944.
McCartney, John Lockhart, Supply Assistant, R.C.N.V.R., V-43125, Saint John, N.B., 29 August, 1944.
McClure, William Arthur, Acting Petty Officer, R.C.N., 4453, Wellington, B.C., 15 August, 1944.
McDonald, George John, Paris, Ont., A/Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-32867, 5 December, 1941-	,	„,
McDonald, J. O., Ord. Art. 2/c, R.C.N.V.R., V-11813, Prince Albert, Sask., 3 October, 1944.
McGee, Aubrey, Acting Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2580, Halifax, N.S., 4 July, 1944.
McGee, Robert Emmett, Retty Officer Motor Mechanic, R.C.N.V.R., V-25243, New Glasgow, N.S., 14 November, 1944.
McGinn, George Hunter, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N., 21592, Kamloops, B.C., 18 July, 1944.
McLean, Leslie Charles Bruce, E.R.A. 3/c R.C.N., 21807, Victoria, B.C., 24 October, 1944. McLeod, Francis Kelly, A/Able Seaman, R.C.N. V.R., V-60713, Saint John, N.B., 26 December,
1944.
McMillan, Duncan Joseph, Stoker Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-16732, Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
McMillan, Robert Strang, E.R.A. 3/c R.C.N.V.R., V-30347, Victoria, B.C., 19 December, 1944. McM'ullin, Thomas Alexander, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-43497, Sydney, NjS., 20 March,
1945.
Mein, Stewart Ferguson, Chief Ordnance Artificer R.C.N. 40626, Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, 11 July, 1944.
Miller, Lyle, A/Petty Officer Coxswain, R.C.N. V.R., V-8903, Baden, Ont. (Fergus, Ont.). 1 January, 1945.
Millions, Arthur Stanley, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N. V.R., V-18430, South Porcupine, Ont., 15 August, 1944.
Milne, George Ralph, Yeoman of Signals, R.C.N.. 4773, Sit. Hyaeinthe, Que. (Regina, Sask.), 1 January, 1945.
Montgomery, Joseph Cameron, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-7910, Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Montgomery, William Merrill, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2561, Eastview, Onit., 8 June. 1944.
Moon, Harold Clifford, Leading Telegraphist. R.C.N., 3866, AVeston, Ont. (Toronto, Ont.), 1 January, 1945.
Moorcroft, Thomas Ediward, A/PO, R.C.N., 4055, Vancouver, B.C.. 14 November, 1944.
Moore, Clarence Watson, Petty Officer, R.C.N.
ALR., V-5547, Montreal, P.Q., 1 January, 1945. Moore, Raymond Alexander, E.R.A., 3/e R.C.N., 21764, Durham, England. (Elmsd'ale, Hants Co., N.S.), 1 January, 1945.
Mulligan, Roland James, A/Petty Officer Tel.. R.C.N., 2784, Big Valley, Alta., 14 November.
1944.
Munt, Oliver Philip, Chief Stoker (Fire Fighter), R.C.N.V.R., V-46590, Truro. N.S., S June, 1944.
Newman, William Thomas, Able Seaman, R.C.N.R., A-2808, Verdun, Que., 1 January,
1945.
North, Lloyd A7ictor. A/Petty Officer. R.C.N.
V.R., V-10323, Regina, Saskatchewan, 8 June, _ 1944.
Novel,. Maurice, Supply7 Petty Officer. R.C.N. V.R., V-587, Montreal, P.Q., 19 December. 1944.
*16.	COMMONS
Naval Services-Awards for Gallantry___
Mention in Dispatches-Ratings-Con.
O'Brien, John Gerald, E.R.A. 3/c R.C.N.V.R., V-48991, Montreal, P.Q., 4 July, 1944.
O'Hara, George Dennis, Leading Tel., RjC.N. Y.R., V-14328, Vancouver, B.C., 12 September,
1944.
Oneschuk, William, Ldg. Sick Berth Attendant, R.C.N.V.R., V-34142, Windsor, Ont., 13 March,
1945.
Orton, Alfred Thomas, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N., 4050, Galt, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Ovens, Joseph, Stoker Petty Officer, R.C.N.R., A-4046, Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Page, Gerald Frederick, Sick Berth Attendant. R.C.N.V.R., V-33556, Kapuskasing, Ont., 1 J" 3,nusi'V 1045
Palmer, Harold, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N.R., A-653, Conivay, P.E.I., 1 January, 1945. Palmer, Walter Raymond, C.P.O., R.C.N.R., A-2798, Hamilton Beach, Ont., 19 December,
1944.
Parker, John Edward Fitzgerald, Chief Stoker.
R.C.N., 21345, Red Deer, Alta., 18 July, 1944. Patry, J. E., Chief Stoker, R.C.N., 21178, Quebec, Que., 3 October, 1944.
Patton, Clifford, Petty Officer Cook (s), R.C.N. V.R. V-3G340, Vancouver, B.C., 1 January,
1945.
Pederson, Magnus, A/Chief Ordnance Artificer, R.C.N.V.R.,	V-11549, Victoria, B.C.,	15
August, 1944.
Peters, Herbert Thomas James, Chief Petty Officer (H.S.D.), R.C.N., 3437, Halifax, N.S., (Victoria, B.C.), 1 January, 1945.
Pineau, Joseph Harold, Petty Officer, R.C.N. V.R.. V-16191, Port Arthur, Ont., 26 December, 1944.
Pitts, John Maurice, Leading Seaman, R.C.N., 4341, Regina, Sask., 14 November, 1944. Polischuk, Fred, Petty Officer, R.C.N. V.R., V-7424, Toronto, Ont., 11 July, 1944. Polischuck, John, E.R.A. 4/c,	R.C.N.V.R.,
V-24915, Winnipeg, Man., 1 January, 1945. Porter, Allan, Able Seaman, R.C.N.R., A-1533, Fox Island, Newfoundland, 8 June, 1944. Potter, Lawrence Irvin Willis, Sick Berth Attendant, R.C.N.V.R., V-44883, Grand Valley, Out., 19 December, 1944.
Potts, Judson Wallace, Chief Stoker Petty Officer, R.C.N., 21272, Halifax, N.S.,	15
August, 1944.
Puncheon, Alfred Morley, E.R.A. 3/e R.C.N.
V.R., V-7325, Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945. Rainsford, Charles Frederick, C.B.R.A., R.C.N., 21531, Victoria, B.C., 11 July, 1944.
Ridge, Samuel Archibald, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2226, Errington, B.C. I Newoastle-on-Tyne, Eng.), 14 November, 1944.
Rigby, E. A., Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2796, Halifax, N.S., 3 October, 1944.
Robertson, Charles, Chief Stoker, R.C.N.V.R., V-25575, Victoria, B.C. (Toronto, Ont.), 1 January, 1945.
Rodgerson, Morrill Henry, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N.R., A-4854, Shag Harbour, N.S., 8 June, 1944.
Rowan, Robert, A/Yeoman of Signals, R.C.N., 3623, Victoria, B.C., 28 November, 1944.	.
Rowe, William Arthur, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N. V.R., V-7966, Toronto, Out., 5 December, 1944.

Salsiccioli, Peter Paul, D.S.M., Chief Engine-room Artificer, R.C.N., 21602, Trail, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Saretsky, R. M., Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-45575, Humboldt, Sask., 3 October, 1944.
Scott, Bruce Simon, A/Petty Officer, R.C.N. V.R., V-2435, Saint John, N.B., 8 June, 1944.
Searway, Norman Lawrence, Petty Officer (T.C.)	R.C.N.V.R., V-7766, Toronto, Ont.,
1 January, 1945.
Second, George Erwin, Able Seaman, R.C.N. V.R., V-28165, St. Catharines, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Shannahan, Leonard Garfield, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N., 4821, Ottawa, Ont. (Victoria, B.C.), 1 January, 1945.
Short, Samuel, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N., 2681, Toronto, Ont. (Halifax, N.S.), 20 February, 1945.
Shute, Thomas, A/Petty Officer Tel., R.C.N.V.R., (Official Number V-17066), London, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Simmons, Ernest Frederick, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N.V.R.,	V-14912, Vancouver, B.C.,	1
January, 1945.
Simpson, Herbert Douglas, AB, R.C.N.V.R., V-57265, Wallaceburg, Ont., 26 December, 1944.
Singleton, Leonard Charles Holmes, Able Seaman, R.C.N., 4123, Sarnia, Ont., 5 December, 1944.
Skavn, Freddy Ove Friberg, A/Petty Officer (H.S.D.), R.C.N.V.R., V-2565, Little River, Saint John, N.B., 1 January, 1945.
Snider, Sidney, Able Seaman, R.C.N.R., A-5526, Windsor, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Snow, Henry, Able Seaman, R.C.N.R., A-2212, Regina, Sask., 8 June, 1944.
Spragg, Jonathan Hecry, Sick Berth Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-2376, Saint John, N.B., 1 January, 1945.
Steadman, Leslie John, Able Seaman, R.C.N.V.R.,	V-24338, Winnipeg, Man., 1
January, 1945.
Stephenson, Carmen Ernest (Posthumous), A/Leading Seaman, R.C.N. V.R.,	V-5646,
Montreal, P.Q., 8 June, 1944.
Stewart, Ernest Stanley, Signalman, R.C.N.V.lt., V-8497, Hamilton, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Strachan, Douglas Robert, Chief Petty Officer, R.C.N.R., A-4161, Toronto, Out., 8 June, 1944.
Stubbing, Albert George, Leading Seaman, R.C.N.V.R., V-40004, Humberstone, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Sweet, Walter Valentine, Stoker Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-10003, Regina, Sask., 8 June, 1944.
Tate, J. F., E.R.A. 4/c, R.C.N., 21393, Victoria, B.C., 3 October, 1944.
Taylor, Kenneth Norman, Telegraphist, R.C.N., 4259, Powell River, B.C., 26 December, 1944.
Taylor, Reginald, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N.V.R., V-16072, Fort William, Ont., 8 June, 1944.
Thomasset, G. M., Petty Officer, R.C.N., 3396, Fife Lake, Sask., 29 August, 1944.
Townson, Douglas Edmund, A/Leading Seaman, R.C.N., 3423, Edmonton, Alta., 14 November, 1944.
Tuttle, Ernest Charles, A/Sto. Petty Officer, R.C.N.R.,	A-4137, Morrisburg, Ont., 26
December, 1944.
Tweedie. James, A/Ldg. Smn., R.C.N .V.R., V-5718, Verdun, P.Q., 29 August, 1944.

War Appropriation-Naval Services
Mention in Dispatches-Ratings-Con.
Vincent,	James Wesley,	Yeo. of Sigs.,
R.C.N.V.R., V-7601, Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Virtue, Reid Howard, A/Able Seaman, V-65076, Bowmanville, Ont., 20 March, 1945.
Vodden, Edward George, A/Petty Officer, V-71909, Chilliwack, B.C., 1 January, 1945.
Von Zuben, Adolph, Steward, R.C.N.V.R., V-45167, Toronto, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Warburton, Robert William. A/C.P.O.. R.C.N.R., A-298, 15 Duff St., Hamilton, Ont., 20 March, 1945.
Ward, Dennis Harry, Able Seaman, R.C.N .V.R., V-10264, Regina, Sask., 14 November, 1944.
Warnock, Raymond Russell, A/P.O., R.CJY, 4580, Vancouver, B.C., 26 December, 1944.
Walden. Frederick Arthur, Motor Mechanic, R.C.N.V.R., V-27674, Toronto, Ont., 30 January, 1945.
West, George, P.O., R.C.N.V.R.. V-18132, Kingston, Ont., 14 November, 1944.
Westbrook. George Arnold, Petty Officer, R.C.N., 3574, 32 Victoria Drive, Vancouver, B.C., 20 March, 1945.
Williams, Owen Glendower, Supply Petty Officer, R.C.N.V.R., V-11263, Saskatoon, Sask., 1 January, 1945.
Wilson, Cyril Herbert Gordon, Chief Yeo. of Sigs.,	R.C.N.,	X-60922,	Victoria, B.C., 14
November, 1944.
Wilson,	William Joseph	Henry,	P.O. Tel.,
R.C.N., 3062, Windsor, Ont., 29 August. 1944.
Woods, MerVyl Harrison, Able Seaman, R.C.N. V.R., V-50658, Montreal, Que., 21 November, 1944.
Workman, Garnet Rodney, Able Seaman, R.C.N. v .R., V-52749, Kemptville, Ont., 26 December, 1944.
Wright,	Edward	Joseph,	A/P.O.,	R.C.N.V.R.,
V-23143, Outremont, P.Q., 1 January, 1945.
Yarrow,	Wilbert	Lyon, Steward,	R.G.N.V.R.,
V-4765, Trenton, Ont., 1 January, 1945.
Yetman, Arnold Charles, Petty Officer, R.C.N. V.R., V-5868, Montreal, Que., 26 December,
1944.
Zelinsky, Fred, Cook (S), R.C.N.V.R., V-35076, Reserve Mines, Cape Breton, N.S., 1 January,
1945.
Bronze Star Medal (U.S.A.)
Dolmage, Wilfred Gordon, Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N. V.R., 2530 York St., Vancouver, B.C., 18 September, 1944.	. .
Grant, Harold Taylor Wood, D.S.O., Captain, R.C.N., 148 Cooper St., Ottawa, Ont., 14 September, 1944.
Lepage, Theodore Nelson, Lieut. Cdr., R.C.N. V.R., 2592 Nelson Ave. W., Vancouver, B.C., 18 September, 1944.
Legion of Merit (U.S.A.)
Storrs. Anthony Hubert Gleadow, A/Cdr., R.C.N.R., 11 Commodore Apts., Oxford St., Halifax, N.S., 14 September, 1944.
Bronze Medal-Order Orange Nassau Netherlands
Hardy, Arthur John, L/Signalman, R.C.N. V.R., V-8319, 62 Bay St., S., Hamilton, Ont., 31 August, 1944.
Non-Operational Honours and Awards
Non-operational awards granted to personnel of the Naval Service, from March 7, 1944, up
to and including March 20, 1945. Companion of the Most Honourable Order
of the Bath	 1
Commander of the Most Excellent Order
of the British Empire	 2
Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the
British Empire	 23
Member of the Most Excellent Order of the
British Empire	 14
Royal Red Cross	 1
Associate Royal Red Cross	 1
British Empire Medal	 15
Albert Medal	 2
Royal Humane Society Medal	 2
Total	 61
Pacific war. I have said many times, as I have said to-night that the role which we assumed at the beginning of the war, namely, that of convoying merchant ships over the Atlantic still remains our chief and our primary task. Last autumn many people felt that the war in Europe was about to end and we were urged1 by some to detach some of our Atlantic farces and send them into the Pacific, with a view to their acquiring experience of naval conditions in that theatre of war. We did not respond to. this suggestion, and I think we were right not to do so. Until the great Atlantic campaign is over, that vast undertaking which ranges over an area extending from the gulf of St. Lawrence on the west to the northern Russian ports on the east, and from the Arctic circle to south of the cape of Good Hope-until that great campaign has been successfully terminated we cannot divert our escort ships to other areas and other waters.
This is not to say that we have given no thought to the war in the Pacific. We have not forgotten that we were one of the first countries, if indeed not the first, to declare war against Japan. I may tell the committee that many communications have passed and many conversations have been held between representatives of our service on the one hand and officials of the British admiralty and of the United States navy on the other with regard to the Pacific war.
Already a fine cruiser, His Majesty's Canadian ship Uganda, acquired from the British government, has been made ready for the Pacific war and she is at this very moment in Pacific waters under the command of Captain
E.	R. Mainguy, O.B.E., of the Royal Canadian Navy. Within a short time we shall commission another Canadian cruiser. It was our wish that Canadian cruisers should bear the names of our provinces just as our destroyers bear the names of Canadian rivers and our frigates and corvettes bear the names of Canadian cities and towns. But the Uganda had
[Stage Direction]
418	COMMONS
War Appropriation-Naval Services >
already seen gallant service with the British navy, although she was practically a new cruiser when we acquired her, and for this reason, as well as at the earnest request of the Protectorate of Uganda and of the British Admiralty we did not choose to change her name.
But for the new cruiser we have selected the name of the senior Canadian province, and within a few weeks His Majesty's Canadian ship Ontario, carrying painted1 on her funnel, as all Canadian warships now do, a large maple leaf, will be placed in commission. A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of inspecting the Ontario in the great Belfast yard1 where she is being built. She is thoroughly modern in every respect. Her command will be entrusted to a proved veteran of the sea, Captain Harold Grant, D.S.O., of the Royal Canadian. Navy.
With these two cruisers we intend to send into the Pacific two aircraft carriers if the necessary arrangements for their acquisition can be made, and I believe they can be made. So far as naval personnel are concerned, these carriers will be manned entirely by Canadians. The flying personnel will come from the British fleet air arm, but many of them I hope will be Canadians who have enlisted in that tine service.
Along with these two cruisers and two aircraft carriers we plan to send a number of destroyers and frigates. I am not able to state publicly the exact number of ships we shall send, or the exact number of men involved; but I can say that the Canadian naval unit in the Pacific, while it will not at all compare in size or strength with the British naval force or with .the magnificent United States Pacific fleet, will nevertheless be a good deal more than a mere token force. It will, I believe, worthily represent Canada in the Pacific war.
The Naval Service. Ninety per cent of our navy men belong to the Naval Volunteer Reserve. They are civilians who have turned to the sea. They are men who left their farms and their factories, their offices and their books; but they have learned quickly and well. Many of them are now in command of ships. I pay my tribute to these men, but I do not forget those officers and ratings of the permanent naval force of Canada who. have done so much to train and to teach the navy of to-day.
The lot of these permanent force men. in our three services was not a happy one between the wars. Reductions that were made year by year in the estimates for defence services were followed by corresponding reductions in personnel, and the life of the permanent force officer was one of uncertainty and unhappiness. I have always held the view that if we are to have defence services at all we should

attract able young men into these services. To do this it is necessary that they be guaranteed some continuity and certainty of employment, and we should also give them in peace some of the tributes we are glad1 to pay to them in war.
The marvel is not that our defence services have made some mistakes; the wonder is that they have done as well as they have done in this war, when one considers the difficulties and hardships that these services have had1 to endure.
I pay tribute also to those civilian members of the naval service-clerical staffs, supervisors, officials of various kinds, labourers in our dockyards and elsewhere who have played so important and valued a part in the development of our naval effort.
I should also like to thank once more the great host of people in Canada who are not members of the naval service, whether on the civilian or on the uniformed side, who have done so much to encourage and sustain the naval effort. I include in this group members of the Navy League in all parts of Canada, officers of Sea Cadet corps, members of women's auxiliaries, civic officials and others in hundreds of Canadian cities and towns who have been active in the adoption of ships and in the provision of comforts for them, and thousands of other persons whom time does not permit me to mention by name but who have in numberless ways cheered and encouraged the naval service in its work.
In 1941 when we had to decide whether certain buildings to be erected in Canada should be of permanent or temporary construction, it became important to come to some decision as to the size of our post-war navy. In that year, the government took the view that the post-war navy should be, in round figures, 9,000 officers and men. That is not a large figure, I admit. It may be that it should be regarded only as a minimum, but at all events it is a figure five times greater than the figure of September, 1939.
The permanent naval force after the war will be supported, of course, by the Naval Reserve and the Naval Volunteer Reserve, and a committee of naval officers has prepared a carefully worked out and comprehensive report for the future organization of these reserves.
As I present, for the fifth time, the estimates of the Department of Naval Service, I look back with pride on what the officers and men of the department, supported by the Canadian people, have accomplished in five and a half years. The six ships of war have been multiplied sixtyfold and the 1,700 men on active service have been increased more than fiftyfold.

War Appropriation-Naval Services
Our shipyards, which were dormant before the war, have awakened into vigorous and fruitful activity and have built more than 90 per cent of the ships that we now use and they have as well built many ships for other members of the united nations.
Our repair facilities have been developed; docks and marine railways have been established; permanent homes have been created for nearly all of the Naval Reserve Divisions, which at the beginning of the war were all living in rented quarters. Training establishments of various kinds have been set up where our men receive not only the general training that all sailors require, but where they can acquire, and where many have already acquired, skill in such trades as those of machinists, electrical artificers, radio artificers, shipwrights, welders, motor mechanics and the like. That taken together, Mr. Chairman, represents a story of growth and progress that nobody dreamed of in the early days of the war.
In those early days, in the autumn of 1939, the Canadian naval staff visualized our navy's task, to put it in their own words, as "the giving of reasonable protection to the trade in our harbours and in the focal points in the vicinity of our coasts." A few months later it was felt that the utmost' number of new recruits that could be handled in the Canadian navy was 4,500. Any others in excess of that figure should go, so it -was recommended, to the British admiralty for service with the Royal Navy. These estimates and recommendations were no doubt based upon Canada's naval experience in the last great war. But they fell far short of the actual performance. Bit by bit the strength of the navy has grown, and its responsibilities have increased. Our men have fought on every sea of the world. They have brought honour and glory to this land. They have been actors in a great drama which now seems to be drawing steadily, inexorably, to its close. Soon they will come back

those who are left-back over the great oceans where their laurels and honours have been gathered. They will come back to knit up the ravelled skein of their lives, and some of them will dwell far from that element which was once their home and their battle ground. Yet I venture to say that so long as memory lasts, the recollection of these great days will be with them, and along with the consciousness of duty done, they will carry in their hearts forever the image of a gallant ship and the spell of the great sea.
Mr. STIRLING:: The story which the minister has unfolded to us this evening is just one more chapter in the grand account which will be handed down to those who come after us of the accomplishments of the Royal Can-32283-27J
adian Navy. He will agree with me that he has done no more than sketch in the outline of what has been accomplished for Canada by Canada's navy. There must come to our minds many questions which we should like to ask that would enable him to amplify the story which he has told, but we realize we must wait for the answers until later days when more information can be given.
I was very glad that the minister referred to the great difficulties which were encountered in those earlier years when the idealism of disarmament was overshadowing us. But that Canada's navy has been able to accomplish what it has accomplished is due at least in part to the plans and the groundwork laid down after the great war in preparation for the time of pressure whenever it should come. I think of Sir Charles Kingsmill, of Rear Admiral Hose, and of Vice Admiral Nelles, when references are made to the carrying out of these plans. Very roughly the plan was that there should be a small, compact, highly trained permanent force, and that we should always be able to call on the assistance of the Royal Navy and of all the training necessary with that highly trained force. 1 remember that just ten years ago the Royal Canadian Navy permanent force consisted of 900 officers and men, that the Royal Canadian Naval Reserve consisted of just under 200 officers and men and that the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve consisted of just under 1,000 officers and men. Adding these up you will find a total in the blue uniform of just over 2,000, and the minister tells us this evening that the figure of last year has gone on growing and that now there are 90,000 officers and men serving under the white ensign.
I am glad he paid tribute to those chiefs of the naval staff whom we look back on and whose service we appreciate. I remember so well when the idealism of disarmament was over us all, as I phrase it, having a conversation with Rear Admiral Hose. He was then chief of the naval staff, and indeed pretty near the end of his tether of endurance because of those cuts in estimates which were considered necessary and because of the criticism which unfortunately was too often levelled at Canada's small navy. I met him again on the eve of his retirement. He had just returned from a trip across Canada, the purpose of which was to visit all the establishments of the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve. He was extremely pleased that at the time of his retirement he should find those various centres in all the provinces of Canada, seven-eighths of them far removed from salt water, not only set up to complement, small though that complement was, but. with a waiting list. And, Mr. Chairman, it is surely a tribute to the

War Appropriation-Naval Services
people of Canada that, whether it be the call of blood or whatever the reason may be, when the first call came the people responded from every province, as the minister has recounted this evening.
On this occasion I should like to pay my tribute to tire work carried on by Vice Admiral Percy W. Nelles. He entered the Canadian navy, as.hon. members will remember, as a cadet, and he stepped up the ladder, putting in his time of service and training with the Royal Navy, and of course benefiting therefrom. He carried us through those years of depression when, unfortunately, the estimates were indeed low, meeting the difficulties which presented themselves at that time; and I would remind hon. members that included in those difficulties was the criticism of ignorant men who all too often were inclined to argue that the dollars spent on the Royal Canadian Navy would have been better spent in some other way. Think for a moment what it would have meant if that had been done! It would have meant that when the call came, when the pressure came upon us, we should not have had that magnificent nucleus from which we could expand. The plan to which I had reference a moment ago was that from this small band of highly trained sailors we should be able to expand the Royal Canadian Naval Reserve, which is formed of those who serve in the merchant ships, and the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve, through its various establishments across the country, and by that means, following the course so wisely laid down, arrive at what the minister has been able to describe this evening.
The war is yet to be won. The minister has indicated that when the trouble in the Atlantic ceases our part shall be played in the Pacific as all Canadians would wish it bo be played. But I presume that before this phase comes a certain amount of demobilization will be taken in hand, and in that connection there are two matters which I should like to bring to the minister's attention and on which I would ask his comments. The first is in relation to that preference which is given under the civil service commission, and of which cognizance is taken in the making of other appointments. As I understand it, that preference is only granted) to those who have served overseas. I suggest that in these considerable numbers the minister has described there must be very many who would have been only too delighted to serve overseas had they been given the opportunity. Duty compelled them to remain in Canada, and I wonder if there is not some way in which that preference can be extended to them in their applications for

service after demobilization. The other matter concerns itself with the arrangements for demobilization leave, which I understand1 differ in the three branches of the service. I think it would be of considerable advantage if it were possible to have similar arrangements in all branches, so that in the work of rehabilitation the sailors may be granted opportunities similar to those accorded the other two services.
I should like the minister to give the committee the benefit of his opinion on that point. Perhaps he would also give us some information as to the progress already achieved under that branch of the navy which has to. do with rehabilitation, and describe what has been accomplished so far in that regard.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: Mr. Chairman, in
considering the estimates for the Canadian navy the first thing that comes to my mind is the gallant service that has been rendered by the men of the merchant marine. We know what they have gone through; we know the perils they have had to meet, whether serving under charter to the Royal Navy, with the Canadian navy or on our inland waters. We remember the days when the U-boats were sinking so many ships in the Atlantic; and with all this in mind one wonders why the government of Canada has not treated these men more or less in the same way it has treated those serving in the Canadian navy. The men of the merchant marine have practically enlisted for the duration of the war. No one can say they have not rendered wonderful service, and I believe some revision should be made to bring their pensions more nearly in line with those of the navy. I hope the government will take this point into consideration.
I do not think anyone but a Scotsman could have made the address in honour of our navy to which we listened to-night. An Englishman might have done it almost as well, while an Irishman perhaps would not have done quite so well. The first English, Irish and Scottish people to come to this country were principally sea-faring men, with the spirit of-adventure in their blood. They came to this country and settled it, but they had the sea in their blood, and when the call came they wanted to get into the Canadian navy. In days gone by, whenever they could find a little pool of water they founded a yacht club or made some arrangement whereby they could go boating; they still loved to be on the water. To my mind that is one reason why we have the stuff that we have in the Royal Canadian Navy to-day.
Canadians have always been willing to help out the navy. Just here I should like to pay my compliments to the Navy League of Can-

War Appropriation*-Naval Services
ada, which has done so much for this country, and on which some of my best friends have served.
No nation in the world will ever be worth its salt unless it is a maritime nation. We must never forget "Hearts of Oak". And even those boys who live away out on the prairies, where there is very little water, must never forget the traditions of those little islands over there, the traditions of the sea and of the navy, and all that those things had meant for civilization and for progress in the world.
I take great pleasure in viewing what has been done by the boys who have gone from Toronto to service in the navy. I take pride, too, in what has been done by the yacht clubs in my city. What Toronto needs, however, is recognition, and with our great love of the sea, and a realization that world trade depends upon the sea, we in Toronto say that our rights should be recognized.
Then, further, we should have that easy access to the sea which for so many years we have been trying to get. Already access can be gained from western Canada to points as far east as Toronto. But what we want now is the development of the St. Lawrence waterways. When we have that we shall have something to satisfy the lads who have come from my part of Canada. They will take some satisfaction from our being developed into an ocean port.
The minister spoke about shipbuilding. Let me point out to the committee that many of those frigates and corvettes were built in the Toronto shipbuilding yards.


Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):: That is right.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Those are the most efficient yards in Canada.


Mr. POTTIER:: Ho, ho!


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The hon. member
says "ho, ho"; would he mind rising in his place, and contradicting my statement?


Vincent-Joseph Pottier: I am agreeing with the
hon. member.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: That is fine; he
agrees with me. I just wished to make that point clear, because 1 am sure those lads in the navy would like to know what has been done in the shipyards of Toronto. I repeat that the Toronto shipbuilding yards are the most efficient in Canada to-day, and that in those yards ships have been built cheaper than in any other yards in Canada. I am telling the committee something that is worth knowing.
Certainly I do not want to see those yards dismantled. We know that after the last war many of the lads who served in the merchant marine Left the service. Toronto was not an ocean port, and the result was that many of the shipyards at that point were dismantled and- went out of business. The remarkable feature, to- my mind1, is how those men, who had such a keen interest in the navy, stuck to it, despite all that was done to their native city of Toronto. Some of the shipbuilding industry went to Port Arthur, and other sections of it went to other points.
As I have said to the minister before, there is no more naval-minded city in Canada than the city of Toronto. I know he will agree when I say the Royal Canadian Yacht club and the Queen City Yacht club have contributed more officers than almost any other yacht clubs in Canada, and perhaps in the world.
Again may I compliment him upon his speech, and also thank him for the fact that at last we are to have a permanent barracks in Toronto for the Royal Canadian Navy. I pay my tribute to all who have done so much for the naval service, and would mention particularly the navy league. May I, briefly, compliment the minister upon the manner in which he has handled his job.


Howard Charles Green: Would the minister give the committee some idea of the plans for recruiting for the navy during the present fiscal year?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: We plan to take into the navy only such numbers as will be necesary to. replace casualties and other men wTho, for some reason, leave the service. We estimate that about 500 a month are all that we require for that purpose. It is on that figure that our present recruiting scheme is based.


Howard Charles Green: There will be no increase in the total number of naval personnel at the end of the fiscal year?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
should think not. Naval strength is now at about its maximum.
Mr. MacINNIS. For some time I believe there was a waiting list of naval recruits. Does that condition still maintain?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes. There are still more offering to come into the navy than the navy can accept. There is still a considerable waiting list.


Grote Stirling: Are they all coming in
through the R.C.N.V.R.?

War Appropriation-Naval Services


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Almost all. A few are coming in through the permanent R.C.N.; but the great bulk of prospective naval men would be R.C.N.V.R.


Grote Stirling: Under what condition
are those coming into the permanent force being accepted? Are a certain number required?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The strength of the permanent R.C.N. was, at February 28, 1945, 4,371. It is somewhat less than half of the allotted complement of the permanent navy. So that a young man wishing to transfer from the reserve to the permanent navy, if suitable, could be accepted.


Grote Stirling: What about the lad who has set his heart on the navy, and who perhaps has been coming along through a sea cadet course? He desires not only to enter the navy but to make it his life work. Is such a lad being received direct in the R.C.N., or has he to enter through the R.C.N.V.R. and take his chance on being transferred to the permanent force?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I cannot give my hon. friend a definite answer. He could go direct into the R.C.N. if he wished. There is still a considerable gap there between the present strength and1 the allotted complement. I can look into the matter and give my hon. friend a definite answer to-morrow.


Mr. EDWARDS:: I had a case recently of a young lad who wanted to join the navy, but he could not get in unless he was willing to sign up for seven years.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: That has always been the rule with the permanent navy.


Manley Justin Edwards: He cannot join for the duration of the war.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: He can go into the reserve for the duration of the war, but if he wants to enter the permanent navy he must go in for a fixed period. I think it has always been seven or five years.


Manley Justin Edwards: The young lad I had in mind wanted to get into the navy for the duration of the war.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: He should join the naval volunteer reserve.


Manley Justin Edwards: I am given to understand that he could not join the R.C.N.V.R., that he would have to sign up with the R.C.N. there being no vacancies in the volunteer force. I should like to know if men are being 
taken into the R.C.N.V.R., and, if so, are allotments being made to the different sections of the country?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: There are only 500 a month to be taken in and when that is divided up among twenty divisions, it gives only twenty-five a month per division, which is less than one a day. That is a small number for each division. Then a division might have a considerable surplus on hand so that recruiting might be quite slack. The allotment of 500 is divided as evenly as possible from one coast to the other.


Mr. ISNOR:: I am sure that all members of the committee were impressed with the recital of the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services, and I know we are all in accord with the words of appreciation expressed by the hon. member for Yale with regard to the [DOT]wonderful achievements of the Canadian navy. There is one matter in which I am particularly interested and on which the minister did not touch. I refer to the future policy with regard to repairs to naval ships.
As the minister well knows we have an exceptionally fine dockyard at Halifax. The facilities of this yard have been extended to a great extent and it is now able to take care of the great majority of the ships. Those of us who live on the Atlantic coast see the ships sailing in and out of Halifax and we see also the large number of naval ships coming to port for repairs. I am wondering if any policy has been set out in regard to the development and carrying on of repair work during the post-war period, particularly the repairing of naval ships.
I can remember back in 1924 and for many years afterward trying to impress various ministers of defence, particularly the late E. M. Macdonald, that we had at the port of Halifax a very fine dockyard, well equipped to carry out all repairs. At that time most of these repairs were being handled by outside concerns, and I always felt that we should maintain a sufficiently large permanent force to take care of all the repairs necessary to Royal Canadian Navy ships.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Is my hon. friend referring to the naval dockyard, or to repair facilities generally in the port?


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: I am referring to the Halifax
dockyard and its ability to take care of ships of the Royal Canadian Navy.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: My hon. friend knows that in addition to the repair facilities at Halifax and in that area generally we have repair facilities at other points in the province, notably marine rail-

War Appropriation-Naval Services
ways on the south shore of Nova Seotia, at Sydney, in Cape Breton, Pictou and other points. I would hope that the hon. gentleman is not too optimistic when he sees some problem about repairs in the post-war period. The problem in the past has been to get something to repair. However, I think he is quite right in asking that we should follow the practice which is fairly commonly followed in Great Britain, that is, to have a good deal of the repairs done in the naval dockyard. My only hope is that the navy will be large enough to present some problem in that regard.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: You have a good yard there; there are facilities and men available, but you lack a dock large enough to take care of warships, both in the Royal Navy and in our own navy. I am suggesting that you should plan things so that, instead of our warships and British warships being sent to the southern states for repairs, this work could be done in our base Atlantic port, namely, Halifax.
Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City); I see more clearly what my hon. friend is suggesting. He will remember that we have established a floating dock at Halifax capable of taking ships up to 25,000 tons, which means anything short of a battleship. Anything in the line of a cruiser, a destroyer, a frigate, a corvette or a minesweeper could easily be handled in that harbour. Ships larger than that, such as battleships, could be repaired in Saint John where there is a large graving dock capable of taking any ship in the world. I thoroughly agree that we should have in Canada facilities for the repair of our own ships and the ships of any other friendly nation which may be in distress, no matter how large they may be. We should have docks and repair facilities large enough to deal with this problem and I hope we shall be able to maintain and perfect them as time goes on.


Vincent-Joseph Pottier: I do not wish to prolong this debate, but I fear that there may be too great centralization in the post-war period. I hope the minister and his officials will not forget-the minister has made reference to this-that there are establishments not only at Halifax and Saint John but at other places. These establishments have the personnel, the equipment and the machine capacity to take care of all repairs. These yards have served their purpose for the present time and I think the time will come *when you will need them. At least they should be kept in good condition and kept operating when at all possible.


Mr. HAZEN:: What personnel is now in training at Deep Brook, and what staff is there at the same place?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The total number of personnel at Deep Brook is 6,917, roughly 7,000. How many of these are staff, instructors, and the like I cannot say, but I will get the details for my hon. friend to-morrow.


Howard Charles Green: What is the policy of the government with regard to building the larger warships? I realize that some destroyers are being built at Halifax. Is it planned that all destroyers for the Canadian navy in the future are to be built in Canada? And what about cruisers? I have here a press dispatch of October 17, 1944, in which Mr. Edmond Sharp, a shipbuilding expert who was sent over from Great Britain to help in the building of destroyers at Halifax, is quoted as saying:
It will be a great disappointment to me personally if Canada does not continue with the construction of destroyers.
And he added that cruisers, too, were well within the scope of Canadian shipyards. I think it would be interesting to the house and to the country to know just what the plan? are.
With regard to the building of these larger ships, last year there was a brief submitted to the government by the Canadian Shipbuilding and Ship Repairing association in which certain recommendations were made having in mind the maintenance of a shipbuilding industry in Canada in the post-war years. One of the recommendations read as follows:
That all Canadian naval vessels shall be built in Canada, and that the government make representations to the British government to etsablish a policy whereby educational orders for British naval vessels may be placed in Canada in the post-war period.
Will the minister make a statement with regard to the attitude of the government toward that recommendation of the Canadian Shipbuilding and Ship Repairing association?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: We have no plan in mind for the post-war building of destroyers. We have certain destroyers now in hand in Canada, namely four Tribal class destroyers. Beyond that we have not planned for the future. There is no reason whatever in my judgment why Canada should not build its own destroyers and its own cruisers too, if necessary. It can be done. One of the destroyers built at Halifax will, in a matter of a few months, be in commission. Work on this ship has been delayed for some time, though no fault can be attributed to anyone. Destroyer construction was new work for this

War Appropriation-Naval Services
country-both the building of the hull and the building of the machinery-and labour problems added to the difficulties of the contractors.


Howard Charles Green: Is that the first Canadian-built destroyer to be.put into commission?
Mr, MACDONALD (Kingston City): She is not yet in commission but will be in a few months.


Howard Charles Green: And she will be the first Canadian-built destroyer?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes. There is no reason why we cannot build destroyers here, and if we can build destroyers we can build cruisers.
As to my'hon. friend's other point, whether the British government can be induced to place "educational orders" in this country I cannot say. Britain will, of course, after the war be seeking export markets and she has always been a pre-eminent country in shipbuilding. I should doubt whether Britain would feel like parting with any of that very valuable part of her export trade. Beyond that I can say nothing at the moment, although I do not think the government has reached any definite conclusions on the point.


Howard Charles Green: There is one other question having to do with the post-war Canadian navy. The minister said that the government plans on having about 9,000 personnel in the Canadian navy. Can he give us some idea of the ships that are to be in that navy and whether there are to be units stationed on both Atlantic and Pacific coasts?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: We have always looked on Halifax as one of our great bases in the east and Esquimalt on the west coast, and I should think there always would be units of the navy on both the east and the west coasts.
As to the exact composition of the navy in the post-war period, my hon. friend will understand that the nature of navies changes.
I would hope that in the post-war years the naval air arm would have the place that it deserves. That is why we have made a small beginning, but nevertheless a beginning, in that field of naval warfare at this time. Exactly what ships will be in the navy I do not know. There would always be destroyers I should think, and having regard to the trend of warfare I think we should have aircraft carriers. Beyond that it would be very difficult to go just now. I would hope that we might have a couple of cruisers, but I could not go into any greater detail at this time.


Howard Charles Green: The plan would be to have
some of the heavier ships on each coast. Is that correct?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes, if we can use the plural at all in regard to the post-war navy. If we have heavy ships certainly I should hope that some of them would be on the west coast.


Howard Charles Green: I said on each coast?


Grote Stirling: Will the minister be good enough to give answers to those two questions I asked?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
should like a little more time to reflect on them.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Wednesday, April 4, 1945.