1945-10-22

NATIONALITY, NATURALIZATION, AND STATUS OF ALIENS

[Stage Direction]
Hon. PAUL MARTIN (Secretary of State) moved for leave to introduce bill No. 20, respecting citizenship, nationality, naturalization and status of aliens.
He said: In view of the importance of the bill it is felt desirable to make a preliminary statement which will be helpful in explaining its general provisions and which will also assist hon. members in their deliberations of it.
On May 24 of this year, speaking in Winnipeg, the Prime Minister remarked on the fact that one of the symbols of nationhood that is lacking in Canada at present is a clearly defined nationality or citizenship status. He indicated that it would be his intention, if the government were returned, to have that defect remedied. The present bill is designed to achieve that purpose.
It should not be concluded from this that the bill in reality makes any sweeping change or that there has not previously been any such thing as Canadian nationality. Despite what one often hears to the contrary, there has been a Canadian nationality, but the difficulty has been that the existing definitions were so specialized and so unrelated that they led to a condition of great confusion and misunderstanding. "Canadian nationals" have hitherto been defined under the Canadian Nationals Act, but in reality the definition had virtually no significance. The term "Canadian citizen" is now, in strict accuracy, only an immigration status. As a third type of status, there is that of "British subject". Undoubtedly each of us in this house is all three of these, but I venture with great respect to suggest that few of us know what it means when the words "Canadian citizen" are used at the present time, or how that status differs from "Canadian national". If we do not know, what chance has the ordinary citizen of this country to know what he is? Sometimes he is told that he is a Canadian and should be proud of it. And then he comes to fill in some form asking his national status and is told that there is no such thing as "Canadian". It is extremely undesirable that there should be confusion about so fundamental a matter.
I have referred to the need for clearer definition of national status in this country. An equally great need, in clarifying the definition, 47696-85
is to remove a large number of legal complications that arise under existing legislation. As I have said, we have at present a naturalization act that defines British subjects and governs naturalization of aliens in Canada. We have also "Canadian Nationals" Act which defines "Canadian nationals". [DOT] Thirdly, we have The Immigration Act, which defines Canadian citizens for purposes of immigration entry. At present a person may be a British subject by naturalization in Canada, but he may have no right of entry because he is not a Canadian citizen. This arises if he has been out of Canada long enough to have lost his "domicile" under the Immigration Act, and the resulting situation is an unending source of difficulty, confusion and embarrassment for Canadians who have gone abroad. Similarly, a person who is the son of Canadian parents, and who is a British subject and a Canadian national may, in certain circumstances, find that he, too, is not a Canadian citizen and cannot enter Canada. For example, if Canadians go abroad and have a child abroad, that child is a "Canadian national", but he is not a "Canadian citizen" for purposes of the Immigration Act, and so he has no right to come into the country. A Canadian national who cannot enter the very country of which he is a national! It is even possible for a Canadian national not to be a British subject. Whether any case of this type has actually occurred I do not know, but due to requirements of registration under the Naturalization Act which do not exist under the Canadian Nationals Act, such a thing can occur.
Mr. Speaker, as a result, to remove all this confusion it is the intention of the government to undertake an extensive revision of the present Naturalization Act in terms of Canadian citizenship. By this I mean that the bill I am introducing is in reality a comprehensive amendment of .the Naturalization Act in which, to avoid the old sources of confusion, all definitions, conditions and qualifications are in terms of a general status of "Canadian citizen". Further to remove difficulty, the Canadian Nationals Act will be repealed and its whole purpose will be encompassed in this new bill. Along with this it is intended to amend the Immigration Act so as to alter its present definitions and provide that anyone who is a Canadian citizen under this new bill will automatically and at all times have a right of entry into Canada. If this is carried through, the result will be that in future there will be only one act governing all aspects and all practical consequences of national status in Canada.
[Stage Direction]
Canadian Citizenship
[Stage Direction]
We will thus achieve a new status of "Canadian citizen" which will be an inclusive and definitive status. At the same time, I want to emphasize and make clear that this will not remove from anyone who now has it, nor eliminate for persons born or naturalized in future, the status of British subject. A Canadian who is now a British subject will under this act continue to be a British subject. A person who is hereafter born a Canadian citizen will thereby also be a British subject. An alien who comes to Canada and is naturalized as a Canadian citizen will similarly become a British subject. The change will be in removing the confusion of conflicting and unrelated definitions that we now have. So far as Canada is concerned the dominant fact will be that of being a Canadian citizen. With it, as a correlative, and important in the commonwealth as a whole, each will also have the status of British subject.
Without going into the details of the bill, there are a few important aspects that it seems desirable to mention. I have said that in general substance, the bill is a broad revision of the Naturalization Act done in terms of Canadian citizenship. It first of all defines who are Canadian citizens by birth. It next sets forth the qualifications for naturalization as a Canadian citizen, and these again are essentially the same as those now m force. There is one additional difference, however, that should be noted. In future, non-Canadian British subjects will be required to take out papers before becoming Canadian citizens. This may appear to be a fundamental change, but it is a change more in procedure than in substance. At present a non-Canadian British subject has no right of entry into Canada, and he does not become a "Canadian citizen" under the Immigration Act until he has had domicile here for five years. In essence all that is now being required is that in future the change of status to Canadian citizenship shall be marked by the acquisition of formal papers. It is felt that this will be a decided advantage to the individuals concerned, as it will give greater certainty and security to their position for purposes of diplomatic protection abroad and of immigration entry when they come to our borders.
I might say that the war has shown the importance of having basic documents for prima facie proof of national status. There have been thousands of cases where persons abroad have appealed to our representatives or to the protecting power for aid on the ground that they were Canadians. Persons born in Canada have been able to produce
fMr. Martin.]
birth certificates, thus supplying a basis for proof. Others naturalized in Canada have been able to produce naturalization certificates. But persons who came to Canada from other parts of the commonwealth have had nothing whatever to show that they 'had become Canadian citizens and were the responsibility of the Canadian government. In peace time there have been similar cases of confusion, difficulty and real hardship. For this reason, it is important to provide papers for non-Canadian British subjects who become Canadian citizens.
On the subject of naturalization I might mention one change that is important throughout the bill. In the past, "married women" have been classed with minors, lunatics, and idiots as persons under a disability. They could not become naturalized or control their national status as independent persons except in very special circumstances. The government looks upon this as an anachronism that has no place to-day and all disabilities for married women have been eliminated in the present bill.
With regard to loss of Canadian citizenship, the conditions are the same as those at present for the loss of the status of British subject- with one addition. That addition is the insertion of a provision for automatic loss of citizenship by a naturalized person who stays out of Canada for six years or more, unless he comes within one of the specified classes or takes steps to protect his citizenship. The provision does not apply to naturalized persons who have served in our armed forces. In addition there are exceptions for naturalized persons who are abroad in the service of Canada, or for a Canadian corporation or business concern, or to go to university, or for reasons of ill health, and so forth. Hitherto there has been a provision for revocation of British subject status if a naturalized person has been absent for seven years. However, it is impossible to keep track of persons who are absent so as to know how long they have been away, and many whose naturalization should have been revoked have remained British subjects. In this war we have had such persons crop up; for example, Germans naturalized in Canada who returned to Germany in 1933 or 1934, whose absence was not known, and who now claim protection and benefits as Canadians. In many cases there is every reason to suspect that a great number of these people were ardent nazis and complete Germans during the war, .however Canadian they may now profess to feel. In future, with the passage of this bill, this will not happen. If such people are absent from Canada for six years or more and do not protect their

Questions
citizenship and are not in the excepted classes, they will automatically cease to be Canadians. Before concluding, there are two sections of the bill which I should like to mention particularly. Both are new; neither introduces any change in substantive law; yet I think they may be of considerable significance to people who become naturalized in Canada. One section authorizes the Secretary of State, with the approval of the governor in council, to take measures-
-to provide facilities to enable applicants for certificates of citizenship to receive instruction in the responsibilities and privileges of Canadian citizenship.
The other provides that the courts, in conducting naturalization proceedings-
-shall, by appropriate ceremonies, impress upon applicants the responsibilities and privileges of Canadian citizenship.
I think that hitherto we have not paid sufficient attention to these matters. In many cases people have become naturalized without having any real consciousness of the fact that they were taking a very significant, step, and sometimes without a true understanding of the obligations incurred. Apart from the purely legal consequences of acquiring a new citizenship, we must remember that in a democracy there are obligations and responsibilities upon a citizen, and these should be carefully explained, it is thought, to those who join us, and they should be fully impressed with the nature of the undertaking. They should also foe given some understanding, in a helpful and cooperative way, of how government in Canada works, and of the great traditions of constitutional liberty and even justice that are the root and source of our individual liberty. We are too apt to take these things for granted, even after a frightful war that has shown us they must be cherished and fought for bitterly if they are to'be preserved; and we should take care that every new citizen becomes a doughty champion of the democratic way of life.
Closely related to this, and yet distinct, is the desirability of making every new citizen feel that he is truly becoming part of Canada. Our "new Canadians" bring to this country much that is rich and good, and in Canada they find a new way of life and new hope for the future. They should all be made to feel that they, like the rest of us, are Canadians, citizens of a great country, guardians of proud traditions and trustees of all that is best in life for generations of Canadians yet to be. For the national unity of Canada and for the future and greatness of this country it is felt to be of the utmost importance that all of us, new Canadians or old, have a consciousness of a common purpose and common inter-47696

85J	'
ests as Canadians; that all of us be able to say with pride and say with meaning: "I am a Canadian citizen."
Mr. BRACKEN:: Mr. Speaker, it was not understood by those of us on this side of the house on Friday evening that this measure would be debated at this stage to-day.


Mr. MACKENZIE:: This is not the debate; it is purely the formal introduction.


John Bracken: Therefore any comments we have to make will be made on the second reading of the bill, when we have the details before us. In the meantime I want to thank the Secretary of State (Mr. Martin) for this more than usually extended statement with respect to the bill, and to commend the government's attempt to clear up a matter which has been very greatly confused in the public mind up to the present time.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. BRADETTE:: What action is the Department of Finance taking with regard to lifting the ceiling price of Canadian silver production?


Mr. MAYHEW:: Representations received
by the government regarding change in the ceiling price of silver are under consideration.


TAXES'-COST OP COLLECTION
[Stage Direction]
Mr. WHITE (Hastings-Peterborough)
'What wras the percentage relationship of the cost of collection to the amount collected in each of the fiscal years ending March 31, from 1935 to 1945, inclusive, of each of the following taxes: income tax, customs duties, excise duties, excise taxes excluding sales tax, and sales tax?
Mr. McCANN:: Customs Excise Division:
The percentage cost of collection of customs excise revenue for the fiscal years 1934-35 to 1844-45 covering customs duties, excise duties and excise taxes including sales taxes is as follows: 1934-35, 2-97 per cent; 1935-36 . 3-20 per cent; 1936-37, 2-71 per cent; 1937-38, 2-48 per cent; 1938-39, 3-15 per cent; 1939-40, 2'82 per cent; 1940-41, 1-80 per cent; 1941-42, 1-31 per cent; 1942-43, 1-23 per cent; 1943-44. -98 per cent; 1944-45, -96 per cent.
The same officers collect customs duties and excise duties and taxes, including sales tax, and it is therefor not possible to break down
i838

Questions
the percentage cost of collections to indicate the cost of collecting a particular impost. Taxation Division:
In respect of income tax including personal and corporation income and excess profits tax and succession duties:
Fiscal year 1935 		Percentage Cost to collection per cent 	 2-95
1936 			 2-56
1937 			 2-08
1938 			 1-87
1939 			 1-70
1940 			 1-85
1941 			 1-06
1942 			 0-59
1943 			 0-39
1944 			 0-49
1945 			 0-64


FREEZING OF PLUMBING MATERIALS
Mr. HOMUTH:: 1.	On what day was the order made freezing certain plumbing supplies?
2.	On what day was it rescinded?
3.	Were telegrams sent notifying dealers and others of such order and of such cancellation?
4.	If so, at what total cost?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	September 10, 1945.
2.	September 11, 1945.
3.	Five telegrams and 112 letters of notification, 112 night lettergrams of cancellation.
4.	Telegraph and airmail expense, approximately $160.


LICENCES FOR AIR FEEDER LINES
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many applications have been made for licences to establish air feeder lines in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta since January, 1944?
2.	Who were the applicants, and what decision has been made in each case?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	Ten.
2.
Applicant-Points to be Served-Decision
Canadian Pacific Air Lines, Winnipeg,' The Pas. refused.
M & C Aviation Company, Prince Albert, The Pas, Melfort, Tisdale, pending*.
M & C Aviation Company, Prince Albert, Edmonton, North Battleford, Lloydminster, Vegreville, pending*.
M & C Aviation Company, Prince Albert, Regina, North Battleford, Saskatoon, Moose Jaw, pending*.
AY. L. Brintnell, Edmonton, Coppermine, Aklavik, Yellowknife, pending.
Frederick AVm. Broughton, Edmonton, Cadomin, refused.
Okanagan Airways, Vancouver, Penticton, Trail, Lethbridge, pending.
Prairie Cities Air Lines, AVinnipeg, Portage la Prairie, Brandon, Dauphin, Yorkton, Regina, AAreyburn, Estevan, pending.
British Columbia Central Air Lines, Vancouver, Penticton, Salmo, Cranbrook, Lethbridge, Calgary, pending.
Frank M. Hurley, AVinnipeg, Dauphin, The Pas, Flin Flon, pending.
*Application made in March, 1944 for postwar services.


WARTIME HOUSING
Mr. ADAMSON:: What is the unit cost of houses built by Wartime Housing in the city of Toronto during the years, 1943, 1944, and to date in 1945?


Mr. McILRAITH:: Toronto	Contract Date	No. of Houses	Total Cost	Unit Cost	Date Completed	RemarksProject 1A	July 5, 1944	100	$407,728 64	$4,077 28	Mar. 15, 1945	No landProject IB	Sept. 29, 1944	50	20S,472 99	4,169 45	June 2, 1945	acquisition chargeProject 1C	Oct. 7, 1944	100	264,307 91	2,643 07	June 28, 1945	Built on$880,509 54	park lands
Note.-The above are complete costs including services, etc. Projects 2, 3 and 4-Work in process-No complete costs available.

Questions


C.B.C. NETWORKS
Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	What is the total mileage of the C.B.C.-network ?
2.	What is the mileage of the "Trans-Canada"
network, and (a) the mileage of operation in 1939 and in 1944;	(b) in English; (c) in
French?
3.	What is the mileage of "Dominion" network, and (a) the mileage of operation at end of first'complete year and at present; (b) in English; (c) in French?
Mr. McCANN;
1.	The total mileage for the national network including all stations which are linked by wire line is 11,573 miles.
2.	Trans-Canada network, October 1945- 7,648 miles. (This does not include the French network which is not an integral part of the trans-Canada network but may be added when required).
(a)	Trans-Canada network mileage October 1939-6,462 miles; in 1944-7,601 miles.
(b)	Is answered by (a).
(c)	The mileage of the French network, as a separate entity in 1939-905 miles; in 1944 -1,477 miles.
3.	Mileage of dominion network is 5,345 miles.
(a)	December, 1944-5,345 miles; October, 1945-5,345 miles.
(b)	5,345 miles.
(c)	There is no French portion of the dominion network. The French network may be added to either the trans-Canada or the dominion network as and when required.


H.M.C.S. &quot;CORNWALLIS&quot;
[Stage Direction]
Mr. LENNARD;
1.	Have steps been taken to retain H.M.C.S. Cornwallis as a training ship?
2.	If so, what type of training will be carried on?
3.	If not,. what disposition will be made of it. and when?
Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	No.	_
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	In so far as the navy is concerned, it is proposed to discontinue the use of H.M.C.S. Cornwallis training establishment on or before the 31st March, 1946, but the' plans for its future use have not yet been determined.


SURPLUS WAR ASSETS-MATERIAL FROM BOUCHARD PLANTS
Mr. BERTRAND (Terrebonne):: 1.	Since May 8, 1945, has the government sold any material from the crown plants known as the Bouchard plants?
2.	If so, to whom was such material sold, and what was the amount of the sale in each case?
Mr. MelLRAITH:
1.	No.
2.	Answered by 1.


POLLUTION OF WATERS-ST. CLAIR RIVER- POLYMER CORPORATION
Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	Have any complaints been received by the Department of Munitions and Supply regarding the pollution of the waters of the St. Clair river, resulting from the operations of the Polymer Corporation Limited and/or its subsidiaries or plants?
2.	If so, what is being done to remove and abate this nuisance?
Mr. MelLRAITH:
1.	Yes.
2.	The complaint is one that involves most industrial plants in that vicinity on both sides of the St. Clair river where there has been substantial industrial development in recent years and a corresponding growth in the cities and towns located on the river bank.
The Polymer Corporation before operations were started, and periodically since, have fully cooperated with the Department of Health and were given to understand that their operations were not objectionable to the health of the community. The Polymer Corporation, however, will cooperate in any joint programme arrived at correcting the conditions complained of, providing it carries the judgment of the health authorities.


SURPLUS WAR ASSETS-WAR PLANTS
Mr. BERTRAND (Terrebonne):: 1.	How many war plants owned by the crown have been sold since the end of the European war?
2.	How many are yet to be disposed of?
3.	Have the plants operated by D.I.L. and known as the Bouchard plants, been offered for sale?
4.	If not, will they be disposed of at an early date, and by what method?
Mr. MelLRAITH:
1.	8.
2.	.95.
3.	No.
4.	It is not possible to state at this time when these plants will foe disposed of or by what method.


Mr. COLDWELL:: What quantities of honey were exported from Canada and to what countries during 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, and the first seven months of 1945?
Questions


Mr. MacKINNON:: Canadian exports, by countries, of honey, during the years 1941 to 1944 and period
January 1 to July 31, 1945.
1941	1942	1943	1944	Jan. 1 to July 31, 1945Country	Lb.	Lb.	Lb.	Lb.	[DOT] Lb.United Kingdom 	
4,071,273	1,S88,484	Gambia 	2,880	Nigeria 	1,200	Sierra Leone 	2,175	Bermuda 	
9,501	5,896	Newfoundland 	
23,714	22,361	8,570	23,690	22,236Belgian Congo 	
1.056	Greenland 	50	St. Pierre and Miquelon 	50	65	125	Iceland 	5,936	United States 	
8,034	8.534	4,256	40	....Alaska 	192	Totals 	
4,113,578	1,935,533	15,116	23,855	22,236


CHARTERED BANKS
Mr. MATTHEWS (Brandon):: 1.	What are the names of the chartered banks now doing business in Canada?
2.	How many branches, by provinces, were operated in Manitoba. Saskatchewan and Alberta, (a) in 1930; (b) in 1945?
3.	Which, if any, of such banks maintain at certain points, a part-time banking service only, and in what centres?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	Bank of Montreal, The Bank of Nova Scotia, The Bank of Toronto, La Banque Provinciale du Canada, The Canadian Bank of Commerce, The Royal Bank of Canada, The Dominion Bank, Banque Canadienne Nationale, Imperial Bank of Canada, Barclays Bank (Canada).
2.	The chartered banks of Canada are not required under the provisions of the Bank Act to furnish information to the Minister of Finance regarding the number of branches operated.
Unofficial sources show the chartered banks operated' branches as follows:
	Aug. 31	Aug. 31,
	1930	1945
Manitoba 	
241	149Saskatchewan 	
467	213Alberta 	
307	166
3. No information.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: 1. How many hogs were requisitioned for the export market from each of the prairie provinces during the week ending October 11, 1945, and what price was paid?
2.	W'ould this price involve any loss to the prairie farmers had they received the domestic price?
3.	How many hogs were requisitioned for export from each of the other provinces during the same period and at what price?
4.	How would the export price compare with the price for domestic use?
5.	Has the government considered making good any loss sustained by prairie farmers whose hogs may have been requisitioned?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1. 3,244,707 pounds of bacon was put into cure for export in the three prairie provinces during the week ending October 13, 1945. This quantity is equivalent to approximately 26,596 hogs.
The following schedule of prices, per 100 pounds f.a.s. Canadian seaboard, will apply to product put into cure during the week ending October 13, 1945, when delivered at seaboard:
Price List for Wiltshire Sides
50-55 lb. 55-65 lb.
A-l	
$22.25	$22.75A-2	
21.75	22.25B-l	
21.65	22.15B-2	
21.05	21.45
[Mr. Coldvell.l

Questions
65-70 lb. 70-75 lb.
A-l	
$22.25	$20.20*A-2	
21.75	19.70B-l	
21.65	19.60B-2	
21.05	19.009.	What is the cost of operation to the 1st of October ?10.	How many employees are there operating the service ?11.	What is the nature of their occupations and salaries or wages of each one?
Price List for Export Cuts
Hams, 10/18	 $23.60
Hams, 18/20	 22.65
Hams, 20/22	 20.60
Gammons, 10/18	 23.60
Gammons, 18/20	 22.65
Gammons, 20/22	 20.60
Middles, A-l and A-2, 22/30		24.10
Middles, A-3, 22/30	 22.25
Middles, A-l and A-2, 30/36	 21.75
Middles, A-3, 30/36	 19.75
Rib Backs, A-l and A-2, 10/18	 25.75
Rib Backs, A-3, 10/18	 23.75
Rib Backs, A-l and A-2, 18/20	 23.25
Rib Backs, A-3 18/20	 21.25
Square Fores, 12/20	 18.45
Square Fores, 20/22	 16.75
Tinned Hams	 29.42
Contract Middles, 22/36	 24.55
2.	The value of pork products distributed in the domestic market fluctuate according to supply and demand, and, since no information is available with respect to domestic prices during this period, it is impossible to estimate whether the .prices being paid for export are less than if the product were merchandised in the domestic market.
3.	During the week ending October 13, 1945, 4,381,211 pounds of bacon was put into cure for export in other provinces as follows: Ontario, 2,734,795 pounds; Quebec, 1,574,187 pounds; Maritimes, 72,229 pounds.
The above quantities of bacon are approximately equivalent to the following number of hogs: Ontario, 22,416; Quebec, 12,903; Maritimes, ,592.
The price schedule for bacon shown in answer to question 1 applies to all export bacon.
4.	Answered in answer to question 2.
5.	Answered in answer to question 2.


RADIO BROADCASTING-SHORT WAVE STATION
James Joseph McCann: .
1.	No.
2.	Answered in No. 3.
3.	As of October 19, 1945, the total commitments are $1,174,630 out of a total estimate of $1,180,500.
4.	With the exception of the three hour weekly test transmission to the West Indies and Latin America all programmes are broadcast on the European beam with programmes specifically directed to the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Holland and Czechoslovakia. Approximately 70 per cent of the time is devoted to programmes for Canadian Armed Forces.
5.	The European beam is programmed twelve hours a day from noon to midnight London time. Latin American test transmission is scheduled Sunday nights from 6.45 to 9.45 p.m. E.S.T.
6.	English, French, German, Dutch, Czech and Slovak with Spanish and Portuguese to Latin America.
7.	Forces programmes are designed to provide Canadian entertainment and news from home. Programmes to other countries contain news bulletins and short talks and descriptive reporting designed to describe the Canadian scene.
8.	The Department of External Affairs, the
Department of Trade and Commerce, the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Information Service are all represented on the Joint Govemment-CBC Committee responsible for the development of the service.	[DOT]
9.	Up to September 30 the cost of operation was $403,352.01.
10.	The total number of employees is 89. Montreal studios, 80; Toronto offices, 2; Sackville transmitter, 7.
11.	International Service Establishment:


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: 1.	Is the short wave radio broadcasting station at Sackville, complete?
2.	If so, what is the total cost?
3.	If not, how much has been expended and what will the total commitment be?
4.	To what areas and principal countries are signals being sent?
5.	How many and what hours are so used?
6.	In what languages are the signals sent?
7.	What is the nature of these broadcasts?
8.	What departments of the government are utilizing the facilities of the station?
Programme Division
Programme Division: Supervisor, P. Aylen; Production Manager, G. Arthur; Research Editor, S. G. Solomon; Librarian, J. C. Dupont; Record Librarian-, R. O. Pelletier; Assistant Record Librarian, B. S. Billot.
French Section: Supervisor, R. Garneau; Announcer, M. de Brabant; News Writer Editor, C. F. Lefebvre; Producer, Announcer Writer, J. M. Marcotte; Script Editor, H. Girard.
Questions

Central European Section:	Assistant to
Supervisor, W. C. Hankinson; Producer, Announcer, Writer (Czech), W. Sehmolka; Producer, Announcer, Writer (German), K. G. H. Blume; Producer, Announcer, Writer (German), E. A. 0. Koch; Producer, Announcer, Writer (Dutch), E. E. Van Berkum.
Forces, U.K. & Commonwealth Section: Clerk, J. G. Kimber; Producer, Announcer, Writer (French), P. Barette; Producer, Announcer Writer, H. McCurdy; Supervisor, A.
L.	Phelps; Producer, Announcer Writer, J. M. Moore; Producer, Announcer Writer, L. Henderson; Producer, Announcer Writer, G. Robertson.
Latin-American Section:	Producer, Announcer, Writer (Spanish), R. H. Meek.
News Section: Senior Editor, J. N. Crandall; News Editor, P. D. Waddington; News Editor, F. G. Lowe; News Editor, M. K. Henderson; News Editor, A. G. Christopher; Copy Clerk, J. Dowling; Copy Clerk, W. H. Spears; Copy Clerk, G. A. Moran.
Toronto Offices: Programme Liaison Officer, C. R. Delafield.
Personnel and Administrative Division P and A Services: Manager, A. D. Monk; Assistant to Manager, J. W. McBurney; Clerk Stenographer, E. M. Walker; Stenographer, L. Van Droogenbroeck; Stenographer, M. C. Joli-coeur; Stenographer, L. C. Goode; Stenographer, B. N. Steele; Teletypist, R. H. Alexander; Switchboard Operator, M. Sauve; Clerk (Filing), G. G. Dupre; Clerk (Filing),
M.	Laflamme; Clerk (Filing), J. G. Ville-neuve; Office Boy, R. Aube; Office Boy, A. Merette.
Attached to Programme Division: Clerk, Translator, I. M. Schwart'zmann; Clerk, Translator, Announcer, G. Pfeffer; Stenographer, D. Welsh; Stenographer, C. Barot; Stenographer, J. Brunet; stenographer, C. Fyen; stenographer, V. A. Watters; Clerk General, M. M. Beullac; Stenographer, G Paquette.	*
Traffic Department: Principal Clerk, I. L. Kirby; Clerk, A. R. Dobrescu; Clerk, C. Gagnon.
Attached1 to Engineering Division: Stenographer, P. M. Grant; Stenographer, L. Hamel.
Attached to Press and Information Division: Stenographer, P. A. Mackinnon; Stenographer, P. M. Boyle.
Toronto Offices: Stenographer, D. J. Ball.
[Mr. McCann.1
Engineering Division
Engineering Division (Keefer Building, Montreal): Assistant Engineer, W. C. Rox

burgh. (Crescent Street, Montreal): Senior Engineer, R. D. Cahoon; Assistant Engineer, F. P. Johnson; Supervisor Operator, G. Archambault; Senior Operator, M. H. Modher; Assistant Operator, J. G. Drapeau; Assistant Operator, J. E. Pelland; Assistant Operator, M. S. Ferguson; Junior Operator, C. D. Giffies; Junior Operator, A. Lorrain; Junior Operator, J. Baribeau; Janitor, J. W. Wolfe.
Purchasing and Stores Department: Stores Clerk, R. Chaput.
International Service Transmitter, Sackville: Supervising Operator, W. W. Grant; Supervising Operator, J. M. Laporte; Senior Operator, G. R. Backhouse; Senior Operator, V. J. Rowe; Assistant Operator, E. W. Ryan; Assistant Operator, R. D. Fairley; Janitor, F. S. Locke.
Press and Information Division: P,. & I. Representative, S. W. Griffiths.
Engineering Division (Keefer Building, Montreal) Temporary Establishment: Wire-man, J. Labrecque.
Casual Employees
Announcer, J. Brooks; Producer-Announcer, T. Rosenmeyer; Producer-Announcer Writer, L. Butler.
It is not considered to be in the public interest to disclose the salaries or wages paid CH.C. officers and employees.


VETERANS LAND SETTLEMENT-KEN0RA-RAINY RIVER
Mr. BENIDICKSON:: 1.	How many applications have been made by veterans of this war for settlertent in the Kenora-Rainy River electoral district under the terms of the Veterans' Land Act?
2.	How many of these applications, (a) have been rejected: (b) approved; (c) are still under
' consideration?


Mr. TUCKER:: 1.	The information is not available by electoral . districts.	The Kenora-Rainy River
electoral district comes under the Port Arthur regional office.	Fifty-six applications for
qualification have been made to that office.
2.	(a)	1
(b)	16
(c)	39-This includes cases where veterans have been called to appear before the regional advisory* committee but have not responded, and cases where replies have not been received from the references whose names were given by the applicants.

Motions for Papers



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. REID:: 1.	Was financial assistance granted to those engaged in the fishing industry during any of the years, 1930 to 1944?
2.	If so, what assistance was given in each of these, years, by provinces?
3.	For what purpose was such assistance given?
4.	How many individual fishermen received' such assistance?


SUGAR AND SUGAR PRODUCTS
Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	AVhat quantities of sugar were exported from Canada and to what countries during 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, and the first seven months of 1945?
2.	What quantities of candy or other sugar products were exported from Canada during 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, and the first seven months of 1945, and to what countries?
Mr. MaeKINNON:	Return tabled.


SURPLUS WAR ASSETS-BATH TUBS
Mr. JOHNSTON:: 1.	Are there any bath tubs stored at Spillers Mills in Calgary by the Department of Munitions and Supply or the wartime prices and trade board or the Surplus Crown Assets Corporation or any other department of the government? If so, how many?
2.	Is there any gyproc lath being stored at the Bowden airport, Alberta, by the above mentioned government departments? If so, how much, and where was this lath procured?


ARMY AND AIR FORCE CAMPS IN CANADA
Mr. CASTLEDEN:: 1.	What camps in Canada, (a) army; (b) air force, with accommodation for 800 or more men were in use on V-E day?
2.	How many of these camps have been, (a) discontinued as military establishments; (b) declared surplus?
,3. IVhat is the military establishment in those camps which have been discontinued as training camps and are maintained by, (a) army; (b) air force?


IPPERWASH, ONT., ARMY CAMP
Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	What was the total cost of the Ipperwash camp?
2.	Who were the contractors?
5.	How much was paid to each of them for, (a) construction of buildings; (b) grading and servicing; (e) any and all other expenditures?


VETERANS ENROLLED IN REGINA AND SASKATOON BUSINESS SCHOOLS
Mr. CARDIFF:: 1.	How many veterans of this war have enrolled in business and secretarial, schools in the cities of Regina and Saskatoon?
2.	What are the names of the schools in which they are registered and how many are registered in each?
VETERANS AFFAIRS-ACQUISITION OF MEN'S AND women's HOSTELS Mr. FRASER:
1.	Did the Department of Veterans Affairs take over the men's and women's hostels, projects No. 3 and No. 4, Wartime Housing Limited, from the Department of Munitions and Supply?
2.	If so, do they intend to use the furnishings, beds and mattresses?
3.	Were any of the furnishings, beds or mattresses sold?
4.	If so, to whom were they sdld?
5.	What was the selling price?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: For a copy of all orders in council or regulations passed since March 30. 1944, which amend, suspend or otherwise alter the operation of, or abrogate in whole or in part any statute passed by the parliament of Canada, together with a list of all statutes so affected.



LIABILITY OF CROWN CORPORATIONS TO MUNICIPAL TAXATION

John George Diefenbaker: For a copy of all letters, memoranda and other documents received by the justice department since September 3, 1939, containing any legal opinion, whether of the law officers of the crown or other counsel, touching on the liability to municipal taxation of crown corporations.



IPPERWASH, ONT., ARMY CAMP

Mr. MURPHY:: For a copy of all correspondence, letters, documents and agreements for sale concerning or in connection with the purchase of lands now comprised within the limits of Ipperwash army camp in Lambton county.



CANADIAN FLAG-MERCHANT VESSELS

Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	For a copy of dispatches from the Secretary of State for the Colonies, dated 16th December, 1865, and 16th July, 1870, authorizing the flag of Canadian government vessels;
2.	Copy of admiralty warrant dated 2nd February, 1892, authorizing the flag of the Canadian mercantile marine "to be used on board vessels registered in the dominion";



Labour-Approval oj Convention
3.	Copy of dispatch from the Secretary of State of the Colonies, dated Downing street, 21st May, 1912, to the Governor General of Canada, in which it was stated that "the red ensign, with the arms of the Dominion of Canada in the fly, is to be used only by Canadian merchant vessels";
4.	Copy of all orders in council regulations and orders relating to aforesaid flags.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, I move that the following resolution be referred to the committee on external affairs:
That this house do approve of the convention concerning the protection against accidents of workers employed in loading or unloading ships (revised), which was adopted by the general conference of the international labour organization of the League of Nations at its sixteenth session in Geneva on the 27th day of April, 1932.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Speaker, on Friday evening the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon) expressed doubt as to whether this matter should go to the external affairs committee or to the industrial relations committee. The acting leader of the government on that occasion intimated that this matter had received a considerable amount of thought from the government, and that it was considered that it. should go to the external affairs committee. At the time the question was raised in the house I felt the hon. member for Peel had made a point worthy of further consideration. During the week-end I have read carefully the proposed agreement, and in my opinion it is going to the wrong committee. In its subject matter it deals almost exclusively with matters relating to labour- the conditions under which seamen shall operate and shall be protected in the loading and unloading of ships. The next resolution on the order paper has to do with the conditions among miners, and there is reference to safety devices for both classes of w'orkers.
While it is true that this is in the form of an international agreement as between ourselves and the international labour organization, and therefore with other governments who will adhere to the agreement, the subject matter is not one which in my opinion should' properly' be considered by the external affairs committee. That would be the wrong committee. In appointing the external affairs committee the whips, who discussed the matter with the various political parties in the house, arranged the membership not on the basis of a knowledge of safety devices at sea or safety devices in the mines, but on the 
basis of interest in the external relations of this country and all that that involves. To refer this matter to the external affairs committee places in the hands of members, who may be quite qualified to go into these matters, something which is not of primary interest to that, committee. On the other hand it denies to those whose principal interest is in industrial affairs of this description the right to go through the agreement and approve or disapprove it, section by section. I believe that in referring it to the external affairs committee we are making a mistake.
I am a member of that committee, but when I read the agreement I realized that there are colleagues of mine who are not on the committee, but who are eminently well qualified to discuss this matter. For instance, throughout the whole of his life the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) has been a miner. While he is not on the external affairs committee, he is on the committee dealing with industrial relations. The hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis), who lives by the sea, knows something at least about ships and seamen, and the conditions under which they work. He may or may not be on the external affairs committee; I have forgotten. In any event in my view this matter should go before the committee on industrial relations, and my suggestion is that in this respect the proposal be reconsidered.
Mr. JEAN-FRANCOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata): Mr. Speaker, I have only two comments to make respecting this resolution. In the first place, let us not forget that it has been unearthed from the old league of nations stuff. It will be noted that the agreement is dated 1932. It reminds me of the old social legislation, cooked by Herridge and Finlayson for Bennett, that parliament had to swallow during the session of 1935.	'
This is called a convention. It is not a convention at all. It is in the same class as the blank forms for the code of civil procedure. It was drafted by the nonentities who adorned the league of nations in Geneva, and who attempted to justify its existence at the expense of all countries, including Canada, which had to pay so much each year, even during the war, when the league of nations was inoperative. It is a humbug, from beginning to end. It is a kind of petty humbug-and that is h-u-m-b-u-g. It is supposedly to help labour, but it will not help labour a bit.
This agreement will not settle the difficulties of labour. Of that we have evidence rigjht now in British ports, where stevedores have been on strike for over a month. Has this

Labour-Approval oj Convention
been accepted by England? This is the kind of so-called unilateral convention which was so roundly ridiculed by the late Mr. Cahan, while he was a member of the house-although after he was made a minister he swallowed it. He could not digest it after his party was defeated at the polls.
This convention is called unilateral-and 'why?' Not because it has been made by two parties, as all conventions are. All conventions are supposed to be bilateral. It has been made by a bunch of fools and parasites who were over there at Geneva-those public exploiters and others, who were preparing stuff to justify the payment of exorbitant salaries and other exorbitant fees for travelling and other expenses. They are parasites, that is all.
Here we are, solemnly accepting the convention. Let us see why. I have great respect for labour, but I have none for those people. My respect is for the real labouring man, not for those with gold chains as big as my fist and cigars as long as from here to to-morrow. What is this international labour organization? They are all these fellows who live on the fat of the land and who call themselves labour men. They are just parasites. They are just people who cannot work and they call themselves labour men. They go through the world with schemes like this; [DOT] they sell their goods and they find people who are credulous enough to believe that they are promoting the welfare of the working men, that they are doing so much for the working men. We are asked to adopt this convention which is not a convention and cannot possibly be a convention. We are asked to do this for the sake of the working men.
Let us consider this from another point of view. I have said something of what I think of those soft brains of Geneva, those international fakers. I will now come to brass tacks and facts. The whole world was in consternation upon learning of the monster strike of stevedores in the ports of Great Britain. We have reduced our rations of perishable food to the utmost in the hope that it will benefit mankind, that it will benefit Europeans who are starving and who need foodstuffs from the two producing countries which can send any overseas, Canada and the United States. My information is that a large quantity of perishable food has rotted on the ships in British ports because these stevedores are on strike and have not realized their duties as human citizens to help in unloading this stuff, which perhaps would have saved the lives not only of children but of undernourished older people. We are trying to do something for the labour men, including these stevedores, and yet they 47696-S6J
refuse to carry out their duties, duties which none of us would refuse to carry out if we were in their position.
Some strikes are stupid, but this strike is criminal. Although the government of Great Britain at the present time is a Labour government, it must be very weak if it has not found means to see to it that these men return at once to their jobs to fulfil a duty which is undoubtedly a national duty. I have some questions which will appear on the order paper to-morrow concerning the shipment of perishable goods to ports in the United Kingdom after this strike .had been declared. I am asking what happened to the perishable food that was on the ships.	.


Major James William Coldwell: Does the hon. member
know that at the present time the ships are being unloaded by troops?


Mr. POULIOT:: I know that troops are
working, but they have had no experience at stevedoring. They were called in at the last moment. The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar knows that the troops were called in after much food had rotted and was of no use to anyone. I appreciate the fact that the troops are there, but what I cannot understand is that the government in Great Britain has not been able to make this class of .labouring men understand that they have an obligation to fulfil, a national duty in time of emergency.
Hostilities have ceased, but victory has not yet been won. Victory will be won only when there is order in society. We shall not have victory until these men realize that they have a duty to do the work they are experienced in doing, to do all they can to- unload this food for the' benefit of the people of the old country. Not only that; I am informed that even though this strike has been declared, perishable food shipped from Canada and destined for Europe is still being directed to British ports instead of being sent direct to the ports of Europe where there is no such criminal strike. If that is the situation, I hope it will be corrected immediately.
In my humble view we should not be asked to have an academic discussion of the work of a man who is not a labour man, but who claims to be, or the work of a group of men who claim to be labour men just for the sake of propaganda. I have seem Jouhaux, the French labour leader, who is just an exploiter of the man in overalls, who is just an exploiter of public opinion. There are many other things that are more important than this for labour, and one is the freedom of labour, the right of labour to ehoose leaders who are not affiliated with international organizations.
At the present time labour men who belong to associations which are affiliated


Major James William Coldwell: Mainly industrial.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No, I do not think so. I concede much that my hon. friend has said. The resolution has industrial aspect, but undoubtedly it does have international implications, and since it is concerned with external affairs I believe it should be referred to the appropriate committee.
I must make reference to the most unfortunate speech delivered by the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot). I believe that the international labour organization, which was a part of the old league of nations organization, has been one of the finest and noblest forces for good in this world in the last twenty years. As one who has taken a deep
interest in it and in the labour movement all my life and has had the privilege of attending some of the meetings of the international labour organization in Canada during the last few years I wish to say that they have justified themselves abundantly by the work they have done in the service of the common man in this and other countries. It is not for us here to condemn them for the sake of passing applause for humorous references. We should admire the work that they have done.
Surely this is the democratic way, to refer this matter to a committee of this house, representing the Progressive Conservatives, the C.C.F., the Social Crediters, the Independents, I believe, and the government, to make such a report as in their judgment they see fit to make to this house.
The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, as I have indicated, would have been right in making his suggestion last year, but now that we have acceded to his suggestion and that of the hon. leader of the opposition and set up a committee on external affairs, this resolution should properly be sent to that committee for its consideration.


Jean-François Pouliot: Page Bennett.


John Bracken: I am not rising to discuss the
relative merits of the proposals as to which of these two committees this resolution should be referred to. With all deference, I doubt if that is of very serious consequence to the house, because they are both good committees. I am rising however to make one or two brief observations and to ask three questions which I think are pertinent. I assume that the hon. member who introduced the resolution will have something to say before it passes.
The resolution asks approval of the international labour organization convention No. 32 regarding prevention of accidents in the loading and unloading of ships. With that objective, I am sure, every hon. member in this house will be in accord. I had thought the minister would make some further comment with regard to the approval of the convention before asking that it be sent to the committee, and I hope he will do that, because eveiy hon. member would like to know more about it before the reference to a committee is made.
Why has the government's approval of this convention been delayed for thirteen years? Is there anything objectionable about it which would account for its not having been brought forward before this? I am informed that the draft convention was passed at Geneva in 1032. and the question. I

Labour-Approval oj Convention
repeat, is this: Why has the approval of this convention been -delayed so long? I am inclined to agree largely with the remarks of the minister who just sat down as to the work the organization has tried to do, but it raises another question. I am informed that during the last quarter of a century some sixty-seven conventions have been passed by this international labour organization and that- only nine have been approved by this parliament. I would ask the minister to give us some idea as to why. if this organization enjoys all the prestige it appears to do, so few of its conventions have been brought to this house for approval.
I understand that during that twenty-five years Canada has sent delegates to every meeting, or practically every meeting, that has been held. I would ask the minister to tell us how much money Canada has contributed to the international labour organization in that time and how much it is contributing annually now. I ask that for the information of the public. It is possible that most members of the house know the answers to these questions, but I think the great mass of the people of Canada do not understand why so few of these conventions have been brought here for our approval.
There are two other, minor, questions with respect to procedure upon which the minister might enlighten us. Is there anything in this convention which the dominion government, under the constitution as it now exists, has no power to carry out? If so, what is the government's thought as to how these objectives might be met?
The other question of secondary importance is this:	What procedure will the government follow after this resolution is approved, in order to make the convention effective in Canada ?
Let me say before I sit down that we on this side of the house have every intention of supporting the objective of this resolution. We shall be interested to know, and we hope the government will make clear in the committee, the implications of all the details in the many articles of the convention- Generally the resolution will have our support.


Mr. C. E. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: Like the leader of the opposition, I have been wondering why this resolution was not brought down long ago, in view of the fact that the convention was passed in 1932. I believe, as does the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell), that the resolution is being sent to the wrong committee. With all deference to the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie), I was going to say that probably

he had not read the resolution over carefully, though I know he has. Every clause, every article in it deals strictly with labour or labour relations. It deals with hours of work, with the amount of wages, and with the entire income of the worker. With the resolution which follows, these conventions deal with almost every branch of labour, from the work around shipyards to agriculture, mining and practically every phase of labour. Nowhere do they touch upon international relations except as the labour relations of one nation apply to another, which is very small in comparison with the general labour situation.
The leader of the opposition said that he would support this, and he did not think it made much material difference which committee it went to. Then he went on to point out'that the government should give us much more information about the resolution before referring it to a small number of men from this house. That is the very point that I would call to your attention, Mr. Speaker. The very fact that this resolution will be referred to but, a small number of men chosen from this house is the reason why it should go to the committee that deals with these problems. When the committee on industrial relations was set up, every party, I believe, had the same thought in mind as the Social Credit party, that those men were picked because they were more closely connected with labour, and had possibly a better knowledge of labour relations than some of the others.
I am not saying that hon. members are not all equally interested in labour problems, but there are some men who are more closely related to the different problems confronting labour, and in my opinion the men on the industrial relations committee have a better knowledge of labour relations than those who are on the external affairs committee.
With all respect to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, I suggest that he should give serious consideration to the whole question. I would be against having this resolution passed on to the committee on external affairs. I have no objections to its being turned over to the committee on industrial relations. Before this resolution passes there should be some marked changes in it. There are fundamental principles involved. The question still presents itself, what good it will do us in Canada? I believe we should spend our time, and possibly we could do so to greater advantage, applying all our resources and our energies to the solution of our own labour problems before undertaking to go abroad in an attempt to solve great international labour problems. In other words, we should put our own house in order first. Notwithstanding that, however, I have no

Labour-Approval of Convention
objections to having the matter referred to a committee, though I think it should be sent to the proper committee, and tjiat is the committee on industrial relations and not the committee on external affairs.


Humphrey Mitchell: I thought the passing of this resolution would be a matter of form. The leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) spoke about these conventions. We have adopted, I think, about nine conventions. I can give the names if the house wishes. But many of the conventions adopted by the international labour organization come within provincial jurisdiction. What happens is that the Secretary of State for External Affairs notifies the provincial legislatures of their passage. I wish to join with my colleague the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie) in the statement he made. Some very important things have been said to-day about the international labour organization. I think many of them have been said in ignorance, if I may say so in a kindly way.


Mr. MacNICOL:: That is kindly.


Humphrey Mitchell: It is meant to be kindly. Of the organizations that had their birth in international relations after the last war, I know of none that has made a greater contribution to the well-being of the working men and women in this world than the international labour organization. I have been an advocate of the I.L.O. ever since its inception. It was the brain child of Sam Gompers, who was president of the American Federation of Labour. If my memory serves me rightly, Sir Robert Borden had a great deal to do with the fashioning of the charter, if you wish to call it a charter.
All this does, Mr. Speaker, is merely to ratify the convention which was complied with in the passing of the Canada Shipping Act in 1934. To my hon. friend who spoke so fervently about the terms of the convention I suggest that he study the Canada Shipping Act and see if it does conform to the articles laid down in this convention.
What my hon. friend the leader of the opposition says is quite true. I think this convention might have been ratified long ago, at the time the resolution was introduced in 1939 by the late Hon. Mr. Rogers, who was then Minister of Labour. I am given to understand that through some error it was not ratified by this house.
So far as I am concerned there are arguments on both sides as to whether it should go to the industrial relations committee or to the external affairs committee, as has been suggested by the government.
For the information of the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) I should like to say that the I.L.O. is meeting in Paris at the present time. The Canadian delegate was at one time a member of this house. Mr. Bengough, the president of the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada, is a member of the governing body. Mr. MacNamara, my deputy, is also a member. I hope that the I.L.O. will be strengthened and that this agency for the study of questions on an international basis affecting working conditions in the broader sense will make the same contribution in years to come that it has in the past.
I should like to correct the impression of one hon. member who said that he would like the bill to pass. This is not a bill; it is merely ratification of a convention, which is covered by the Canada Shipping Act and the setting up of the necessary machinery to carry out the provisions of this particular convention.
I am sorry I cannot speak from memory about the costs, but I shall be glad to obtain the information and give it to my hon. friend some time later this afternoon.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: I would not like to
overlook this point. The minister gave credit to Samuel Gompers and Sir Robert Borden. Was not Albert Thomas the real father of the I.L.O.?


Humphrey Mitchell: No. Thomas was the
first director of the I.L.O. in 1919. I think he was at that time the Minister of Munitions of the French government. He was a great character, a forceful personality. If I remember correctly, I think he was a socialist, which is to his credit-I mean a continental socialist. Thomas was the first director, but it was Sam Gompers who conceived the idea of this international organization, representing governments, industry and trade unions. Does that answer my hon. friend's question?


Mr. COLD  WELL@: We will not argue the point. .


Mr. BLACKMORE:: May I ask the minister a question? Could he elaborate to some extent on the general statement made by the Minister of Veterans Affairs that there were international implications in this?


Humphrey Mitchell: I can answer my hon.
friend's question, but I do not know whether we are permitted to do this at this stage of the proceedings.


John Horne Blackmore: The Minister of
Veterans Affairs said that there were international implications in this resolution, and

Labour-Approval of Convention
that therefore it ought to be referred to the committee on external affairs. I was just wondering whether the Minister of Labour would elaborate to some extent on these international implications.


Humphrey Mitchell: I might say this,-I do not know whether I am permitted to do it; it is an international organization like UNRRA. It is like the resolution on food that was before this house last week. It is purely an international organization, and Canada is a member of that body. Is that clear?


John Horne Blackmore: Is it the general
objective to tie up our labour relations in Canada with the international labour organization so that we cannot do anything without its consent?	[DOT]


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: Ask the question
in the committee.


John Horne Blackmore: We are talking to the house at the present time.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I would remind the house that we are not in committee; therefore the minister, as the mover of the resolution, has no right to speak more than twice.


John Horne Blackmore: Probably some other member of the administration will answer it; it is a statement that should be elaborated.
Motion (Mr. Mitchell) agreed to, and resolution referred to the committee on external affairs.



APPROVAL OF CONVENTION CONCERNING STATISTICS OF WAGES AND HOURS OF WORK IN INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE

Humphrey Mitchell: I move that the following resolution be referred to the committee on external affairs:
Resolved, that this house do approve of the convention concerning statistics of wages and hours of work in the principal mining and manufacturing industries, including building and construction and ini agriculture, which was adopted by the general conference of the international labour organization of the league of nations at its twenty-fourth session in Geneva, on the 20th day of June, 1938,-


John Bracken: Mr. Speaker, before you put the question I should like to make a few comments. I know I have no right to refer to the discussion that took place' on the other resolution, but with due respect, the minister did not answer one or two of my questions. One of them can be asked on this resolution. If we ratify this convention, has the dominion

power to carry out what we are doing, or does some of the jurisdiction fall to the provinces?


Humphrey Mitchell: May I answer my hon. friend now? The dominion is already carrying out, through the bureau of statistics, the provisions of this convention. It prepares statistics on hours of labour, wages, and related matters. It is being carried out.


John Bracken: There is one other question that perhaps it will be in order to ask at this time. I understand that under the constitution of the international labour organization this government is under an obligation to submit conventions and recommendations to the national legislatures. That is the way the phraseology came to me from the organization in Montreal. If that is the constitutional position, how is it that few of those sixty-seven conventions have been referred to this parliament over the past twenty-five years? Why should there have been only nine, rather than more?


Humphrey Mitchell: I thought I had
answered my hon. friend; at least I tried to answer him. He appreciates, as I do, the constitutional implications in labour legislation in Canada. Certain things come purely within the jurisdiction of the provinces, while others of course have national implications. It is to my knowledge that in the case of conventions which affect provincial jurisdiction or legislation, the Secretary of State for External Affairs or the Secretary of State informs the provincial governments. That is why more of these conventions have not been adopted by this parliament.


John Bracken: Then might I be permitted to add one other word. In our inquiries with respect to the work of this organization, of which we very much approve, wo find that of these sixty-seven conventions, while Canada has dealt with only nine, practically every other country has dealt with many more. My information is that Belgium has dealt with thirty-three, Denmark with nineteen, France with thirty-one, Norway with twenty-three, Sweden with twenty-five, Switzerland with fifteen, the United Kingdom with thirty-four, Australia with twelve and New Zealand with twenty-three. The only reason I am raising this point is that if we are to continue to make considerable financial contributions to this organization we ought to pay more attention to their recommendations.


Humphrey Mitchell: I would not want the impression to go abroad that Canada is a backward nation; my hon. friend will under-

Veterans Affairs
stand what I mean. They have the same difficulty in the United States, in Switzerland, and I think in Australia. These are all federal states. Speaking from memory, the adoption of conventions by the Dominion of Canada is on a par with that of any other nation in the world having the same legislative set-up, if I may put it in that way.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and resolution referred to the committee on external affairs.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. R. MacNICOL (Davenport) I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Reconstruction. I am sorry I have not been able to send him .written notice, but I know he is so familiar with his department he will be able to answer without difficulty. One day last week a report appeared in La Presse reporting a rumour that it is the intention of the government to expropriate Canadian Pacific Air Lines. What foundation is there for this report?
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Reconstruction) :: The government has not given
consideration to expropriating the shares of Canadian Pacific Air Lines, and is not doing so at present.



GERMAN INDUSTRIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Ritchie MacNicol: A
dispatch in to-day's Globe and Mail announced that the United States is taking over certain of the I. G. Farben plants in Germany for shipment to the LTnited States. Is there any likelihood of our government obtaining one or more of the hydrogenation plants by means of which the Germans have been extracting oil and gasoline from coal?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Recently the government sent a mission to operate with the British and United States missions in Germany. It is my understanding that while certain experimental equipment has been removed from Germany, no important operating equipment has been taken from that country. However, I shall be very glad to call the attention of the mission to the interest of Canada in the hydrogenation plants, and ask it to do what may be possible to secure one.



FIREARMS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. W. GLADSTONE (Wellington South):: I should like to bring to the attention of the Minister of Justice or the acting leader of the house the fact that three shooting accidents over the week-end are reported in the Ottawa morning newspapers. The headings are as follows: 1. "Posse kills woman while hunting gang." 2. ''Loaded shotgun found in ditch injures four children." 3. "Boy kills pal with souvenir gun." The article relative to the latter incident makes this comment:
The accident was the second to occur in Ottawa recently in which a souvenir gun was the cause of death.
I am sure my question will be obvious; it is as to the methods of protecting citizens from the dangers arising out of the flood of weapons going about the country.
Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans Affairs): The Minister of Justice is meeting a distinguished visitor to the dominion at the present time, and instructed me to give the following reply to the question of my hon. friend. Of course we all deplore these unfortunate accidents, but all we can do is recommend the utmost prudence on the part of those who are in possession of firearms.


Mr. FRASER:: Only last week the Department bf Justice, which I suppose would mean the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, issued an order that all guns taken in under defence of Canada regulation 37, I believe it was, were to be returned both to Canadians and those who are not Canadians.. I wonder if the government could not maintain some control over the return of those weapons, because there has been an appalling number of shootings throughout the country.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I quite agree with my hon. friend, and I shall direct his question to the attention of my colleague when he returns to the house.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. P. WHITMAN (Mount Royal):: Will the Minister of Veterans Affairs inform the house if a decision has been reached with respect to the construction of the Currie hospital in Montreal?
Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans Affairs):	My hon. friend was good
enough to send me notice of his question
Public Works-Tenders

earlier in the day. My reply is that a change has taken place in the matter of hospital facilities for this department in the Montreal area. In addition to Ste. Anne's hospital, which makes provision for over one thousand beds, we had planned to build a new hospital with four hundred active treatment beds on what is known as the Benny farm on Sherbrooke street, to be known as the Currie Memorial hospital. We now find it necessary to defer this programme, for. the reason that in all probability the army is going to turn over to us the main part of the Montreal military hospital, making provision for five hundred active treatment beds. Since this gives us more beds than construction of the new hospital on the Benny farm would have provided, there is no justification at this time for our proceeding with the new construction on the Benny farm.
However, we do need hospital facilities for tubercular cases, and hope to erect or acquire in the near future a permanent five hundred-bed sanatorium in the Montreal area for patients from the province of Quebec. We are also preceding with the erection of a health and occupational centre at Senneville, near Ste. Anne's. This will provide for 180 patients, and will be a most modern plant for the practise of this new type of treatment known as physical medicine, whereby veterans, after they no longer need active treatment, are restored to health and full recovery of their functions in healthful and congenial environment and conditions.



PUBLIC WORKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders.of the day:
Charles Edward Johnston: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Public Works. Is it a regulation of this department to call for tenders before letting out contracts? Are such contracts to be given to local contractors, when such local contractors are competent in every respect to perform the work, or is it the practice of the government to bring contractors from other provinces to do the work?


Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works):: In the Department of Public Works it is the practice to call for tenders either in the erection of buildings or other kinds of work. Generally such calls for tenders appear in the press, and no one is barred from tendering. The general practice has been that the lowest bidder receives the contract. Of course there have been some exceptions to that rule. I recall one occasion in British Columbia where, after calling for 
tenders, and finding we could not get bids, we had to come to an agreement with a firm to do the work. However the general practice is to ask publicly for tenders, the lowest bidder getting the contract.


Charles Edward Johnston: Does that decision lie with the local representative, or does the department make it?
. Mr. FOURNIER (Hull): I have given the general practice, which I am told has prevailed for the last fifty years, except in certain instances.



TRANS-CANADA AIR LINES INCREASE OF CAPITAL    CREATION OF CORPORATION TO OPERATE SERVICES UNDER CONTRACT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Miniser of Reconstruction) moved1 that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Trans-Canada Air Lines Act 1937. to increase the capital from five to twenty-five million dollars and to authorize the Canadian Nations Railways to issue securities to twenty-five million dollars for acquiring the stock of the corporation; to provide authority in the governor in council to create corporations to operate and maintain air services under contract with Trans-Canada Air Lines such corporations to be controlled by Trans-Canada Air Lines; also to make provision for the payment of subsidies to such corporations payable out of moneys to be appropriated by parliament, and with provision for the termination of the present contract for the transport of mails and for a new contract for mail transport.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Golding in the chair.
Clarence Decatur Howe: The bill which will be based upon the resolution provides for some important amendments to the Trans-Canada Air Lines Act. It has been customary for tihe committee on railways and shipping, government owned, each season to examine the affairs of Trans-Canada Air Lines. The time for that examination is at hand, and I believe the committee is to meet with the officials to-morrow.
My proposal is that we advance to the stage of second reading of the bill, and that it be given second reading without any commitment as to policy, and referred to the committee on railways and shipping. I have a lengthy statement which I should like to give at the proper time, and perhaps if we could advance to the stage of second reading I could make my statement then. Any debate thought necessary could be had at that time; the bill could then be sent to the committee for further study and then referred back to the house for such disposition as it may care to make of it.


Trans-Canada Air Lines


Mr. GREEN:: It was our understanding on Friday evening that the intention iwas only to advance the resolution one stage. No one on this side was'expecting there would be any discussion to-day iwhen the resolution was in committee. I would ask that the minister adjourn the matter at this time, so that the discussion may ensue to-morrow or some other day. We are not prepared now to discuss this matter as fully as it should be discussed. The resolution before us is an important one, and should not pass this stage without consideration. Certainly there was no intimation that it would go further than the committee stage to-day.


Mr. KNOWLES:: I should like to make a different suggestion as to procedure, because I too feel that this is an important measure. Without committing myself, and judging only from the terms of the resolution, it would seem to be the sort of measure I would welcome and would be anxious to support. It would seem to foreshadow a policy in respect of feeder lines which this group has supported all along. However, whether or not such is the case, it seems to me the measure is of an importance sufficient to justify discussion on the principle of the bill before the matter is referred to a committee. I agree with the minister's desire to expedite the measure as much as possible, but-


John Bracken: We are in committee.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The leader of the opposition says we are in committee, but I would point out that we are in committee on the resolution; the bill is not before us. If the committee were agreeable I should think we might pass the resolution without extended discussion, and that to-day or to-morrow we could proceed with second reading of the bill and have the statement from the minister as to the principle of the legislation. I am anixous to have a matter of this kind pushed along as quickly as possible, for the terms of the resolution appear good to me, but I feel that if we were to refer this measure to the committee after second reading, without discussion, we would be abrogating our rights. If we pass second reading we shall have agreed to the principle of the bill.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I consider it important that a statement be made either prior to or concurrently with the bringing down of the bill. I should not like to leave it to anyone to interpret the proposals contained in the measure before the statement from the government has been made. I can make it now, if necessary, and I am prepared to do so. I believe it would meet the desires of all concerned if we were to pass the resolution,
bring down the bill and have it called for second reading, at which time I could make a statement. Any other hon. member who wishes to do so could speak at that time, and then the debate could be adjourned pending receipt of a report from the committee.
I believe it is important to have this matter before the committee at an early day. Officers will be brought from Winnipeg and Montreal, and possibly from other points, to answer questions in connection with the air lines, and to bring them twice w'ould cause a certain amount of disorganization in the air lines offices.


Howard Charles Green: The minister is missing one point, because if the procedure he suggests is adopted there will be no opportunity for questioning here in the house.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Oh, yes.


Howard Charles Green: Our only opportunity for questioning the minister is when the resolution is in committee. Once the resolution is adopted the bill is brought in and. then there is a debate on second reading, with no chance for questioning across the floor of the house. This is an important measure, and we should not be asked to waive one of our rights for getting at the root of the matter. This is the only chance we will have to -question the minister.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is hardly so. The bill will be sent to committee for study. It will then be brought back and be debated clause by clause in committee of the whole house. That is the usual procedure. There will be every opportunity to question the minister. Questions can be put after information and explanations or have been given by the officers of the air line. That is quite frequent^ the procedure with important legislation. It is in conformity with past practice to give second reading to a bill and send it to committee without accepting the principle of the bill. Such a reservation can be made, and is frequently made. The principle of a bill may be discussed when the bill returns from committee.
I do not want to impose my ideas on the committee. I am in the hands of the committee. If the committee wish to discuss the matter now and have the bill brought down for first reading, then I should like to make my statement on the resolution. Otherwise I shall be glad to make it on the second reading.


John Bracken: Will the minister explain what urgency there is in proceeding now? It was not my understanding that there would
Trans-Canada Air Lines

be any major discussion of the matter at this time. Our understanding was that most of the time would be devoted to the consideration of the war expenditures and demobilization' measure. We want to help the government facilitate this measure, but if we proceed with it now it will be at the expense of its being given full consideration.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I do not seem to have made my point. I think it will be of advantage to all hon. members if this bill is discussed in the committee on railways and shipping, government owned, when the affairs of Trans-Canada. Air Lines are being examined. To examine the affairs of Trans-Canada Air Lines without these amendments being before the committee would hardly meet the spirit in which the committee works. The only urgency is that the committee is to meet to-morrow. I know the officers of the air lines and railway are here, with all their records, prepared to proceed with the usual sessions of that very important committee. I should like to get the bill over to the committee so that we shall not have to send them away and then have them come back at another time. It means a good deal to the operations of the air lines to have the committee conclude its sessions in one sitting. ,It is needlessly disrupting to the affairs of the air lines if their officers have to come here twice.


Howard Charles Green: Would the minister be
seriously prejudiced if he were to make his statement to-day and then move that the committee rise?


Clarence Decatur Howe: My proposal was that we should advance the bill to second reading, at which time I would make my statement.. .


Howard Charles Green: No.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I am quite willing to make my statement on the resolution, but I thought it would be more intelligible if the bill were before the committee. We would not be talking about something we have not seen.


Howard Charles Green: The minister is asking us to give up the one chance we have to question him before . the bill is passed by the house. No matter what he says about reservations that may be made on second reading, once this bill has passed second reading it means that the principle of the bill has been adopted.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No.


Howard Charles Green: We should not be asked to waive our right to discuss the resolution in committee.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: With all due deference to my hon. friend, the procedure we are following now is exactly what I indicated when I said that the Minister of Reconstruction would introduce this resolution to-day. That was my statement of the house proceedings the last time we sat.	.


John Bracken: The acting house leader usually makes his statement during the last minutes before adjournment when there is no time to discuss it. I think he will agree that our understanding was that the maximum time to-day would be devoted to a consideration of the war expenditure measure and that no considerable time would be taken on anything else. Certainly we did not expect that there would be any major debate on this matter.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It seems to me that the flaw in the minister's suggestion is this: if the house advances this resolution to second reading of the bill and the minister then makes his statement and permits a debate, the bill will then be referred to the committee on railways and shipping owned by the government, before having been dealt with in committee of the whqle house.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It always is.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That still would not make it desirable to this side of the house. We would be forgoing our chance to ask the minister questions after he has made his statement and before the bill goes to the special committee. That is what we would like to do. It seems to me that the minister could make his statement to-day on the resolution stage, even though the bill is not before us. He can tell us what is in it and we can then question him. We desire to have a. chance to question the minister before the bill goes to the 'special committee on railways and shipping owned by the government.
Mr. HO"WE: This bill is designed to place Trans-Canada Air Lines in a position to undertake the substantially increased responsibilities which will be placed1 upon it during the next few years, as a result of the extension and improvement of existing Canadian air services and the establishment of new Canadian air services particularly in the international field. Trans-Canada Air Lines has been designated by the government to operate all services of a main line character within Canada and to operate Canadian international air services. To carry out this task it must be in a. position to multiply its activities several times over. At the same time it must be ready and able to act in a flexible fashion; for the development of civil aviation has been,

Trans-Canada Air Lines
and is likely to continue at such a rapid rate that present conditions governing particular air operations are likely to require substantial modification as development takes place from year to year. The purpose of this bill is, therefore', to provide a broad framework acceptable to parliament, within which Trans-Canada Air Lines under the supervision of the minister responsible for civil aviation, and with the approval of the governor in council can meet any contingency that may arise in carrying out the duties allotted to it.
Trans-Canada Air Lines, a relatively new organization, established by statute in 1937, has already established a record of which the Canadian people may be proud. Its regular commercial operations now extend from the west coast to the east coast and on to Newfoundland. ' It is also operating a non-commercial wartime service for the government across the north Atlantic which in due course will be transformed into an- ordinary commercial line. Its achievements have been such that Canada's reputation among other countries in the field of commercial aviation has been substantially enhanced.
It is the intention of the government to continue to develop Canadian air services, domestic [DOT] and external, in a manner commensurate with our needs and with the preeminent position which we hold in the field of air transport. We do not propose any exaggerated pattern of growth merely for reasons of prestige, or any forced expansion out of line with our normal economic and national needs. Compared with the programmes of some otheT countries our own plans appear reasonable and even modest; nevertheless they do involve the addition of many thousands of route miles to our existing network of services.
Within the domestic field some of our plans for development of main line services have already been announced. New four-motor aircraft are to be provided before many months and a shorter transcontinental service across the great lakes is to be initiated. Other main line services are to be added, including for example, a service from Winnipeg through Saskatoon to Edmonton. The studies which are at present being carried on with a view to-elaborating the-new main line services which Trans-Canada Air .Lines should establish are not yet complete, but as this' work progresses it is my intention to keep this house fully informed of our plans for domestic, development by T.C.A.
In addition, we have been granted certain new rights for air services from Canada to the United States. T.C.A. is already operating the only through service from Toronto to New York. Under the new agreement with the United States signed last February, Trans-Canada Air Lines will establish additional services from Halifax to Boston, from Toronto to Cleveland, from Toronto to Chicago, from the lake head to Duluth, from Victoria to Seattle, and from Whitehorse to Fairbanks.
These new services to the United States together with the new services which Trans-Canada Air Lines will establish within Canada will in all likelihood more than double the present route mileage operated by T.C.A.
In addition we propose, subject to satisfactory agreements with the other countries concerned and after we have acquired suitable new equipment and more trained personnel, to initiate three main international services; the first across the north Atlantic to the United Kingdom; the second from eastern Canada to the West Indies and Caribbean area and Latin America; and the third, a trans-Pacific route which will be operated ' in cooperation with other commonwealth services in that area. Decision has not yet been reached whether our Canadian air operations in the Pacific will extend as far as the antipodes or whether they will connect at an intermediate point with other commonwealth services from the far east and Australia.
It will take some time to make the necessary arrangements for these services and to get them established on a regular basis. In all probability a period of two or three years may elapse before the pattern is complete, although we hope that a regular commercial service on the north Atlantic will be in full operation before many weeks have passed. In any event, the establishment of these new international routes will involve route mileage that will probably be close to five times the present mileage operated by Trans-Canada Air Lines in North America. To sum up then, the addition of new mainline services within Canada, of new services to the United States, and of new international services will probably multiply Trans-Canada Air Lines present route mileage five or six times over. This full development will obviously require substantial additions to the capital, equipment and personnel of Trans-Canada Air Lines.
I have already said that I do not consider these plans extravagant. Admittedly, there must be a substantial financial backing to get them started, but the whole intention of the Canadian government in developing this pattern has been primarily to develop services which have a reasonable chance of operating on an economic basis; and not for the sake
Trans-Canada Air Lines

of national prestige to embark upon useless operations which will require continuation for an indefinite period of costly subsidies.
However, to place Trans-Canada Air Lines in a position to undertake all these services, a substantial increase in its capital is necessary. (Its present capitalization of $5,000,000 is adequate for its present operations but does not leave any leeway.) Accordingly the bill proposes an increase in the capital of Trans-Canada Air Lines to $25,000,000 which we believe will be adequate to provide for implementation of the plans which I have described.
Further, special administrative arrangements are necessary in connection with major international air operations. Services to the United States are really part of our domestic network and have always been considered as natural transfrontier extensions of domestic services. These particular services accordingly will be operated directly by Trans-Canada Air Lines. The long through international air services, however, will have to be treated as separate entities for both administrative and operational reasons. Not only do these long international operations differ considerably in nature from our domestic operations but each of them differs from the other in regard to operating conditions, distances, types of traffic and similar matters. For this reason it is desirable to separate them from the domestic network while at the same time utilizing the advantages that can be obtained through the training, experience and high standards that have characterized the domestic operations of Trans-Canada Air Lines.
Moreover, we, along with other nations who are members of the provisional international civil aviation organization now functioning in Montreal have accepted the obligation to present full details on each of our international air operations to the organization so that they may maintain a complete register of operating and cost statistics of each international air service.
There are also definite advantages in an administrative organization for international lines which will permit segregation of all statistical detail, financial and otherwise for each of our major international operations; otherwise we may become confused between them and may not always have a clear picture of the value and position of each.
For these reasons it is believed that a separate company or companies should be established for operation of the major international air lines which we will plan to establish. We have not yet reached the stage in our planning where it is possible to state whether a single company will be sufficient for this 
purpose or whether more than one will be required; it is likely however that differences in operating conditions will require more than one company.
We have decided and announced that Trans-Canada Air Lines-, the government-owned Canadian Air service will 'be charged with the operation of our international services. There is a definite advantage in providing common supervision and common standards for all government-owned air services and in achieving an integrated pattern in their development, whether domestic or international, we must, as well, utilize the ability which Trans-Canada Air Lines has already demonstrated and seek standards of operation which through their uniformity will improve economic efficiency. It is, in consequence, obvious that any new companies established should be 'subsidiaries of Trans-Canada Air Lines.
To achieve these objectives the bill proposes that the governor in council may establish new corporations for the operation of air services, at the same time determining the capital of such corporations and naming the provisional directors, and that the shares of any corporation so established shall be offered for subscription to Trans-Canada Air Lines. The bill also empowers Trans-Canada Air ,Lines to acquire and dispose of shares in companies established to operate air services. In order to protect the position of any companies incorporated under this Act, and insure that they may always remain under government control, it is also provided that Trans-Canada Air Lines must always retain fifty-one per cent of the shares of any such company. As a matter of fact it is the present intention of the government that Trans-Canada Air Lines should be the complete and sole owner of any such corporations established for the operation of Canadian international air services and the provision I have just mentioned is merely intended to add flexibility to meet unforeseen circumstances.
Any new company established under the Act would in general have the powers that Trans-Canada Air Lines at present possesses. In respect of authorization for its operations it would be treated in the same fashion as Trans-Canada Air Lines; that is, the governor in council would in the-first instance designate the air services which the new company is to operate and would then authorize the minister responsible for civil aviation to enter into a contract with the. new corporation for the operation of these services. Arrangements for carriage of mail by any new company in-

Trans-Canada Air Lines
corporated under the act would be made directly with the Postmaster General on the authorization of the governor in council.
It is impossible at this point to describe the detailed plans for each of the three main international services I have outlined. The company or companies that may be required, the amount of capital involved, the nature of the contract that may be entered into, the exact route to be followed, the frequency of services, the traffic stops to be made and the rates to be charged are all matters which are under study, by the responsible agencies of the government, and which are subject to continu-_ ing negotiation with other governments. All I can say at the moment, is that of the three routes I have mentioned, first priority will be given to the north Atlantic air service, an operation which we hope will be ready in the relatively near future, second priority will be given to the service to the West Indies and latin America, althought it may well be a year or so before this service is in operation; while third priority will be given to the Pacific service, the establishment of which depends in time upon the clearing of the Pacific and the working out of cooperative arrangements there. We had earlier considered that the war against Japan might well involve a substantial delay before operations could be initiated, but recent victory has, of course, changed the picture so that it is now possible to plan in terms of a Pacific operation which we hope may be started almost as soon as our service to latin America.
The added powers which have been given to Trans-Canada Air Lines in respect of purchase and disposition of shares in other companies have been extended to cover not only subsidiaries set up under this act but to cover other companies operating air services. This provision is designed to improve the economic efficiency of our international operations for it is likely to prove to our advantage to make specific agreements with other air companies in countries served by the lines which we operate, so that these other companies may feed traffic into the Canadian services. Achievement of this objective may in turn require investment in, or assistance to, these other companies.
Similar considerations have governed the provision in the bill that empowers Trans-Canada Air'Lines to loan money to any new company incorporated as a subsidiary of Trans-Canada Air Lines. This will, for example, make it possible for the revenue from paying services to be used>, if necessary, as loans to assist in the establishment of new services as required. In short, to repeat what I have already stressed, the main intent of the bill is
to seek parliamentary approval for a satisfactory framework which will protect the interest of the people of Canada in respect of development of our air service; and at the same time make it possible for Trans-Canada Air Lines, subject to the approval of the minister and the governor in council to pursue a flexible policy designed to meet the varying conditions and contingencies that are likely to arise in the development of air transport, and to make the best possible arrangements to achieve economic efficiency on each route.
A further change proposed by the bill relates ' to the carriage of mail within Canada. Originally the statute establishing Trans-Canada Air Lines provided that payments by the post office for the carriage of mail within Canada should be on a sliding scale calculated annually on the basis of the revenue and costs of operations of Trans-Canada Air Lines during the preceding year. This was a formula designed at the time to satisfy the position on the main transcontinental service when it was reasonably certain that the number of schedules to be operated would be limited and that mail would be. initially the most substantial factor in the traffic carried. The growth of services within Canada and the modification of schedules on existing routes have changed this position substantially. Carriage of mail will always be of fundamental importance to air services, but other types of traffic have grown and are growing rapidly. Moreover, initiation of numerous new services and new' schedules means that conditions relative to carriage of mail vary from route to route. It has, therefore, become evident that more flexible pro- , visions are required in respect of payment for air mail carriage. Accordingly it is proposed that the governor in council be granted authority to repeal section 17 of the Trans-Canada Air Lines Act which provides the formula for mail payments, leaving merely the provision that the Postmaster General on authorization of the governor in council may enter into a contract with Trans-Canada Air Lines. It is our intention that when a new contract has been agreed upon, to govern payment for carriage of mail, the governor in council will take action to repeal section 17.
Finally, in accordance with the need for flexibility which I have already mentioned, it is provided in the bill that any contract which may be entered into w'ith Trans-Canada Air Lines by the minister responsible for civil aviation or by the postmaster general may be altered or amended from time to time as circumstances require on the authorization of the governor in council. Here again the reason for action is the fact that the development of civil aviation is taking place so
Trans-Canada Air Lines

rapidly that a long term contract such as was originally planned in the Trans-Canada Air Lines Act may well become out of date in certain respects. Before its ten-year period has elapsed that provision should be made for modification in accordance with rapidly-changing circumstances.
I believe it would be of assistance to members of this house in considering the bill if in closing I reviewed briefly the history and what I believe are the accomplishments of Trans-Canada Air Lines.
As I have indicated, Trans-Canada Air Lines was incorporated by act of parliament in 1937. Its task was to provide the swiftest possible system of transportation between communities scattered across a territory of
3,000	miles and thereby to more closely integrate the nation.
Prior to this legislation there had been an abundance of aviation activity within Canada, but nothing of a transcontinental design. Operations were, for the most part, of the "bush" variety, serving mining camps and isolated settlements. Numerous small companies, flying a great diversity of equipment on a "charter" or "contract" basis, moved large quantities of men and supplies. Some scheduled operations were in existence on the Pacific coast, into the Northwest Territories and the Yukon and along the north shore of the St. Lawrence and into the maritimes- but the country had no coordinated air transport. The railways remained the only east-west arteries of Canadian transcontinental transportation. By 1937 it had become 'evident that something more was needed; that a nation so vast in its distances and so various in its economic divisions could not afford to do without the. fullest advantages of time and distance-destroying aviation. So Trans-Canada Air Lines was designed to meet a great Canadian need.
How well has this organization met the responsibilities that were entrusted to it?
To begin with, it must be realized that in 1937 the airline began with nothing. The airport, meteorological and communication needed *to support scheduled services by large aircraft were almost non-existent. Much of the terrain through which the transcontinental route must be threaded was wilderness. Canadian experience with aviation of this type and on the scale intended was very limited.
Yet to-day,' just eight years later, Trans-Canada Air Lines is recognized as one of the world's foremost air transport organizations. Its aircraft move with precision between Sydney, Halifax, Moncton, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, London, Windsor, North Bay, Winnipeg, Regina, Lethbridge, Calgary, Edmon-

ton, Vancouver and Victoria. They also cross the border to New Work and fly daily to Newfoundland. Through the joint efforts of T.C.A. and the Canadian government, an elaborate airport and airways system has been evolved and a 'stout foundation is in readiness for the greater aeronautical development that is certain to come. T.C.A.'s operational standards and achievement are respected through the air transport industry. All this has been accomplished in a few short years.
Yet the true significance of T.C.A. is not to be found in any record of mere growth, but in the contribution that the still-young airline has made to Canada's well-being.
This country is one of vast distances and varied interests, relying for its coherence as a nation upon the development of wide loyalties and general understandings. The success of confederation has depended upon the slow growth of tolerances and the gradual destruction of sectionalism. In large measure, the basic problem has been a geographical one-how to bring into closer association the far-flung economic and racial entities that together comprise Canada-how to establish a real community of interests and responsibilities among a people scattered widely between two oceans.
Facilities for transportation and communication have been among our most powerful tools in the fashioning of 'Canadian unity. Without the railroads, Canada as we know it could never have evolved. The same is true of radio and telephone, of bus and of private automobile. All these have fostered an exchange of goods and ideas that to-day bear fruit in an ever-tightening economic and .political union.
T.C.A. serves in the same high tradition. For the past eight years it has brought the unprecedented speeds of modern aviation to bear upon the problems of Canada's geographical immensity and internal diversity; and so effective has been its work that Canadian distances have, already lost much of their old significance. To-day, the travelling Canadian with limited time at his disposal is not confined within a narrow radius of his own home. The entire nation lies just beyond the nearest airport and a new sense of nationhood is being fostered by Canada's new accessibility to its citizens. In particular, Canadian industry and business have received a major stimulus from air transport. The busy entrepreneur, salesman or technician can now fashion his activities and his ambitions on a national scale, secure in the knowledge that Canada is no longer days, but only twelve hours wide, and that time of travel has ceased to be a major

Trans-Canada Air Lines
obstacle to tihe development of broad markets, the surveys of distant territories and the supervision of wide-spread field organizations.
T.C.A.'s carriage of air mail between the developed communities of Canada has likewise contributed to a mounting national consciousness, by accelerating the written exchange of information and ideas to an extent difficult to over-estimate. More and more goods of perishable or urgent nature are moving by air and new domestic markets are opening for many a Canadian producer. T.C.A., the transcontinental airline, is quickening the tempo of our whole national life.	[DOT]
It has not been possible for some time to purchase the additional aircraft required for the full satisfaction of Canada's mainline* air transport needs. But, through the efficient use of existing equipment, T.C.A. has been able, since 1940 to triple its carriage of passengers, multiply by four its volume of air mail, by eight the weight of air express. Miles flown in 1944 exceed ten million.
In spite of the restrictive conditions of recent years, it is safe to claim that no other airline in the world has grown to such stature in so short a time. Moreover, the work has been done with efficiency and imagination and without waste. T.C.A.'s maintenance, dispatch and pilot technique and standards are famous; this aviation service that has grown into so powerful a sinew of our domestic strength has shown an eight year not revenue for its shareholders-the people of Canada.
It should be borne in mind that T.C.A. has functioned almost from itis beginning in a wartime economy. The airline was just two year's old when Germany marched on Poland. After that day it dedicated itself to the paramount task of speeding the final victory. No evaluation of T.C.A.'s national service is complete without mention of its war records.


Howard Charles Green: The minister has given the committee a very interesting statement with regard to this proposed bill and also with regard to the future air policy of Canada. I should like to add my word of praise for Trans-Canada Air Lines for what they have done in helping to develop the country. The air service has been of great value to all parts of Canada, and to no parts more so than to those far removed from Ottawa. I know it has meant a great deal to my province of British Columbia; in fact the development has been most remarkable, both in the number of pe'ople who fly and in mail and express carried. I think it has done a great deal to draw the farthest removed parts of Canada together.
Having said that. I would suggest to the minister that, since his statement is comprehensive, a little time be given to hon. members to read it over and prepare questions to be asked on the resolution stage. There are different questions that come to me; but I believe the committee would save time and the discussion would be far more effective if the committee were to rise this afternoon and the discussion be carried on to-morrow.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Chairman, I still think the procedure I suggested at first was the proper one. It is the procedure that is usually followed, namely, to allow the discussion to take place on the bill when it is before the committee of the whole. I think the discussion could take place more easily when the bill is before us. However, I am quite willing to meet the wishes of the opposition. I would point out that it is the responsibility of the government to organize the work of this house. We like to meet the opposition, but I do not think the opposition should be too dictatorial in regard to the order in which we take these bills. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that this be the first order of business to-morrow, and that the committee rise, report progress and ask for leave to sit again.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The whole opposition has not requested that this matter be left over, only the official opposition.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I know that.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am not opposed to the discussion being adjourned at some time today and further discussion being carried on to-morrow, but I for one should like to make a few comments now if the minister will hold his motion for a few minutes.


Clarence Decatur Howe: If we are to adjourn this discussion it is the understanding that to-morrow, Tuesday, it will be the first order of business.


Major James William Coldwell: Now, Mr. Chairman, I do not think that is altogether right. It was arranged that the first order of business to-morrow would be the budget.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No, never.


Major James William Coldwell: It was arranged that we would go on to-day with the war appropriation bill and certain resolutions, and on Tuesday we would go on with-


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I want to say most definitely that no such arrangement was made.	*


Major James William Coldwell: That was my
understanding.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: It was certainly not mine.

Trans-Canada Air Lines


Major James William Coldwell: It was my understanding the other evening. I think we should proceed with this matter now and get rid of it. I cannot see why it should be held up from day to day. My colleague, the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, has made some study of this matter. He is looking after this phase of the house business for us and would like to take advantage of this opportunity to make a few comments. I do not think this motion should be pressed. I think he should be given an opportunity to make his remarks.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: If he is ready to proceed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: I might mention that on Friday night the Minister of Veterans Affairs drew our attention to the fact that this matter should have high priority to-day. As the Minister of Reconstruction pointed out, the officials of the Canadian National Railways and of Trans-Canada Air Lines are to meet our committee to-morrow. I consider it very unfortunate that they should be held up here unnecessarily while we take time to discuss this matter. I think we should proceed to have it referred to the committee without any delay if possible.


Mr. FULTON:: While it is true that the
Minister of Veterans Affairs said that this matter would come up to-day, I for one did not understand that we would be asked to debate the matter or take the steps which * we are asked to take now, namely to send this bill to the railway committee before we had an opportunity to pass on the principle of the bill. I would be' most unwilling to have this bill sent to the committee before we approve the principle of it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps I may be permitted
to clear up that point. I cannot understand why we have to deal with legislation in this way. In the old days it used to be quite the ordinary practice to hold up debate on a bill and refer it to a committee without committing the opposition to the principle. That was frequently done. It is a time saver. It permits the debate to be more intelligible, if I may be permitted to say that, after the members of the committee have received all the facts that they require. The bill is then sent back and put through committee of the whole house, and there is ample time for hon. members to debate the bill after having been informed by the officials as to what the effects of the bill will be. That seems to be the reasonable way to make time. However,

I am in the hands of the committee. This debate, having been started, if the hon. member wishes to carry on it is all right.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister said that
we would carry on.


Howard Charles Green: Now?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I understand that the
Minister of Reconstruction moved a motion which is now before the committee.


Major James William Coldwell: We shall take a vote
on this; we shall record the house on it.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I do not want to
oppose-


Clarence Decatur Howe: I made a motion, but I am
in the hands of the committee. I understood that this resolution was to be-passed to-day.
I am willing to do anything that will save time. I think it is foolish to have several debates on this bill. If it will save time to adjourn the committee now and have the debate to-morrow, let us do that. If it will save time to finish it to-day, let us finish it . to-day.


Major James William Coldwell: Because one section
of the opposition is not ready, that is no reason why the business of the house should be held up.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Do not say that.


Major James William Coldwell: I am saying it. This
' has been on the order paper for some time, and those who are going to discuss it should be ready to go on.


Edmund Davie Fulton: We are ready to discuss it; but if we once start, we are not ready to part with it until there has been full discussion.


Major James William Coldwell: I know what has been the practice of the house in the past. This resolution has been on the order paper; we knew it was coming up, and we should be prepared to discuss it now. I object to this delay until to-morrow, when other business should be proceeded with.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Waiting until to-morrow will not get the bill before us.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The minister has made a long and comprehensive statement; and we, not possessing the second sight which apparently the C.C.F. have, want to study it. This is a new statement which definitely and seriously alters the concept we had of government ownership of Trans-Canada Air Lines, and in particular government ownership and operation of foreign, external airways. This is one of the most important matters for this house to study, and I concur in the suggestion

of the minister that we should now adjourn the debate and have an opportunity to read over the important statement the minister has just made. I consider this much more important than all our dealings with respect to ground transportation. In the past it would have been unthinkable to introduce a railway bill and discuss it at once, so that I would support the motion by the minister.


Clarence Decatur Howe: If I may make just one more suggestion, even at the risk of repetition, I think I would very much dislike having to discuss this bill without having seen the bill itself. That is what my hon. friend proposes to do. If we could advance the legislation one stage we could have all the debate we liked on the motion for second reading.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Will the bill not be ready to-morrow?	.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is ready now, but it cannot be distributed until we get past the resolution stage.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Do I understand that the minister is withdrawing his motion?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, I am not.


Stanley Howard Knowles: When we asked the
minister to go ahead and make his statement this afternoon there was no suggestion that the debate would be adjourned after he had spoken. The very fact, as the hon. member for York West has pointed out, that this matter is so important it seems to me requires that some expression of opinion be given by other sections of the house this very day. I appeal to the minister to withdraw his motion and give other sections of the house a chance to offer some comment. As a matter of fact, since the minister has made his statement, I think the purposes of the entire house, particularly of private members on the opposition side, would be better served if we could now proceed to the .point where we would have the bill before us, but that will not happen if we simply adjourn the debate on the resolution until to-morrow.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We have spent more time in debating procedure than in discussing this legislation, so I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that you let the committee decide. Put the motion, and get the decision of the committee.


The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Golding):: The
Minister of Reconstruction has moved that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, and have a further discussion on this question to-morrow. The question is on the motion.
Motion agreed to: yeas, 59; nays, 15.
Progress reported.
22, 1945
Demobilization-Naval Services



WAR AND DEMOBILIZATION

[Stage Direction]
PROVISION FOR APPROPRIATION OF §1,365,000,000 FOR WAR PURPOSES, DEMOBILIZATION, PROMOTION OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY, ETC.
The house resumed from Tuesday, October 16, consideration in committee of a resolution to grant to His Majesty certain sums of money fpr the carrying out of measures deemed necessary or advisable in consequence of the war-Mr. Ilslev-Mr. Golding in the chair.

Mr. STIRLING:: Mr. Chairman, the conduct of this discussion so far has, to my mind, been eminently unsatisfactory. Three weeks ago, late at night, the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services began his statement, which he was not able to complete. Some days later he was followed by the Minister of National Defence for Air, who made a statement on which there was some discussion. Some days later again, in the last ten minutes of an evening session, the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services succeeded in completing his statement. Then, when the committee returned to this subject again, the same minister, speaking on behalf of the army, made a statement and one observation was offered afterward on the part of the opposition. I do not consider that this gives us a proper opportunity for that detailed and considered discussion which this matter warrants.
The minister's statement, dealing with past, present and future, is to be found in Hansard of October 2 and October 9. So far as the future is concerned, I do not quarrel with the attitude taken by the government when it considers that the international situation is such that it is hardly feasible to proclaim a definite permanent policy for the navy. Demobilization is still being carried on, and there are various reasons entering into the question of what Canada's navy in the future shall be which scarcely lend themselves to definite decision' at this time.
The minister deals with the past by doing little more than to bring up to date statements which have been made on previous occasions with regard to naval affairs. I take this opportunity of expressing my appreciation of the services of men in the little ships. As the minister has said, a considerable portion of the work falling to the Royal Canadian Navy has been in connection with north Atlantic convoy duty. That is true, but mucn

Demobilization-Naval Services
service was given elsewhere as well: in the Mediterranean, off the coast of France, and particularly up and down the inhospitable coast on the eastern shores of this country.
Those little ships carried on their lonely vigils, ever looking out for evidence of enemy action, passing that information back to headquarters, where the positions of U-boats, either singly or in nests, could be plotted and charted, thus enabling those who directed the convoy system to devise the routes the convoys should take. They carried on that work in fog and in storms, facing the perils of the elements as -well as those of the enemy, and under such freezing conditions that the helms on these little vessels had to be used cautiously, lest the tons of ice in their top hampers rendered them top heavy.
We, whose lands have not been devastated in the least, as have the lands of our allies, are a little inclined to accept these services with all too little appreciation. Lives were lost, health was impaired, nerves were strained, and those men are coming back to take their part once more in civilian occupations. It will be wise of us indeed if, in dealing with such men, we allow sympathy to play its proper part. The practice of using convoys started very early in the war. At that time on both sides of the Atlantic there were only a few small vessels suitable for the work of guarding those convoys. They were hastily collected, hastily manned, and hastily gunned. They were used with the stiffening of iestroyers, the services of which were badly aeeded in other directions. This condition prevailed while corvettes were being designed and built. Those designs were improved, and the second editions were released. Frigates were built, until at last we were in a position to give adequate provision to the convoys of the north Atlantic.
Before the U-boat menace was overcome the command of the north Atlantic convoy passed into the hands of the Canadian navy, with headquarters at Halifax. The minister did well the other day in extolling the services rendered to us and to the allied nations by Rear Admiral L. M. Murray, who was in charge of the convoy system.
The minister referred to the fact that early in this year the Canadian navy had reached the peak of its strength, namely, 95,000. Demobilization has already disposed and is disposing of about half that number. He anticipates that by March the figure will have been reduced to some 10,000. He has pointed out that the actual strength of the permanent force of the navy is 534 officers and 3383 ratings, making a total of just under 4,000. 
So that to have the 10,000 by March he will have to obtain the services of some 6,000. With this in mind he has put forward a recruiting campaign, from which he expects to obtain new enlistments to sign on for four years service.
He will obtain the assistance of some in the navy who will express a willingness to serve for another two years in what we may call an interim force; and perhaps it would be more easily understood if we called it a temporary permanent force. Then he will have the cadets who will graduate from year to year from the Royal Canadian naval college.
I would ask the minister to give a detailed progress report of the recruiting scheme,, setting out when it started and how it has progressed. We read some weeks ago in the press something to the effect that- seventy per cent of those coming forward were new enlistments. but that those who were expressing their willingness to continue for two years and who are already in the service, were coming along in greater numbers. I would ask the minister in his progress report to. deal with the proportion which will be allowed between newly enlisted men and those who are desirous of continuing to serve. I would ask him also to describe the terms of service being offered these men.
For instance, are war-time pay and allowance rates to be carried on?	Is marriage
allowance to be continued? What sort of plan is in contemplation to take care of the length of time required for service pension? And, although this may not be a closely related subject, I would ask him to explain the position of those in the permanent force, and those who have been serving but who came in through the reserves. What will their position be with regard to war service gratuities? I understand that no further gratuities will accrue after next March.
What is the position of the man in the service to-day who, through his length of service, has earned a certain amount in war service gratuities? When will he receive those amounts, and in what form? The minister has referred to the joining up of the two forms of reserve into one reserve, for the future. Will he explain whether the reserve of the future will be comparable in terms of service with the reserves of the past. It seems to me that we must accept the fact that a reserve of that sort, the volunteer reserve of the past, the non-permanent active militia of the past, was a body of civilians who gave of their spare time to training and exercises in the establishments across Canada and who were

Demobilization-Naval Services
ready in times of annual leave or annual holidays to give of their time to service afloat. In that regard a good deal of assistance was given in the past by employers who facilitated leaves so that they would fit in with cruises. It does not seem to me that it is likely the minister can rely on members of the reserve to make up ships' companies of vessels to be retained in commission.
The minister also made reference to the sea cadet corps. I think his predecessor was the first Minister of National Defence to recognize and commend this corps. He expressed the opinion that we should look upon the sea cadet movement as being a fruitful source of sailors of the future. It was not started for that purpose; it was started more -with the idea of endeavouring to inculcate into the youth of Canada the principles of the Royal Navy and what that navy stood for as adopted on our behalf for the Royal Canadian Navy. It was to that end that the corps was carried on.
Two or three years ago the regulations governing the corps were amplified and brought up to date. To-day the sea cadet movement in Canada is recognized as being a far more efficient body than it was before. I trust the time is not far distant when the government will be able to give a little more assistance to the sea cadet corps. I have been interested in this movement for a good many years. There are two small corps in my immediate neighbourhood, one at Kelowna and one at Penticton. I know full well, particularly in the years of depression, the grave difficulty we had to keep those corps going. They were located in rural areas where there was no large city population to appeal to, and those of us who were particularly interested in the movement had to dig down into our pockets to keep them going.
Then the. war came along and the numbers increased considerably. Just a day or two ago 1 received a letter from the president of the sea cadet corps "Grenville" in Kelowna, of which I should like to read three sentences. He is making his annual appeal to the public of that neighbourhood for financial support for the corps, and he says;
From its ranks, thirty boys are now serving in the navy, seven in the mercantile marine, eighteen in the army, and twenty in the air force.	.
Seven have been killed in action, three decorated and .one mentioned in dispatches.
The training these boys have received has served in good stead during the crisis of war. but should be continued with equal vigour during the peace, in inculcating discipline, ability of leadership, character building, and willingness to seTve.
I agree entirely with the statement made by the president of that organization. I would emphasize the fact that he. is referring to a small body that has carried on for about a dozen years. There are many in that neighbourhood who deeply appreciate what these boys have been taught.
About half-way through his statement the minister said that he would turn from men to ships. I wish that he, having turned to ships, had given the committee some more detailed information with regard to ships. At the present time we are without knowledge as to what ships are to serve on either of the coasts of Canada. A little light was thrown on this subject by the minister's predecessor who on one occasion said that a total strength of
9.000	was being considered. He then made a statement which to my mind was a strange statement for a minister to make of his own department. He said that he considered that figure too small and hoped it would be increased to 15,000. The minister put it at 10,000.
A little light was thrown on the subject, again in what I think was a most unusual way. At a press interview the senior officer on the Pacific coast stated that Canada's postwar navy would be much larger than her prewar navy and that it would consist of cruisers, fleet aeroplane carriers, destroyers and frigates, which would be in equal numbers on either coast. I do not know whether the minister authorized that statement to be made or approved its having been made.


Mr. ABBOTT:: I did not.


Grote Stirling: I contend that this is the place where we should be given that information. The proper place to give that information surely is in the statement which the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services has made to this house. In referring to ships he referred to the cruiser Uganda, which was recently brought back to the Pacific coast in order to dispense with the services of those on board who desired demobilization. He has not told us whether her complement has again been filled up, or what her purpose will foe now.
He has referred to the cruiser Ontario now serving with the Royal Navy in the Pacific. We want 'to know whether she is to be brought back shortly for a similar purpose, how rapidly her complement will be restored and what she will then be used for. Two days ago the antiaircraft cruiser Prince Robert docked at Esqui-malt, having brought home released prisoners of war from the Pacific. I presume that the same process will go on in connection with the Prince Robert and that those of the ship's company who desire to be demobilized will be

Demobilization^-Naval Services
dispensed with. Are we to understand that her complement will then be brought up again? What will she be used for?


Douglas Charles Abbott: She is to be declared
Burplus.


Grote Stirling: That is one of the pieces of information with regard to our ships that I should have thought the minister would make in his statement. He then referred to the four Tribals built in Canada, one in commission, two to be commissioned next year and the fourth to be commissioned in 1947. The Tribals are admirable ships, but they are not quite as admirable as they were some six or seven years ago when the Royal Navy introduced them. They are far from being obsolete now, but they are moving along the road to obsolescence. Ahead of them on that road are the River class, and still further ahead on that road to obsolescence are those older destroyers upon which we presumably placed some reliance. The minister simply referred to the Tribals and then stopped. He made no reference to the Crescent class. When we first heard of the class known as the Crescent, we knew that they were the last word in destroyers, and that Canada was to have four of them. We know that one is commissioned and already on her way to the Pacific coast. We believe that the second will be commissioned in the course of the next few weeks, and we know nothing of the third and the fourth. Will the minister make a statement informing us of the position with regard to the Crescents? The Crescents are so far ahead of the Tribals because they have been outfitted with all these various discoveries of the war. The armament is different; the scientific instruments are different; the electrical installations are brought up to date. They are, I suppose, the last word in destroyers to-day. We were to have four, and we believe that we know something about two.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Grote Stirling: At six o'clock I was
drawing attention to the very considerable amount of additional information that we look to the minister to provide us with so that we may get a far more complete picture of the Canadian navy to-day and of the immediate future. He has made no reference whatever to

the naval air service; yet that subj ect was drawn to our attention, when the minister for air was before the committee, by the hon. member for Quebec South (Mr. Power) who expressed his opinion, and his opinion must carry considerable weight with us because of the excellence of the service which he rendered to us and to the allied nations when he was minister for air. He expressed an opinion which would not of necessity be agreed to by the minister for naval services, and certainly we look to this occasion for a statement of the government's views with regard to the immediate future of the naval air service. We want him to tell us how many pilots we have, the number of aircrew, aircraftmen serving in the ships and the aircraft at our disposal, and to what extent those figures which he will give us may be expanded.
I wish now to attempt an analysis of the ships which are at our disposal, and of the men to man them. We get very little help from the minister's statement in that regard. There is a short paragraph near the end of his statement which reads:
It is now proposed that at the outset Canada's peace-time navy should comprise two cruisers, probably two light fleet carriers, ten to twelve destroyers and the necessary ancillary craft, all of these of the latest and most ' modern type, while in reserve and for training purposes we will continue to hold a certain number of frigates. Such an establishment will require a force of about ten thousand officers and men.
There is a rule of thumb, which has obtained in naval circles for a great number of years, that for each man afloat there should be a man ashore. There would be men undergoing initial training, and their instructors; those carrying out technical courses with a view to promotion, and their instructors; the establishment on both coasts, with the necessary employees; headquarters here in Ottawa with its various branches, with pay and personnel; ordnance technical branches, each with its director and those serving under him.
It is interesting to note that the rule of thumb appears to apply with some accuracy to the very small figures of Canada's pre-war navy. At that time there were five ships afloat. There were destroyers. They were smaller than Tribal and their complement was probably something under two hundred. Shall we say that 900 were afloat in those two ships? Double that figure and you have just about the strength of Canada's pre-war navy. If we apply it to these ten thousand we find ourselves with 5,000-afloat and if those 5,000 are disposed in ships which are serving on each coast, and they are of equal size, we have 2,500 men afloat on either coast.

Demobilization-Naval Services
The complement of one of our cruisers is from 800 to 900, and on the small aircraft carrier, from 1,000 to 1500, so that we find that the best part of 2,000 of the 2,500 on either coast is taken up in the cruiser and the aircraft carrier. The complement of a Tribal is 220 to 240, so that if there be one Tribal attached on either coast we have used up 2,220 or so of the 2,500 and we have, say, 280 to dispose of.
One of the mistakes we made in the prewar navy was that we did not have in service auxiliary vessels. In peace time some of the duties of the Canadian navy on either coast consist of such work as training, and support of the Department of Justice and the Department of National Revenue in their requirements. and such work would be far better carried out by auxiliary vessels than by the far more expensive vessels such as destroyers.
We arrive, then, at one cruiser, one small aircraft carrier and one Tribal, and if we choose to add a second Tribal there is then very little left in the way of man-power for any ancillary vessels at all. I suggest that a squadron composed of one cruiser, one aircraft carrier, one destroyer and perhaps some, ancillary vessels is a most unhandy squadron to do anything with. If the two were added together they would be an equally unhandy fleet unit. In the plans which have been laid down for us in the past, hon. members will remember that after the great war Lord Jellicoe paid a visit to the dominions and expressed his opinion, based on his long experience, as to what the dominion navies might see fit. to be made up of. I do not think his report was ever adopted as the building programme in Canada, but it carried weight and it was of interest.
I do not propose to recount what it was composed of, but it did consist of a squadron on either coast. Also, in years since that, our naval staff has on more than one occasion prepared building programmes, and with the experience which our naval staff has had we may be quite sure they were looking upon it as minimum strength for which they were providing. They also required that there should be a service on either coast.
What are the duties of the Canadian navy in war time? Offence, defence, the capability of joining together in one fleet unit for war operations; and in peace also to join together for exercises, preferably fleet exercises, with the fleet of the Royal Navy. These exercises have all too seldom been held in the past. The idea has always been that they should be there prepared to carry out exercises, and the duties which fell to their lot, so that they might be joined together, if it were required,
to act as a fleet unit. In peace time, what is the duty of a squadron on either coast, besides actual defence of our neutrality? It has been to carry out certain necessary work of the departments on the coast, to carry out training and to protect and police those lanes on which our commerce crosses the seas, and particularly in those focal areas near our coasts north and south of Vancouver island, north and south of Newfoundland, around the coasts of Nova Scotia to the bay of Fundy, all for the purpose of showing to the world that we have naval vessels afloat. If we do that there is the least likelihood that lawlessness will raise its head on the high seas.
I look to the minister for a great deal more information than he has yet given us. I would conclude my remarks with this suggestion, that it is entirely wrong for us to extol the magnificence of Canada's commerce, to boast that we are the fourth trading nation in the world and at the same time to provide inadequate naval defence for that commerce in the focal areas. We must be ready. All too often m the past, in naval discussions which have had to do with the size and disposition of Canada's navy, we have come across such a remark as this: "The force should be sufficient ufitil support arrives." I ask, from where will that support come? It surely must come, and can only come, from the navies of other countries, navies built and maintained by the taxpayers of another country, not from our pockets. It seems to me that we do not save our face when we extol the magnificence of our commerce if we are not prepared to do our share in defending it.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The hon. member for Yale has made a number of points which I shall endeavour to answer. First, let me say that on one I am in complete agreement with him. I, too, am far from satisfied with the arrangements as they have developed for presenting the defence estimates. I have been spending a good deal of time in sitting here waiting to get to my estimates, but all to no purpose. No one is entirely to blame for that situation. It has been due in part at least to getting certain matters through, namely, the united nations agreement, the food agreement, and so on. I may say also that the fault is not entirely due to the government. There has been a certain amount of discussion taking place on the other side. But now that we have finally' reached them, and I hope that with a reasonable degree of luck we shall be able to get through them promptly.
The hon. member first asked me to give him some information as to the recruiting campaign for the interim force. Let me say at once that
Demobilization-Naval Services

there has been no recruiting campaign at all. A month or six weeks ago we announced the basis on which men would be taken in the interim force in the three services, pending determination as to the terms and conditions on which our permanent forces will be set up. We realized at that time that that was not a very satisfactory basis on which to appeal to a man to stay in the army, but we did want to indicate to those who were in process of being demobilized at that time that we needed the young men who had gained experience in this war in our permanent forces, and that we hoped that some of them (would consider staying on. The committee will recall that when making that statement with respect to the army last week I was able to indicate a little more definitely the terms, and conditions which *would apply to the permanent forces in all three services, and now we are able to give a little better idea as to what the size of those forces will be. I was unable to say exactly what the scale of pay and allowances would be, but a committee has been set up. It is working on the matter now with a view to arriving at a pay scale which will be reasonably uniform between the three services. As I said in my statement, the pay will be good pay. We have not any intention of setting up a cheap permanent force. We have given an undertaking to men when they sign up now in the interim forces that a definite statement will be made not later than March 31 next.
I myself hope that I shall be in a position to make it much earlier, but that is the final deadline we have set. We have said to those men who may decide now to sign up in the interim forces: "If you do not wish to stay on in the permanent forces when you know what the terms and conditions are to be we will relieve you of your undertaking to serve until September 30, 1947." This is not a complete answer to them, but all the man is taking a chance on-if I may put it in that way-is that he is .saying: "Although I am entitled to be demobilized now.I will not go out until the terms and conditions are finally announced which will not be later than next March, and then I can decide whether or not I want to stay in." The only chance he is taking is that he may lose an attractive employment opportunity in the meantime.
We have announced that service in this war, and in the interim forces, will avail as service for purposes of pension. I am informed that that is a point which is of some considerable importance to men who are contemplating joining the services. Again an interdepartmental committee has been working on the question of a pension plan. Its work is well advanced and we shall be in a position to announce that plan at the latest by March 31.



[DOT]3
The committee will recall that the other conditions I mentioned were that promotion will be available to junior officers on the basis of merit even in peace time, and the other conditions which I outlined. Therefore I think that those who may be interested in making the services a career have some fair indication now as to what the conditions are likely to be. It is true they will not know definitely until March 31 at the latest, but I hope that the committee will be 'able to complete its work as to pay scales and one thing and another before that date. At the moment the chief basic task which is occupying the attention of our three services-I know it is the case in the navy and army and I am sure it is the case in the service over which my colleague, the Minister of National Defence for Air, presides -is the demobilization programme. This is taking the attention of a very large proportion of our staff. In both the navy-and I am talking about the navy now-and the army we do not contemplate putting on what one might describe as a recruiting campaign until early in the year. I am not sure myself whether that may not be a bit too early, because, if I remember my own experience, the psychology now is that there is a desire to get out. Until we get a little farther advanced along that road I do not know that a good many chaps who may now want to make the service a career are yet prepared to make a definite decision. In any event, speaking now for the navy, I may say it is not our intention to attempt to put on any organized recruiting campaign, if I may so describe it, until early in the year.


Grote Stirling: Have any come forward
so far?	.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes. We are not so badly off as far as officers are concerned; we could do with more ratings. I have been personally more concerned in seeing that some of the younger officers with combat experience in this war and good technical qualifications may be induced now to make the service a career before they have left and gone out and established themselves in civil life. It was for that reason that we have been endeavouring to give as definite an indication as we could of the conditions under which they would be serving in a peace-time force.


Grote Stirling: Is the minister in a position to give figures?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am not at the moment; I could give them a little later when we are discussing the naval estimates. I have not them before me at the moment. They are appre-

Demobilization-Naval Services
ciable, but they are not large. Frankly, that is not a matter which at the moment is giving us any particular concern. I am speaking of the navy now. We have been concentrating on getting certain key officers, or trying to get them. I am advised by the staff there is no such pessimism. At the appropriate time they will be able to get all the men they need for the post-war navy.


Howard Charles Green: What about the technical men?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is always a problem. Those are the men on whom they are concentrating now; but after all, the Japanese war only ended less than two .months ago, and although our demobilization has been proceeding pretty rapidly we still have a fairly substantial number of men in the navy. I feel reasonably sure that even a number of those who have taken their discharge will come back a little later and ask to be allowed to take on the navy again as a career. Basing my statement on the advice I have had from my officers, I do not really anticipate there will be any serious difficulty in getting the right type of men, the type we want, for our post-war navy. We want to get as many as possible of the younger men, including the younger technical men such as those to whom my hon. friend has referred.
The next point the hon. member for Yale raised was the matter of reserves. I say to him at once that we have not yet completed our definite plans as to the organization of our new reserve set-up. The staff are now working on a submission for an appropriate order in council setting out the terms and conditions of that reserve. I anticipate it will be available very shortly, certainly well within the time we shall need to have it available; but as I indicated a moment ago, at the moment the priority as far as the ' planners and the staff are concerned is to see that the demobilization machine operates smoothly. At the same time we are working on the plans for the reserve, but I am not yet in a position to make any definite public statement as to just what those terms and conditions will be.
The hon. member referred to the value of the sea cadet movement. I am glad he did so, because personally I feel that this movement is performing a most valuable role in our naval set-up. We have never considered that we were a seafaring nation, but during this war we have shown that lads can come from the central provinces and make fine sailors. One way to develop that spirit is,
I think by having these sea cadets corps scattered about in the interior of Canada, 47696-87
where these young lads can learn something about seafaring matters. If I might speak personally, I can say that one of my own boys has found it extremely interesting, and he never had anything to do with seafaring matters until he joined the corps.
Then my hon. friend asked as to the disposition of ships as between the two coasts. I am not in a position nor do I propose to make any definite statement as to the exact disposition of our available ships between the east coast and the west coast. I will say this, however, that Canada is a two-coast country and certainly we have to operate a two-coast navy. Our navy is not to be concentrated on either one or the other coast. If the members of the committee will look at the mathematical total of our ships they will see that by and large the figures I have given can be readily divided by two. I am not prepared to say that we shall have one cruiser on the east coast and one on the west coast at all times, or that we shall have one carrier on the east coast and one on the west coast at all times, and the same with the destroyers. I will say that there will be a substantial portion of our fleet units operating on each of the two coasts.
My hon. friend asked some questions about the cruiser Uganda. As the committee knows, the Uganda returned to Esquimalt some time ago, just before the end of the Japanese war, in order to enable those of her personnel who had not volunteered for Pacific duty to be replaced. She is still at Esquimalt. Two or three days ago we had word from Admiral Fraser, commander of the British Pacific fleet, that the Ontario was no longer required with that fleet. I am pleased to be able to tell the committee that she is now starting on her way back to Canada and I anticipate will arrive within the next month, certainly well before Christmas. The Prince Robert has already arrived at Esquimalt, and as I indicated in an interjection to my hon. friend's remarks this afternoon, we no longer have need for her so that she will be declared surplus and disposed of in the ordinary way. As some of the committee may not know, she was a merchant ship converted to an antiaircraft cruiser for operations in the Pacific. That type of ship is no longer required, so that we do not contemplate retaining her and she will be disposed of.
Now a word as to destroyers. It is true that in my preliminary statement to the committee I did not indicate perhaps as definitely as I might have, or as I am quite 'willing to, what destroyers we would be having in our initial post-war fleet; but as my hon.

Demobilization-Naval Services

friend knows, and as he indicated this afternoon, we now have the four Tribals in operation.


Grote Stirling: Four Tribals in operation?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes, four in operation.


Grote Stirling: In his statement the minister said that two would be commissioned in 1946 and one in 1947.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Those are the ones being constructed. We have four Tribals now in operation and the three now being constructed. As I indicated in my statement, the final one will be completed in 1947. We have two of the V-class fleet destroyers; we have two Crescents, one of which is in Kingston Jamaica, to-day and on her way to the west coast, while the other, as my hon. friend indicated, will be commissioned very shortly. We also have at present one old River-class destroyer which for the moment we contemplate using for training purposes. I am not competent to say whether the Tribals are more modern or more effective than the Crescents. I had never heard that the Crescent was more efficient or more effective than the Tribal. The Crescent is a later type destroyer, it is true, but the Tribal is the largest destroyer in any modern fleet. As its armament it has eight guns and four tubes as against four guns and four tubes for the Crescent, and the vice chief of the naval staff, who had personal experience in operating the Haida, one of these ships in the channel, tells me he found the extra fire power of the Tribal a pretty satisfactory thing to have. In any event no one can say with certainty that the Crescent is a more effective, more efficient or more satisfactory destroyer to have than the Tribal. It is true that the Crescent, as now coming out of the yards, has a more modern type of radar gun control equipment, but that equipment can and will be installed in the Tribals. So that I am not competent to argue with anybody as to the relative merits of design as between the Tribal and the Crescent, but I can say with certainty that both are up-to-date, modern destroyers, and I think the Tribals we have now, with the additional ones we expect to have, should prove very satisfactory units for the Canadian naval service.


Howard Charles Green: What about the other two Crescent destroyers?


Douglas Charles Abbott: As my hon, friend knows, those Crescents are on loan, and at the moment we do not propose to expand the number of our destroyers. The total number, as my hon. friend will remember, is four

Tribals in operation and three under construction; two V-class fleet destroyers, which are modern destroyers, and two Crescents, making up the ten destroyers to which I referred in my statement. If more are needed they can be added at any time. However, at the outset those units to which I referred in my statement, the two cruisers, two light fleet carriers, and ten destroyers, with the usual auxiliary craft such as frigates and minesweepers in reserve, I think constitute a good, workable little fleet to start with. It can be easily expanded if needs be, but that is the fleet which the government and staff feel is a satisfactory, workable type of fleet with which to start our peace-time navy and, as plans at present exist, that is the basis on which we intend to proceed.
As to the naval air service, as the committee knows plans prior to the termination of the Pacific war contemplated our manning two lijght fleet carriers' for Pacific operations. Those carriers were to be on loan from the Royal Navy. They are now being constructed in British yards. The first will be commissioned about January 15 and, according to present information, the other will not be completed until about six or seven months later.
We had arranged for the necessary flying personnel from Canadians who were serving in the fleet air arm with the Royal Navy and for other Canadians who were taken indirectly into the R.C.N.V.R. as flymg personnel and trained, of course, in the fleet air arm, to man those two carriers.


Mr. BROOKS:: How many aircraft would each ship carry?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I cannot answer that at the moment, but I can get the information quickly, and I shall give it later on. That flying personnel was, of course, "hostilities only" personnel. They were not men signing on for a permanent naval career. So that in respect of carriers as in respect of other units in tlie fleet it will now be necessary to provide the personnel from men who will sign on either as interim force or, better still, of course, in the permanent force.
My good friend the hon. member for Quebec South (Mr. Power) in the debate the other night-unfortunately I was not here

 raised the question, or possibly I should say made the suggestion, that careful consideration should be given to the advisability of establishing a separate fleet air arm. I read his. remarks carefully and I note that he did not say that he was definitely against it. He did say that he felt most careful and serious consideration should be given to the ad-

. Demobilization-Naval Services
visability of setting up such a separate fleet air arm because of the probable duplication of staff, and the like. No separate fleet air arm has yet been authorized, but it is contemplated. I think, after having given the matter a considerable amount of study myself, it is desirable that there should be a separate branch of the naval service including flying personnel who are naval officers. It is intended that these officers should be naval officers, as well as flying officers. In other words, they should be full-fledged executive officers, and after training as pilots and flying as pilots or observers on these carriers, in due course they should take their places as ordinary executive officers, let us say, as second in command, or as commander of a carrier. That is the practice which has been followed in other fleets, notably in the Royal Navy and in the United States navy and there is much to recommend it.
Such study as I have been able to give to the matter thus far indicates that there would not be any serious duplication of effort. I understand that discussions are now going on between the navy and the air force with a view to coordinating the training of pilots for fleet purposes. It is quite evident we shall have to maintain air establishments on both east and west coasts, and it would be very easy to arrange that those establishments should conduct training jointly for naval personnel and for those who may contemplate serving in the air force. Then the naval personnel, when they have had their preliminary training at land aerodromes, can get their further training on the two carriers. At any rate, that is the plan, as it has been worked out up to the present time, and it strikes me as being a fairly reasonable sort of plan.


Grote Stirling: Does Canada now own any aircraft suitable for naval air service?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes, we do. We were able to obtain some. While I have not the figures, the fact is that the British were able to provide us with some aircraft they had at Dartmouth, which were flying on carriers in the Atlantic. Those aircraft are available to us now.


Grote Stirling: What are they?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I cannot remember just
now. but I can get the information.
The hon. member asked for more details as to how the estimated figures of 10,000 personnel are made up. I do not think I can do better than place on Hansard a summary of the number of officers and ratings 47696-87J
who, it is contemplated, would be serving afloat, and perhaps in total the number serving ashore. The following table will set out that information:
Personnel Officers Ratings
Cruisers	
102	1,552Light fleet carriers	
63	803Destroyers (fleet)	
102	1,806Destroyers (river class)....	8	154Frigates (river class)	
25	308Minesweepers (Algerines)	...	16	174Minesweepers (105-foot)	.	...	4	30Motor launches	
4	20Miscellaneous craft	
60	778384	5,625
This gives a total, officers and ratings, of 6,009.
Then, for shore establishments, we have a total of 3,999 or almost 4,000, making an estimated grand total of 10,000. This, of course, contemplates that in the peace-time establishment there will be a considerable number of civilian employees. During the war in our shipyards and dockyards we had a great many men in naval uniforms, who were really not sailors. They were doing work such as plumbing, mechanical work and that sort of thing. Personnel of that type are not required in peace time in uniform. This was necessary in war time because it facilitated getting them, keeping them under discipline and that sort of thing. But in peace time, in addition to the uniformed personnel there would of course be a considerable number of civilian personnel performing duties which during the war were performed by men in uniform.


Howard Charles Green: About how many?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have no definite estimate as to that. It is pretty hard to say just at the present time. However, I can indicate generally that there would be a considerable number.


Mr. LENNARD:: Why the increase in
civil salaries?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is one reason, of
course. During the demobilization period we are replacing uniformed personnel as rapidly as possible with civilian personnel. For instance, in a place like national defence headquarters at Ottawa, where we can get a civilian grade 1 clerk to do a Wren's work, we do so.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: What is the complement of a tribal destroyer?
Demobilization-Naval Services


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall have to ask ray
hon. friend to let that question stand. The information will be available in a few moments.


Mr. CASE:: In connection with the navy,
when a man signs on for the interim force how long is it before he knows whether or not he is accepted?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I would say he knows at
once. If he signs on I would say he is accepted. If he applies to his commanding officer and says, "I would like to serve in the interim force," then that of course is subject to acceptance. The commanding officer may take some time to make his decision. If he signs on, he knows right then and there that he is in.


Mr. COCKERAM:: We have been told that the maximum number of men in the navy was 95,000. Before we can intelligently discuss these estimates I think we should know how many men are in the service to-day and how many are being discharged' daily. We would then have some basis for checking up.


Douglas Charles Abbott: About'fifty-three per cent are out to date. I shall have the exact figure in a moment.


Alan Cockeram: How many are you letting out a day?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I do not know that it follows an exact daily average. For the last month or two it has gone on at the rate of about 10,000 a month.


Alan Cockeram: Over 50,000 have been discharged from the navy up to date?


Douglas Charles Abbott: About fifty-three per cent of the total. I do not know that we have discharged' 53,000 to date. Those actually out .or on the way out up to October 31 number 46,773, or 53-2 per cent of the total.


Mr. BOUCHER:: What information is
given to recruits entering the interim service as to the instructions they will recieve or what educational facilities and privileges will be accorded to them during their term of service? They must sign on for two years or probably five years. I think a great number of the men who will volunteer for that period *would want to know what trades they can learn, so that when they return to civil life at the expiry of their# time in two or five years, as the case may be, they will have some equipment to undertake civilian life.
They will also want to know what reestablishment privileges they will have when their term has expired. Just now many forms of assistance are given to our armed forces which are not now available to the man who goes

into the interim force. I think the minister should give more particulars as to the possibilities that are open to these men, or what inducements are being offered for their going into the service.


Douglas Charles Abbott: As I say, a man must make up his mind no later than March 31 whether he wants to stay in the interim force. As to pay, allowances and all the rest, they are exactly the same as he is now receiving. We are taking no new men into the interim force; it is open only to men who are now in the service or who have just been discharged, men who have had training and experience during the war. They will continue to receive the same pay and allowances and all the rest as they received during the war. They are entitled to gratuity,- the rehabilitation grant and reestablishment credits, as well as the various other benefits, educational and the like. I should have answered that question when replying to the hon. member for Yale when he asked what the situation would be with respect to gratuities, and so on.
This matter is now being discussed. It has not yet been settled as to when that will be paid. The rights will continue to accrue to not later than March 31 next, at which time the gratuities, reestablishment credits and so on will cease to accrue. It has not yet been decided whether the man who signs on for a year or two will be paid his gratuity now, but that is being discussed. There is some difference of view between the three services.
As to the man who goes into the permanent force for five years, I must confess that this is a matter which is entirely new to me. If he is now a member of the forces he retains his right to gratuity, reestablishment credits and so on. However, I am afraid I shall have to inquire as to where he would stand if he wanted to take a university education at the end of five years.


George Russell Boucher: A man is not entitled to many of these benefits until he takes 'his discharge. Therefore, if he continues in the interim force or enters the permanent force, he would not take his discharge. Then a man may want to continue his education. I think these men should know what qualifications they can acquire by continuing in the interim or permanent force. The department should give consideration to setting up some sort of vocational training to be coordinated with the military or naval training that these men will receive. This would prove an inducement to the men because they would know they would not be totally helpless should they desire to ask for their discharge to enter civilian life again.

Demobilization-Naval Services
There is also the problem of housing for the wives and families of these men. Will they	be able	to take	advantage of government	loans	in	order to	establish their familiesin homes? I am sure that many hon. members	know	of	men in	the permanent armywho	have	wives and	children whom they
would like to get settled in homes of their own. I understand that at the present time they must have their discharge before they can take advantage of the Veterans Land Act. I understand that if a man is in the permanent force he must get a written statement from his commanding officer that he will remain in the community for approximately ten years.
I know of one or two cases that I want to have ironed out in some way. One man has served during the war and he would like to get established with his family. He would like to go into the permanent force rather than take his discharge, but if he does that he may be transferred to another community. The fact that a man joins the permanent force does not relieve him of responsibility to his wife and children, but it should not react to his disadvantage in connection with rehabilitation grants and other benefits.
I have another case that has just been drawn to my attention. This man was in the permanent force before serving overseas and he intends to remain in that force. He wants to buy in his parental neighbourhood a home in which to establish his wife and children, but he cannot get any benefits under the Veterans Land Act until he obtains his discharge. He may then rejoin the permanent force, but even then he must get a certificate from his commanding officer that he is likely to be kept in the community for the next ten years.
This makes it almost impossible for these men to take advantage of these provisions. I think these matters should be made clear to the men in the three forces because at present it is very disquieting to them.


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend has raised some very good points. A man joining the interim force or the permanent force does not lose any of the benefits to which he is entitled as a result of having served in the war. I will see that my hon. friend's remarks are brought to the attention of the staff who are now working on that very problem. As to giving assurances as to the type of vocational training that will be given men in the permanent navy during peace time, I am not in a position to say anything about that just now. If a man joins as a tradesman he is bound to get training as a mechanic or an
engineer, but I do not think I can give any assurance that definite vocational training courses will be established. I will bear my hon. friend's remarks in mind and discuss them with the staff.
While I am on my feet I may say that the complement of the Tribal destroyer in wartime is 275 men. With the reduction to about four-fifths of the wartime complement, the complement now will be 220 men. As to the aircraft on our light fleet carriers, there is one squadron of twelve bombers or Fireflies. Then we have one squadron of eighteen fighters, Seafires, making a total of thirty.


Grote Stirling: Does the minister say that at the moment no new enlistments are being taken in?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No; what I said was that we are taking in no enlistments in the interim force. I think we are taking enlistments in the permanent force. A man with no previous naval training cannot join the interim force; he must join the permanent force.


Grote Stirling: The statement was made in the press a few weeks ago that 70 per cent of those coming forward were new enlistments who were signing on for a four-year period, and that the others coming in from the present service were coming in in greater numbers than they had been. Is that totally incorrect?	[DOT]


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have not heard of thdse percentages and I would be surprised if they were accurate. I will verify the percentages and give more definite information later. But I know that we are not taking large numbers into the permanent force. Up to comparatively recently we were not anxious to do so because we w-anted to get the scale of pay and allowances clarified, and with very large of wartime personnel still in the service we were not particularly anxious to take into the permanent service new men with no naval training.


Howard Charles Green: When the war estimates first came up for consideration we outlined to the committee four broad principles concerning our defence forces of the future which we asked everybody in the house to endorse. One of those principles was that we must not destroy the efficiency of any of our forces. All the Canadian forces have done splendid work. I think the time element in connection with enlistments for the permanent forces is very important, and just at this time the government must be very careful or they might destroy the efficiency of the forces for a long time to come. Take the navy. The
Demobilization-Naval Services

minister has admitted to-night that not very much attention is being paid to getting any recruits. For the moment they are not bothering very much about the navy of the future.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I said, new men with no naval training.


Howard Charles Green: I can understand that. It is only natural that the department should be concerned primarily at the present time with demobilization, but I think they must put far more emphasis than they have been doing on the navy of the future. Otherwise they are apt to wake up next year and find that they cannot get the men, that they have these ships tied up at the docks on both coasts without men to man them. If that should happen it will be very difficult to build up an efficient navy again. I would urge upon the minister that he change his outlook a bit. He said this evening that the psychology now was to get out, that everybody wanted1 to get out of the navy. I think he is quite wrong there. I have had young men come to me and say that they were eager to make a career of the navy, but that they could not do so and would not feel justified in doing so until they had more of a lead from the government; more information as to what chance there would be of a successful career in the navy.
The very fact that the department have set a total of 10,000 personnel for the navy seems to me to indicate a failure to grasp the problem. We are told by the highest authorities n the country that 10,000 will not be sufficient ;o man the ships that have been listed by the minister to-night. That may or may not be mrrect. Of course, we are in the hands of the experts who understand these matters, but there is at least room for suspicion that this figure of 10,000 is not adequate to ensure that the ships we have or are getting will be properly manned. Does the minister not think it would be wise to raise his sights a little in order to be sure that we shall have enough men? Nobody wants to join a force that is going to be weak; to join a navy that is not going to be able to make the cruises that should be made by an efficient modern navy. I would ask the minister to check over with his officials that question of the numbers to be in the permanent navy just to make sure that 10,000 will be ample. We are very dubious about it, and if the minister starts off with too few I am afraid that it will be difficult to maintain an efficient navy. We are very much concerned lest any one of the forces be allowed to slip back in this interim period, and we would ask the government not to be too smug about having plenty of time to get the forces converted from a war-time to a peace-time basis.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: The question I wish to direct to the minister is one in which I think a great many Canadians are interested, namely, what use is being made of Canada's larger naval vesels in bringing back Canadian troops from the old country? I understand that the smaller vessels will not make efficient troop transports, but are there not some larger vessels that could bring perhaps 350 in one trip? What larger vessels have we that might be used in that work?


Douglas Charles Abbott: We really have no naval
vessels suited to the transport of troops across the Atlantic in winter. We have the auxiliary aircraft carrier Puncher, which has been and still is operating regularly transporting troops, carrying about 200 each trip. We have brought back a considerable number on the older class of destroyers, and a good many have been ferried from Newfoundland. But many of our destroyers have been operating steadily under difficult conditions for a number of years now, and they bady need refitting. In any event, a destroyer is not suited to carrying troops across the Atlantic particularly in winter; I would not want to be one of the troops on them; they are not designed or fitted to transport troops, and the staff tell me that they cannot be used for that purpose. The Puncher is being used and will continue to be used. As my hon. friend indicated, corvettes and frigates for very much the same reason are not suited for the transport of troops, so that unfortunately the naval craft we have are not of. the type suitable for transporting troops across the Atlantic, particularly in winter.


George Hugh Castleden: With regard to the
permanent force, how many have transferred from the present force to the permanent force?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I will take note of the question and try to give that information later.


Mr. MERRITT:: I want to speak to the
question which has been raised by the hon. member for Yale and the hon. member for Vancouver South. I refer to the question of securing sufficient suitable personnel for the navy. My remarks will be applicable, of course, to all three services. I am apprehensive that the government's policy is not going to meet the case. Their own requirements are
55,000	men, and as I shall go on to suggest in the particular case of the navy, there are many people in this house and in the country who believe that figure should be larger. Fifty-five thousand for peace-time service is a very large figure at which to shoot in this country, and I think this whole problem has been approached by the miiiister, if he will not mind my using the word, in too casual an attitude. He has a very great responsibility on his

Demobilization-Naval Services
shoulders at the present time, and in the debate on these estimates I have not seen that he realizes how big that responsibility is.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Appearances are very deceptive.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: The minister says that appearances are very deceptive. That is perfectly true, but I say to him that if he gives the same impression to prospective recruits for his forces as he gives to me he will not get many recruits. I want, however, before I get on with too much criticism of his policy, to say one thing, and that is that the statement he made with regard to the terms of service, when he spoke on the army estimates, has done a great deal to clear up difficulties we have been having up to the present time in understanding his policy, and difficulties which prospective soldiers, sailors and airmen have been having in deciding whether to go into civil life or into the services. It was a very good statement and laid down good principles and it will do much to clear up doubts in the minds of those going into- the services. But that statement is not enough. I say that the whole policy the minister has put forward in regard to the naval services is one of indecision, indecision on size, indecision on principles, indecision on terms of service.
I wish to go over the whole question before I finish because I am going to suggest that there was no need whatever for any indecision in respect of any of these mattens. There are two essentials before you will have officers and men joining your services. The first essential is that the rates of pay, pension and working conditions shall be such as to attract young men. That is the part where the minister has put forward his best effort, but even that is not as complete as it could be or as it should be, although it goes quite a long way. The second essential, however, is the assurance of a continuing force sufficient to warrant, to a man who goes into the navy, a career. Men will not join the services just because the rates of pay are satisfactory if they do not know that those services will continue to exist in sufficient strength to give them a goal to shoot, at in life. That is what they want and it is not only good conditions of service which will bring them into the forces.
Both ministers for the defence services, in bringing down their estimates, have based their inability to make a statement, their desire to have an interim force, and their uncertainty about the future, upon the fact that they do not know what the obligations of the country will be under the united nations charter and also upon the fact that they do not know what the atomic bomb is going to do to the present types of service.
I realize that the matter is difficult to decide; I realize there is a problem there. But I do say this, and I want this to be clearly understood, that no one on this side asks the ministers for any rigidity in their policy. The last thing that we want in navy, army or air force is rigidity of numbers, rigidity of size, rigidity of weapons, rigidity of anything whatever. We must not have that rigidity. But it is possible to go too far the other way and to be too indefinite, and I say that the minister has been too indefinite and that our recruiting will suffer for it.
Let us take the second of the two essentials I gave, career and terms of service. I want to deal first of all with the question of career. What has the minister told us of the future navy? He has told us a little more to-night than we knew before, but still not very much. He has given us the size of the force in men and ships but has not laid down the policy or the principles which have governed the administration in arriving at these sizes. At the beginning of the debate we gave to the government definite principles upon which we suggested that they should proceed. I will run over them quickly: first,, the obligation to defend ourselves; second, the obligation under the united nations charter; third, efficiency; fourth, scientific development; and fifth, coordination of training and equipment with Great Britain and the United States.
I want to point out to the committee a significant matter in this debate, namely, that the minister has given us no principles whatever which have governed him in reaching any of these figures; and more than that, except possibly for the question of scientific development which he dealt with in his statement, he has not even, endorsed one of the principles which the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Green) laid down about . a month ago. He has not even said whether he agreed or disagreed, and he has not given us any principles of his own.
The second thing we know about the navy is this. We have been given a size in men and ships which does not jibe with efficiency. The hon. member for Yale (Mr. Stirling) has pointed out a rough guide of one to one; and the minister himself, in making his speech on the navy, gave some significant figures. For a force for the Pacific war bigger than the proposed peace-time fleet by some forty frigates he was going to have 13,500 at sea and a large number-I forgot what it was- of reinforcements on shore.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Thirty-five hundred.
[DOT] 1374
Demobilization-Naval Services


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: Thirty-five hundred; and in addition to those thirty-five hundred he was going to have another 21,500 of personnel doing shore jobs during the war. That is, the relative figures between those at sea and those on shore would be one at sea to one and a half on shore. The figures he gave to-night show a proportion of five at sea to four ashore and I suggest that that does not give us any assurance that this will be an efficient navy. Although it is becoming clearer as we go on with the debate what the plans are

and I for the life of me cannot understand why we were not told in the first place all these things and so saved my talking to-night, and talking on the part of a lot of other people-we were told there was to be an interim navy; and from the suggested term and title, without any explanation, one might gather that it was not only a navy interim in personnel but a navy interim in ships. If the navy is to be interim in ships, where does that Canadian sailor's career come from? Therefore I suggest that the second consideration, the provision of a career, has not been met at all by anything that we have heard from the minister in this debate. Neither by a statement of principle nor by any statement of fact has the minister guaranteed that there will be a permanent and continuing navy which warrants a career.
Let me turn for a moment to the first consideration. The terms of service must be such as to be attractive to a young man who has the alternative of a career in civil life. The minister has given in principle terms which I find go a long way toward being satisfactory; but I suggest that October 16, some three weeks after this debate opened, was a very late time to come forward with what I should have thought would be obvious from the first, namely, that these terms of service must be laid down quickly and decisively so that men who are now making up their minds would know what to do.
Before coming to the terms of service I should like to speak for a moment on the danger of an interim navy and an indefinite policy. I suggest that indecision in this matter has an effect, first of all, on the morale of the force itself; second, on the attitude of the public toward that force, and third, on the attraction of recruit-s to the force. We all remember the pre-war attitude of this country and the great difficulty there was in obtaining recruits for a permanent force very much smaller than the proposed one. I wish to say to the minister-and this is where I take great issue with him-that we are not a warlike nation; we do not rush to the colours
[Mr. Abbott1
in peace time. We are a great country with a small population, and we have all sorts of things to do in developing this country without turning for our livelihood to the forces.
The time has come when we must maintain reasonably sized forces. The minister is now in the position where he is responsible for obtaining these men. If I were in his position I would not take my responsibility as lightly as he appears to take it. He has a very great task ahead of him and I hope he succeeds, but I suggest that he must change his attitude if he is ever to get 55,000 men for the three services.
The great problem of this government is not to decide on the particular size of the forces. The great problem of the government is to maintain interest in these services at a time when they are necessary and at a time when everybody is trying to get out of the services. As the hon. member for Vancouver South said, if he lets them go now, if he gives people the idea that he does not want them in his services, then he will have a very difficult time getting them in the spring or at any other time.
While I am on that subject may I refer to the statement of the minister that he was at present working on the demobilization programme and that there would be no recruiting campaign until early in the year. I should like to know from him to-night whether, without that recruiting campaign, and without an active recruiting campaign, we can expect to see the two cruisers in commission this winter.
The task facing the minister is not made more easy in this country by the attitude that the government took on its man-power policy during the war. The people of Canada do not believe that they handled the manpower policy any too well; and when we get this kind of thing in the peace-time services they are going to be inclined to think it is the same government with the same policy for peace time that they had in war.
I suggest that the minister must get out and get this force; I suggest that he must start as soon as he can, because I know and many other hon. members know, by talking with excellent young officers face to face who have seen service in this war, that many of them have said: "We would like to stay in; we do not know the terms of service; they are completely indefinite; we cannot wait around; we have to get out." We have had those terms of service almost dragged out in this debate like pulling teeth. I suggest to the minister that he circulate them around the country with quite as much publicity as is being given to a certain victory loan poster.

Demobilization-Naval Services
In addition to those who have said definitely that they are not going to stay in because they do not see that career ahead of them, there are any number who are undecided. Although the minister has not given us any information I hope he will do so. Any information I have had indicates that the total numbers coming forward are very small indeed. The test of it all is, of course, are those recruits coming forward in adequate numbers? Until we have that information I suppose the issue cannot be decided. But what happens to this navy if we do not get enough men? In the first place, we will never get the efficiency which it is so obvious we must have in any force. And if we do not get enough men and we want to keep up efficiency we are going to have to put ships out of commission. Fpr all we know, the Uganda is practically out of commission now at the start of the programme. We remember too that there was some desire to have a bigger navy after the last war. The cruiser Aurora in particular was kept in commission for a very short time, then taken around to Halifax and laid up, and then after everyone had forgotten about her, she was scrapped. We do not want that to happen again, and it is up to the government to make certain that it does not happen. I suggest that although the minister cannot state figures or principles, he should give us in this debate an undertaking that these ships which he has indicated will form part of the peace-time navy, will be kept in commission for a period, for as many years as he can commit himself to now. If he did that, then many fears on this side of the house and many of his difficulties in getting recruits would be removed.
I said earlier that' I thought this whole policy was one of indecision, and that there was no necessity for it. I do not want to let this opportunity pass without explaining what I meant by that. Why should we be indefinite as to the future of the navy? The minister said that because of our indefinite obligations under the united nations charter and because of the possible effect of the atomic bomb-


Douglas Charles Abbott: I did not mention that.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: The minister said that he did not mention that. If necessary, I can refer to the passage in his speech. Certainly the Minister of National Defence for Air mentioned the atomic bomb as one of the reasons for indecision. I say that just because we have the atomic bomb, that is no reason whatever to wait before making up our minds what our forces are to be. -Ordinary forces still are necessary. We do not have to look very far back into history to see this same 47696-88
argument advanced again and again. The most recent and most striking example was just before the last war, when everyone said that the war would be decided by air power. It was quite common talk in the streets, referring to Great Britain, that we did not need an expeditionary force on the continent; it would not be of any use having one there because the war would be decided in the air. So that there was only a very small expeditionary force available to go to France in 1939, and as a result we got into all kinds of danger there. That is exactly the same argument we hear advanced now in connection with the atomic bomb; and that argument has been heard before each war all the way back through history. Therefore the atomic bomb gives us no reason for waiting, no reason not to be decisive now and know what we are going to do.
Now let us turn to our duties under the security pact of the united nations. Again there is no reason to. wait. In the first place, those duties may be undecided for an indefinite period of time, five or six years or more. What are we going to do in the meantime? In the second place, I suggest that when those duties are announced they will not affect us substantially in our calculations with respect to our armed forces. I would remind the committee of a fundamental principle in military thought, expressed in these words: every commander is responsible for his own local protection at all times. I was taught that this principle applied to a private soldier as well as to a section commander and also to a government in deciding high matters of policy. Our first duty is to defend this country to the maximum extent of which we are reasonably capable. We do not need to wait for any united nations charter to make up our minds what our defence force should be. Our duties under the security council, even when we know them and after we have provided our defence force, are not going to make much difference to us, because I suggest to the committee that our duty will consist of three things. First, we shall be. responsible for our own imfnediate local defence. Second, we shall be responsible for material aid and possibly for convoy duty in getting our materials to where the united nations want to use them. Third, it is very unlikely that we would ever be called upon for an expeditionary force, because the great powers have ample forces and they would not need a division or something like that from Canada, which would only make their administration more complicated. But even if an expeditionary force from this country were required, still that would not make any difference to the size our force

Demobilization-Naval Services

ought to be, because the use of an expeditionary force from Canada at the behest of the united nations would presuppose that the united nations were working together-


Douglas Charles Abbott: I do not wish to interrupt my hon. friend, but we are on the naval estimates now. I do not know whether he is referring to a naval expeditionary force, or what.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: I am referring to a naval expeditionary force, or an army or air force; it really does not matter.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is quite all right.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: I am referring now to the reason given as to why greater particulars could not be communicated in regard to the navy in principle and in fact, that reason being that our duties under the united nations charter were uncertain. Therefore I say, even if that expeditionary force were required by the united nations council, we could send our defence force, so that really there is nothing in this point about having to wait for a decision by the security council of the united nations before deciding what our defence forces should be.
Our permanent forces, navy, army and air force, exist and should be set up now for two purposes: first, to maintain our own immediate local defence until our allies can come to our aid or unitl we can mobilize our reserves; second, to train our reserves. We know what those local defence requirements are; we know what those training requirements are, and we can say now what kind of forces we ought to have.
In conclusion, I simply want to say that while on this side of the house we have not the technical advice available to the minister, and perhaps, therefore, may not be able to offer any detailed criticism as to the actual number of ships required, or anything like that, still we are in a position to offer some constructive suggestions, and I am going to close by summing up my suggestions to ensure that the minister gets 55,000 men or more for the armed services, of whom I suggest that 15,000 rather than 10.000 should be for the navy. First of all I say to him: Be definite in principle. Disclose your principles fully. Take the house and the public into your confidence. Above all, give the country a general assurance, perhaps, but an enthusiastic assurance, certainly, that in this navy a young Canadian can find a career equal to anything he could find in civilian life. Second I say to him, forget the . term "interim navy" or "interim army." Wash it right out. Create your permanent Royal Canadian Navy now. If you require some short service personnel in addition to the 
regular personnel, recruit them on terms more beneficial than those offered your long service personnel.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have never used the term "interim navy" in my life. Somebody else must have put it into my mouth.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: If the minister did not
use it I am sure it must have come from his department, because certainly it is all around the country to-day.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No, it did not come from
my department, and it did not come from me.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: In connection with the
navy, provide it on the scale necessary for our own local protection and for our training. The minister will not go far wrong if he holds to those two principles. . Then coordinate the rates of pay and working conditions with civil opportunity. The minister has given us an assurance in that connection, and I want to thank him for it. But there are two ways of getting men for peace-time service, by conscription and by the voluntary system. If we are not to have conscription, and I for one do not advocate it, we must get these men by the voluntary system. If they do not come forward with the rates of pay and conditions of service offered by the minister initially, he must raise those rates and better those conditions until he does get the men, because, above all, we place upon him the responsibility of finding those men.


Jean-François Pouliot: It is always with the utmost pleasure that I listen to the remarks of my hon. friend the member for Vancouver-Burrard (Mr. Merritt). It is the first time I have had the pleasure of rising after him, and I take this opportunity to congratulate him upon his accomplishments during the last-war. May I remind him, too, that Colonel Dollard Menard, who was with him at Dieppe, was born in my constituency. By the way, Colonel Menard, like the hon. member from Vancouver-Burrard, was not a swivel-chair hero. Both of them were good men.
I am under a handicap when discussing military matters with the hon. member who has just spoken. However, as neither of us is a sailor, we are on equal footing when we discuss naval estimates. Let me pay this tribute to the minister, that he has undertaken onerous duties. I cannot understand how he could reasonably expect to take charge of the Department of National Defence for Naval Services as well as the Department of National Defence, when they were both in such a mess. But I admire his courage, and I give him credit for assuming such responsibilities.

Demobilization-Naval Services
Coming back to the able speech by the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard, may I say. that I noted his suggestion to increase naval personnel from 10.000 to 15,000. But let us suppose that he were a young man of eligible age, without his very fine war record, and that he had thought sometimes of enlisting in the navy. After listening to a depressing speech, such as the one he has just delivered, would he have done so? No, I do not think he would have rushed to a naval recruiting office and said, "I want to become a sailor."
Of course there is poetry in a naval career. I shall always remember the sight of a young sailor who stood with his sweetheart in front of the show-case of a silversmith or jeweller. Both of them were looking at engagement rings. The sailor pointed his finger at one of them, while his fiancee looked at another. Finally, after a mild argument-an argument so mild, may I say, that we have had none of the kind in the house-the boy nodded his assent to the suggestion of the girl.
Well, there is romance! There is always romance in the navy, and because of that the navy has a special appeal. Of course there are heavy seas, and it is hard to be a sailor. At times it is a hard life, because one must remain a long time away from home. But there is so much poetry in the crests of the waves, in the music of the winds, and in the idea that one is between heaven and the sea- not between the devil and the deep blue sea-throughout all the day and all the night, for all the time. The sailor is always thinking of coming back to his home and telling his family of the wonders accomplished while the dear one was away.
There is a way to induce young men to join the navy, and there is another way to induce young men to keep far away from it. I shall leave it to the committee' to decide what the effect of the speech delivered by the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard would have been on a group of young men who, before listening to him, would have been ready to enlist in the navy.
Some proposals have been made to establish a permanent navy for the defence of this country and for the convoying of ships all over the world. One thing I do hope is that if the suggestion of the minister is accepted by the committee and by parliament, we shall have a Canadian navy which will not be under the control of the admiralty, but one which will act in cooperation with it. There is a great difference between both ideals, both suggestions.
In the first place those who believe that the Canadian navy shall be under the orders 4769G-88J
of the admiralty have an inferiority complex. They do not exist as Canadians. They do not think as Canadians. They think as human beings while living in an adjunct of the empire called Canada, and thpy still believe that the admiralty has jurisdiction over this country. There is a great difference between domination by the admiralty and cooperation with it.
I remember that when His Majesty the King came to Canada in 1939 he had on board his ship an admiral of the fleet who had that funny name of Sir Dudley Pound. Of course the ship was delayed by fog off the coast of Newfoundland, and it remained there at anchor for some time. I was very much worried, because I wanted to see the king. I said, "As a loyal Canadian subject I have a right to see the king, an3 I do not see why Dudley Pound keeps the king away from me." That was what I said in the house. Dudley Pound was there and kept the king in the fog, despite the protestations of the member for Temiscouata to let the king come ashore in this country, and land in Quebec city. But Dudley Pound was there, and Dudley Pound kept the king in the fog. Great man, Dudley Pound! But finally the king came here, and there was bright sunshine when he landed from the ship at Quebec harbour.
I met some other admirals of the fleet. In London there are at least a dozen or two admirals of the fleet. I was dumbfounded. I said to one admiral, "Who is the admiral of the fleet?" and he said, "I am". I asked again, "Who is the admiral of the fleet?" and another one answered, "I am." They were all admirals of the fleet. Here we have an admiral of the fleet called Jetty Jones. He was chosen by that great man, Angus L. Macdonald, who I hope will be defeated tomorrow, although I do hope the great Liberal party of Nova Scotia will secure a victory. Jetty Jones was not there when the explosion occurred. He was afraid of the explosion and he came here, but afterwards he was told to go back.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am very sorry if I have made a mistake. It is the first time I have made a mistake.


Douglas Charles Abbott: As soon as he heard of the explosion he went immediately to the damaged area, before almost anyone else.


Jean-François Pouliot: I thank the minister for his explanation. I thought the admiral had returned. I hope the minister will fire him as soon as possible and thus get sgmeone out

Demobilization-Naval Services
of the department. Once I was in Halifax and1 I noticed a number of sailors who were servants at H.M.C.S. whatever it is in Halifax, at the dockyard. There is a special name for the dockyai'd but I do not remember exactly what it is.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Cornwallis.


Jean-François Pouliot: Oh, no.	.


An hon. MEMBER:: Temiscouata.


Jean-François Pouliot: It is Stadacona, or something like that, some Indian name. Those men swarm around' like ants; they are all over everything. They are good men. As I said in the first place, I think a lot of the army. I admire the sailors and all members of the crews in the navy, but there is one thing I cannot understand. The men of the navy enjoy overseas preference in connection with the civil service, but the men of the merchant marine do not. These men were just as much exposed as the men in the navy but they do not get the same preference in the civil service. I cannot see any difference between the man serving on a ship under the minister and the man serving on a ship under the Minister of Transport or on the ship of some private navigation company. Stokers work under sea level in both cases and sailors run the same risks. The men in the navy who have sailed only in Canadian waters are entitled to overseas preference. I am not objecting to that, what I object to is that the man who has served on a mercantile ship does not enjoy the same overseas preference in connection with civil service appointments.
I know the minister is very well disposed toward this matter, and I know his colleagues have the same favourable disposition. But the fact is that this discrimination exists and it should be corrected at once. I know of one case-of course everything happens in my constituency-where two young men were applying for a position. One stated that he had overseas service, but the other man, who had served on a merchant ship and had gone overseas many times, did not have the same privilege. This is not fair and I am sure every member of the committee will feel likewise. It is something that should be corrected at the earliest possible opportunity.
I appreciate the kindness of the committee. I will not imitate 'Churchill in saying that I consider myself to be a child of parliament, but I consider the House of Commons is a real mother to me.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I should like to answer one or two points raised by the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard. I am sorry if I conveyed the impression of being casual or of not taking my responsibilities seriously. That perhaps is

due to an unfortunate mannerism on my part, or it may be due to the fact that my hon. friend has not known me very long. I can assure him that I take my responsibilities very seriously indeed. I will express no opinion at all as to how I am discharging them, but again I assure him that I do take them very seriously.
I think the other important charge he made against me and against the government was that we had been indefinite and indecisive in announcing our post-war policy. Perhaps we have been, and I do not admit it, but I want to say that we have been more definite than any other allied country in announcing the character and composition of our post-war forces. We have been more definite than Great Britain or the United States.


Howard Charles Green: The United States announced the particulars of their fleet.


Douglas Charles Abbott: They have not announced it.
I do not think the time is ripe to lay down hard and fast rules as to what our post-war forces are to be, whether army, navy or air force.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: I did not ask the minister to lay down hard and fast rules; all I asked was that he lay down hard and fast principles.


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend said that we had been indefinite and had not stated in sufficient detail what our forces were to be.
I may not be able to answer that charge, but I am saying that at least we have been more definite than any other country that I know of. I think it is still too early to attempt to lay down hard and fast rules as to what those forces are to be, either as to the nature of their composition or as to their size. I never made any reference to the atomic bomb, but. I did refer to new and terrible weapons. There are a good many new weapons besides the atomic bomb, jet propulsion, for example.
I suggest that only six weeks after the end of the Japanese war is a little too early to lay down hard and fast rules as to just what types of ships we are to have or just how many men will be in our post-war forces. I think we have to proceed a little more slowly than that.


Mr. D. KING HAZEN (St. John-Albert):: When the Minister of Finance moved that the house go into committee to consider this resolution to grant 81,365 million toward defraying the cost of the war and demobilization, the hon. member for Vancouver South, who opened the debate for the official opposition, outlined four broad principles which he believed should form the basis of the defence policy of this country. I propose to summarize those four principles as an introduction to my brief remarks.

Demobilization

Naval Services
Those principles are: first, that we must be prepared, if attacked, to defend Canada to the best of our ability and be in position to live up to our commitments under any agreement we enter into with the security council under the charter of the united nations. Second, we must maintain the efficiency of our armed forces. Third, our armed forces must be given the help of our scientists to enable them to keep up to date and have the most modem improvements in equipment and training. Fourth, there should be the closest coordination in training and types of equipment among the different nations of the British commonwealth and empire and the United States.
I wish to lay some emphasis this evening on the third principle that we have suggested, namely, that our armed forces have the help of our scientists. I do so because I believe that it is a matter of pressing importance. I think the minister of defence, when he made his informative statement on the navy, did not [DOT] deal with the matter fully or make a complete or wholly satisfactory statement on the subject. His remarks will be found on page 875 of Hansard, where he said:
While it may be difficult to continue naval scientific research on an extensive scale during peace time, it will be generally agreed, I think, that the service should keep itself abreast of developments in the field and that an adequate organization and facilities for that purpose must be maintained.
I would ask the minister this question: Why should it be difficult to continue scientific research on an extensive scale in peace time? I would ask him this further question:	If
we fail to continue scientific research on an extensive scale in peace time, how can we keep abreast of developments?
I want to be fair to the minister, and so . I will bring to the attention of the committee a statement he made to this house when he-spoke on Tuesday last, not as minister of national defence for the navy but as minister of defence for the army, which statement I thought was somewhat more reassuring. He said on that occasion as reported at page 1134 of Hansard:
Recent developments have demonstrated how vital it is that we should maintain an adequate organization for scientific research and development.
The desirability of placing, research on the broadest possible basis, with close integrations of the efforts of the three armed services and the national research council, is fully realized and further action to that end is now under active consideration.
Perhaps that was as far as he could go at that time for plans and policies on an important subject such as this require, time and careful consideration. But he said that active
consideration is being given to the matter, and I hope that active consideration is being given to it. The matter is of such great and urgent importance that the committee is entitled, I think to a 'complete statement of government policy in the very near future; it is entitled to this statement before this session ends. The minister told us this evening that the chief task of his department was the demobilization programme. But it seems to me that this is a task of even greater importance.
In the past, Canadian industry and government have been far too dependent on sources outside the country for the results of research and there has been little dissemination of technical knowledge. I do not think any member of the house will take issue with me on that statement. The words are not my own. They will be found in the white paper presented to parliament by the Minister of Reconstruction in April of this year, which deals with reconstruction in the second stage of the war and is entitled, "Employment and Income with Special Reference to the Initial Period of Reconstruction."
I, like many others, hold the view that scientific research has become so important that it is the vital factor in our future existence as a free country. It must be the keynote of our defence. Without it we cannot maintain our liberties against aggression. It seems to me that in view of the great discoveries and developments which have been made in the world of science during the war that has just ended, and of the future developments which we expect as a result of what we have learned, it is of the greatest importance that Canada continue its scientific investigations on an extensive scale and encourage her scientists in order that we may be in a postiion to defend our country in the days to come.
General George C. Marshall, chief of staff of the United States army, in a report he made to the secretary of war this month, on the 9th instant, urged that the United States be kept strong and ready for future aggression from any source.
For the United States to be kept in this position he recommended first and foremost "constant intensive scientific research and development." His words are as applicable to Canada as they are to the United States. If this country is to be in a position to defend itself from aggression or to wage war when its freedom is threatened the government must have constant intensive scientific research and development and close cooperation with the research organizations of Great Britain and the United States. It is, I believe, the duty

Demobilization-Naval Services
of the government to maintain and encourage scientific research in order that we can defend ourselves against modem weapons of war.
General Marshall said in his report that he had asked General H. H. Arnold, chief of the United States armed forces, to estimate the capabilities of modern weapons. General Arnold in his report referred to some of the hitherto highly secret developments, and in the course of his remarks said:
We can direct rockets to targets by electronic devices and new instruments which guide them accurately to sources of heat, light and magnetism. Drawn by their own fuses such rockets will streak unerringly to the heart of big factories, attracted by the heat of the furnaces. They are so sensitive that in the space of a large room they aim themselves towards a man wfto enters, in reaction to the heat of his body.
Within the next few years there will be produced jet-propelled bombers with speeds of 500 to 600 miles an hour, flying to targets 1,500 miles distant at altitudes above 40.000 feet. Development of even greater bombers, to operate in the stratosphere at supersonic speeds and carrying bomb loads of more than 100.000 pounds already is certain.
These aircraft will have sufficient range to attack any spot on the earth and return to a friendly base.
At this very moment we are making a single bomb weighing 45,000 pounds to keep pace with the bomber, already under construction, which will carry such a load. Air ordnance engineers have blueprinted a bomb weighing 100,000 pounds.
Improvement of jetfighters may well produce w-thin the next five years an aircraft capable of the speed of sound and of reaching targets
2,000	miles away at altitudes above 50,000 feet.
It is essential that this country, through scientific research keep pace with these developments.
General Marshall, in the course of his report, said that "discovery of the secret of atomic power can be man's greatest benefit or it can destroy him," and he added these words:
It is against the latter terrible possibility that this nation must prepare or perish.
His words are as applicable to Canada as they are to the United States. We must plan and be prepared to meet modem scientific instruments of destruction with modern scientific instruments of defence.
Last Wednesday, the 17th instant, General Marshall appeared before a congressional committee on the effect of the atomic bomb on the size of military .establishments. In the course of his evidence he said that "if a war of atomic bombs ever gets started the United States intends to have a good supply of the devastators on hand," and he went on to say that two big bomb plants were producing right now" and "building up a reserve."
What are we doing here in Canada? Have w'e or are we to have any plants that will produce these bombs? Have we any arrangement with the United States about their

production? General Marshall's statement was referred to in an editorial that appeared in the Ottawa Journal the other day, which said that if these matters can be discussed openly before a congressional committee by the chief of staff of the United States army they surely can be discussed openly in parliament.
Canadian scientists have made important contributions to the development of modem weapons of war and of defence, but more important work lies ahead and should be undertaken with the assistance of the government. Constant, intensive scientific research and development should be the keystone of our defence policy.
In July of this year, Doctor Vannevar Bush, director of the office of scientific research and development, an emergency organization that has been set up in the United States, presented to the president a report dealing with what should be done to extend scientific research and development in the United States after the war. This report states that "in this war it has become clear beyond all doubt that scientific research is absolutely necessary to national security." If quotes from a joint letter which the United States secretaries of war and navy sent to the national academy of science as follows:
This war emphasizes three facts of supreme importance to national security: 1. Powerful new tactics of defence and offence are developed around new weapons created by scientific and engineering research. 2. A competitive time element in developing these weapons may be decisive 3. War is increasinly total war in which the armed services must be supplemented by active participation of every element of the civilian population.
To ensure continued preparedness along farsighted technical lines the research scientists ot the country must be called upon to continue in peace time some substantial portion of those types of contribution to the national security which they have made so effectively during the stress of the present w7ar.
The report goes on to say:
There must be more-and more adequate- military research during peace time. We cannot again rely on our allies to hold off the enemy while we struggle to catch up. Further, it is clear that only the government can undertake military research; for it must be carried on in secret. Much of it has no commercial value and is expensive. The obligation of government to support research on military problems is inescapable.
The report says that "military preparedness requires a permanent independent, civilian-controlled organization having close liaison with the army and navy but with funds directly from congress, and with clear power to initiate military research which will supplement and strengthen that carried on directly under the control of the army and the navy."	.

_____	Demobilization-Naval Services
I quote these brief extracts from the report as it appears in the appendix to Fortune magazine of September, since they support the position I have taken, and I would suggest to the minister that he and his officials make a study of the report if they have not already done so.	.
I would now ask the minister to tell us what the government proposes to do with the mechanical and engineering buildings of the national defence council which were erected near the city of Ottawa early in the war, at, I understand, at a cost of $3 millions. Is it the intention of the government to keep these buildings open and functioning as at present? Does it propose to keep up the staffs of scientific workers in these buildings ^ or to curtail the staffs? If it proposes to curtail them, to what extent? Has it lost any of the scientists who were employed in those buildings since peace was declared, or perhaps I should say more correctly, since the termination of hostilities.
There is another matter that I would refer to briefly. It has to do with the conversion of our industries from peace to a war basis in the event of hostilities. I do not think this matter has been referred to in this debate. In making plans for our future defence consideration should be given to a tie-in with industry and close planning so that quick industrial mobilization may be had in the event of war in order that there may be a quick turnover from peace to war production. This should be a matter of close study by the government in cooperation with our industrialists and the plans that are drawn up should be reviewed from time to time.
We all know how difficult and disquieting was the process of developing war industries and turning out the necessary munitions of war after we declared war in 1939. We all know of the difficulties and delays we experienced then in obtaining plants, machine tools, materials and equipment, and what great delays there were at that time. What we learned as a result of that experience should not be lightly brushed aside or forgotten, but we should profit by those rather bitter lessons. They should be made the basis for future defence in planning the conversion of peacetime industries in the event of war and also in connection with the reserves of essential materials. Has this matter been given consideration by the government? It is a matter that should have its best consideration as I have already said, and plans should be made in order that our peace-time industries may be turned over to war-time industries as quickly as possible in the event of hostilities.
In conclusion, I desire to say that I believe the defence of our country is one of such vital importance that it should not become a matter of party politics. It should be placed on a level above party. Never again should there be any cleavage on the size or effectiveness of our armed forces. This may be a difficult thing to bring about; it may be difficult to prevent such a cleavage from happening. Undoubtedly there will be differences of opinion, but those differences of opinion should not develop into party issues if this can be avoided. It would assist in preventing this from happening if a standing committee of the house were set up by the government on defence matters as we have suggested. This committee would enable members of the house to obtain first hand information from chiefs of staffs and other experts, which would be not only of great educational value but also of great value in enabling them to come to sound conclusions on defence policies that are so vital to the future safety of this nation.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I thank the hon. member for St. John-Albert for his constructive contribution, and as he very fairly pointed out I elaborated a bit more on my statement on the army as to what the research and development was than I did in the other. He is quite right when he said that I am not in a position to make a more definite statement here as to just how that matter will be handled other than to say that the chiefs of staff of the three services are now working with the officials of the research council with a view of preparing and submitting to me and to the government specific recommendations as to how this question of research and development should be handled. When these recommendations have been made, which I anticipate will be fairly soon, and have been considered I should be in a position to make a far more definite statement to the house. I think that was the main point in my hon. friend's remarks and I wish to answer in detail.


Mr. MOORE:: I should like to ask a question of the minister-


Howard Charles Green: There was a question about the building.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have not that information; it is all part and parcel of the same thing. I shall get that information. I think it relates more to the army than to the navy.


Douglas King Hazen: There was one other matter to which I referred, namely, the plans we should make in the event of hostilities in the future. I was referring to plans for a rapid conversion.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I overlooked saying that those plaps are definitely under way, yes.
. COMMONS Demobilization-Naval Services


Ronald Stewart Moore: I should like to ask the minister a question in connection with the disposal of Royal Canadian Navy ships. I understand-


Douglas Charles Abbott: This brings up an important point. Would my hon. friend give me a moment? I had intended to say this a bit earlier in the discussion. We followed the practice in past sessions, as hon. members who were here will remember, of attempting to introduce a reasonable amount of order into the consideration of the estimates by considering them under twelve or thirteen main headings, which were called primary ones. It was usually understood that general matters would be discussed under the first heading, which happens to be "civil salaries". It was more or less agreed that matters of general interest would be dealt with under the first item and that specific questions relating to special subjects would be dealt with under the particular heading. For instance, I think the question of ships would very properly come under item 10, which, as the committee will see from the list which has been passed around, relates to acquisition, construction, charter, repairs and upkeep of ships. I should like to raise that point at this stage. Up to the present we have been discussing naval matters in general terms, which is quite proper under item 1; but if we are to go into specific detail I think it would make for a more orderly handling if we can as far as possible do it when we consider these primaries item by item.


George Hugh Castleden: Is there any item there for disposal?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I think actually it could quite properly come under the heading "Acquisition, construction, charter, repairs and upkeep of ships." That item relates to dhips, and when that item comes up I should have my data on ships with me.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I rise to a point of order? My point of order is this. I do not speak for the hon. member for Churchill, but I have no objection to the minister's suggestion that at some stage in t)he proceedings we reach a point where we should begin to discuss these matters under items. But if the minister is going to suggest that that rule should be applied to the hon. member for Churchill, it should apply to other hon. members as well.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is true. We started consideration of the estimates to-night. But my hon. friend knows as well as I do-he was in the last parliament-the practice has been for us to carry on a fairly general discussion under the first item, although the matters do' not relate to civil salaries.


Stanley Howard Knowles: We have had that.


Douglas Charles Abbott: So far the matter has been general. We discussed research and development. We have discussed general topics, and my hon. friend is now asking a specific question as to the disposal of ships. I could probably answer it here to-night, but I suggest, unless it is urgent, that he hold that question until we come to the item which deals with ships. I could then have my data and figures on ships before me, instead of having to work through my books or consult the officials. I make that suggestion in the interests of order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am quite in agreement with the position the .minister takes. However, I would suggest that he be equally vigilant with other hon. members.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall do my best. I cannot offer any guarantee; as my hon. friend knows from past experience, it is impossible to adhere strictly to that rule in every case. We always get off it a little bit. Unless we have some rule of that kind it is difficult to get through the estimates. We really need to take them up one by one and pass them and then go on to the next.


Ronald Stewart Moore: I am quite willing to defer that question.


John Bracken: I was rising to ask only one question, but in view of the discussion in the last minute or two caused by the question of the hon. member for Churchill, spoken to by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, and answered by the minister, perhaps I might say a word or two on it. When we first came into this committee of the whole to deal with these estimates for war expenditures and demobilization, speaking for this party I said that we would undertake to discipline ourselves and follow the procedure as outlined by the minister to-night. That was not because there is any rule requiring us to do so. As a matter of fact the government's own procedure does not require anyone to refrain from taking up any item in this committee at any time. There is only one resolution before us, to provide $1,365 million for war expenditures and demobilization for the next seven months. That is the only resolution before us, but I agree wholeheartedly that in order to get ahead we must discipline ourselves and follow some general procedure on which we can agree. The general procedure suggested was that on the first item of each minister's estimates a general discussion could take place. There was no decision as to how long that might be continued. After that we should try to keep our discussions to the details of each specific

Demobilization-Naval Services
item as we came to it. This party is willing to follow that procedure in order to expedite the work of the house.
When we first began to consider these estimates there was some misunderstanding as to the meaning of certain figures which had been given hon. members. We were given a table showing certain figures for the first five months of this fiscal year and certain other figures for the last seven months. Later, I believe it was explained by the government that those figures should not be taken too literally, that the figures under the first column did not necessarily mean that much money had .been spent, and the figures for the last seven months were not necessarily accurate as to the requirements for that period. In view of the fact that those figures did not mean very much to the committee, or were not very helpful in the consideration of the estimates, we asked the Minister of National Defence for Air if he could give us the actual expenditures for the first five months and the estimated expenditures for the last seven months. The minister did so. At the same time he explained that even those figures would not be very helpful in determining whether a certain amount was the best amount for a certain item.
The question I want to ask the minister is this. Has he considered following the revised procedure in connection with the navy and army estimates? Perhaps I should follow that with this other question: does he consider that such figures would be useful to the committee if he did give them? In my experience in voting estimates for the last twenty years or more, figures of that kind have been very helpful. That may not be the case in this interim period between war
and peace. If the minister considers they would be of some use I respectfully suggest that he do as his associate minister did and give us the actual figures for the first five months and the estimated figures for the next seven months.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I can give the figures for six months now, and personally' I think it would be very helpful to the committee to have them in that form. The committee will see that the papers which have been circulated are set up on the basis of contrasting estimates for 1944-45 with estimates for 1945-48, showing what has been granted already and what additional amounts are required to March 31, 1946. Those forms were prepared a month or more ago, when I thought I might be going on a little earlier. It has now been possible to prepare, and I have had prepared, a statement showing the amounts actually expended from April 1 to September 30, a period of six months, with the total asked for the year and, in case the committee may be interested, the percentage which the total amount expended bears to the total amount asked for the year.


John Bracken: Could the minister make copies available to all hon. members?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have not had those made available. I could put them on Hansard tonight, and they would be available to-morrow; perhaps that might be the simplest way of getting the information before the committee quickly.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Then with the consent of the committee I shall place these tables on Hansard:
NAVAL SERVICE-ESTIMATES 1945-46 Schedule Showing Actual Expenditures from 1st April to 30th September, 1945
Objects of expenditure
Civil salaries	
Pay and allowances	
Travel, transportation and freight	
Properties:
(A)	Capital expenditures	
(B)	Repairs, operating expenses and rentals.
Personnel supplies and services....;	
Signal and wireless equipment	
Ammunition	
Armament stores	
Fuel for ships	_	
Acquisition, construction, charter, repairs and
upkeep of ships	
Naval stores and harbour defences	
Miscellaneous stores and services	
Sundries-rehabilitation grants, postage, pilotage, etc	
Amount	Total asked	Percentage spent for nr siexpended	for year	six months$ 3,245.307	$ 7,938,334	46%69,252.836	98,351,247	70%4,662,919	10,008,869	47%2,505,447	7,017,590	36%3,037,819	7,890.534	38%6,416.902	12,905.279	49%1,586,554	11,402,289	14%2,299,927	9,063,563	25%5,604,958	24,716,825	23%4,369,068	9,915,270	44%16,254,554	50,695,563	32%8,617,794	29,645,280	29%3,505,026	10,844,578	32%1,722,341	10,033,446	17%$133,081,452	$299,528,667	
Or about 44 per cent already spent for first six months.
Demobilization-Naval Services


Mr. MARSHALL:: Before the minister
gives us those figures would he give us the actual expenditures for the year 1944-45 under each of these headings. On the sheet that has been given to us they are estimates only, and I should like to have the actual expenditures under these headings.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That can be given very
readily. The sheet was prepared in that way in order to contrast like with like, we compared estimates for 1944-45 with estimates for 1945-46. When that was done I raised some question about it, thinking it might be more informative to give actuals for 1944-45 and estimates for 1945-46, but I was told this was the way it had always been done and I thought, who am I to change the practice? I suppose I had better read this into Hansard, although the figures do not differ very much. These are the actual expenditures for 1944-45:
Civil salaries	 $ 7,352,832
Pay and allowances	 123,207,131
Travel, transportation and freight.	10,696,391
Properties:
Capital expenditures	 10,306,753
Repairs, operating expenditures
and rentals	 7,905,375
Personnel supplies and services....	17,284,555
Signal and wireless equipment....	2,448,002
Ammunition	 12,726,173
Armament stores	 42,313,757
Fuel for ships	 26,245,374
Acquisition, construction, charter,
repairs and upkeep of ships		97,063,122
Naval stores and harbour defences.	49,091,842
Miscellaneous stores and services..	8,268,811
Sundries-postage, pilotage, prize funds and rehabilitation grant..	2,188,764


James Alexander Marshall: I think the minister
and the committee will see the wisdom of the question I asked, because they will find that in a great number of cases the amount shown as an estimate is lower than the actual expenditure.


Douglas Charles Abbott: In some cases it is higher,
too.


James Alexander Marshall: But even at that the
estimates are still lower than those for the year 1945-46 in many cases, so that actually to a large extent the expenditures in 1944-45 were much higher than the estimates.


George Hugh Castleden: In the totals they are less, are they not?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is right, I think.
They vary as to individual items, but in the total they are well in line with the estimates. The estimates for 1944-45 were $418,000,000 and the expenditures were $417,000,000.


James Alexander Marshall: That is true; I agree
with the minister. But, for example, let us >
take the matter of pay and allowances. The estimate for 1944-45 is shown as $114 million, whereas the actual amount spent for pay and allowances was $123 million. There is a tremendous difference between $123 million and the estimate for the current year 1945-46.


Alan Cockeram: I should like to know
when the estimates we are now discussing were prepared, because if one studies these figures at all closely he realizes immediately that they are out of line with the expenses for the last year, and for the first five months period of the present fiscal year.
With respect to civil salaries I note the amount asked for by the minister is only $250,000 less than the amount asked under the army estimates in spite of the fact that the navy has possibly a quarter the number of men that are in the army. I am surprised that at this time, when the navy is being demobilized at a very great rate, there should be an increase in the civil salaries in that department amounting to $526,347 for the year.
With respect to the item of pay and allowances, may I point out that while discussing the army estimates the other day the minister stated that 100,000 men had been demobilized from the army, and that on that account there could be a saving of approximately $12 million a month. The minister has told us to-night that 53.000 men have been demobilized from the navy.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No; I said fifty-three per
cent. I think it is 46,000 men.


Alan Cockeram: Around 47,000.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes, or on leave awaiting
discharge.


Alan Cockeram: Then, 47,000 men have been demobilized. On a comparative basis there should be a saving in expenditures of at least $5 million to $6 million a month in the item of pay and allowances for the next six months, or $30 million to $36 million. But we find that the total reduction for the year amounts to only $25 million, with the new figures the minister has just given us.
In other words, the saving which was made from the beginning of the fiscal year to this day have not been taken into account at all. What I am afraid of is that too little attention has been paid to the preparation of these estimates and to the final balancing of them. The figures the minister gave us to-night showed that while the estimates for 1944-45 were $418 million, the actual expenditures, as given by the minister, amounted to $417,098,882. What I am afraid of is that we will pass these

Demobilization-Naval Services
estimates, just the same as we will pass other government estimates, and we will know that if the money is not spent under these headings a way will be found to spend it.
In my opinion the estimates the minister has produced to-night have not been given the consideration by the high officials of his department that figures of this magnitude should be given; because as we go down the list we find that, while the figure for personnel supplies and services has been decreased by fifty per cent, reflecting a large reduction of personnel in the navy, there is no corresponding decrease in pay and allowances. While capital expenditures are down, we find that repairs, operating expenses and rentals are to be increased to the extent of SI,174,643, despite the fact that the war is over and has been since early in the fiscal year.
Turning to the final item for sundries, postage, pilotage, and so on, I find there is to be an increase, taking into account the new figures the minister gave us to-night, of something like $5,100,000.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Most of that is rehabilitation grant. If my hon. frend will read farther he will see that it includes rehabilitation grant.


Alan Cockeram: But why does this
department include rehabilitation grant in an estimate when other departments do not?


Douglas Charles Abbott: It has to be in there. It
is paid by this department, as thirty days pay.


Alan Cockeram: The minister 'is putting thirty days pay in as a rehabilitation grant.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Every department puts it
in, although all might not put it under the same heading. I do not wish to interrupt my hon. friend, but let me say that I am prepared to discuss each of these headings, item by item, and to give every explanation asked in respect of increases or decreases. I have a good deal of supporting data for the increases, and information respecting the decreases. In the course of the discussion I would be very glad to give that information.
In connection with pay and allowances, for instance, as will be seen on the table which goes on Hansard to-night, seventy per cent of the estimated amount has already been paid out, leaving thirty per cent for the remainder of the year.


Alan Cockeram: I am glad the minister is to be so frank with the actual figures, item by item, because we as members of the house have a duty to the taxpayers, and that is to
see that the expenditures by the government are properly regulated, and that there is economy in all branches of the service.
I hope the minister will tell us when he prepared these estimates because that has a bearing on the whole matter. There is another point I would bring to his attention at this time, because it deals with the efficiency of his department, and possibly with the senior officers thereof. Has the minister seen the articles written in the periodical News in the last few months by Commander Wm. Guy Carr, R.D., R.C.N.V.R.? Would the minister make a statement to the committee covering these charges? If there is any truth in them, then there is something very wrong with the efficiency of his department. Some of us may have been down on the east coast, and have a little knowledge of the points mentioned in some of the articles. The articles have been made public, and I believe that it is in the interests of the service the minister has the honour to direct, and in the interests of the people of Canada, that the minister should make a statement covering them.
In practically all the charges made by Commander Carr he states that courts of inquiry were held, and I believe the reports of those courts of inquiry should be made available to the house. If there were any dereliction of duty by any member of the department, then such officer, or officers, should not be carried on under the new set up.
I would ask the minister to give serious consideration to that series of articles dealing with Shelburne, and with the Acadia Construction company. The minister should tell the members of the house who this Acadia Construction company is. The company has done the majority of the navy's work on the east coast. Who are the directors of it? Serious charges have been made against the company by Commander Carr.
If the minister desires to get his estimates through, as he no doubt does, there must be complete frankness on his part with the members of the house. He will find we are all willing to facilitate the passage of his estimates and to facilitate the whole procedure, but we feel that we should have this information. I was surprised that when the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard was speaking the minister was so jocular. When the hon. member for Temiseouata rose in his place I wondered what kind of political show we were having to-night.


An hon. MEMBER:: Promoted by the minister.



I3S6 COMMONS

[Stage Direction]
Demobilization-Naval Services
Alan Cockeram: Promoted by the minister, somebody said.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Oh, no.


Alan Cockeram: That has happened on several occasions this session. We want to get down to serious business. We want to discuss the affairs of the government of this country. We do not expect that every time we ask questions somebody will rise to give a jocular speech.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I mentioned before that recently I was in the naval hospital at Halifax. The people of Canada have reason to be proud of the splendid medical and hospital services being provided for the men in that hospital. One young man from my constituency who was in the hospital is now back in Saskatchewan where we have not- the same medical and hospital services available that were available in the service. I draw the minister's attention to the'report of a national health survey conducted by the medical procurement and assignment board. The next time the committee meets I wonder if he will let us know the number of medical officers now in the navy as compared with the navy personnel, and also the figures for the army and the air force.
When this committee report was brought down we had a ratio of 4-9 medical men per thousand of men. in the navy; 4-5 for the army and 3-66 for the air force. The committee suggested that a rate of between 3-5 and 3-7 per thousand should be ample for all medical needs. I think everyone is agreed that in the midst of war the very best services should be provided, but now that the war is over I think we might expect that progress might be made in reducing these ratios.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall try to get that
information. There were just one or two points raised by the hon. member for York South. He asked when the estimates were prepared. The first estimates were prepared last spring, when estimates are always prepared. They have been revised and revised, the final revision, so far as my final approval was concerned, having occurred on September 5. I think we called it a day when the session opened, and at that time the Japanese war was over.


Alan Cockeram: You have let out many more men since that time than you anticipated.


Douglas Charles Abbott: About what we anticipated. At the time of the final revision we contemplated a discharge rate of about 10,000 a month. I do not want to appear to be in a jocular vein, and I have not put up the hon.
fMr. Cockeram.]
member for Temiscouata or any one else to answer for me. I intend to do that myself. When I answered the 'hon. member for Van-couver-Burrard I did not intend to introduce any jocular tone into the discussion. I am here to answer any questions hon. members want to ask and I shall try to do so to the best of my ability.


Alan Cockeram: What about those articles that appeared in the periodical News?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am prepared to make a full statement on that, but it is a little late to do so to-night. The articles related to certain yachts that were taken over and to the developments at Shelbourne. I shall be delighted to give a full statement in answer to the article by Mr. Carr.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The United States
Secretary of the Navy Forrestal, in making a report to congress recently, stated that the function of the United States navy was to take the war to the enemy and that, despite the new and devastating weapons, there could be very little change in the classical functions of the navy. He supported his contention by requesting a great increase in the scientific work and specialized training being done by officers of the- United States navy.
That brings me to the question I want to ask about Royal Roads. I do not know whether the minister has seen the announcement recently made that the United Kingdom does not intend to keep open Woolwich academy. In other words, the Shop is to be closed. That seems to be an extraordinary decision to have been taken, to close this highly technical training establishment in the United Kingdom.
I do not suppose there is any service where the permanent officers must be as highly skilled and must undergo such a lengthy, rigorous and constant training as the regular naval officer. He is taken as a boy in his middle teens and educated for probably three or four years in the naval college. He then becomes a midshipman and goes on for probably another two years. In Royal Roads we have an excellent training establishment, situated where training can be carried on for twelve months in the year. It is situated on an excellent bay; it is well established, and in my opinion it is extremely well run. That was my opinion when I visited it some months ago.
In view of the uncertainties that must be set many of the services I think we should have a fairly definite statement upon this matter. It takes a long time to train a permanent naval officer. He is a highly skilled

Demobilization-Naval Services
technician; as new weapons are perfected he will become more and more highly skilled and his training will have to be more and more intense. We must induce the right type of young Canadian to go into the naval service.
This war has shown, as nothing else has, that the Canadian has a peculiar genius for naval service. The traditions of the British navy have been well identified and carried on by the Canadian navy. If we are to fulfil our duties toward ourselves and the united nations we must see to it that the permanent officers taken into the navy are keen and anxious and willing. Every year there are a great number of men who want to get into the naval services. In view of that I am going to ask the minister this question concerning Royal Roads. Will the Royal Naval College at Royal Roads be continued? The second question is: Will there be any changes in the scope or length of the course contemplated? The third question is: In view of the development in the size of our army from its small pre-war establishment will the number of cadets admitted annually to Royal Roads be increased?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Perhaps my hon. friend would allow me to answer those questions . the first thing when the committee resumes. My reason for asking that is that the acting leader of the house would like to have the committee rise and report progress in order to get two departments into supply. I can answer the first question now. Royal Roads will continue.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Mr. Speaker, on Friday evening I said that I would like the permission of the house to move two departments into supply on civil estimates, just to call them, not for consideration of the items.


John Bracken: Might I ask the reason for the urgency? As I understand it, we have the estimates of all three services before us in committee already without a single item having been passed. What, then, is the urgency for putting two more departments into supply?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: It has been the custom ever since I have been in the house to ask for permission to move not too many but at least five or six departments into supply on civil estimates so that they may be considered when other business is not available for consideration by members of the house. There
is no urgency in the matter. It is just a matter of convenience. If the house is opposed I shall not1 press the matter at all.


John Bracken: Why not bring in four departments instead of just two?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: After the motion in regard to Wednesday sitting is carried there will only be two days on which a motion for supply can be moved, when any hon. member has the privilege of bringing up any grievance that he wishes to have redressed. There are about twenty departments altogether to be moved into supply, so that ample opportunity will be afforded to any hon. member to voice any complaint or move for the redressing of any grievance.


John Bracken: So long as we have about sixteen other departments on which to talk about our grievances, we will agree.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Demobilization-Naval Services
I wish to point out, Mr. Speaker, that there are two parts to this amendment, and that they stand together. The two parts are, first of all, a request for the immediate appointment of a government controller, and, second, the enactment of certain legislation. When I say that the two parts stand together I am underlining the fact that it would not really solve the situation just to appoint a government controller. That could be done and the result might be the forcing of the employees back to work without any satisfactory settlement of the dispute for a long period of time. I point out that concurrent with the appoint-men of a controller there is required the enactment of legislation that strikes at the root of the trouble. The employees at the Ford plant are asking what we believe to be one of the things the war itself was fought for, namely, industrial democracy. They are asking that the union at Windsor be given the same amount of union security that is enjoyed by their fellow workers in (he Ford plants across the river in Detroit.
I have before me a copy of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1944-


James Horace King: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. gentleman, but actually there is no motion before the house.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: There was no motion at all made by me in regard to this matter. I asked the house if it would permit me to call two departments into supply. My hon. friend has been out of order for the last five minutes.


Mr. ROSS (Souris):: Completely up the wrong alley.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: And there was no motion put by Mr. Speaker.


Stanley Howard Knowles: On Monday there is no such thing as going into supply without a motion.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: There was no motion made.


Stanley Howard Knowles: And I waited until I heard the minister say: ''I now so move."


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: And there is no amendment. before the house either.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker-


James Horace King: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. gentleman, but I understand that the hon. member is putting forward a motion of grievance as there were a motion before the house to go into committee of supply. As far as the Chair is concerned, there is no motion before the house.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I strongly object to what is happening here now. This

has been done before. When the leader of the opposition was discussing with the acting leader of the house just what was being done consent was finally reached to proceed, and the acting leader of the house turned to Mr. Speaker and nodded "I so move", if I am not mistaken, and Mr. Speaker started to leave the chair. That was when I rose.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No.


James Horace King: Order. I want to be
fair to the hon. gentleman and I want to be fair to the house. I understand that there was a discussion between the leader of the opposition and the leader of the house, but the fact remains that there is no motion at all before the house, so that the hon. member is out of order. I would remind the house that it is eleven o'clock.


John Bracken: Will the leader of the
house be good enough to outline the work for to-moiTow?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: To-morrow, as was announced this afternoon by the Minister of Reconstruction, he would like to advance further the resolution which we discussed early in the afternoon, and after that we shall proceed with defence estimates. I shall ask the permission of the house to approve the resolution standing in my name with reference to private members days. It has to be moved to-morrow because it affects every day after next Wednesday.


John Bracken: The minister suggested
that one item of business to-morrow will be the discussion in committee of the resolution by the Minister of Reconstruction.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: That will be the first.


John Bracken: Did the minister wish to suggest that we should get through to the second reading to-morrow?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: That rests entirely with the house. It is the desire of the Minister of Reconstruction, because I understand there is a certain delegation that is anxious to meet the committee to which the bill is to be referred, the committee on railways and shipping. Of course I cannot give any guarantee in that regard; it rests entirely with hon. gentlemen.


Howard Charles Green: Just one stage would be
pretty good, I think.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: We shall expect from
hon. gentlemen opposite the very fine cooperation we have received this session.


Howard Charles Green: You will always get that


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

Privilege-Mr. Maybank
Tuesday, October 23, 1945.