1945-11-02

[Stage Direction]
Mr. A. P. COTE (Matapedia-Matane-for Mr. Lesage) moved the first reading of bill No. 28 (from the senate), respecting the Quebec Railway, Light and Power Company.
He said: I am sorry to say the hon. member for Montmagny-L'Islet (Mr. Lesage) has been called back to Quebec on account of the death of an uncle, and I wish to substitute for him and move the first reading of this bill.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. FIREARMS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. JOHN BRACKEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Justice. It arises out of several unfortunate occurrences in recent weeks in different parts of Canada, one of them in Ottawa within the last few days.
Has the government made any plans to cooperate with the provincial and municipal authorities in order to check the series of crimes of violence reported from many centres in Canada?
More specifically, has the Minister of Justice considered the advisability of having a conference with the provincial attorneys-general, either at the time of the dominion-provincial conference, or at some other early date, to consider ways and means of coordinating the work of crime prevention and detection?
Has the minister under contemplation any amendments to the criminal code in respect of this problem, and if so, will a bill for that purpose be introduced at this session?
Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice): Mr. Speaker, I received notice of the question only a few moments ago. There is better than plans; there is actual cooperation. I would not attempt in just a few moments to describe all the points of contact and cooperation, but I might indicate some of the highlights which occurred to me when I read the question.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police is in charge of the provincial police work in six of the nine Canadian provinces-Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. My information from the commissioner is that during

the war years there have been fewer crimes of violence than there were during the thirties in those provinces, and that there has been no noticeable increase in such crimes since V-E-day.
In the other provinces the Royal Canadian Mounted Police have always stood ready to render to municipal and provincial police authorities all such assistance as is from time to time requested by the attorneys-general of such provinces.
A police bulletin, issued weekly by, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, goes to all provincial forces and to those of incorporated cities and towns throughout Canada. It features all available information considered to be useful in the prevention and detection of crime. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police laboratories, fingerprint records and other records dealing with criminology, their analysts, ballistics experts, bandwriting experts-in a wrord, all their facilities and personnel, are at all times available to all the other police forces in Canada.
In reply to the second question I would say that there are many problems dealing with the administration of justice which it is planned to discuss with the attorneys-general at the dominion-provincial conference, if possible; and if it does not prove to be possible at that time, then as early thereafter as may be convenient to them. This, I may say, is one of those several problems.
My reply to the third question would be that the matter of this outburst of crime and violence has received the attention of the government as well as that of the press throughout the country. On more than one occasion the matter has been discussed by me with my colleagues, and a special committee of the cabinet has been constituted to help me in the preparation of a measure felt to be proper to deal with the situation. It is regarded as one of some urgency. As there is considerable material already before the house, consideration is being given to the question whether or not there will be an order in council, operative only up to such time as legislation can be assented to, or in any event not to be operative after the end of the session if legislation is not assented to; and accompanied at the earliest possible moment by a bill to amend the criminal code in that regard.


John Bracken: May I thank the minister for his full and satisfactory answer.

Labour Conditions



NINTH VICTORY LOAN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. B. BARRETT (Norfolk):: Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Finance inform the house if any other counties besides Norfolk have reached their objective in the ninth victory loan?	-


Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):: I am afraid I cannot answer that question definitely. I have not a report of the standing of counties before me.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to make an announcement in connection with the negotiations which hon. members will recall have been going on between their employees and the three major meat packing companies of Canada.
Hon. members will recall action was taken in this connection by appointing Mr. Justice Richards a commissioner to assist the parties to come together and discuss their problems. The government also took the unusual action of appointing a controller of the meat packing plants and deputy controllers for various cities where plants are located, and, at the same time, by order in council, required that the plants continue in operation.
No time was lost by the commissioner, Mr. Justice Richards, in getting the parties together, and negotiations have been going on in Winnipeg during the last few days. I might add that representatives of the producers, that is farmers, have sat in during the negotiations.
I am very happy to say that the parties themselves reached a mutually satisfactory agreement at 1.30 a.m. to-day. I am sure hon. members will be glad to hear that negotiations have been satisfactorily concluded. I have not received details of the agreement and of course those affecting wages will have to be finally approved by the appropriate wage boards.
I understand from telephone messages that the main features of the agreement are that the weekly hours are to be reduced from 48 to 45 per week, and that pay will be given for the six legal holidays during the year. Furthermore, it has been agreed upon that a joint 47696-111J
application will be made at once to the appropriate wage boards for an increase of approximately 4j cents per hour.
I feel that we have reason to be well satisfied in regard to the successful outcome of the negotiations, and I also feel hon. members will endorse my expression of appreciation to Mr. Justice Richards and those who have been representing the union and the management of the packing plants, and also those who were good enough to come to the conference as representatives of the farmers.



STRIKE AT FORD MOTOR PLANT, WINDSOR

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Humphrey Mitchell: The leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) asked, if I would keep the house informed as to the negotiations with respect to the Ford dispute. I regret to say that the men's organizations have turned down the proposal of which I informed the house last Monday. No word has been received yet from the Ford Motor Company of Canada.


Mr. WILLIAM IRVINE (Cariboo):: In view Of the most satisfactory results which have been obtained through the minister's action in regard to the threatened strike in * the packing plants, will he now consider taking similar action in regard to the Ford strike?


Humphrey Mitchell: The answer is no.



CANADIAN ARMED FORCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. P. C. BLACK (Cumberland):: I should like to ask a question either of the Minister of Transport or the Minister of National Defence. What is the government's policy with respect to the transportation of men who fought in the Canadian services, but who have homes in England and. desire to return to them? I have a letter from The Veterans of Foreign Wars in Halifax, stating that twelve of their men-and the names and numbers are set out-were booked for passage but were unable to, secure authority te sail * on the Queen Elizabeth, which left Halifax a few days ago with 6,000 vacant berths. I should like to know the policy of the government in this connection.


Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport):: I was not aware of this question.
I shall ask my officers to look into the matter and try to give the hon. member an answer on Monday.
Veterans Affairs


Percy Chapman Black: I tried repeatedly to get in touch with the minister, and failed to do so.


Lionel Chevrier: I am in the house and
in my office repeatedly.


Percy Chapman Black: I telephoned
the minister twenty times.



WARTIME HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day.
Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Peel):: I
[DOT]should like to direct a question to the Minister [DOT]of Munitions and Supply which arises out of negotiations which have been under way for some time between the city of Toronto and the dominion government for the use for emergency housing purposes by the city of the two dormitories at Malton, Ontario, in my constituency. Has an agreement been concluded in the matter, and, if so, will the minister table it or, at least make it available? In my county there are numerous problems which may arise by virtue of the conclusion of such an agreement.


Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):: There have been no negotiations between Wartime Housing and the city of Toronto leading to the taking over of the buildings at Malton by the city of Toronto. Representations have been made to the government about the need of additional shelter in that area. The emergency shelter administrator has approached Wartime Housing and expressed the desire to make use of the buildings at Malton for emergency shelter. The buildings have been placed at his disposal, and I think arrangements are now being concluded by which Wartime Housing Limited will operate the building under the direction of the emergency shelter administrator. That is the position today. Of course, it being two departments of government, no agreement will be required.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day.
Mr. G. K. FRASER (Peterborough West):: I should like to ask the Minister of Veterans Affairs a question. Could he inform the house where his department has placed counsellors across Canada to give advice to ex-servicemen as to careers? This matter is urgent as many of these men are asking for this information.

Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans Affairs) : I shall be glad to give my hon. friend a full and detailed answer on Monday next. I could make a general reply now, but I think it would be more satisfactory to give him the details on Monday.



PERMITS TO EX-SERVICE MEN TO GO INTO BUSINESS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a brief statement on the issuance of permits to exservicemen to start business.
On Friday last the hon. member for Simcoe North (Mr. Ferguson) asked me "how much longer returned soldiers are to be refused permits to go into business," apparently suggesting that it was a general policy of the wartime prices and trade board to refuse permits to ex-servicemen. This, of course, is not the case. However, on Tuesday, when he raised the matter again he made it clear that what he had in mind was not so much a general policy but some particular instance, raised in some letter received by an ex-serviceman; so I suggested that he put a question on the order paper. He has not yet disclosed the particular letter to the house. He has, however, disclosed a letter to the press. I have assumed that it w'as the same one and have had the case traced, and am now in a position to make a statement on it without further delay.
Before I tell the house where this particular case stands, it may be useful if I explain the position and policy of the wartime prices board in regard to issuance of licences. Ever since May, 1944, when the whole question was considered by cabinet, the board has in general been issuing licences freely to returned servicemen and others. Flowever, there have been a very few fields where, because of acute shortages of raw material, it would have been pointless to issue licences freely; indeed it wTould have been unfair to existing operators whose supplies had already been drastically reduced, and uneconomical from the point of view of making the best use of available supplies to meet civilian demands. Therefore the board has not been able to grant licences freely to three groups: to industrial sugar users, to users of broom corn, and to certain manufacturers and distributors of textile products. Even here, however, special arrange-

Demobilizations-Army
merits have been made to ensure that exservicemen who immediately before enlistment had owned and operated businesses in these restricted fields, should get not onty their licences but also their appropriate quotas of supplies.
The most recent figures, those for the month of September, show clearly what has been happening. In that month the board issued 3,212 licences to new entrants into business; of these, 710 went to ex-servicemen. Only in nine cases was the board unable to grant licences requested by ex-servicemen; in other words, 98-7 per cent of applications received from ex-servicemen were granted. Further, if those nine cases had been filed within the last week or so they would not have been refused because they were all textile cases and the supply situation is now such that the board expects to be able to grant licences freely within a few weeks.
This brings me back to the case raised by the hon. member for Simcoe North. I find that the application, about which he is apparently concerned, reached the board's licencing division in Ottawa only on Friday, the day that he raised the question in the house, and that the board has dealt with this application in the same way as others being received currently in the textile field. A form letter has gone to this applicant requesting that the board be permitted to hold his application for a short time, because they expect to be able to issue a licence to him within the next few weeks.
I think that the hon, member for Simcoe North may have been misled by the phraseology of the letter which he handed to the press, and I would admit that the terms of the latter are not clear. The official in the board's cotton administration who wrote it was not directly concerned with the issuance or refusal of licences; the matter had been referred to him because he was in a position to advise the applicant about tire position of raw materials in the field he was planning to enter. In. this, as in other cases, the board tried to warn the new entrant of possible troubles ahead; usually such advice is much appreciated. However, as I said before", despite the warning issued, the licence application subsequently came forward to Ottawa in the usual way and it will be approved shortly.



WAR AND DEMOBILIZATION


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, November 1, consideration in committee of a resolution to grant to His Majesty certain sums of money for the carrying out of measures deemed necessary or advisable in consequence of the war-Mr. Hsley-Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair,

The CHAIRMAN:: When the committee rose last night we were considering item No. 6 of the army estimates. Shall the item carry?


Mr. PEARKES:: There, were certain questions to which the minister promised a reply.


Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of National Defence):: The hon. member for
Nanaimo asked me certain questions with respect to the signal service in the Northwest Territories, to which I have attempted to prepare answers. He asked first whether the wireless stations in the Northwest Territories would be manned in future by the Royal Canadian Corps of Signals. The answer is that it is proposed that the Northwest Territories radio system will continue to be operated by the Royal Canadian Corps of Signals. '
He asked whether these opportunities would be extended to the northwest staging route, which is also an important communication line. My answer is that that is now under consideration. It is probable that the R.C.A.F. will be responsible for the operation of the land line communications facilities on the northwest staging route, but no definite decision as to the final responsibility for operation has yet been taken.
He asked for what amounts were contracts let for the reconstruction of the British Columbia telephone line between Vancouver and Hope, and between Victoria and Campbell river, and also to Port Alberni. My answer is that those contracts were arranged by the Department of Munitions and Supply and the Department of National Defence for Air. When the estimates of these departments are before the committee I think that that information could be made available.
My hon. friend also asked what arrangements had been made for the disposal of the equipment obtained by the Pacific Coast Communications board. That matter is still under consideration, and that same answer I must make
Demobilization-Army

with respect to possible arrangements to continue the service in more remote parts of British Columbia through which telephone lines were constructed for defence purposes, and as to the wireless link between the Charlotte islands and Prince Rupert.


George Randolph Pearkes: Do I understand that no arrangements have been completed with British Columbia Telephone with respect to the reconstruction of those lines? What will be the disposal of the equipment at the conclusion of hostilities? I was under the impression that arrangements had been made whereby certain equipment would be made available under certain conditions to the B.C. Telephone.


Douglas Charles Abbott: These questions come within the department of Munitions and Supply or National Defence for Air. Perhaps my hon. friend would put his questions then, or I could bring them to the attention of my colleagues for answer when their estimates are before the committee.


George Randolph Pearkes: Were not those agreements made by the Department of National Defence for the army?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am advised that the contracts were made by the Department of Munitions and Supply. I am'afraid that I cannot elaborate on that.


Mr. MERRITT:: I would like to ask a question which relates to each of these items from No. 5 to No. 10. It applies to every one of them. The other day in connection with the naval service the minister said that the accounts were paid by the department. I take it that some of these costs apply to the termination of contracts and for deliveries of stores which were ordered in war and will not be used in war. Can the minister say how much of this item and succeeding items down to No. 10 represents the termination of contract payments, how much represents stores paid for which will have to be destroyed or turned over to War Assets, and how much represents stores which will be useful in the future? Would he at the same time say whether he himself decides on the amount that will have to be paid on the termination of contracts, or is that done in the Department of Munitions and Supply?


Douglas Charles Abbott: If it is a straight cancellation charge, that amount is taken, up in the estimates of the Department of Munitions and Supply. If the manufacture of the equipment in question is completed and the equipment is delivered to the army, that is included in the item under consideration. It may be that after delivery some of the equipment
[Mr. Abbott. 1
will ultimately be declared surplus and turned over to War Assets. I do not know that I can readily give my hon. friend a break-down of that latter category. I can tell him how much of the estimate covers commitments from the previous year. There have been no new commitments since V-J day. Between V-E day and V-J day there were some new commitments for signal and wireless equipment, because it was then contemplated that we would be carrying on the war against Japan, although I am advised that these commitments were limited. I do not know that I can at this time give definite information as to what portion of the equipment previously ordered and delivered or to .be delivered will ultimately be declared surplus. That whole question is being reviewed by the staff. Obviously we are going to be in a good equipment position, with ample motor vehicles, ample signalling equipment, all the latest and most modern types of equipment for the reserve army and for setting up adequate reserve stocks for the permanent force. Consideration will have to be given by the staff as. to what is a proper and appropriate ' division under these two heads, and the balance I take it would be declared surplus and be disposed of. I am afraid that I cannot give the break-down in exactly the way my hon. friend asked for it. Cancellation charges as such are borne by the Department of Munitions and Supply.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Ammunition and bombs, $70,525,161.
Mr. CASE:: The minister is budgeting for $70,525,161. Expenditures to - September 30, 1945, were $17,123,030, which leaves a balance of $53,402,131. Since the active campaign has ended, it does seem to me that the figures are out of line, and I would imagine that there could be some paring down of this $53,000,000 odd from September 30 on.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The committee might like to have a brief break-down. As in most of these items from now on this is largely a carry-over to clean up existing commitments. Of the total estimated provision of $70,525,161. $47,058,880 represents commitments incurred prior to the beginning of this fiscal year, and $23,466,281 represents commitments incurred since April 1 last. This item is literally a clean-up item.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: There is nothing in the item regarding experimental work by the minister's department?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I should not think so. There may be some small amount for -orders of new

Demobilization-Army
ammunition to round out types that we have run short of, but the item is for the straight purchase of ammunition and .bombs.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I meant new equipment that it might be desired to test and check and that might be coming in to the minister's department.


Douglas Charles Abbott: There may be some small amount in the item for that purpose, but the manufacture of ammunition and bombs has been kept up to date, and experimental work has been carried on with large scale manufacture of the ammunition itself.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The United States army the other day got what they call Little Jim, a gun with a 22-foot barrel, and they will have no opportunity of using it. I was wondering if the Canadian army was going to carry on experiments of that sort.


Douglas Charles Abbott: There is included in the item SI 15,000 for Canadian armament research and development. That is probably what my hon. friend has in mind?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Armament, including rifles, machine guns, mortars and guns of all descriptions, $84,006,979.
Wilfrid Garfield Case: I presume the same answer would [DOT]apply here. It looks as though there had bpen previous commitments to a substantial amount. Will the minister explain?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The carry-over here is even larger. Of the total of $84,006,979, the carryover is $57,000,000 odd, and there are new commitments subsequent to the first of April of 826,497,000.


George Randolph Pearkes: In view of recent reports
in the press regarding the attitude of the United States with reference to having uniformity amongst the American republics in the matter of the production of arms, et cetera for the future, and in view of the fact that a senior officer of the war office in London, who is charged with responsibility for the policy in connection with arms in the British army, paid a visit to Ottawa last week, could the minister tell us the results of any conferences between this British officer and the minister or officials of his department, and indicate the policy which the Canadian army intends to follow with reference to the development of arms, either in respect of British or of United States patents? .


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am afraid I am not in a position at the moment to make any statement as to the policy. We are maintaining the closest contact with both the British and the
Americans. All members of the committee will agree, I think, that it is desirable that equipment of this kind should be standardized as much as possible. The method of achieving that desired end is one which has to be worked out. I am not in a position to make any statement as to . the results which will be achieved, except to express the fervent hope, which I know is shared by a good many others, that a satisfactory solution will be found.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Does the minister's department intend to give the various units throughout the country more equipment of different kinds of guns-I mean mortars, and so on?


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend is referring
to reserve army units, I suppose?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes. As I said in my preliminary statement, it is our intention to see that the reserve army units have the latest and most up-to-date equipment in ample quantities. We have the quantities to give them now. Perhaps ten or fifteen years from now new weapons will be brought down, but the army to-day is well supplied with the latest and most up-to-date equipment, and that will be made available to the units of the reserve army.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Does the minister's department intend, as was done after the last war, to give guns away as ornaments for city parks and the like?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That has not been considered. If I can express a personal opinion, I am a bit against it. I never thought they added much to the aesthetic appearance of our parks.


Mr. McMASTER:: The amount for rifles
and machine guns, so late in the war, seems rather large. Were these guns and rifles which are mentioned as being manufactured intended for the Canadian army or for some allied army?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The items here are only for our own forces. As my hon. friend knows, we manufactured fairly substantial quantities of guns and small arms for other nations under mutual aid. But that is not included in these estimates.


William Irvine: Is. it the intention of the
government to use the excellent camp and hospital which have been established at Prince George for training purposes in the future? Has any consideration been given to that, or does the minister intend to give any?

Demobilization-Army


Douglas Charles Abbott: I cannot say I have given
any specific consideration to that question.' I will take note of ray hon. friend's remarks and see that the facilities at Fort George are kept in mind.


Mr. HARKNESS:: What disposal is being
made of the large number of guns, machine guns, and so forth, which were in the hands of the Canadian army overseas at the end of the war? Is it proposed to bring them back to Canada, or are they to be scrapped over there? The same question really applies to the next item; what is being done with the armoured fighting vehicles, tanks and armoured cars, which are of no use for civilian purposes?


Douglas Charles Abbott: In common with other surplus property of this kind they will be turned over to War Assets for disposal, presumably for disposal in Europe. If there are in Europe certain types of weapons or like equipment which are surplus to army requirements and which we need in Canada, they will be brought back, but any that are surplus will be declared surplus in Europe and War Assets will dispose of them there, or any place they see fit.


Mr. JOHNSTON:: Is any of that equipment being destroyed over there?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No.


Charles Edward Johnston: Because sometimes it
might be brought back here and declared useless and put into scrap.


Douglas Charles Abbott: None of it is being scrapped, so far as I know.


William Alexander McMaster: Does the minister intend to dispose of rifles? It seems to me that at the end of the last war we had a considerable number of rifles, yet when this war commenced there seemed to be a tremendous scarcity. Is it the intention of the government to retain rifles in some place and keep them in condition?


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon."friend may have forgotten that after the fall of France a large numer of rifles, some 75,000, in Canada were sent over to England, and that pretty well depleted our stocks of rifles. These rifles have not been sent back.


Mr. GLADSTONE:: It is a common practice in the home to remove to the attic things not required at the time, and this practice goes on year by year until, perhaps, moving day comes, and a great deal of household furniture and equipment is found to be obsolete. I am told that this sort of thing may have been going on in the armouries across the country, and that there will be found there much 
material and equipment which could far better be scrapped and disposed of. I bring this to the attention [DOT] of the minister to inquire whether this may not be a favourable time for a housecleaning in the armouries.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes. The point is very well taken. I understand that a review or survey is now being made and steps are being taken to get rid of obsolete equipment, turn it over to War Assets Corporation, and see if they can dispose of it.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Following my previous question, I would ask if any restrictions are placed on the sale of guns and so forth in Europe. Has the government laid down any policy as to whom these guns may be sold to? There is a distinct possibility that they might be sold, let us* say, to the Spaniards.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Not so far as I am aware. It does not come under my department, -which is not a disposal department, but I understand that such negotiations as have been carried on have been with our allies-the Dutch, or French, or others who may have need of some of this equipment which we can supply.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
MT vehicles, trucks, tractors, trailers, tanks. AFVs, and repair parts, $126,002,216.
Mr. PROBE:: I should like the minister to give an approximate breakdown of the amounts of the equipment, recently held by the Department of National Defence under category 9, which it is proposed to keep, which has already been scrapped or destroyed, and which has already been turned over to War Assets Corporation for disposal. It does not have to be to the nearest dollar, but I should like to get a picture of that.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am advised that it may take some little time to make that information available. The practice is that when a truck or a car or anything else becomes surplus it is declared surplus, turned over to War Assets, and then of course the disposal is at the charge of War Assets.


John Oliver Probe: I do not want anything exact, but would the minister please indicate whether any considerable number of vehicles have already been turned over to War Assets Corporation?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am advised that a fairly substantial number of them have. I am not in a position to give exact figures now. Perhaps I can get the approximate figure or the approximate value and place it before the committee before this resolution is carried.

Demobilization-Army


Mr. HAZEN:: Has any fuel been turned over by the army to War Assets?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Not very much, I am advised. There has been some coal, but in the language of the deputy minister it has been turned over in outlandish places.


Mr. FULTON:: The minister may recall that when we were dealing with the naval estimates the member for Regina City asked a question similar to the one he asked to-day and a request was made to have the information available on the army estimates. It would give a better picture of the amount of money we are actually authorizing to be expended. We should know approximately how much will be received back for items that have been declared surplus. I would support the request of the hon. member for Regina City if that information can be made available at all. In that connection, can the minister give any information as to what boards or groups overseas are passing on this equipment and declaring what is surplus? What policy guides them? How do they make the decision, and on what basis do they determine whether to dispose of material or bring it back to Canada for disposal^


Douglas Charles Abbott: That decision would be
made by the chief of staff overseas, the army commander, with the approval of C.M.H.Q. in London, and they would authorize it on the recommendation of the army commander. I do not know the routine, but I suppose the army commander would get a recommendation from the Q.M.G. branch, which in turn would have a recommendation from someone else, and it would move up the line until authorized at the top. To put it broadly, however, it is authorized by headquarters overseas.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Has serious consideration
been given the question whether it is worth while bringing the material back to Canada to make it available here rather than disposing of it there? I realize that it would cost a great deal, but has that been done?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I misunderstood my hon. friend. That decision would be made here. A report would be made here as to what was being declared surplus, and headquarters in Canada, as a matter of policy, would decide whether that particular type of material should be brought back to Canada or disposed of there. The final declaration to War Assets Corporation would be made in Ottawa -the declaration as to whether the material was surplus, no longer needed in the army. If the army no longer needed it in Canada *'7096-112
or in Europe, War Assets Corporation would decide whether it should be brought back or
disposed of there.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: The question has been raised by the member for Regina City and the member for Kamloops as to the amount of material turned over to War Assets Corporation and they have indicated that it would help us to know how much money would be involved. I have been under the impression that whatever is turned over to War Assets Corporation has nothing to do with these estimates. If there is a credit it is a national credit rather than a departmental credit.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is correct.


Mr. KNIGHT:: I would ask the minister whether any games equipment has been turned over, such as footballs, baseball bats and so on, which have been used by soldiers and army personnel during the war, or whether such equipment is likely to be turned over in the immediate future. There is in my own home university in Saskatoon an urgent need at the present moment for such equipment, and the reason for the question is that many of the men who require it are men who used it in the armed forces. I should guess that there are about 800 military personnel attending the university of Saskatoon. The director of athletics there has applied to the department for the release of some of the equipment which cannot be obtained through ordinary channels of business, and they are particularly anxious that some should be released in the immediate future. Is there any prospect of that?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am not in a position to answer the question. Games equipment is provided by the auxiliary services, which, as my hon. friend knows, are under the jurisdiction of the Department of National War Services. The army as such does not provide games equipment. When that department is under consideration the minister will no doubt give my hon. friend the information.


Mr. MARSHALL:: I do not know under what item the question of canteen funds arises, but I would ask the minister for a statement with regard to the administration of that fund. I understand that the committee met in 1941. I was a member of it, and so far as I am aware no report has been received since that year. That fund has now reached a very considerable sum, and I understand that an advisory board has been appointed to administer it.. I would also ask the minister to give us some information with regard to N.A.A.F.I. If he cannot give it to-day perhaps he will put it on the record later on.

Demobilization-Army


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am afraid I shall have to ask my hon. friend to let the question stand, and I will try to make a statement later. The direct administration of canteen funds is not primarily an army matter, and any profits are turned over to the receiver general. There is not in the army a benevolent fund as there is in some other services. The administration of N.A.A.F.I. is something with which the Canadian army in Canada has nothing to do. I believe that in Great Britain N.A.A.F.I. services some of the camps in which our troops are stationed-perhaps all of them-and also on the continent of Europe. I did not quite catch what my hon. friend asked-with regard to N.AA.F.I.


James Alexander Marshall: Is it not supervised from Canada?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No. There is no supervision by Canada of N.A.A.F.I., and other canteen services, auxiliary services, the Canadian Legion canteen and so on are under the jurisdiction of the Department of National War Services. As regards the ordinary regimental canteens, to which I suppose the hon. member for Camrose refers, the army has of course some responsibility. The regimental funds board looks after that. I will consider what my hon. friend has said and see if I can make a more extended statement.


Douglas Scott Harkness: In connection with the declaring of vehicles, tanks and so on to be surplus, and turning them over to War Assets for disposal, I would ask on what scale equipment of this kind is being retained for the use of the reserve army. The war establishment. of an anti-tank regiment is some 250 vehicles of all sorts. What proportion of these is being retained for reserve army regiments of that type?


Douglas Charles Abbott: We have not reached that point yet. We have large stocks of these vehicles available, but I do not know whether the staff has definitely determined yet how many will be kept for the reserve army. I can make this general statement, however, that ample reserves will be provided. I am not in a position to give a specific answer to my hon. friend now.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I know there are not in Canada sufficient vehicles to equip completely the six divisions which have been spoken of for the reserve army, yet there seems to be quite a bit of disposal going on. I was wondering whether any reasonable amount of equipment was going to be retained for the use of the reserve army so that it might be [Mr. Marshall.1
much better trained than the reserve army was before the war, at which time we sadly lacked equipment of all sorts.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Sufficient will be retained for full training purposes, and probably some may be brought back from the other side.


George Randolph Pearkes: When we were discussing the naval estimates the minister gave the assurance that training in combined operations would be continued, but when I asked a question in regard to repairs to landing craft he informed me that this was dealt with under the army estimates. Would he now be able to say what proportion of this money is being spent for the repair or replacement of damaged landing craft?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am told we have not that information, but I will see if it can be dug out of the detail at headquarters.
Mr. PEARIvES: I hope that can be done, because these landing craft are not in the same condition as they were when they started, and it is important that we carry on this training. We have the minister's assurance that it will be carried on, and I should like to be satisfied as to the cost of these repairs.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am sure the landing craft will be kept in repair, but I do not know whether it is possible to give my hon. friend the exact amount included in these estimates for the repair of landing craft. That may be included in a general estimate for repairs; I imagine it is.


John Oliver Probe: I see that tractors are mentioned under this item, I should like to know from the minister whether it would include also any considerable quantity of road building equipment, and how much of such equipment has been liquidated already to the War Assets Corporation. I understand there is quite a demand on the part of various governmental bodies for surplus tractors, bulldozers and other road building equipment, and I should like some picture of the state of that item.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am afraid I can give only a very general statement. This equipment was in pretty short supply here in Canada, but I am informed that we are bringing back from the other side quite a bit of engineering equipment, which I think would include bulldozers and things of the kind.


John Oliver Probe: You have no figures?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No, I have no figures here. As I think the committee will realize, it is a little too early to give accurate figures on

Demobilization-Army
just what, will be surplus and what can be disposed of. We are still pretty much engaged in cleaning up after the end of the war and seeing where we stand-taking inventory, as it were. I think probably when we come to consider the estimates early next year we should be in a position to give definite, clear cut information as to just what is available for the civilian economy and what has to be kept in the service.


John Oliver Probe: We often hear reports of the scrapping of a considerable amount of this equipment. I am inclined to agree that in many cases these reports are exaggerated, but I hope the minister will give an assurance that equipment which is usable, particularly by governmental bodies, will not be scrapped too readily.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Oh, yes. my hon. friend may rest assured that nothing will be scrapped that has usable value. He is quite right when he says there is no foundation at all in fact for these statements that valuable assets are being scrapped and thrown away.


Robert William Gladstone: During the war there *was need for quick delivery, messenger service and the transportation of personnel from place to place in Ottawa, and I presume at military district headquarters elsewhere. We have been accustomed to seeing on' Elgin street a procession of military vehicles, army and air force especially, far outnumbering civilian transport. It would 9eem to me there might be an opportunity, not only in regard to the army, navy and' air force but in regard to all branches of government in Ottawa, to work out some coordinated system of delivery from one department to another as a means of effecting a saving in peace-time. .1 am wondering if under this item the vote showing a reduction of perhaps fifty per cent in the amount estimated for the year, does not give some encouragement in the direction of economy. The point I should like to leave with the minister is the possibility of some coordination in dispatching and delivering about the city, where there would seem to be an opportunity of saving money.


Mr. CARDIFF:: From time to time we receive inquiries as to where these surplus vehicles are being sold and in what quantities. Can the minister tell us in what part of the country these surpluses are being declared, and the numbers that are being sold in each section?
47696-112}


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have no information as to the particular areas in which they have been declared surplus, but these surplus declarations are made right across Canada. As a vehicle became surplus in M.D. 6 it would be so declared and disposed of presumably in Halifax. The same would apply in M.D. 2, M.D. 4, M.D. 5 or any other district. They are declared surplus in the district in which they are located, and under normal circumstances are disposed1 of in that district. That has been the procedure so far.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: I notice tanks mentioned in this item, together with repair parts, and so on. I should like to draw the minister's attention to a condition connected with the tank range in St. Vincent township in the county of Grey. An agreement was entered into by the army and the municipality with respect to repairs to the road, but I understand from the reeve of the municipality that the agreement has not been honoured so far as the army is concerned. Some inquiries have been made, and I am anxious to know whether the repairs referred to in this item would be repair parts only or whether anything would be included to implement the agreement concerning road repairs in St. Vincent township.


Douglas Charles Abbott: We have passed that item already. It would come under item No. 4, maintenance of property.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: As long as the money is there it will be all right.


Mr. BROOKS:: I should like to ask a question with regard to typewriters. The minister said a few moments ago there were no exceptions in regard to turning over all assets to the War Assets Corporation. On a number of occasions I have heard that typewriters were to be turned back to the companies who made them, that they were not to be put on the market. I should like the minister to say whether or not that is correct.


Douglas Charles Abbott: If that were the case it would be simply on instructions of War Assets Corporation. We would have declared them surplus and held them subject to direction, and we would take their instructions as to where we delivered them. There should be no direct disposal by the army, of typewriters or anything else.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I understand the army does not dispose of them, because they are turned over to War Assets Corporation, Does War Assets Corporation sell them to the public,
Demobilization-Army

or are they turned back to the companies from which they were purchased in the first instance?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I do not know. I would have to give the same answer I have given before, that when the unfortunate minister who will answer the questions on behalf of War Assets Corporation is before the committee he will be able to tell my hon. friend.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: Wihat information has the minister with respect to the declaring of surplus materials in Great Britain?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Probably the hon. member was not in his seat when^I discussed that in detail only a short time ago. The procedure there is substantially the same as it is here. Headquarters in London will decide which properties should be declared surplus. That information is forwarded to N.D.H.Q. here.


George Hugh Castleden: Has the minister information as to the quantities?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have not the quantities, no.


George Hugh Castleden: The minister cannot give the committee the quantities of such materials declared surplus?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No. I probably could get the information, but it is not before me now. Material is being declared surplus practically all the time.


Mr. JUTRAS:: With respect to bulldozers and road equipment, may I point out that in my province, there is a great shortage of road equipment of various types, especially tractors and bulldozers. As the committee is aware, during the war we were allowed only a small quota from the United States, where we got most of that equipment. The result was that to a large extent bridges were neglected, and to-day many municipalities are faced with the necessity of repairing bridges for the winter months. In some plac.es efforts are being made to secure some of these bulldozers and tractors from the army, the air force, or any other branch of the service. As the minister has said, they have not yet been declared surplus. I understand that at the present time the authorities are in process of taking stock. Is there any possibility of cutting a few corners or getting rid of red tape with a view to speeding up the turning over of this type of equipment to War Assets Corporation?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall see if we can speed it up as much as possible.
*'Mr. Brooks.]


Mr. SINNOTT:: The information I obtained from the branch of War Assets Corporation in Winnipeg was that all typewriters would be sold back to the original companies I spent a couple- of hours discussing this matter with the authorities, and that was the information they gave me.


William Ross Macdonald: May I remind hon.
members that the item before the committee does not deal with War Assets Corporation. Those items will be discussed later. We would expedite matters if hon. members would withhold their questions in that connection until the appropriate estimates are before us.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: These questions have
developed from the minister's statement that all assets were being disposed of to the public.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: That was the general statement the minister made.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No, not "to the public". I do not know where they are being disposed of. I said that when we no longer required them in the army we declared them surplus. They are handled by the crown assets allocation committee. Then they go to War Assets Corporation for disposal.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: We understand that, and we will have to get our answers from the minister in charge of War Assets Corporation. I understand that soldiers are given preference in the purchase of war assets being turned back in the United States. Have any representations been made by his or other service departments to War Assets Corporation to give returned men preference in the purchase of these assets? I understand that in the United States such assets are being disposed to returned soldiers at low prices.


Mr. MACKENZIE:: The Department of Veterans Affairs has made strong representations to the War Assets Corporation along the lines suggested by the hon. member.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Has there been any action?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The action seems to be quite favourable, I can tell my hon. friend.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Keep pressing.


William Alexander McMaster: Do I understand you to say, Mr. Chairman, that at a later time we will have an opportunity to discuss the operations of War Assets Corporation?


William Ross Macdonald: War Assets Corporation comes under the Department of Reconstruction. When that department is before the committee, members will have an opportunity to ask their questions.

Demobilization-Army


John Bracken: It is understood that
there are no sales at all from defence departments.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is my understanding of it.


John Bracken: Of surplus goods.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Correct.


James Alexander Marshall: At what point is a training centre turned over to AVar Assets Corporation? Let us suppose that the occupants of the centre are moved out, and that only'a skeleton staff remains. Under such circumstances, when is it turned over? Is it under the supervision of the department, or that of War Assets Corporation?


Douglas Charles Abbott: When a training establishment is no longer required we declare it surplus, just as we do any other type of equipment, and War Assets Corporation takes it over. There may be a period of a week or two, or perhaps a month, when War Assets Corporation might not have the staff to look after it; I am not sure as to that. Under such circumstances we may do a caretaking job for a month or so. But once the army is through with it, and it is declared surplus, the primary responsibility is with War Assets Corporation for care and disposal.


Mr. LENNARD:: I would draw the min- ' ister's attention to the opposite item in the naval estimates, and would point out that he left several questions unanswered. I am not demanding that the answers be given before his items are passed, but I am simply reminding him that if he could give the answers as soon as possible it would be helpful.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I think I have almost all that naval information ready, but I thought I might wait until we had finished these estimates, at which time I could take a few minutes and give all the information at one time. *


Frank Exton Lennard: I am not even asking the minister to do that. I am simply reminding him.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have not forgotten.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Operating cost of mechanical transport, fuel, maintenance, etc. (not including repair parts), $25,774,636.
John Oliver Probe: I believe this would be the
proper item on which to consider the buildings used to house mechanical transport operated by the Department of National Defence.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That should have been
discussed under item No. 4.


John Oliver Probe: What disposition has been
made of the world grain show building in Regina? Has it been turned back to the city by the department? If not, when can we expect to get it back? Has the General Motors building been taken over for the maintenance of Department of National Defence vehicles?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The first property to which reference is made is being used as a demobilization centre in Regina, and will be required for that purpose for some time. Disposition of the second building referred to is under active" consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Sundries, including printing, stationery, telephones, telegrams and other costs not included in above items, $13,394,771.
Alfred Johnson Brooks: There was a question about the reserve army I wished to ask the minister. As he knows, these men have done a good job during the war in certain parts of Canada. Many of them are older men, ranging in age from forty-five to sixty years. Would it be possible, nowT that the war is finished and their job is over, for those men to get their discharges from the army? Will any recognition be given the reserve army for their services during the war? As the minister knows, certain sections of the eastern coast were set aside for defence by these men. They were called out at odd times of the day and night, and they rendered very good service. I should like to know also the strength of the reserve army at the present time.


Douglas Charles Abbott: On the first point, we are
now giving consideration to what should be done about allowing the members of the reserve army, who as my hon. friend has said have rendered such outstanding service during the war, to leave the organization. As my hon. friend says, they are mostly older men and they have done a great job. Perhaps I should not make the statement on the floor of the house, but I do not think very much would be done if they did not show up at parade three times a week. What we really hope for is that they will hang on a bit longer to allow the lads to get back from overseas. Many of these men will have had combat experience; they will be much younger men, and they may want to join the reserve army. The whole question whether these men should be permitted to relinquish their work is now under careful consideration.
If I may express a personal opinion I think that some recognition should be made of their services. As to what form that will take, again we have not been able to decide whether
Demobilization-Army

it should be a button or whether some special consideration might be given to their accelerated service qualifying them for the long service medal for service in the reserve army during the war when their duties were much greater than they would have been in peace time. The whole picture is being looked at, and I may say most sympathetically. I hope to be able to make some announcement at an early day.
The latest report I have as to the strength of the reserve army is as of August 31, 1945. This gives the strength as 4,470 officers and 59.938 other ranks.
The hon. member for Nanaimo asked what provision was being made for the maintenance of landing craft. I have been advised that provision for maintenance has been made and that the landing craft are currently being kept on a care and maintenance basis.


John Oliver Probe: Could the minister break up this item into subsections so that we shall have some idea as to what is covered here?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The first large item is
$2,915,258 of a carryover from the preceding fiscal year. The total item of $13,394,771 falls under three headings. First, there is printing and stationery, $4,063,527. Then there is special training equipment, $614,000 and sundries, $8,717,244. I shall give a little detail as to the sundries. There is a long detailed breakdown of this item in my estimate book, and I can give some of the totals so that hon. members may have a general idea.
There is an item for miscellaneous expenses which includes certain editorial and stenographic staff overseas, speakers, Canada Digest and so on, $1,832,000. The big item in that is male personnel, nursing sisters, C.W.A.C. in Canada, $1,629,000. This is a maintenance cost of $9 per year for sundry items. Expenditures incurred by the geographical section, $4,500. Expenditures by the historical section, $5,500. Expenditures incurred under A.G. for booklets, pamphlets, cut-outs, advertising, song rights, publication rights, reception centres, allotments to districts for local expenses, window cards, posters and sundry expenses in connection with recruiting, $250,000. Special educational films, production of films and news reels, $124,500. Rehabilitation training programme overseas, $50,000. I am just giving some of the larger items. The list is a long one, but it is available to any hon. member who wants to see it. Research and information, publication of army bulletin Khaki, C.W.A.C. news letter, $160,000. Sports programme, $125,000. Broadcast service to personnel of army forces in United Kingdom and theatres of operation, $28,000. Concert parties and army shows, $177,100. Inventions board, $50,000. Pacific coast mountain rangers, administration expenses, $120,000. That is part of the carry-over. Wireless construction, antennae networks and ground systems, $140,000. That is under communications service; there is an item of $2,216,900 for that.


John Oliver Probe: The minister mentioned overseas speakers. Should not that come under the wartime information board? Should not the item for educational films come under the national film board?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Those are special expenditures which the army makes for its own account.


Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: Can the minister give us any information about the revenue derived from the army shows?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am advised that we do not get much revenue. The army shows are generally shown to the troops. I shall get that information and give it to my hon. friend later.


George Hugh Castleden: I understand the
minister cannot give us the figures with regard [DOT] to the materials that have been declared surplus, either by the army in Canada or in Great Britain.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Not at the moment.


George Hugh Castleden: Can they be provided for this committee?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I would doubt it. The deputy minister tells me that it is done periodically. It is available the same as any information of that kind, but just how soon I would not care to say.


George Hugh Castleden: Billions of dollars have been spent on the army, and the materials are an asset of the Canadian people. The Canadian people have paid for them, and they would like to know what disposition has been made of them.


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend will recall that there is a notice of motion on the order paper to set up a committee, which I imagine will make an exhaustive inquiry into the operations of the War Assets Corporation, and that is the place where the information will be made available.


George Hugh Castleden: Quite correct. But War Assets will have nothing to do with any of these things until after the minister's department has declared them surplus.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is correct.

Demobilization-Army


George Hugh Castleden: But if we knew how much the minister's department declared surplus we would have an idea of what War Assets and crown assets allocation committee were doing.


Douglas Charles Abbott: All we could give would be an estimate. War Assets will be able to give the actual figures.
Mr. LaCROIX (Translation): Mr. Chairman, for some time past, hon. members who are surely entitled to express their own views, have been unanimous in their request for the establishment, in peace-time Canada, of a considerable fighting force, or, if you prefer, of a first-rate army-


Douglas Charles Abbott: I do not want to interrupt my hon. friend, but we are now on an item in the estimates which covers sundries, including printing, stationery, telephones and telegrams. _ I know that I am interrupting before my hon. friend has really got started but it is quite evident to me that his remarks have no bearing on printing, stationery, telephones, telegrams and other costs-
Mr. LaCROIX: It is in connection with the army.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes, but the procedure in this case was the same as with the rest of the items. We had a lengthy discussion on item No. 1, and if one member were allowed to make a general statement now, obviously I could not object if another attempted to do ' the same thing. So I must raise a point of order, Mr. Chairman.


John Bracken: I asked the minister a question the other day, on Tuesday, I think, with respect to the N.R.M.A. He answered it in part on Wednesday, at which time he gave the enrolment in that organization by years. Yesterday he gave the estimated cost by years of that organization. In giving this further answer he stated:
Here is the estimated figure for each fiscal year based on per capita cost for personnel costs only:
Then he gave the costs for each of half a dozen years, totalling some $246,000,000. In my question the other day I asked if the answer would include overhead. I ask the minister now' if he will explain how he arrived at this cost.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes, I have given that explanation. "Personnel costs" includes the following items: Pay and allowances; travel and transportation; operating expenses of
properties; clothing and necessaries; personal equipment; barrack stores; rations; medical stores; dental stores; printing and stationery. The per capita estimate includes these items of cost. I am advised that that is as close to it as we can get. '


John Bracken: The reason I ask the question is this. In making a rough calculation, taking first of all the numbers in the organization and then the figures of cost for each year, it looks to me to be an exceedingly small figure, varying in different years from $200 per individual-those individuals probably were not in for the whole year-up to $500 for the whole year. It looks a pretty small estimate of the cost.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I did not make the estimate myself. I asked the officials of the department to make as accurate an estimate as they could of the cost. It is obvious, of course, that such can only be an estimate. There was not an N.R.M.A. organization as such. Each of these men was with other soldiers in establishments for the Canadian Army as a whole. I think that that figure probably reflects pretty accurately the cost of these men. Of course there is the further point, as I mentioned in my opening statement, that of the 158,000 odd who came into the N.R.M.A. with that status, something like 57,000 to
58,000	volunteered for general service in the army and others volunteered for one of the other two services.


John Bracken: Could the minister give the total strength of the force in say the year 1944? I know it would vary a little bit from time to time, but the enrolment by years does not give the strength in any particular year.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I can give the number of men having N.R.M.A. status in the Canadian Army at any given date. I have not the figures here, but could get them very quickly. For the sake of illustration, I could take December 31, 1944 or some date close to that; w'ould that satisfy my hon. friend?


John Bracken: Yes. Is there any way of arriving at the average strength in a given year? Is there any such figure?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I do not know. I would have to inquire as to that. I have given the number who came in each year. The number varies from time to time. Some were converting to general service and other new men were coming in. I wall bring my hon. friend's question to the attention of the staff and see if we can give an average, but I doubt if it w'ould mean much.
Demobilization-Army


John Bracken: Let us leave it this way. I do not want to ask for unnecessary detail, but I should like to have an idea of what was the normal strength of the force in each of those years. The minister might give the figure for the first of each month for each year, or the figure for the first of one month of each year.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I could give the strength, I think as at December, 1944; I have some data here on that. Some of these figures, or substantially the same, appeared in Hansard in April last. The total strength of the N.R.M.A. on September 30, 1944, was approximately 60,000, divided into 42,000 suitable for infantry and the remainder for other categories. The total strength on March 31, 1945, was 35,000, of which approximately 20,000 were suitable for infantry. The total strength on August 15 was about 27,500, of which about 15,000 were suitable for infantry.


Mr. GREEN:: That was exclusive of the men on extended leave?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: What was the number of these men in each of these years?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I gave those figures before. They appeared in Hansard a day or two ago. Speaking from memory they were 9,000 odd on August 15, 1945. In April last I gave the number on extended leave at that time. That information is readily available, and I could get it quickly, but the figures I have given will give the committee some idea of the approximate strength in September, 1944.


John Bracken: The minister was good enough to give us the number enrolled by years, but that figure in itself does not give us the total strength by years. Perhaps the minister will at some later time give us this information, for a given date in each of the years during which this organization was in existence, say at three or four different periods in the year, so as to give us the approximate strength at four times in each of these years.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I will have a table prepared showing the strength of the N.R.M.A. for three or four periods in each year.


John Bracken: Thank you.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: A few days ago someone asked the minister a question with reference to the army of occupation, and the minister promised to give us the break-down. I wonder if he would be prepared to do that now.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am still waiting for
information.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: While I am on my feet may I ask a question with reference to the officers and men who were called up under general order 139 in 1940 and who have been serving full time in an administrative and training capacity in different camps throughout Canada. Some of these men were too old to be taken in the active army, and the categories of some of them would not permit it, but their services were required. Are these men entitled to a discharge button?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Were the men to whom my hon. friend refers in the army?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Yes; they were called up under G.O. 139 in the army, and those who were fit were afterwards given the privilege of going active, but many of the men were not physically fit, or too old.


Douglas Charles Abbott: They were old reservists, were they?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Many of them. They were instructors and administrators.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am advised by the Minister of National Defence for Air that they are entitled to the discharge button. As to my hon. friend's other question, I am still waiting for the break-flown of the exact composition of the occupation force. I have here and have had for two or three days the composition of the force, how it is divided, but the present strength under headings is being sent by bomber mail. It was dispatched the day before yesterday. As soon as I get it I shall place on Hansard the total, setting out the composition of the force. The hon. member for Vancouver South asked about that the other day.


Howard Charles Green: There has been an extensive discussion of the army estimates, and the official opposition have no intention of going any further. But before the estimates pass I should like to point out to the minister and to the committee that we are deeply concerned about the Canadian army of the future. We realize of course that the whole world has moved into a new era. With the development of the atomic bomb, rocket projectiles, and many other scientific devices, the whole picture has been changed; and of course it is very difficult for the defence forces and the ministry and the House of Commons to be sure of the best plans to follow with regard to our defence forces. I suppose.the Canadian people are in the same undetermined frame of mind. Those of them who are giving consideration to the problem will be in some doubt as to what is the best thing to do.
(Mr. Abbott.]

Demobilization-Army


Douglas Charles Abbott: May I interrupt my hon. friend one moment? The reason I do so is this. We are on this last item. I do not want to stop the hon. gentleman, but I had to take a point of order with the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency, that we had concluded the general discussion. If we pass this item, as I think we should do, I take it that it would be open to members of the committee, if they saw fit to do so, to make some general observations, but I would like to pass the individual items, if I may be permitted.


Howard Charles Green: This is the last item.


Douglas Charles Abbott: This is the last item.


James Alexander Marshall: What about these "sundry services"?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Oh, yes; we are going to pass "sundry services" too; I am not omitting those. But I should like to finish with the items, if I may.


Howard Charles Green: I have no objection.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I had to stop the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency. I think it would be better to proceed on that basis.


Howard Charles Green: As long as I shall be allowed an opportunity-


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes. I would have interrupted my hon. friend a little earlier, but I had to speak about an important matter to the Minister of Finance and I had not quite grasped what he was starting to say.


Howard Charles Green: On this occasion it happens that we are merely trying to be helpful.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Quite.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: We appreciate the unusual.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
B. Sundry services.	.
Experimental station, Suffield, $2,180,342.
Mr. MacNICOL:: What experiments have
been carried on at Suffield station?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The experiments carried on have been extensive. A good many of them have been of a very secret nature. I do not know that they are quite so secret now, but there have been experiments in gas warfare, with special types of weapons, and that sort of thing. It has been an extremely valuable project, and one which I hope the Canadian army will see is continued in the future.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Did the department build camps there?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Just for the accommodation of the personnel who were conducting the experiments.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Where was the water for domestic purposes in the camp obtained?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall have to have inquiries made. Perhaps I can give my hon. friend the answer a little later this afternoon.
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH:	In some of
these items we find that in the first six months of the year there has been spent from 19 up to 60 per cent. I refer to the tables on the second page. If the minister finds that in the first six months 'he has spent only 25 per cent, what makes him think that in the next six months he will spend 75 per cent?


Douglas Charles Abbott: In a good many cases they are carry-over accounts. These are cash expenditures in the six months.
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH:	I notice it
applies also to the sundries-this experimental station, for instance. In the first six months 25 per cent was spent. There would not be any carry-over there.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I 'pointed out that there are large carry-over expenditures in these items. Some of them may not have come in the first six months. That applies to . the Suffield station as well as to the others.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Does this item for the
experimental station at Suffield cover the total cost of that station, or does the British government, which was also concerned there, pay part of the cost? What I want to know is whether Canada carried the entire expenditure or if it is a shared cost.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Shared cost. It is fifty per cent of the cost.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Internment operations (Canadian costs), $1,853,296. [DOT]
Alistair McLeod Stewart: Could the minister give us any idea as to the cost per capita of these internment operations?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Practically all of this is
for account of the British government. We simply act as their agent, and we recover the cost from them. I will see if we have the per capita cost.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Do I
understand from that that Canada has no internment costs of its own?
176S
Demobilization-.4 rm y


Douglas Charles Abbott: Just the guards. These
represent the Canadian costs; they are largely for the guards. The per capita items, the food and clothing and so on, are charged to other countries-to Great Britain.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Canada really has no share in the costs of internment, beyond the guards?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No. We estimate the average for an officer, for instance, at $30 per month. The various items of cost are broken down. I do not know whether my hon. friend wants the details.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: What
I was getting at was the cost of keeping a prisoner in this country.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall have to get that
figure and give it to the hon. member later.


Mr. REID:: What is the total number of
Germans and other prisoners in the internment camps, how many are working outside, and how soon will these men be returned to where ;hey came from?	[DOT]


Douglas Charles Abbott: In my opening statement I mentioned the number of prisoners of war that we had. I have not the statement here, but it seems to me it was somewhere about thirty-four thousand. I have given the information; I shall have to turn it up.
I can give a bit more information on the break-down of these costs. From April 1 to August 31 the estimated actual expenditure was $595,000 and we have $1,853,296 for the rest of the year.


Thomas Reid: One year?


Douglas Charles Abbott: One year, yes. The total estimate for this year is $1,853,296 and that represents a very large decrease from the previous year, which I think is due to the fact that this year not only pay and allowances but camp guards at United Kingdom camps are not included in this item, as well as costs of certain other officers and other ranks who were in hospital stalls in United Kingdom camps. They are now included under this heading.	.
On the outbreak of war a number of enemy aliens and Canadian citizens were detained under the defence of Canada regulations and it was agreed between the Canadian and the British governments that Canada should receive a number of enemy prisoners of war and refugees for internment in this country. By order in council passed in September, 1939, it was provided that the Minister of National Defence should appoint a director of intern-

ment responsible for the supervision and coordination of internment operations in Canada,
. reporting to the Secretary of State. The Department of National Defence became responsible for the supervision, and maintenance of camps and the provision of guards, rations, clothing for internees, and internal discipline and administration. It is estimated that during 1945-46 there will be interned in Canada 36,867 prisoners of war and civilian internees or refugees, the responsiblity of the United Kingdom. . My recollection was somewhere about 35,000. By arrangement between the governments of Canada and the United Kingdom the costs of internment operations and refugee camps are divided as follows: Total ' cost of all United Kingdom prisoners of war and internees camps and staffs, to be borne by United Kingdom with the following exceptions: camp guards, Veterans Guard of Canada, supplied by Canada; secondly, camp hospital staffs; thirdly, working pay of fifty cents a day to all prisoners of war and internees. These items are borne by ourselves. Canada bears the total cost of all prisoners of war and civilian internees the responsibility of the Canadian goVemment, and all camps and staffs. In addition, Canada pays all costs of camp guards and camp hospital staffs for all internment operations, and is responsible for working pay of prisoners of war internees.
. There is a lengthy detail showing how these costs are broken down. Civil salaries, wages and pay and allowances of officers and other ranks are estimated to amount to $686,810; travelling, transportation and freight are estimated at a total of $629,924; sundry items, construction and repairs, $10,000; operating expenses of properties, $55,178; clothing and necessaries $57,375; personal equipment $18,200; and so on, all through a long list.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: There is no need to read it.


Douglas Charles Abbott: 
[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Inspection board of United Kingdom and Canada, $5,300,000.

Demob iliza lion-Army
John Ritchie MacNicol: As the war is over and most of this money was spent in connection with inspection throughout of war equipment and materials required to prosecute the war, and as we know that for the first six months we spent only thirty-three per cent, does the minister think we shall spend anything like the amount estimated for the remainder of the term?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I should hope not, but the estimates were prepared on the assumption that we might have to.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dependents' allowance board, $836,600.
Edmund Davie Fulton: Does this represent simply
administrative costs, or does it include amounts paid to dependents?


Douglas Charles Abbott: This is just the administrative, cost of operating the board.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Under what department will the amounts paid to dependents be found?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Those amounts are under pay and allowances.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dependents' supplementary grants fund, $5,080,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: What does this mean?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The dependents' board of trustees is authorized to make supplementary grants on compassionate grounds in case of need. I discussed some of the circumstances in which those payments are made when considering last night the case of dependents left overseas because of lack of shipping to bring them back. These are funds which the dependents' board of trustees, as set up across Canada, pay out to needy cases. As the committee probably knows, these boards are voluntary boards composed of public-spirited representative citizens of the different provinces who see that needy cases of soldier dependents receive supplementary grants where the circumstances justify it.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I take it that is given outright; it is not a loan.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is correct.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: May I express my appreciation of the activities of the board. The conception was an excellent one and the dealings I have had with the board up to the present indicate that they approach their problems with great sympathy.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Imperial war graves commission, $53,64-0.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Before I discuss this
particular item, may I ask the minister why the estimates were divided into supplemen-taries and those mentioned above the line of supplementary'.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It has been done in this way right along and I am advised it was a treasury requirement. They asked to have them broken down in this way.


John Ritchie MacNicol: As regards this last item, the -amount is not a large one and I presume, as the full returns come in, perhaps in another session, the amount will be greatly increased. This is an item which I am sure every member of parliament and every authority will stand behind one hundred per cent. Anyone who travelled through the war areas of Europe in the years following must have been comforted to see what had been done by the war graves commission. When I visited those sections in which our heroic men had been buried I felt proud as a Canadian of what had been done, not only by those who had passed on but by the commission who sought to perpetuate their memories. Any amount that is required to give them fitting burial and due commemoration will I am sure be supported by the whole house.


Douglas Scott Harkness: As the hon. member says, this seems a very small am'ount. I should like to know how the costs incurred by the commission, so far as Canadians are concerned, will be carried. Will there be a bigger [DOT] item next year?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Probably there will be. At the moment all these graves are being cared for by the army. This is a contribution to the Imperial war graves commission, which, as the committee knows, has been in existence since the last war. I have no doubt that in future years, after our army has returned, our contribution to the war graves commission may have to be larger than it is now.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Who is the Canadian representative on this war graves commission?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I believe Colonel H. C. Osborne has been our representative on the commission in Canada for a great many years.


George Randolph Pearkes: Does this Imperial war
graves commission look after the cemeteries in the far east as well as those in Europe?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am advised that it is
charged with the responsibility in all parts of the world. I do not know that from my own knowledge, but that is what I am told.
Dcmobilizatio n-A rmy


George Randolph Pearkes: Is there any likelihood of the bodies of Canadian soldiers who lost their lives at Hong Kong being returned to Canada?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No, I would think not. I believe there was a statement in the press about this not long ago, but the Imperial war graves commission decided as a firm matter of policy that the bodies of our men who were killed in foreign lands should not be returned to Canada but should rest in the lands where they lost their lives. I believe that has been decided as a matter of policy by the Imperial war graves commission, on which we were represented.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Douglas Charles Abbott: One or two matters are
still outstanding on which I promised to give information. I should like to state now that as soon as' this information is available, which probably will be early next week, I will ask the committee to be allowed to put it on the record. I also have ready now most of the information asked for in connection with the navy, and I will put it on record either this afternoon or at some other convenient time.
Mr..KNOWLES:	If tjiere are any further
questions arising out of that information the minister would answer them at the same time?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Will the minister take
under consideration making a statement at that time as to the working of the war-graves commission? We have had inquiries from time to time.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I would be very happy to make a statement at that time.
Mr. WILFRID LaCROIX (Translation): Mr. Chairman, for some time certain hon. members of this house, who most assuredly are entitled to their own opinions, have been urging the setting up in this country during peace time of large armed forces or, if you prefer, of a first-rate army with conscription as the form of enlistment, as was advocated by the honourable member for St. Boniface (Mr. Viau) and by many other honourable members of this house.
I have too much respect for the honourable members to insinuate that such propaganda is inspired by the legitimate desire on the part of brass hats to keep their high-salaried positions, because a good many among them would find it difficult to obtain comparable employment in civil life. Let me tell you
tUr. Abbott.]
that the inevitable result of the organization in this country of a big army would be the continuance of the exorbitant taxes which people in the lower salary brackets now have to pay, as well as the maintaining of the far too numerous controls which dominate and paralyse private enterprise to such a degree that it is extremely difficult for any ambitious young man to start a new industry or business, because he is denied the quota of goods he would need for that purpose. In short, it Would mean the dictatorship of the military caste to the financial prejudice of every one among us.
In view of our geographical position and our small population of 12,000,000 we cannot launch out into such an- adventure. I feel that, on the contrary, all the financial resources of a young country like purs should be devoted to its development with a view' to eliminating unemployment which unfortunately, is already being experienced. As a matter of fact, how can a manufacturer or a business man face the problems of the future if the burden of his obligations toward the government is maintained at its present rate?
Let us rather endeavour to create in this country a first rate agricultural and industrial wealth. Is not a country which has reached such a position through the development of its huge natural resources a decisive factor - in a war, as was evidenced by the United States in the last conflict, even though that country did not have conscription during peace time.
The more powerful our military organization is, the more apt it will be to become a factor which a prospective enemy would endeavour, to the limit of its powers, to destroy as constituting an obstacle to its ends and, therefore, a cause of future armed conflict between our country and this theoretical enemy. I claim that military training in peace time, if exaggerated, might well be an endeavour to apply in our country the worst pre-war European methods, which, as you are aware, have led and would still inevitably lead to war.
On this subject here is what the archbishop of Boston had to say. Although his military knowledge and experience may, with reason, be doubted, we must nevertheless admit that he gives us an example of common sense and logic which, in my estimation, should be the guiding principles of our future policy. I quote:
Ever since Napoleon resorted to conscription in peace time and Prussia followed his bad example, such a system has inevitably resulted in dictatorship, militarism and competition in

De mobilization-A rmy
armaments. This system has been a curse' to Europe and it has paralysed its culture. God fo -bid that we apply here the worst theories of the old world. Compulsory military training, discredited to such an extent in Europe, must not encumber our post-war programme. Let all American statesmen take the lessons of history. All the nations who lost the second world war had conscription in peace time. They have been bled white, both morally and physically. Such is the infallible result of conscription in peace time.
I have no objection to a well disciplined army, as long as it remains in proportion with our population and financial resources; what I object to is the arming of the whole nation.
Here is, on this subject, an excerpt from an outstanding newspaper of our province, VAction catholique:
Had the European nations maintained permanent armies instead of organized armed peoples, the last two wars would not have unleashed such a storm of destruction. If Canada is really a peace-loving nation wishing to bury the hatchet for good, why does it not take the lead and set an example in disarmament? That argument, however, is not the only one used by those who favour compulsory military service, but this proposal is put forward only by a few enlightened individuals who are real busy-bodies.
The other protagonists are more dangerous for they invoke subtle arguments. They use the sentimental appeal and put forward two reasons: the need of physical training and the dream of bringing about in Canada unity of thought with all that it implies, as if two different cultures could no longer develop side by side in our country.
The need of physical training is obvious. Education, however, is a provincial responsibility. There can be no bargaining or backing down on this issue. Moreover, it is far from proved that military service in itself is the best means of building up sound men. It is better to insist on the necessity of entrusting physical education to the schools, which means to. the parents themselves, since this is part of their duty. It is better to develop young people's taste for physical exercise, life in the open and the building up of their muscles through sports while making them conscious of their personality. Military training often becomes nothing more than plain unadulterated regimentation. -
Next comes the need for developing better citizens. In this sphere, f>ropaganda is right in its element. It tends to mould all Canadians to the same pattern, to fashion minds that will find legislative union more and more acceptable.
Further:
For reasons as varied as the need of adventure and the improvement of business relations, with the added attraction of the Anglo-Saxon standard of living, there are far too many who, every year, go over to the other camp. On the other hand, the relish derived from conquest and the tendency to assimilate remain deep-rooted among some of our Anglo-Saxon fellow-citizens. According to their character, they still stalk their prey, using bold or subtle methods.
All things considered, the arguments put forward in favour of compulsory military service are almost baseless. They are designed only for people who, because of the war, have lost all control over their feelings.
We are on slippery ground and must climb a very steep hill. Our reaction must be all the stronger to counterbalance a more insidious and constant propaganda. It is the will that founts, and we must will it decidedly.
We may rightly wonder if the enforcement . of peace-time conscription for military service in Canada will not lead to moral disintegration which will prevent future generations from playing a useful part in solving the problems of their day, especially when opinions such as those voiced by Major-General Chisholm who is a senior administrative officer and a high-ranking member of the army, are expressed.
I wish to refer to a recent pronouncement, in Ottawa, of the deputy minister of National Health and Welfare. To my mind, such an utterance would warrant his immediate release by his superior, the Minister of Health (Mr. Cla'xton). I quote:
The idea of good and evil is a myth created by politicians, priests and others interested in keeping us under their domination.
This is not the first blunder of the major-general, for it is he, who, during the war, claimed that sexual laxity was a necessity for soldiers. Therefore, this deputy minister is amoral by his own admission and should be shown the door without delay.
I am certainly not convinced that the inception of a two or three-year compulsory military training programme wou!4. give us a bette'r class of citizens. This policy of a first-class conscripted army has always been the first plank of the Tory platform, for the members of that party know that it would be a factor of closer intimacy with the empire; and is not imperialism the keystone of their doctrine?
It is also a tenet of the Social Credit party, whose leader, the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Low) stated, in this house, on September 28 last, as reported in Hansard:
While we are making Canada strong, we must at the same time be prepared to contribute of our strength to ensure the preservation of Britain. Britain is in danger. Britain is in a serious condition. If Great Britain is destroyed the British commonwealth of nations cannot endure; therefore we must be prepared to contribute of our strength to ensure that Britain will remain strong and virile, and that the British commonwealth of nations will be maintained.
I do not believe the French Canadians will ever get fair play in the Canadian army, for, of all the parties represented in this house,
Demobilization-Army

the Liberal party has the most sympathy for them, and in spite of their efforts and good intentions,'they have failed, during the war, to prevent discrimination being shown against them. How could they get better results in peace time when all our imperialistic brass hats will be enshrined in high army posts to form a class accountable to no one. Of course-, certain improvements could be implemented, but, as a whole, the imperialistic views will prevail. These views require that the French Canadians have as little influence as possible in the army, because, as a class, they are the most devoted to the Canadian fatherland.
Allow me, however, to congratulate the Minister of Defence for his worthy efforts at the present time, in favour of Canadians of French descent. I would also like to acknowledge the evident good will of the Minister for Air (Mr. Gibson) who stated, in a letter he sent me on November 1:
In our post-war plans and in recognition of the splendid record established by the all French-Canadian squadron No. 425 overseas, it has been more or less definitely decided to establish a permanent R.C.A.F. station at Ancienne Lorette.
In order that you may be familiar with the magnitude of such a step, may I outline in brief just what a station such as this incorporates:
(1)	A permanent V.L.R. (very long range) squadron (heavy bomber-Lancaster) will be in operation.
(2)	In addition, an auxiliary squadron detachment will be in operation.
(3)	In addition, a V.H.F. (very high frequency) Homersite will be operated.
(4)	To permit the above to function, a station headquarters will be established.
(5)	All in all, the station strength will approximate twelve hundred personnel.
(6)	Further to the above operations, the Department of Transport will be in position and, 1 understand, plan to operate a commercial flying base utilizing large four engine planes, thus establishing a No. 1 airport.
(7)	In order to adapt the existing station to meet operational requirements for the above, the runways will be extended giving temporary employment to several hundred men.
(8)	Further, changes, extensions and alterations to existing buildings and construction of new buildings will be required to provide the requisite accommodation.
(9)	As the station strength will constitute in great part of married personnel, the population of the station will be proportionately increased.
Therefore, you will gather that in order to honour the reputation of No. 425 squadron, we have very ambitious plans for Ancienne Lorette. the effects of which should be very material throughout the Quebec area.
I have striven for ten years, since I have entered this house, to have the need of a national flag and a national anthem recognized.

May I sincerely congratulate the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) for the steps which he has taken to ensure the achievement of this goal. I believe that this is the result of the vision and the tenacious efforts of his close associate, the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent). I hope that any sign of colonialism will disappear from that flag.
But if French Canadians are to secure the share and influence to which they are entitled in the army, the present Minister of National Defence-who, I know, is sympathetic to the French Canadians-will have to roll up his sleeves and assert his authority and make a thorough clean-up of the headquarters staff. I sincerely hope that he will succeed but I have my doubts in this regard.
At any event, if there are possibilities of creating in our army a true Canadian spirit, it is certainly not with the Tories or with the Social Credit party that this goal will be attained; indeed we are aware of the views already expressed in this house by their respective leaders in this connection. Hence my confidence in the generous and unselfish endeavours of the Liberal party leaders along this line. To attain success, I repeat that it will be necessary to eliminate the spiritual influence from London which still subsists within that party for I am convinced, as I have always been for that matter, that the best means for our country to attain full maturity is the complete severance of our ties with Great Britain.
We should reply "no" to the suggestion contained in the book by George Grant, entitled "Canada must choose-the empire yes or no," which the members have received recently. We should, as I say, answer "no"; we should direct our policies towards the complete independence of our country and cooperate with the United States in the solution of our future problems in keeping, of course, with our financial resources and our ability. Indeed, I am convinced that if, to-morrow-, England should have some difficulties in some corner of her far-flung empire, to put down an uprising for independence in India, for .instance, our country, inspired as always by Downing street, will hasten to send at our expense an expeditionary force as she did at the time of the Transvaal conflict.
Some people condemn the stand taken by Ireland and the Irish in the w-ar that has recently ended, but anyone who takes the trouble to study the political history of that country will readily understand that attitude.

Demobilization-Army
Every member of this house is aware of my aversion for war and militarism, but my stand would be quite different were I convinced that Canada alone was concerned.
Besides, if our country enjoyed full independence, could we not play on this north American continent the part that was played by Switzerland in all European wars?
The honourable member for Bonaventure (Mr. Arsenault) explained the other day why defaulters or deserters are so numerous in the province of Quebec. All the reasons he adduced are true and I support him. That is why, in concluding, I shall take the liberty to ask the government to consider those reasons and grant at once to deserters a general and unrestricted amnesty. Let the government take into consideration the fact that there is at this time a. tremendous labour shortage in the forests and on our farms and let them hasten to grant deserters their release, which would help these two basic industries of the Canadian economy to carry out the heavy tasks which the UNRRA expects them to fulfil, while it would also enable deserters to participate in the relief of distress in Europe.
(Text.)


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, in opening my remarks a few moments ago I pointed out that we had moved into a new era. I referred also to the tremendous development that had taken place in weapons. I suggest to the committee that the development of [DOT] those weapons has made the defence of Canada a far more difficult and pressing problem than it has been during the lifetime of anyone in this chamber. We have another problem presented by the fact that we shall be under commitment to the united nations organization. A development that occurred in the last few days is even more serious. I refer to the statement made this week by President Truman that the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada are in effect the trustees of atomic force. All of these developments mean that we must give the most careful consideration to our defence forces.
The plan submitted by the government during the discussion of these estimates is that we shall have an active army and a reserve army. The active army is to be composed of a small trained field force with, I presume, three or four infantry battalions and two armoured regiments with certain artillery. In any event it is to be quite a small field force.


Douglas Charles Abbott: But representative of all arms.


Howard Charles Green: Representative of all arms, yes. The remainder of the 20,000 or 25,000 personnel in the active army are to be used for training and research and other activities of that kind.
On the other hand, the reserve army is intended to be the back-bone of Canada's defence forces. The minister expressed that in a few words, to be found on page 1136 of Hansard, when he said:
. . . this important force which will form the background of any future military endeavour . . .
The minister said that the reserve army would comprise six divisions, with armoured troops and other supporting troops. I am not quite clear as to the total, but I think he said, between 130.000 and 150,000.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That was an estimate on my part and I would not want to be held to that figure.


Howard Charles Green: In any event the reserve army will be much stronger than it ever was before.


Douglas Charles Abbott: We hope so.


Howard Charles Green: In addition to 'those six divisions, the reserve force would be responsible for coastal defence and for anti-aircraft defence. At the present time the strength of this force is about 60,000, so that there will have to be a great increase in the number. The plans are indefinite. I do not think anyone will question that statement, but I admit that it would be difficult to have definite plans at this stage.
We must remember that after the last war the Canadian corps came back to Canada with a wonderful record of being the best equipped and most efficient fighting force in Europe; yet it was not very long before our defence force had been terribly weakened. We do not want to have the same development take place after this war. The government should be warned against sliding back to the 1939 outlopk, and there are signs that that is the trend. General George C. Marshall made a statement this week which applies to Canada just about as strongly as it applies to the United States. He is quoted as using these words:
For the moment, in a widespread emotionai crisis of the American people, ' demobilization has become in effect, disintegration not only

Demobilization-A rmy
of the armed forces but apparently of all conception of world responsibility and what it demands of us.
Then there were these further words:
We must somehow get it clear in our thinking that the fulfilment of our responsibilities is not some vague mumbo-jumbo. It requires positive active effort and' sacrifice, and above all it is a continuing process.
We in the official opposition believe that the carrying out of the plans for Canada's army of the future will be a big undertaking. We think it will be a difficult job for this government to carry out that plan and that it would be a difficult job for any government. First of all, there is the recruiting. The government will have to raise nearly 200,000 for the active army and for the reserve army. That in itself is a tremendous job; nothing approaching it has ever been done before in peace time.
Then the training will be quite difficult. There is no use in having a reserve army made up of men who have had practically nc training. I was not in this war so that I cannot speak with any authority, but I do know that because of mechanical developments the soldier had to know far more than did the soldier in the last war. If there is ever a war in the future, the soldier of that time will have to know a lot more than the soldier of to-day. I do not think we should run away with the idea that we can have a fully trained reserve army by giving them one night a week and a week at camp in the summer. The training question is a difficult one. It also involves getting the consent of the employers of the men in the forces for them to take time off to go to camp. It is not going to be easy at all. The question of equipment will become very difficult in future yeans. It is all right now because we have the equipment from the war but within a year or two that equipment will be obsolete and we shall have to keep on getting modern and up-to-date equipment.
The most difficult job of all will be to build up the support of the Canadian people behind these two armies, the active army and the reserve army. I do not believe that our people are in the frame of mind now to support those armies. It has never been done in Canada; it is something entirely new. It will require very strong leadership if these plans are to be carried out. We believe, too, that the time element is very important, that if the government lets the whole question ride over for a few months and does not point out to the people how difficult the problem will be, then it may be too late. In six months or in a year our chance may be gone. We believe that if a defence force
[*Mr. Green.]
is to be built up along the lines suggested by the minister he must tell the Canadian people of the plans at as early a date as possible; tell them the position; tell them what Canada's new and important position in world affairs calls for in the way of defence forces; tell them of the vital needs.
If that is done, and I think all parties in the house would cooperate because there is nothing political about this question-it is far too serious to be the subject of political controversy-I believe that the Canadian people will respond just as they have responded to every other appeal that has been made in that spirit. You see, Mr. Chairman, a satisfactory settlement of this question may involve the survival of Canada as a nation, so that I would ask that the government lose no time and spare no effort to see that these plans are carried through to a successful conclusion.	[DOT]


Douglas Charles Abbott: Perhaps I might in the short time before six o'clock clean up some of the outstanding matters on which I promised to give information with respect to the navy, but before I do so I might say that I intended to announce in the course of the discussion this afternoon that following the established policy of lowering the point score for discharge from time to time, the point score for discharge from to-day will be 110, a reduction of 10 points from the 120.
For the information of the committee, in the past two months, September and October, we have discharged approximately 80,000 men. and almost 20,000 additional have been put out on extended leave. The committee will recall that men who are returning to former employment, and so op, if they have not their required points for discharge, can be put out on extended leave. There have been returned to the civilian economy during the last two months approximately 100,000 of all ranks, made up of the 80,000 men discharged, and 20,000 additional put out on extended leave.	[DOT]
A number of other questions on which I promised to give information I shall have to leave until probably next week.
The hon. member for York South (Mr. Cockeram) asked as to the ranks of officers employed at naval service headquarters and local district headquarters? The information is here in the form of a table, and perhaps rather than take the time of the committee in reading it I may have permission to place it on Hansard.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The list is as follows:

Demobilization-Army



NAVAL SERVICE HEADQUARTERS

[Stage Direction]
-	Vice- Admiral	Rear- Admiral	Commodore	Captain	Cdr.	Lt. Cdr.	Lieut.	Sub-Lt.	Comm'd. Off.	to O	Matron- in-Chief	Nurs. Sis.	Chaplain1	1	1	28	54	90	227	27 *	15	43	1	1	2

[Stage Direction]
C.O.N.D. (H.Q. Toronto)				1		6 1	8 8 1 1 1 5 7 6 2 1 2 2 1 2 4 1 [DOT]i 2 3 9	21 26 '10 4 13 30 23 47 8 4 11 1 28 11 11 9 7 19 10 15 76	3 5	1	2 5 1		
"BRUNSWICKER"													1
"CARLETON"										1			
"CARTIER"													
"CATARAQUI"									3 7 4 6 2		1 2		
"CHIPPAWA"						1 1							
"DISCOVERY"										1			
"DONNAC'ONA"					1								1
"GRIFFON"													
"HALIGONIAN"													
"HUNTER"						1			3				
"MALAHAT"													
"MONTCALM"						2			3 1 3	1	6		
"NONSUCH"													
"PREVOST"											1		
"QUEEN"						1				1			
"QUEEN CHARLOTTE"													
"STAR"						1			4 2 1 14		1 4		
"TECUMSEH"													
"UNICORN"													
"YORK"						4				1	7		4
TOTAL													
			1	1	18	71	384	61	6	30		6
Note: These figures do not include officers appointed for leave, hospitalization or demobilization, as follows:-
N.S.H.Q. 6 Naval Divisions	216
The hon. member for Regina City (Mr. Probe) asked: What are the amounts to be voted for civil salaries and pay and allowances for H.M.C.S. Queen of Regina for 1945-46?
The answer is that no provision is made for civil salaries in these estimates. Two Grade 2 clerks were taken on at the end of September 1945, for a period of about four months in connection with demobilization operations. No provision was made in the estimates for this expenditure in this particular establishment. Sufficient funds are available, however, to meet it.
As to pay and allowances, the estimated permanent establishment at the Regina division is 1 officer and 3 ratings. The amount provided for this number of personnel for pay and allowances during the seven months period from September 1, 1945, to March 31, 1946, is S3,598. The present staff consists of 9 officers and 44 ratings of whom 8 officers and 41 ratings will be demobilized at a later date. The pay and allowances of these 8 officers and 41 ratings is provided for in the general provision for personnel who will be demobilized. Some additional personnel are, at the present time, temporarily on the strength of H.M.C.S. Queen, principally in connection with the demobilization of naval personnel.
The hon. member for York South asked for the number of admirals, vice admirals and rear admirals and captains on the strength of the navy to-day. That information will appear from the table which I have already put on Hansard, and therefore it is unnecessary for me to answer that question in detail. There are 71 serving and 31 who have been retired since March 1, 1944.
The hon. member for Bruce (Mr. Robinson) asked: What is the lowest ranking officer in the navy who can impose a sentence of thirty-four days' stoppage of pay? Authority to punish summarily is visited in any commissioned officer in command of one of His Majesty's Canadian ships. Only in exceptional circumstances is an officer below the rank of lieutenant appointed in command.
The hon. member for Wentworth (Mr. Lennard) asked me to give the percentage of naval and civilian labour in H.M.C. dockyard, Halifax. The total numbers of naval personnel as of October 1, 1945, borne in H.M.C.S. Scotian, which is the dockyard establishment, are as follows:
Officers 272; ratings 1,162; making an aggregate of 1,434. The total numbers of hourly paid male and female civilians as of October 15, 1945, and other civil servants are 4,923. This would give the percentage break-down
[Stage Direction]
Demobilitation-Army
roughly as follows: Civilians 77-5 per cent;-naval 22-5 per cent. This includes all administrative staffs as well.
The hon. member for York South asked for the costs and tonnages .of the yachts equipped at the start of the war. There were fourteen yachts acquired and the particulars requested are as follows. Perhaps I might be allowed to put this on Hansard:
Name of vessel	Cost	Gross tonnage	BuiltBeaver 	... $ 73,609 56	808	1902Caribou	... 135,204 52	295	1928Couger 	.. . 101,073 62	200	1916Elk 	... 186.631 26	578	1926Grizzly 	... 91.571 00	132	1909Husky	... 215,225 04	360	1930Lynx	... 129,458 44	495	1922Moose 	... 171.993 68	263	1930Otter	.. . 72.374 14	419	1921Raccoon 	... 206.777 26	372	1931Reindeer	.. . 154.934 48	337	1926Renard 	. . . 59,729 96	411	1916Vis o n	... 130.116 74	422	1933Wolf 	... 62.653 94	293	1915
The Bras D'Or is not included in the above list observing that this vessel was on loan to Naval Service from the Department of Transport.
The hon. member for York South also asked who was responsible for the purchase of these yachts and whether there was a naval board to pass on these ships at that time or whether there was one officer who decided.
I am informed that a special committee was formed, headed by the Hon. Norman Rogers, then minister of national defence, and the Hon. C. D. Howe, then minister of transport, and charged with the responsibility of acquiring certain vessels. On behalf of the Department of Transport these yachts were originally purchased in the United States by private owners in Canada and change of registry effected. The vessels were later requisitioned by the director of marine services of the Department of Transport and turned over to the navy at the price paid by the private owners. The acquisition was with the full cognizance of the senior representatives of the naval service at that time.
The hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard (Mr. Merritt) asked how many Fairmiles had been declared surplus, what their age was and how much they cost. Seventy-five had been declared surplus as of October 24, 1945. The first Fairmile was completed in November, 1941, and the last one was completed in October, 1944. The average cost for each of these ships was $140,329.09.

The hon. member for Regina City wanted to know the nature and extent of the proposed teletype rental service for this year, the cost, and the companies or persons to whom this money will be paid.
Teletype service is rented wherever it is more economical than the use of commercial telegrams or where speed in transmission of data from technical stations is essential. Circuits rented at present are as follow:
Between Ottawa and the following points: Halifax, Esquimalt, Montreal.
Between Gloucester and New York. The Royal Canadian Navy pays the cost to the United States border only.
Between Ottawa and Coverdale; that is Moncton.
Between' Halifax and Coverdale.
Between Halifax and the following points: Sydney, Shelburne and Cornwallis.
The expenditure from April 1, 1945, to August 31, 1945, amounted to $171,129.
The amount of $126,000 was provided for the last seven months of the fiscal year; and the companies from whom lines will be leased are: Canadian National Telegraphs, Canadian Pacific Railway Company, North American Telegraph Company, Northwest Telegraph Company, and Maritime Telegraph and Telephone Company Limited.
Then the hon. member for St. John-Albert (Mr. Hazen) asked a number of questions. The first one related to rented properties, and he wanted me to advise the committee as to the rentals being paid in respect of properties occupied by the naval service, where and to whom they are paid, and how the amount compares with the amounts'paid in rentals last year. I have here an elaborate table, which covers several large foolscap sheets, and with the permission of the committee perhaps that may be placed on Hansard.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The table is as follows:
Atlantic Coast Out Ports Location - Lessor - Rental Digby. N.S.-	,
Water street, W. F. Webber, $35 per month.
Sick bay, Royal Bank, $30 per month.
Dental clinic, Dr. J. W. Smith, $12 per month. Lunenburg, N.S.-[DOT]
Lincoln street, Mr. McLachlan, $8.50 per month.
Mulgrave. N.S.

Water pipe line, C.N.R., $2.50 per month. Pietou, N.S.-
Gas and oil storage, C.N.R., $4.50 per month.

Demobilization-Army
Port Hawkesbury, N.S.-	-
2.1 acres, boom defence, Super service station, $35 per month.
Boom defence, C.N.R., $1 per month.
Gaspe, P.Q.-
Pipe line, C.N.R., $5 per annum.
Sandy beach, H. Adams, $1 per annum.
Sandy beach. Miss Robson, $1 per annum.
9 66 acres, C.N.R., $60 per annum.
Halifax, N.S.
Dartmouth, N.S.-
Water supply, 6 leases, C.N.R., $30 per annum.
Aerial cable, Maritime Telegraph & Telephone Co., $29.20 per annum.
Halifax, N.S.-	'
South wharf, Acadia Sugar Refining Co., $135 per month.
Overhead wire crossing, C.N.R., $1.50 per annum.
Electric poles and cable, C.N.R., $8.50 per annum.
Deepwater branch, C.N.R., $1 per annum.
Cow Head, Mrs. Osborne, $25 per annum.
Osborne Head, N.S.-
2 acres, Mrs. Osborne, $10 per annum.
Halifax, N.S.-
Four buildings, L. E. Shaw, $65 per month.
Pier 2, National Harbours Board, $404.50 per month.
Home Laundry Building, United Cleaners, $240 per month.
Saekville street, United Service Corporation, $53.15 per month.
Merchant Seamen's Pool, Department of Transport, $1000 per month.
Montreal, P.Q.-
625 St. Maurice street, Brown's Garage Ltd., $5,750 per quarter.
Shed 25, National Harbours Board, $1,905 per month.
1580 Amherst street, L. J. O. Belanger, $800 per month.
1505 St. James street, B. Wainberg, $315.52 per month.
4590 St. Denis street, H. P. Masse, $800 per month.
3485 McTavish street, Presbyterian College, $523 per month.
Craig street, C.P.R.. $55 per month.
Redpath crescent, Mrs. Holt, $1 per annum.
Saint John, N.B.-
Lawson Building, B. Lawson, $80 per month.
Shelburne, N.S.

Battery Point, C.N.R., $10 per annum.
Fire alarm circuit, Maritime Telegraph & Telephone Co., $8.80 per annum.
Sydney, N.S.-
Cranberry Head, Town of Sydney Mines, $1 per annum.
Mile 98.19, water line, C.N.R., $1 per annum.
Mile 101.85, water line and cable, C.N.R., $5 per annum.
Mile 101.8, communications, C.N.R., $4.50 per annum.
Cape Breton, Dominion Coal, $1 per month.
Rhodes Curry wharf, Sydney Foundry, $1,920 per annum.
Swivel Point, Nova Scotia Steel, $1 per month.
* Terminates 30th November, 1945.
Quebec Base
Quebec City, P.Q.-
St. Valier street, G. I. Lachance Indust., $400 per month.
Shed 18, National Harbours Board, $660 per month.
Buade street, R. E. Anctil, $150 per month.
Saint John, N.B.

Sydney street, J. J. Mitchell, $100 per month.
240 Main stret, Slipp & Flewelling, $150 per month.
Thornes wharf, Eastern Coastal Steamship Co., $75 per month.
Charlotte street, J. Robertson Co., -$60 per month.
Saints Rest Bay, parcel A, Mrs. Enright, $20 per annum.
Saints Rest Bay, parcel B, C. H. Dexter, $10 per annum.
Saints Rest Bay, parcel C, P. Manchester, $10 per annum.
Reed's Point, National Harbours Board, $2,625 per quarter.
Esquimalt, B.C.-
Esquimalt Athletic hall, Athletic Association, 60 per month.
Staff houses Nos. 3 and 4, Wartime Housing, $500 per month.
Staff house No. 2, Wartime Housing, $270 per month.
Nanaimo, B.C.-
Newcastle Island, C.P.R., $550 per annum.
Courtenay. B.C.

Fire building, city of Courtenay, $2.50 per month.
Prince Rupert, B.C.-
Staff house No. 9, Wartime Housing, $584 per month.
Lot 12, block 20, city of Prince Rupert," $93.30 per annum.
Boom defence, Shell Fish Packing Co., $150 per annum.
Water fi'ont, block "G", Ed. Lipsett Ltd., $150 per annum.
2.24 acres, C.N.R., $551.50 per annum.
149 Fourth avenue, J. P. Currie, $50 per month.
Wharf and foreshore, Government of B.C., $250 per month.
Coal storage, C.N.R., $35 per annum.
Ill Second avenue, L. C. Eby, $35 per month.
Vancouver, B.C.-
1146 W. Georgia street, Montreal Trust, $200 per month.
1018 W. Georgia street, Uptown Markets, $150 per month.
2186 S.W. Marine drive*, L. M. Molson, $250 per month.
Rowing Club building, Vancouver Rowing Club. $30 per month.
1806 W. Georgia street*, Royal Trust Co., $500 per month.
1014 Hornby street*, R. A. Wyllie & Son, $300 per month.	_
Lapointe pier, National Harbours Board, $35 per month.
Buscombe building, Ker & Ker, $90 per month.
Boat landing float, National Harbours Board, $15 per month.
Demobilizei lion-A rm y

Location - Lessor - Rental
St. John's, Newfoundland-
Cold storage, Harvey & Co., $500 per month.
llotwood, Nfld., John Cole, $50 per annum.
Harbour Grace airport, Harbour Grace Airport, $10 per annum.
Cornwallis, N.S.-
100 acres, Ueepbrook, Mrs. Garty,* ** $12.50 per month.
St. Hyacinthe, P.Q.-
Training ground, Dept, of Agriculture, Quebec, $5 per annum.



W.R.C.N.S.

[Stage Direction]
Preston Springs Hotel, Preston, Ont., A. R. Kaufman, $1,250 per month.
Railway crossing, C.N.R., $1 per annum.
R.C.N.V.R:
Calgary-
Hickman block, V. B. Bravely & Co., $25 per month.
Halifax-
St. Joseph's hall, R.C. Episcopal Corp., $200 per mouth.
Montreal-
1448 Mountain street, A.. AY. Barry, $75 per month.
Quebec-
Quebec Winter club, Quebec AATinter Club, $520 per month.
Regina-
Waseana AVinter club building, AVascana Winter Club, $300 per month.
Saint John-
Drill hall site, C.N.R., $315 per annum.
AA'indsor-
AlacDougall avenue, Burroughs Ltd., $1 per annum.
Winnipeg-*
Garry street, Hudson's Bay Company, $41.65 per month.
611 Crescent avenue, Oldfield, Kirby & Gardner, $175 per month.
Red river, C.N.R., $1 per annum.
Ottawa, Ont.
[Stage Direction]

Beach Foundry building, Beach Foundry Ltd., $592.01 per month.
297 Booth street, Mrs. M. E. Alexander, $100 per month.
414 Booth street, A. Aubrey. $125 per month.
265 Laurier avenue west, Campbell Motors, $479.75 per month.
1153 Wellington street, Catholic Emigration Society, $175 per month.
[Stage Direction]
King's House, 10 Haymarket, London, Ministry of Works, $785 per month.
Smithston Institute. Greenock, Scotland, Ministry of Works, $3,755.82 per month.
78 Duke street, Devonport. England, Ministry of AA'orks, $12 per month.
24 Haymarket, London, England, Ministry of AA7orks, $1,118.36 per month.
AVar Artist Studio, London England, Ministry of AYorks, $50 per month.
*Rent on this building was settled , on a computed basis from
7/12/44 to 30/4/47 at	 $100,433 73
** Includes allowance for unpaid rentals at Xiobe accrued 1944-45 for which no previous provision was made.

54 Haymarket, London, England, Ministry of Works, $700 per month.
Leith House, London, England, Ministry of Works, $1,060 per month.
Panton street, London, England, Ministry of Works, $72 per month. '
Whitcomb street, London England, Ministry of AYorks, $70 per month.
Prince's Gate, London, England, Ministry of Works, $150 per month.
Ace's garage, London, England, Ministry of AYorks, $205 per month.
Toronto, Ont.-
1-3 Front street, Sam Smith, $1,375 per month.
Magazines 2 and 3, C.I.L., $25 per month.
Church and Lombard streets, Toronto Motor Car Co., $2,300 per month.
D/F and Loran
Gloucester-
Lot 19, concession 9, H. Armstrong, $8.75 per month.
Lot	16,	concession	9, E.	Wallace,	$1	per
annum.
Lot	18,	concession	9, D.	Charron,	$2	per
month.
London-
Station site, London Airport, $50 per month.
Cap d'Espoir-[DOT]
Lot	143,	range I,	Irwin	Trachy,	$20	per
annum.
Lot	144,	range I,	Arnold	Trachy,	$10	per
annum.	,
Lot 145, range I, Horace Trachy, $11 per annum.
Lot 146, range I, Thomas O'Brien, $9 per annum.
Lot 146, range I, W. T. O'Brien, $15 per annum.	-
Montreal. P.Q.-
Ford Motor building, Hartford Investment Corporation.*
Rents paid in 1944-45	 $575,819 74
**Rents paid and provided for 194546	 437,891 01
Decrease	 $137,928 73
The foregoing figures do not cover rentals for space made available to the naval service and occupied by it through the Department of Public Works. In such cases, the Department of Public AVorks pays the rentals, if any, and, as the amounts are not billed to the naval service, they are not included in this summary.
The lion, member for St. John-Albert also asked as to what repairs to establishments have been made this year, where they' were made, who made them, and what they had cost. I have a similar statement, not so lengthy as the first one, which, perhaps, with the unanimous consent of the committee I might place on Hansard.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The replies as tabulated are as follows:

Demobilization-Army
Total repairs for 1945-46 (1st April to 30th September, 1945) $188,942.91, distributed as follows:
Location	Civilian maintenance Labour	L.P.O. or M&S Contract	Contractor	TotalAtlantic Coast outports	$ cts. 315 87 998 80 34,572 00 12,676 47 5,567 76 41,280 50 3,076 96 515 85 1,570 61 1,251 14 660 16 6,617 96 15,078 95 4,219 38 4,011 48 2,097 38 5,248 08 652 10 5,597 01 385 75 374 05 20,857 89 1,406 02 3,389 54 841 84 7,832 55 185 57 2,271 18 4,150 06	$ cts.	$ cts. 315 87 998 80 34,572 00 12,676 47 5,567 76 41,280 50 3,076 96 650 85 1,785 61 1,251 14 660 16 6,617 96 15,078 95 4,219 38 4,011 48 2,097 38 5,248 08 652 10 5,597 01 385 75 374 05 20,857 89 1,406 02 3,389 54 841 84 7,832 55 185 57 2,271 18 5,040 06Gaspe	Halifax base	Stadaeona	Peregrine	Bedford Basin	Halifax armament depot	Montreal	135 00 215 00	Mander and Lucas.. Herve Lavoie	
Renous					
Saint John, N.B					
Shelburne					
Svdnev					
Esquimalt					
R.C.N. Naden					
Prince Rupert					
Vancouver					
Kamloops 						
St. John's, Nfld. base					
St. John's barracks					
Newfoundland outports					
Cornwallis					
R.C.N. college					
St. Hyacinthe..:					
Bytown, Ottawa (N.S.H.Q'.)					
Niobe, England					
Toronto					
D/F & Loran					
R.C.N.V.R. divisions	
Grand Totals	890 00	Gilbert and Son....	187,702 91	1,240 00	188,942 91
Summary of R.C.N.V.R. Divisions-Repairs, 1945-46, from 1st April to 30th September. 1945
Total $5,040.06
. Location	Civilian maintenance Labour	L.P.O. _or M&S "Contract	Contractor	TotalCharlottetown "QUEEN CHARLOTTE" '	$ cts. 169 08 117 38 783 56 105 07 165 13 157	90 358 53 171 41 221 83 187 74 246 41 408 05 643 52 158	25	$ cts.	$ cts. 169 08 117 38 783 56 105 07 165 13 157	90 358 53 1,061 41 221 83 187 74 246 41 408 05 643 52 158	25Halifax-"HALIGONIAN"	Quebec. "MONTCALM"	Montreal "DONNACONA" and "CARTIER" Ottawa-"CARLETON"	
Kingston-"CATARAQUI"....				
Toronto-"YORK"					
Hamilton-"STAR I"			890 00	Gilbert and Son. ...	
Preston-"STAR IT"					
London, Ont.-"PREVOST"					
Windsor-"HUNTER"					
Port Arthur-"GRIFFON"					
Winnipeg-"CHIPPAWA"						
Saskatoon-"UNICORN"					
Totals					
	4,150 06	890 00		5,040 06
				
				
D emobilization-Army

He asked one or two other questions as to costs of construction. These statements are not quite ready, but I expect they will be within a day or two.
Then the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross) asked what the value was of gasoline, fuel oil and coal that the department has burned up, and from what places it was purchased.
The following are the expenditures for gasoline, fuel oil and coal from 1st April, 1945, to 22nd October. 1945:
Fuel oil	
$4,312,407	76Diesel oil'	
201,184	65Gasoline	287.952	91Coal	
101,790	34Fuel for heating (for ships only)	
61,217	56Total	
$4,964,553	22
The above amount does not include payment for these commodities which might have been picked up by H.M.C. ships in United States waters, and in connection with which reports, have not yet reached naval service headquarters.
The above-mentioned gasoline, fuel oil and coal were purchased from the following at their various distribution, points: British American Oil Company Limited; Canadian Oil Company Limited; Globe Oil Company Limited; Home Oil Company Limited; Imperial Oil Limited; Irving Oil Company Limited; McColl-Frontenac Oil Company. Limited; North Star Oil Company Limited; Provincial Oil Company Limited; Shell Oil .Company Limited; Standard Oil Company of British Columbia; Union Oil Company Limited of British Columbia; R. Grandy Irwin, Dominion Coal; General Coal; Vancouver Island Coals.
Supplies were also obtained from admiralty sources and United States naval sources.
The hon. member for Souris also asked if I could give him the break-down of the amounts of oil which had been turned back to * the Department of Munitions and Supply or to War Assets Corporation. I am advised that the following amounts have been declared surplus under the heading of fuel for ships: high octane gasoline, 101,405 gallons; bunker fuel oil, 1,45S barrels; diesel fuel oil, 500 barrels. In addition, such fuel oil as remained in the tanks of ships transferred to War Assets Corporation would be regarded as surplus. These amounts, however, would not be large. I am also informed that, in order to avoid unnecessary purchases of fuel oils, considerable

quantities have been transferred between naval tankers, thus preventing the accumulation of large surplus stocks of fuel oil. Total amounts at present carried in naval tankers are not considered more than will be required by the naval service to finish this fiscal year.
That, I think, covers the various matters on which I promised to give the committee information at a later date.


Douglas King Hazen: I asked the minister about the figures for construction, and he said he did not have them. When he gets them will he put them on Hansard?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I undertook to do so, yes. I thought I might have them later this afternoon, but they are not quite completed.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE FOR AIR

Mr. SKEY:: Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to delay the committee longer than necessary but I should like to make a few remarks in regard to air force policy. In the beginning of the debate on the defence estimates the hon. member for Nanaimo as an army officer paid the air force a tribute which was undoubtedly very acceptable and generous in every way. As a member of the air force I do not propose to attempt anything of that order, for I think the public of Canada are for the most part aware of the tremendous achievements of the Royal Canadian Air Force during the war-accomplishments in mobilization, construction engineering, supplying of services, training and fighting in partnership with the allied nations. In this fighting instrument, which our country had such a great part in developing, we had without doubt the most powerful offensive weapon that has ever been evolved in the history of warfare, and as such we as members of this committee should regard it during the discussion of these estimates of the air force.
In beginning I would quote, just to prove to the committee that that is not my own assessment of my own service, General Marshall in his biennial report as chief of staff of the United States army, published in the New York Times on Wednesday, October 10, 1945:
Both Keitel and Jodi believed that the invasion could be repulsed or at worst contained, and both named the allied air arm as the decisive factor in German failure.

Demobilization-Air Services
There we have great military experts paying their tribute to our air arm.
We must now turn our minds to the contemplation of this weapon from a peace-time point of view. The first thing that comes into our' minds is naturally atomic energy and the atomic bomb. I do not propose to attempt any statement on that to-day. It has been taken care of in the press by authorities, and it is moreover on a level that places it beyond discussion by the average inember of this house. It has, however, brought, the time factor in the strategy of war into prominence, and this time factor is tlie thing that we must keep before us in considering all the estimates for the defence forces. In other words, there will not be- time in the next war to mobilize, to debate, to talk and so on. We must be ready if there is another war. The appreciation of the war by General Marshall is printed in full in this issue of the New York Times, and some of the conclusions in it affect Canada and may prove very useful to this committee as a guide in our discussion of our defence estimates. Suffice it, however, to say that our destiny, security and freedom as a nation are completely linked with those of our cousin the United States of America. Speaking of the United States, let me quote some of the things that General Marshall says:
In good conscience this nation can take little credit for its part in staving off disaster in the critical days of 1942.
And again:
It is certain that the refusal of the British and Russian peoples to accept defeat was the great factor in the salvage of our civilization.
From the first quotation is it not plain to us that there is a tremendous necessity for preparedness against a future conflict of any kind, and from the second quotation is it not apparent to us that we must have the soundest of political institutions in order that our *people may have the fortitude to refuse to accept defeat under any circumstances?
Here is a third quotation:
Dissension among the enemy nations and lack of long-range planning may well have been the decisive factors in this world struggle in its most critical moments.
He says that, after he has proved that two or three times during this war Germany, Japan and Italy were on the verge of achieving a strategic position from which it would have taken us years to dislodge them. He says that dissension in their own ranks was the factor which caused the failure of our enemies. Here we have an example of dissension. Can we not bring this home to the people of our own country? Can we not cite the political difficulties of France as the cause of her failure
to fight the war as thoroughly and as successfully as the common man in France wished it to be fought? Can we not say that it is the responsibility of all leaders in this country to put away any dissension from our nation, any dissension they might cause themselves? And wdien I speak of leaders I do not mean only the representatives of constituencies in the House of Commons; I mean religious leaders, leaders of different racial groups, labour and management. Is this not a lesson to us that if we become so divided in this country we, too, may suffer from the application of the old maxim, "divide and conquer,'' and become an easy victim to an aggressor in the future?
Here is. a further quotation:
We may elect again to depend on others, and the whim and error of potential enemies, but if we do we will be carrying the treasure and freedom of this great nation in a paper bag.
That is what General Marshall says, speaking of the United States, that- if they elect to depend on others, on the whim and error of their potential enemies, then the future of their country will be as secure as if it were in a paper bag.
As hon. members of this committee know, our national security is undoubtedly vested in our armed forces. The air estimates are before the committee now, and I should like to advance this statement by General Marshall to urge that we should study them most carefully. We should be prepared to say so if we think they are not sufficient, as well as if we think they are too great; we must be prepared to err on the one side as well as on the other in connection with these estimates.
Here is a further quotation, having to do with morale:
The appearance of an unusually effective Weapon or of a particularly attractive item of enemy equipment usually provoked animated public discussion in this country-
That refers to the United States, of course. -especially when stimulated by the criticism of the army's supposed failures to provide the best. Such incidents posed a very difficult problem for the war department. In the first place, the morale of the fighting man is a matter of primary importance. To destroy his confidence in his weapons or in the higher command-is the constant and intense desire of the enemy. Americans have active imaginations. They always want the newest weapons. They might endow' the enemies' new'est weapons with extraordinary qualities, thus giving the greatest help to him by informing the enemy which of his weapons is hurting us most.
That quotation bears directly upon the responsibility of the press as well as the responsibility of public leaders, that they control their remarks and statements during
Demobilization-Air Services


Hon. COLIN GIBSON (Minister of National Defence for Air):: Mr. Chairman, I wish to congratulate the hon. member upon his helpful address when dealing with the air force. He has brought out many items which I think should be discussed in committee. I agree with him entirely in his remarks to the effect that the time element is one of the most important in the air force. We realize that any post-war force must be ready and available at all times. That is the basis upon which we are working in preparing for our post-war course.
The hon. member asked two questions, the first of which- was whether the estimates contained any amount for research. In item 10 we find the amount of $1,000,000 for aircraft designing and development, and in item 14 there is the sum of $434,586 for sundry projects being investigated at the present time.
His second question dealt with standardizing our equipment with that of the United States. While we are not standardizing in the manner he indicated, at the same time we are keeping close liaison with everything that is going on in that country by way of development. Our joint staff mission in Washington is keeping abreast with all developments in that country.


George Hugh Castleden: I note that we are asked to pass estimates amounting to $613,625,654. I believe the Canadian people are looking to the committee to present an air force policy which will justify this expenditure, and which will make possible our ability to meet the constantly changing picture which appears on the scientific front. This is a condition which affects not only the air force, but also the army and the navy.
The people of Canada want to be assured that, after having signified- our willingness to take part with the united nations in an effort to put teeth into the force which will maintain peace throughout the world, we shall be able to make a worth while contribution, and one which will reflect credit on our country. I can readily understand that, until our commitments to the united nations organization are agreed upon, the minister may have some difficulty in properly defining this policy, and drafting a complete programme. Replying to the last speaker the minister said he had about $1,500,000 for research. It occurs to me that that amount is too small, when we realize that out of more than $613 million we are appropriating only $1,500,000 for research.
The field of scientific research is changing so rapidly that even within the last six months we have seen a change which makes obsolete equipment which that short time ago we thought was superior and essential to our defen'ce. I doubt whether Canada can maintain her position in the field of research and as an effective unit among the united nations unless she is prepared to spend a greater proportion of her money and her effort in that regard.
The operation of the British commonwealth training plan in Canada has been one of the bright spots in Canada's contribution to the war. We are pleased to note that in their drafting of air force policy, ministers who have headed that department have, decided to maintain at different points throughout Canada certain permanent air force training ports, where training may continue. The personnel which will man the defence system of Canada, and that of the united nations for the prevention of future war, is of utmost-importance. Canada's success in the field of air operations, one of her greatest successes, has arisen from the fact that out of our civilian population we were able to produce personnel who could take hold of the job of administration and of the development of scientific research, and transform it into an actual fighting, combat force which could be used effectively.
The contribution made by Canadian airmen in the last war was one of the greatest, one of which Canada is proud, and I believe we should try to maintain that record. Where did those men come from? They came from our schools, because Canadian youth is air-minded. Our public schools, and particularly our high schools are filled with young men who are attracted by the field of aviation. They study plans and types of aircraft, and they should be given an opportunity to develop those natural talents they possess.
My suggestion would be that a larger proportion of these estimates might be devoted to this purpose. No doubt the minister will outline his plan with regard to the maintenance, perhaps not of a cadet corps which would emphasize the military side of activities, but rather of a group who would study scientific advancement in aviation. Young men who show promise and who have the physical stamina should be encouraged to come forward, and should be given an opportunity to carry on studies where they could attend lectures conducted by those who understand the technique of aeronautical engineering, and are in touch with the latest scientific advancement. Those young men who ^how promise should be encouraged, even to the
Demobilization-Air Services

extent of being given scholarships, so that they might go on to university and receive their bachelor of science degree. I would not so much favour a military college, which is apt to become too much bound up with red tape and to be hemmed in with unnecessary army discipline. I would prefer that civilians of the proper type and having the required ability might be given the facilities for continuing their courses. Such aeronautical courses could be made optional in connection with the attainment of a degree of bachelor of science. Them those men in select groups might go to a permanent training camp, so that in the advanced field of flying we could provide a force of men who would be constantly trained and who would have university courses always available to them. Such men could go back into civilian life as a je serve.
Some sort of central body will have to be maintained. I rmderstand, of course, that the minister will have some difficulty in estimating exactly how many men he will require in such a force. There should be training centres where civilians could be given refresher courses and advanced training.
I do not think enough credit has been given by Canada to the men of the groundcrew, the men who manned the ships, who worked out in the hangars, the men who as the army went into France were under such terrific conditions of combat. A great deal could1 be done in our technical schools toward training groundcrew. If we had a series of flying clubs across Canada and a number of these air training schools carried on on a peace-time basis, we could then fulfil most efficiently the effort we are to be called upon to make in our contribution to the united nations. We would then be able to maintain a force, not necessarily for war but for the maintenance of peace. That should be our objective.
I cannot see how we could expect the Canadian people at this time, because of the constantly changing scene to undertake a large expenditure of money to maintain a large permanent force. The engines we had a year ago are obsolete to-day. Recently we had an opportunity of seeing a jet-propelled plane in operation. That certainly is an advance which puts much of the material upon which we spent hundreds of millions of dollars almost out of the picture.
I should like the minister to state what his plans are with regard to the preparing and training in Canada of a large civilian force with at least a fairly large number of men who are expert in the most advanced type of training. I should like to know something of his jelans so far as expanding the amount which he has said he is giving toward that

work is concerned. I should like to know if it is the policy of his department to maintain the air force separately, or whether they will work in conjunction with the army and navy. I should like to know also whether the research work will be carried on separately. These are [DOT] things in which the people of Canada are interested.	'


Colin William George Gibson: When I made my statement when the estimates were first brought down I outlined what the future policy of the air force was in as definite terms as it was possible to use at the present time. We have a planning committee working on a plan for a post-war air force. As has previously been announced, we are working on the basis of a force of ten regular squadrons: three bomiber, three fighter, three transport and one photo squadron. In addition to that, we shall have the necessary auxiliary units. It is realized that this is not a large force. First we must decide whether we are going to train a lot of men. If we trained a lot of men, we could not afford the planes that would be required. On the other hand, if we equipped the force with the latest planes in large numbers, we would not be able to keep the personnel that would be required to fly them.
It is realized that it takes about the same time to train a man to fly as it does to build a plane. Therefore we have felt that it would be desirable to keep a small compact force made up of the various fighting elements which could be rapidly expanded in time of necessity and which would1 be available at a moment's notice at any time.
The hon. member asked how we were working with the other forces. We are working in the closest cooperation with both the army and the navy. Hon. members have heard of the winter exercises that are to foe carried on this winter by the army. The air force is cooperating in the dropping of supplies and will work with the army throughout.
The question of a fleet air arm has been raised. At the present time the officers of my department and of the naval department are holding discussions in an effort to work out how they can best integrate the training of those who will be flying in the fleet air arm. I think satisfactory arrangements will be worked out whereby the air force will be responsible for the training on land and the providing of bases and airports for the navy fliers when they are on land, and the navy of course will look after them when they once go to sea.
The hon. member for Yorkton mentioned research and suggested that a greater percentage of these appropriations should be allotted to that work. I would point out

Demobilization-Air Services
that the appropriation asked for is largely for expenditures incurred during the war. It is realized that in peace time we shall have to devote a considerable amount of money to research work. We are doing that in close cooperation with the army and the navy. We have a research and development board on which are representatives of the three services. There will be no overlapping, and the work will be carried on in conjunction with the officers of the three services and of the national research council.


Mr. McIVOR:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to have a brief word. I think the government is to be congratulated upon having two good ministers for national defence. To look at each of these men you can see that not only have they acted the part, they look the part. Neither of them is overweight, which is in keeping with the slogan of each force that it shall cany no excess baggage.
While the air is not man's natural sphere, the air force has conquered the air. Somebody has said that if the Almighty had expected man to occupy the air he would have been equipped with wings like the birds or angels. Man has shown that he does not need that equipment. The air force does not need anyone to defend its record; the record of the air force stands supreme. They have done a job for which all Canada is grateful.
Because of the great distances in Canada I think the minister would be well advised to have a strong permanent force. Look at the men from whom such a force could be picked. These men have been through the war; they have had a course of training second to none. No doubt it has become a proverb that no dunce could receive his wings in the air force. I commend the minister for trying to build up a permanent air force. Such a force should have its stations located from north to south and from east to west. They should cover the whole country. This brings me to the question I wish to ask.
There should be a permanent station at the head of the lakes, at Port Arthur, Fort William and the Thunder Bay district. Even though we are located at the head of the lakes we are the centre of Canada. We are the great distributing point at the head of the greatest fresh water lake which will be on the great waterway. It is not only the centre of Canada materially, but because of the progressive spirit of those two cities it is going to become the hub of Canada, Therefore we should have an air station.
Again, we are a long distance from any other large centre. Winnipeg is a long distance away to the west, and Toronto and Montreal are a 47696-113$
long distance away to the east. Therefore we think it would be in the best interests of the permanent force to have a station at the lakehead. There we have a well-equipped air field, with splendid runways. It is perhaps the third best airfield in Canada and is on the new Trans-Canada air route. The field is also well equipped with buildings and is surrounded by Christian people, who, I am sure the minister will agree, would be a splendid tonic for the air force. I think I need use no further argument to convince the minister that it would be in the best interests of the Royal Canadian Air Force to have a station at the head of the lakes.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I wish to bring up a
matter which I have raised on two or three different occasions, and if I am not in order in bringing the matter up now I shall have to wait until the civil estimates come up.
I have reference to a number of young Canadians from Ottawa, Toronto and many other large centres who in 1943 enlisted in the British fleet air arm. When I first heard of this in Toronto, where I knew a number of these young men, I brought the matter up in the House of Commons. The present Premier of Nova Scotia was then minister for the naval services. I informed him about these young men being taken right out of the schools-of course, their parents were informed of their enlistment-and almost before anyone could . know about it they were shipped over to England. The minister at that time apparently was not acquainted with what had taken place. That was in 1943. It seemed strange to me how these young rnen, seventeen, eighteen and nineteen years of age, could be taken right out of their school or university in Canada and be sent across the water to join what turned out to be the British fleet air arm.
I am not finding any fault with the British fleet air arm for trying to get these young men, because heaven knows the mother country at that time was going through what no other nation in the world's history had gone through and she needed the bravest of the brave, which aptly describes these young men.
I brought the matter up again in the house last year, in March of 1944. At that time many of these young men had come back to this side of the water and had been sent to train at Pensacola in the United States. After training there they were sent off to the old land. At Pensacola many if not all of these young men made application for transfer to the Canadian service, and they were informed that in due course they would be transferred to the Royal Canadian Air Force. But when they arrived in England a number of them were kept there, while the rest were sent, some to the Indian ocean and some to the Pacific ocean. Those
Demobilization-Air Services

who went to the Indian ocean took part in the campaign waged by the British fleet air arm against the Japanese, and those who went to the Pacific ocean later flew over Tokyo in attacks on Japan from British carriers.
An Ottawa father of one of these young men came to see me yesterday. He is a prominent man in Ottawa who had read of my asking a question about these young men in the house a few days ago, and he told me of his son's flying over Tokyo. Apparently these young men who got as far as the Indian or the Pacific ocean were out of touch with whoever took their applications for transfer . to the Canadian service, which was what they all wanted to do. Those who remained in England and were not sent to the Pacific or the Indian Ocean were transferred to the Canadian service.
What I feel is this. I think all these men should be treated on the same basis. I do not know how many of them there are; but certainly if fifty young men applied at Pensacola for transfer to the Canadian service and later twenty-five of them-I am using arbitrary figures-remained in England where, * because they were in closer touch with the authorities, their applications for transfer to the Canadian service were accepted, while those who were sent to the Indian ocean or to the Pacific and did perhaps a greater service did not have their applications for transfer to the Canadian service accepted, I say that that is wholly unfair. I crossed the floor to speak to the Minister of National Defence for Air personally about this matter when his estimates were first before the house. Perhaps I did not present the case to him very clearly, but on that occasion he told me that the matter was under the control of the minister for the navy. So that I let the matter go until just a few days ago when it was getting near the end of the debate on the army estimates. I then asked the Minister of National Defence about this matter, and he stated that it was not in his department and gave a general reply to my inquiry. I still maintain that it'is wholly unfair that these men who applied during their training at Pensacola for transfer to the Royal Canadian Air Force should not have been accepted for the Canadian service.


Colin William George Gibson: If the hon. member does not mind a question at that point, he keeps referring to the Canadian service. He refers to the fleet air arm, does he not?
Mr. MacNICOL; Yes, of course.


Colin William George Gibson: That does not come under these estimates. It has nothing to do with my department.


John Ritchie MacNicol: "I am trying to find out under whose department it does come, and I have been unable to find that out so far. The former minister of national defence for air, the hon. member for Quebec South (Mr. Power)-than whom no man in the government has done more for the country's war effort-he was a very capable, brilliant minister whom everybody in the house admired and does yet-gave, in a speech that he made in the house on October 5, a pertinent discourse as to just where we were heading, and I should like to hear from the minister now before us when he replies just what notice was taken of what the former exceptionally brilliant minister for air had to say. This is what he said, as reported at page 807 of Hansard:
Before we go on to an examination item by item I should like to say a word with respect to the creation of a fleet air arm and to lay before the two ministers concerned, the Minister of National Defence for Air and the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services, certain factors which I believe should be considered very carefully before they embark upon any large undertaking in the way of a fleet arm.
We are considering the estimates for the air force,' not at the moment those of the fleet air arm; but I should like to know if any notice has been taken of what the hon. member for Quebec South said a few days ago, as a matter of fact on October 5, because he is a man who has had very great experience; he is'really the father of our war effort in the air whether it is the fleet air arm or the regular air force, and his counsel should be listened to. Apparently it has not been. So that if he was confused I am confused.


Mr. COTE (Matapedda-Matane):: May I ask the hon. member in what particular re-Bpect the advice of the former minister has not been followed?


John Ritchie MacNicol: Because we are considering the estimates now item by item, whereas the former minister suggested to the house-


Mr. COTE (Matapedia-Matane):: But has the minister announced that there is a difference in policies?


John Ritchie MacNicol: No. My hon. friend does not understand.


Antoine-Philéas Côté: The hon. member conveyed the implication that the new minister had departed1 from the views of the former minister. I should like to know in what particular respect he has done so.

Demobilization-Air Services


John Ritchie MacNicol: If my hon. friend will read the remarks of the former minister on October 5-


Antoine-Philéas Côté: I know what they are.


John Ritchie MacNicol: -he suggested to the minister who is now before the house, the Minister-I assume1-of National Defence for Air, that some consideration should be given to whether we are to have two air forces or not, namch' a land air force and a fleet air force. I am offering no opinion; I do not know enough about the matter to pass any comment, but I thought I ought to find out whether the minister now before the committee had considered what the former minister said in the course of his remarks at that time.
That is about all I have to say. If I can get no satisfaction at the present moment; if, as is suggested, I am not in order, I will defer this matter until the civil estimates come up, and at that time the minister for the army and the navy will not get away with what he lias got away with in the last few days, in throwing me to one side with regard the young fleet air arm men.


Colin William George Gibson: The question of the fleet air arm comes entirely under the navy. We have the same minister for both army and navy; I suppose that if the matter was brought up on his army estimates he may have said it was out of place on that occasion; but I shall be glad to take the matter up with him.
I know that many Canadians joined the British forces and qualified for the air branch of the navy. At that time Canada had no flat-tops and no fleet air arm of her own. Now Canada has some of these ships, and I understand they will probably be getting some Canadians in the fleet air arm of the navy.
I heard the very fine speech which was made by the hon. member for Quebec South, and I agreed very largely if not altogether with what he said. He made a plea that we should not have duplication in air services in this country. I think that is an extremely sound stand to take. We have followed up his suggestions. There is a joint committee of the navy and the air force sitting at the present time, so that we shall not have the navy and the air force setting up parallel training schemes in this country, and we shall not have two adjoining airfields, one training navy and one, air force personnel. The two services,will act in conjunction,' so that we shall avoid the duplication which was feared by the hon. member for Quebec South.


Mr. ARCHIBALD:: 
Antoine-Philéas Côté: Is that so?


Harry Grenfell Archibald: Yes, it is so. I know, because I was out talking in one of the stations, finding out what the score was. Now you want to reduce the ranks to whatever level you see fit. But it is not the rank the boys are worried about; it is the pay. The pay envelope is the only reason a man accepts promotion; he takes it because he can get a little more money. This cheap method is not going to work; the boys are not reacting favourably to it. During the war we had this set-up, that an aeroplane went in the air with, say, a crew of four or eight men, of whom half might be officers and half N.C.O.'s. Every man was a good' man in his individual place. But when they came down the caste system of the permanent force separated them socially. An N.C.O. got "six bits" for his flight and an officer got two dollars. The modern machine has destroyed the caste system; yet it is maintained here because of the class nature of our society. We shall have to do away with that and make it more flexible.


Antoine-Philéas Côté: May I ask the hon. member a question? The hon. gentleman was in the air force. Did he have a square deal, or did he not, in that force?


Harry Grenfell Archibald: I told the committee I had a square deal except when a permanent force man came along.	,


Antoine-Philéas Côté: Oh, oh.


Harry Grenfell Archibald: Yes, I went through it.


Antoine-Philéas Côté: I am asking you. Put it on the record-that is what I want-whether you had a square deal or not.


Harry Grenfell Archibald: We had also the difference in pay between W.D.'s and men. We stand for equal pay for equal work. These girls, up to the limit of their ability, filled the job in some cases as well as the men did, and yet there was this discrepancy. When I went to the Edmonton manning depot one of the first things we received was a lecture on esprit de corps, and I shall never forget that as long as I live. An officer got up and every quotation on esprit de corps which he gave came from a German textbook. The Joe sitting next to me said, "What's this?" I did not enlighten him. However, the point is this, that we had no textbook; we had nothing to teach the men so that they could develop that spirit. It was right there, apparent in the lecture which this officer gave. We must develop a national philosophy, an esprit de corps that will inspire men who are will-(Mr. Archibald.]
ing to sacrifice themselves. There is too much cynicism going around in this country at the present time. We know that before 1914, before the last war there was a great deal of spirit in this nation, but there was less of it this .time, because the boys had gone through an unemployment period. They did not know any trades and we had to develop trades in a hurry. Men often went out ill trained and now we hear that there are five thousand returned men unemployed at Windsor. The government had better put them to work and keep them at work so that we shall have the skill necessary for the nation in the next war. If they do not, we are doomed.


Mr. HERRIDGE:: During recent months I have had interviews with, and have received letters from, young women with lengthy service who wished to get their release because they had opportunities for civilian employment of a high order. I will give an illustration. A certain young woman served a long time in New York and gave excellent service for nearly four years. Prior to enlisting she was well known in mining circles in British Columbia and had a continent-wide reputation. Her work in connection with the British Columbia mines exhibit at the San Francisco exhibition was of the highest kind. She had experience in mining, prospecting, company organization and so on. She has an opportunity now to return to that employment; and if the minister will refer to the department of mines of British Columbia, or the chamber of mines in Vancouver or in Nelson, he will be told that this young woman is urgently needed to return to that work at this time. I mention that by way of illustration. These young women to whom I have been talking explain to me that in many cases they were doing quite routine work. Most of them belong to the clerks administrative. They are a responsible, reliable type of young women who are anxious to return to civilian employment. My question is this. When does the minister think it will be possible for this type of personnel to secure release?


Colin William George Gibson: That is a difficult question, in that we have the women's division which is- being demobilized in the same way as the men's division, and the members of that division are going out in the same proportion as they are to the total number of men in the service. In the air force we have various trades, and those in some trades that can be spared are being demobilized more rapidly than in other trades where their services are required. At the present time

Demobilization-Air Services
during the period of demobilization there are two trades that are very necessary to the force, clerks administrative and clerks accountant. It will be realized that there is a great deal of clerical work to be done in connection with the demobilization of a large force, with the result that we are not able to let them out as rapidly as some of the other trades. They are being demobilized bn the basis of "first in, first out", and the W.D. referred to, if she has a position to go to and is entitled to preference, can go to the position when the air force can spare her services. But we have to consider the welfare of the service as a whole. We do not wish to slow up demobilization by letting out too many clerks and then having our repatriation centres hlocked because we cannot get the clerical work done in order to have releases put through.


George Randolph Pearkes: The hon. member for Fort William emphasized the fact that there were two capable ministers on the opposite side. That is a very small percentage, so that we can be generous on, this side of the house. But his motive was to advocate the advantages of having a flying field or station established in his constituency. It would save a lot of time, in case other hon. members on the other side of the house intend to make similar addresses, if the Minister of National Defence for Air would tell us where the five operational stations which he is retaining will be located. That is the first question.
The second is this. He made reference to the close cooperation existing between the Department of National Defence for Naval Services and his own department and said that he did not want to see any unnecessary duplication in the field of flying. Might I ask him whether some liaison exists between the Department of Justice and his own department, because no doubt the Royal Canadian Mounted Police would probably utilize the aeroplane in their operations?
The third question that I would ask him arises from the question I asked on October 4 regarding the early training of prospective officers for the R.C.A.F. Before this war, graduates from the Royal Military College at Kingston were allowed to enter the R.C.A.F. under certain conditions, and students from the universities were also admitted under a certain set of other conditions. They, too, were permitted to enter into the regular R.C.A.F. before the war, and I should like to know what arrangements are being made for the intake of future officers because, if parents are to give their boys, who they hope will follow the R.C.A.F. as a future career, any special form of educational training they
should be advised at the earliest possible opportunity. I would point out that these boys who go through such colleges as the Royal Military College or the Royal Naval College do receive certain not only definite advantages, so far as academic and1 physical training are concerned, but also financial advantages by attending these government-supported colleges. Is it the intention of the R.C.A.F. to start a college of their own? Those are the three questions I should like to have answered.


Colin William George Gibson: As to the first question, I mentioned that we have five operational stations being maintained at the present time. I did not mean that we would have only five operational stations in Canada, or five permanent stations, in our post-war set-up. I have seen the plans that we are working on and I expect that more than five stations will be kept on a permanent basis throughout Canada, but I do not want to give the names at the present time because as yet no definite decision has been reached as to where they will be located, although they-will be spread across Canada, not only on the coasts but inland as well. In addition, we shall have our airports where auxiliary squadrons will be located, and we shall have a training establishment as well. So that we shall have quite a number of stations throughout Canada, considerably more than five. The five to which I referred previously were the last remaining operational stations that had been in service during the war.
In regard to cooperation with the Department of Justice, I have had consultations with the Minister of Justice concerning assistance for the mounted police, and we have given some undertaking as to how we can help them. I do not know yet how far they intend to go in providing flying training for the mounted police, but there is no doubt that they will receive eveTy cooperation on the part of the air force. I am not certain as to whether they intend to set up their own establishment of aircraft, but undoubtedly if they are going to train pilots the R.C.A.F. will be willing to undertake to provide the courses required.
In connection with the training of prospective officers, that again comes under the postwar plan. There have been suggestions from some sources that since we have a military college and a naval college we should have an air force college. Another point of view is that we should have a training school at which men will qualify for commissions as they qualified during the war. That matter is under consideration at the present time. No decision has been reached as yet as to what the terms of service will be or in what way commissions
Demobilization-Air Services

will be granted in the post-war force. Of course those who are signing on for the interim force have the undertaking that if they wish to remain in the permanent force they will be kept on.


George Randolph Pearkes: Is there any opportunity
for those in the interim force now to prepare for commissioned rank?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamliton West):: Educational courses are run in the service to qualify men. That has been done all through the war; and men in the ranks who are recommended for commissions are, of course, commissioned in the force.


Mr. BRYCE:: I should like to speak on
behalf of the airmen who enlisted away back in 1940. I have in mind a boy who did 1,212 hours of flying; who volunteered three times to go overseas and was always turned down because he was said to be an indispensable man. That did not apply to only one man; it applied to many. Now, after five and a half years spent in training these wonderful fliers, these men whom we have read so much about, some of whom helped to save Britain, these men find that when they ask for a job they are told they have no overseas service and so cannot get that job. I think that is very unfair, because these men offered to go overseas. These were the men who enlisted in 1940. When they apply for positions in the government service they are told, "No job can be offered because you are not a veteran with overseas service." These men could not possibly have done any better. They were frozen in their jobs; they had to stay there, and now when they come to re-enter civilian life they are victimized. I do not believe that is fair, that situation should be remedied. The other fellow who got overseas, who perhaps was in Britain all the time and who never put in 1,200 hours flying time, is able to come back and get a job in the civil service. I should like the minister to consider that situation and weigh these cases. A man who enlisted in 1940, who volunteered three times for overseas service and was turned down because he was needed at a station here in the commonwealth training plan, should be given some consideration. I want the minister to look into that.
There is another point. I notice that every hon. member who rises to speak boasts about his constituency. If the hon. member for Fort William ever plans to establish an air station I suggest that he come out to Gimli and see what a real air station looks like.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: I know all about it.


William Scottie Bryce: Can the minister give me any information as to what is likely to happen
{Mr. C. W. G. Gibson.]
at Gimli? Is it to be a permanent station? We have a real, live council there, and their post-war plans will depend upon the-plans of the air force with regard to that station, in connection with housing accommodation, water facilities and different improvements they intend to make.


Colin William George Gibson: I understand that Gimli is on the list for use after the war. Just how it will be used I am not prepared to say at the present time, but it is recognized as a valuable airport and it is likely it will be used.
The matter of the civil service preference has given me a good deal of heart-burning, because I realize that a great many members of the air force were kept in this country against their will. They were required here in connection , with the commonwealth air training plan. Many of them who were very anxious to go overseas were forcibly retained in this country to act as instructors. After the last war the civil service preference meant that a person had to land in England before becoming eligible for it. I hope to be successful in having that extended to include those who have flown beyond the territorial waters of Canada, which would take in those flying from our coasts on convoy work and coastal patrol. But I think it will be realized that to extend the preference to all members of the force who served in Canada would create such an enormous class of people who would be entitled to the preference that it would practically remove that benefit in the case of the man who had served overseas.


William Scottie Bryce: Don't you think-


William Ross Macdonald: I must draw the attention of the committee to the fact that the question of employment in the civil service does not come under these estimates. It is a question for the Department of the Secretary of State and the Department of Veterans Affairs and should be considered when the estimates of those departments are before the committee. I do not want to be too strict in these matters, but it does seem to me that if we are to make any progress our discussion should be with respect to the estimates before the committee. I would therefore ask hon. members not to discuss the estimates of other departments at the present time.


William Scottie Bryce: I want to abide by your ruling, Mr. Chairman.
The last time I spoke in the house I said that I never rise but I am ruled out of order, either one way or another. I do not want to be that way. I want to keep within the rules of the house, just the same as any other body. But does the minister not think that there

Demobilization-Air Services
should be included in that category men who have flown over a thousand hours and who enlisted in 1940, men who were turned down three times before going overseas. They were the men who saved the country, those men who went in 1940 without any compulsion whatsoever.


Robert William Gladstone: I was wondering if it might not be possible for us to save time by disposing of the general discussion, and then adhering to the items. It seems to me that within the last while questions have been asked which might more properly be asked under one of these fourteen items. If we proceed in this fashion we are in danger of duplicating our discussions.


Mr. HARRIS (Danforth):: What the hon. member for Wellington South has said is quite true. But he must remember that we are ti-ying to draw from the minister some idea as to the general policy his department is going to follow. We know the war is over, and we want to know now what the future policy is to be.
After all, viewed1 in the light of decades or centuries, this is a new department, and a new function of government. This has come in our time. It is an expensive function, but a very necessary one and, as the hon. member for Trinity said, one which did a great deal to preserve our present civilization.
At the height of the war we did not mind spending money, and we voted it without hindrance. True, we investigated some policies and ideas promulgated with the advent of the Department of National Defence for Air. But it is just as true that we overlooked many features in the conduct of that department which we did not entirely approve. No one knows better than the hon. member for Wellington South, who has just taken his seat, that we saw duplication in all the services which, in ordinary business practice, would not be permitted.
I would ask the minister this evening to let us know his policy in respect of (a) clothing and supplies of a kind suitable for air force, and at the same time for army personnel. I agree that the navy, a force old in tradition and in habit, might not wish to be coupled with the army, although to my mind, in this day if we are to follow good business practice, all departments should look to economy in conducting their affairs, and wherever possible should do their purchasing and their handing out of supplies through one purchasing system. There should be uniformity, instead of keeping up three or four distinct
systems, as we find it at the present time. Therefore I ask why there could not be some coordination in the purchasing of clothing.
.Then, (b) what is the position in connection with diets? Set up within the organization of the air department is a distinct and separate system of diets. This might have been necessary when the war was at its height, and diets for airmen were different from those-of men in the army. But am I not within the judgment of the chamber when I ask the department at this time to give some consideration to coalescing its effort with the effort being made by the army along similar lines?
Then, (c) in connection with housing, the housing the men receive, the hours they are on duty, and the service they are to give; is there not some way in which we might lay down a policy so that there will be more uniformity in that regard, and less of those jealousies we see emanating from men in different cloth, all of whom are serving our country?
Then, (d) what about the men requiring examinations and hospitalization? We know that hospitalization was built up across Canada-not in one unit, oh, no; rather, in four units. The navy had its ideas respecting a system of hospitalization; the army had ideas of its own, and so had the air force. My good friend the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie) knows that the old Department of Pensions and National Health had its ideas, too.
Each branch had its own supplies coming from different units, different purchasing agents. Many times those supplies were going to the same destination, and at great expense. When some years ago officials were cross-examined on the point, we received this reply: How would it be possible for a man in blue who was hospitalized to be served by a medical man in khaki? It just was not done! A man in air force uniform could not accept treatment from a man in khaki-and the minister knows that is on the record.
But we were at war in those days. Stress and strain on our country made it necessary for those members who interested themselves in matters of that kind to curb their inclination to criticize, so that we could get on with the war.
I say to the administration: The war is over. We are asking the minister now to recite the policy for his department. This is a good department to begin with, because it is new. In the name of economy let him coalesce, as best he can, the different features of cost which he believes necessary, in order that he might have a first-class Department

Demobilization-Air Services

of National Defence for Air, which would work alongside and in harmony with other branches of national defence.
With all due respect to the hon. member for Wellington South, this is a time when the minister should rise in his place and recite to Canada to-night what the general policy of his department is to be. I agree with what was said a few minutes ago by the hon. member for Davenport. The previous minister recited a policy of a kind which would coalesce the efforts of the different branches of national defence. Yea, Mr. Chairman, he went so far as to originate a committee composed of different units of the armed services, to sit in month by month for the purpose of finding where economies could be effected. While we have asked across the floor of the house for the minutes of that committee, to my knowledge they have never yet been tabled.
The minister of that day felt that something of that kind should be done. The new minister has no doubt studied what has happened in the last three or four years, and in his studies he must have come across that idea which was put forward by his predecessor. Then, too, he must have some ideas of his own which would be in the general interest of Canada, and particularly when the country is no longer at war.
I am not of opinion that we should carry-on a tremendous organization which would keep active all those features ancillary to the actual service in war time, but I am strongly of the opinion of the hon. member for York-ton who stated a few minutes ago that the developments and advancements which are being made should be part and parcel and one of the first responsibilities of the Minister of National Defence for Air. That is aside from the question of economy which I was trying to emphasize. Spend all the money necessary for research and keeping right up to the last minute, but in the business administration and the actual work within the department let us have some coalescing with the other departments of national defence and let us show some signs of real economy now that the war is over.


Colin William George Gibson: I am glad to reply to those remarks because I feel thg.t a definite effort has been made to prevent overlapping in the work of the various departments. The hon. member for Danforth has suggested that one system should be adopted in providing clothing and supplies. Throughout the war the procurement of clothing and supplies has been done by one department, the Department of Munitions and Supply. When any one of the forces had any require-
ments, they made out their list and the purchasing was done by that department. There was no competition between the army and navy and air force for the supplies which were required and which might be in short supply.
The same thing is true in connection with diet and food. Food for the air force is supplied by the army service corps. I quite agree that our flyers overseas did receive some special food. For example, they had an additional supply of milk, and we went to some expense to provide that for those who were engaged in aircrew duties. But the basic food supplies were supplied to the air force by the army service corps.
The same thing applies to hospitalization and medical supplies. Medical supplies are provided to air force hospitals by the army medical corps. These supplies are bought in bulk and distributed in that way. I am prepared to admit that in the early days of the war when hospitals had to be provided at a rapid rate, the air force secured buildings and established their own hospitals. These have now come under the general control, and no hospital is built or planned for until it has been approved by the wartime committee on hospitalization. This is a government committee which plans all hospital requirements in this country and coordinates the efforts of all departments in the field of hospitalization.


Joseph Henry Harris: I hope the
minister will check that statement with regard to hospitalization with his colleague who is sitting beside him. He knows that they impinge on the old pensions and national health, now veterans affairs, rather than on the army. There are two distinct set-ups.


Colin William George Gibson: I shall be glad to check that.


Joseph Henry Harris: Neither one
knows what the other is doing. They arc both trying to do the same thing. That is the condition right here within rifle range of this building, and that is just one example.


William Alexander McMaster: 
Colin William George Gibson: This is a matter we discussed before. I do not want to get the committee confused in what was voted at the last session and what was actu-. ally granted. While it is included in the total amount required, it is not included in the amount we are asking the committee to vote at this time.	In my estimates the
requirements for the total year are $598,487,116.	We have already been granted
$325,985,039, which means there is an additional amount of $272,502,077 required, which we are asking the committee to pass.


Mr. ZAPLITNY:: There are a couple of questions I should like to ask, and since I cannot find an appropriate item under which to ask them, I am asking them now. Can the minister give us some information about the disposition of the airports at Dauphin? There are two fine airports there, No. 10 and No. 7. I should like to refer to sessional paper 142B which contains the answers to some questions I asked. The first question was:
What decision has been reached as to the retention or disposal of (a) the main aerodrome at Dauphin, Manitoba?
That was No. 10 service flying school. The answer given was this:
This unit, formerly No. 10 service flying training school, is now being used to store reserve equipment and will be required indefinitely by the R.C.A.F. At - such time as the unit becomes surplus the aerodrome and buildings will be referred to the Department of Transport.
I should like to know if that service flying training school is still being used for the 47696-114J	'
storage of reserve equipment or whether it has been transferred to the Department of Transport.


Colin William George Gibson: I am informed that we are still using that for the storage of reserve equipment. When it is needed no longer it will be turned over' to Transport for whatever use they may decide to make of it.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: My next question was as to No. 7 bombing and gunnery school at Paulson, Manitoba, and the answer was:
Certain facilities at this school, which disbanded on 15th September, 1945, will be retained for R.C.A.F. use. The remainder will be referred to Department of Transport.
I should like to know what these "certain facilities" are and how long it is intended to use them for this purpose?


Colin William George Gibson: I shall be glad to give that information to my hon. friend later.	,


Douglas Scott Harkness: What is being done or is proposed to be done about the photographic division of the air force? I know there have been some flights for mapping during the past summer. Is that to be continued, and, if so, on what scale? Is the whole country to be photographed from the air and mapped? I ask this question because a chap who was attached to No. 7 photographic wing came to see me about two weeks ago and told me that he in'eompany with a considerable number of other airmen, mostly N.C.O.'s, have been sitting around for the last month or so more or less twiddling their thumbs, and in the meantime trying without success to get their release from the air force. Are these men being kept on for some particular purpose? If not, is the establishment to be reduced? According to my information a considerable number of these men think that the chief reason for their being kept on is to provide a good excuse for the continuance of jobs for certain high-ranking officers, which is a poor spirit on the part of men in any service.


Colin William George Gibson: The air
force have had two photo squadrons up to the present. One of them has been engaged in doing work for the Department of Mines and Resources. During the past summer we have photographed in the neighbourhood of 200,000 square miles of this country. This means that a great deal of work will still have to be done in the station developing the negatives and preparing the maps for them, so that there should be a good deal of work at headquarters of the photo squadrons. It is not intended
Demobilization-Air Services

to retain both squadrons in the post-war setup ; we shall have only one. It is possible that some of the work that we have been doing for other departments will have to be done by civilian companies.
I am glad that my hon. friend has brought up the question of dissatisfaction at wing headquarters because I have heard rumours of it myself, that the men felt they were being held there when they should be allowed to get out. I had a report made on the establishment that was fairly satisfactory, but I am having another report made to find out if the men are being demobilized in proper rotation and if any men are being retained whose services are not required. I am glad, I say, that my hon. friend has raised the question because, if in any station the men have the feeling that they are not being fairly dealt with, I want to know about it and I want to investigate it.


Douglas Scott Harkness: On what scale will this
aerial mapping be done in the future? How many square miles are likely to be mapped in a year?


Colin William George Gibson: It is rather difficult for me to say. The work is planned by the Department of Mines and Resources, which requests us to do certain work. We have done work not only for that department but sometimes for provincial governments. Our own squadron will be doing work of a service nature from now on. I would not be prepared to say how many square miles of mapping will be done in a season.


Douglas Scott Harkness: It is a valuable service and I was hoping that it would be continued on a reasonably large scale.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Has the minister's attention
been drawn to a statement which received wide publicity a short time ago which was made by the head of Trans-Canada Air Lines to the effect that he found R.C.A.E. pilots unsatisfactory in some respects in civil operations? Has the minister had any member of his staff investigate this statement? It seems to me absurd to say that men who have flown without all the aids that civilian pilots have had during the war prove unsatisfactory for ordinary air line operation.


Colin William George Gibson: I did see the remarks that were made by an officer of Trans-Canada Air Lines and I considered them unfortunate, but I have hesitated to make reply to them because often more harm can be done than good accomplished by starting a controversy between two government departments. I want our men to have the feeling when they come out that they will have an

opportunity to join Trans-Canada Air Lines, and I should not like to have any bad feeling existing between the two organizations.
In fairness to our own pilots I should like to put on the record what our men have -accomplished in the way of transport work.
The R.C.A.F.'s transatlantic transport squadron's record of 450 transatlantic crossings from January 1, 1944, to October 31, 1945, with but two fatal accidents one of these on take-off, will stand favourable comparison with any other transatlantic transport operations during a similar period.
The record of 164 squadron, flying a schedule on the east coast of Canada,'Newfoundland and Labrador, operating often in some of the foulest weather to be found on the north American continent, is even more impressive. A typical year, 1944, saw this squadron move 25,980 passengers, a total payload of 12,300,000 pounds over an air mile distance of 2,670,000. The squadron has never had a fatal accident and has never lost an aircraft since it was organized in 1943.
The record of 165 squadron, operating on the west coast, with the added hazard of mountain flying, is also impressive. That squadron has had but one fatal accident since it was organized in 1943. In 1944 the squadron moved 23,573 passengers a total payload of
9,618,000	pounds over an air-mile distance of
1,290,000.
The ferry wing of R.C.A.F. transport, in no small measure was responsible for the success of the gigantic British commonwealth air training plan, in 1944 delivered 9,152 planes in 55,365 flying hours for a total air-mile distance of 6,718,500.
It is not the intention of the R.CA.F. to allow the immeasurable experience gained during the war to be wasted. This experience came from one schedule that had its origin at Roekcliffe and its termination at Cairo, with a feeder service to continental Europe, Gibraltar, North Africa and Italy; from another schedule on the east coast of Canada, Newfoundland and Labrador; and from another that covered the entire west coast and what is now known as the northwest staging route.
That is a record of which the Royal Canadian Air Force can well be proud:


Frank Exton Lennard: Further to what the hon. member for Calgary East had to say about No. 7 photographic wing, my information is that they were not only not busy but they were operating in two shifts, a night shift and a day shift, and my further information is that this was done to prevent too much congestion during the day time.

Demobilization-Air Services


George Hugh Castleden: Would the minister, in view of item 10, be prepared to give the committee, before we get down to the discussion of that item, a break-down of the aircraft on hand1, what we have in the various fields-that is, training aircraft, bombers, and other types of aircraft-the number we have in Canada, the number we have overseas, the number we have declared surplus, and the number that we have on hand stored at the present time?


Colin William George Gibson: I shall have to get those figures. I have not them here.


George Hugh Castleden: I did not suppose the minister had. I was just serving notice.


John Bracken: May I ask one question? The minister's associates who preceded him have given statements of expenditures for last year under these different items, as well as estimates of expenditure. I do not think the minister has given us such a statement, and it would be helpful for us to have, in addition to the estimates for this year, the actual expenditures of last year under these different items.


Colin William George Gibson: It might be well if I read that into Hansard now, and then everybody would have it on Monday.


John Bracken: The minister could not give us a typed statement of it?


Colin William George Gibson: I can have that done, yes.


John Bracken: Perhaps the minister
would read just the totals, and those who want to do so could take them down now. I suggest that he let us have the statement.


Mr. MacINNIS:: If he reads the figures now they will be in Hansard on Monday.


Colin William George Gibson: The actual cash expenditures in 1944-45-


John Bracken: With all due deference to the hon. member for Vancouver East, if the minister reads them now he will give us just one column of figures. If he gives us a typed statement we shall have the parallel columns, and such a statement would be of more use to us.
Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West) r I can read them both, if you like. What I might do is to hand in the statement and have it appear on Hansard, if that has the consent of the committee.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.


Colin William George Gibson: The tabulation is as follows:



ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE

[Stage Direction]
Estimates 1945-1946 Estimated cash		Actual cash	
Item	requirements 1945-1946	expenditures 1944-1945	Decreases1. Civil salaries and wages	$ 12,094,320	$ 19,074,736	$ 6,980,4162. Pay and allowances	269,437,334	345,241,928	75.804,5943. Travel, transportation and freight	23,912,775	26,629,592	2,716,8174. Construction, purchase, repairs and operating expenses of properties	26,832,427	40,800,327	13,967,9005. Personnel supplies and services	15,061,674	25,035,026	9,973,3526. Communications, signal and wireless equipment	16,724,519	* 17,836,222	1.111,7037. Ammunition and bombs	10,487,068	15,410,757	4,923,6898. Mechanical transport and marine craft. ..	2,451,532	3,467,155	1,015,6239. Fuel costs for aircraft, M.T., and marine craft 	24,347,379	46,804,211	22,456,83210. Aircraft, engines and spares including overhauls	71,881,105	163,369,155	91,488,05011. Miscellaneous stores and equipment	6,245,000	7,612,261	1,367,26112. Flying training contracts	1,000,000	18,573,863	17,573,86313. Maintenance of overseas squadrons	129,018,454	647,931,025	518,912,57114. Sundries 	4,132,067	3,381,222	Inc. 750,845$613,625,654	$1,381,167,480	$767,541,826Less estimated recoverable from United Kingdom in respect of training capitation	15,138,538 $598,487,11G	Inc. 15,138,538*	$1,381,167,480	$782,680,364
Demobilization

Air Services
Douglas King Hazen: Has there been a decrease
in the number of civilians employed at headquarters since Y-E day? If so, what does the decrease amount to, and how many are employed there at the present time?


Colin William George Gibson: The hon. member's question has to do with headquarters in Ottawa: is there a decrease in the number of civilians at the present time-from what date?


Douglas King Hazen: From V-E day.


Colin William George Gibson: I shall
have to get that figure for my hon. friend and put it in later.


James Alexander Marshall: What was the amount
actually spent last year under item 1 alone? As we are now discussing that item, it would be well to have the expenditure for last year.


Colin William George Gibson: Actual
cash expenditure for civil salaries and wages, $19,074,736. This year there is a decrease of $6,980,416.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: There is one matter on which
I should like some information, but before bringing it up I would thank the minister for his statement on the operations of our transport aircraft in the Royal Canadian Air Force. I think it is an enviable record, and I hope that it will be publicized in the press of the country as well.	[DOT]
My question is as to the granting of civil licences. I should like to know whether the R.C.A.F. have any control over the granting of commercial licences to service pilots retiring.


Colin William George Gibson: The air
force has nothing to do with the granting of civil licences. I did not hear tl/e second part of that question.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Will air force pilots retiring
from the service be granted licences to fly pleasure aircraft if they are not allowed to fly commercial ones? .


Colin William George Gibson: I am not in position to answer that. I a.m not sure what the Department of Transport requires in the way of civil licences.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: When the Minister of National Defence presented his estimates he also had a column headed "percentage spent in first six months." It may be asking quite a lot, but I believe that if the minister for air is going to prepare a table for us it would be convenient if he would include the percentage spent in the first six months, adopting the same plan as that followed by the Minister of National Defence, who had columns showing "total estimate 1945^16", "expenditure to 30th September, 1945", and "percentage spent in
, fMr. C. W. G. Gibson.]
first six months." I thought that if he is going to prepare tables for us for Monday, he might give consideration to including that.


Colin William George Gibson: I have
already put on Hansard, at page 806, the actual expenditures that have been made during the first five months of this fiscal year. That is the actual amount which has been paid out.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Pay and allowances, $269,437,334.
Item agreed to.
Travel, transportation and freight, $23,912,775.
Item agreed to.
Construction, purchase, repairs and operating expenses of properties, $26,832,427.
William Alexander McMaster: I wanted to address one question to the minister about the repairs and operating expenses of properties. In the county of Haldimand there are five airports. What is the policy of the department with regard to these airports: Dunnville, Hagers-ville, Caledonia, and one or two others? Are they to be retained by the air force or are they being handed over to War Assets Corporation?


Colin William George Gibson: I believe these are being turned over, but we do not turn them over to War Assets Corporation. The air force, if it has no further requirements, turns them over to the Department of Transport, and that department decides what disposal shall be made of them.


William Alexander McMaster: Have they been turned over already to the Department of Transport?


Colin William George Gibson: I cannot say whether they have actually been turned over yet.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Communications, signal and wireless equipment, $16,724,519.
George Randolph Pearkes: I have a few interrelated questions which I should like to ask the Minister of National Defence for Air, having been put off on to him by the Minister of National Defence for the Army. First of all, I should like to ask the minister if there is any inter-service board dealing with intercommunications of which the deputy minister or other official of the ministry of air is chairman, or has been chairman at any time?


Colin William George Gibson: The
deputy minister was chairman of the board of communication system on the west coast, Blit whether he is still in that position I am not sure.
17C7

Demobilization-Air Services


George Randolph Pearkes: Was there a British
Columbia communication board of which the officer commanding the western air command was at one time chairman?


Colin William George Gibson: I shall have to get that information. I do not know of my own personal knowledge.


George Randolph Pearkes: Perhaps if the minister would accept my statement that there was such a board-


Colin William George Gibson: If the hon. gentleman knows I will accept his word.


George Randolph Pearkes: -then I might be able to help him out. As no doubt the minister knows, during the course of the increase in defences on the Pacific coast, that board had supervision over the construction or reconstruction or improvement of a number of telegraph or telephone systems of a communication which, as an hon. gentleman over there suggests, included a large number of poles, the holes for which a great many soldiers dug, and into which they put the poles. Those systems of communication extended, from Vancouver up to Ashcroft all through the Cariboo and then westwards from Prince George linking up with such places as Vander-hoof and Prince Rupert, while branch 'lines were run out from Williams Lake to the coast at Bella Bella. In addition to that, extensions were made to the British Columbia telephone system on Vancouver island, by means of which practically the whole of that system was reconstructed, or to a large extent reconstructed, between Victoria and Campbell river, and from there extended on to the northern end of Vancouver island, with branch lines running out from near Nanaimo to Aiberni. I have seen that construction work going on. There was a great deal of manual labour done. The right of way had to be cleared; poles had to be erected and wires strung all along these poles. I do not know whether those contracts were let to the Briti-ish Columbia Telephone company, which is a private company, I believe some sort of subsidiary to the company which is generally known as A.T, and T. of Chicago. Whether they were let by the Department of National Defence for Air I do not know, but I do know, or I have a reason to believe-perhaps I had better put it in that way-that the information regarding those contracts was communicated by this board, of which the chairman was the deputy minister for air, to the Pacific coast communications board, and I would ask if the minister would state what contracts were let or what funds were paid by the board to the British Columbia Telephone company for the maintenance or
reconstruction of the lines between Vancouver and Hope and for the lines on Vancouver island between Victoria, Campbell River and Port Aiberni.


Antoine-Philéas Côté: May I ask the hon. gentleman a question? Do the honourable gentlemen of the army living there, from generals down below the line, the bigwigs I know of, protest against such communication service?


George Randolph Pearkes: I cannot tell the hon. member; I am not in the army now. I do not know.
Mr, COTE: (Matapedia-Matane): I mean the retired gentlemen of the army.


Colin William George Gibson: I shall have to see if I can get that information. .It is a complicated question and I do not know whether the deputy minister was the chairman. I understand that he was not the (chairman of any inter-service committee, but I will find out what information we have available so that I can give it to the committee.


George Randolph Pearkes: I think the chairman of the inter-service communications board will be able to give that information without great difficulty. It is part of the records of the department.


Colin William George Gibson: I understand that the deputy minister was not chairman of it,


George Randolph Pearkes: Or some other official of the department. May I ask this question? What information was sent from the board in Ottawa to the board in British Columbia advising them as to the disposal, or arrangements that had been made for the disposal, of the equipment at the cessation or shortly after the cessation of hostilities? I am not suggesting that the minister's department necessarily made the arrangements with the company. I am suggesting that the board here did inform the board in British Columbia as to what those arrangements were, and therefore I am asking if we may be told what those arrangements are.


Colin William George Gibson: I will try to get that information if we have it.


George Randolph Pearkes: Thank you. Then, as I pointed out, some of these lines were constructed in remote areas. Some were constructed linking up centres of population, and I should like to know if there are any plans for the disposal of equipment or the services which are being rendered into those remote areas, when the defence services no longer require these communication systems for
Demobilization-Air Services

defence purposes, so that, if possible, the services in the more remote areas of British Columbia may be made available for settlers in those parts.


Colin William George Gibson: If those plans are available I shall certainly be able to produce them.


George Randolph Pearkes: Thank you.


Howard Charles Green: I would endorse what has been said by the hon. member for Nanaimo. This communication system could be of immense value to the people living in the more remote districts of British Columbia and also in the Northwest Territories and in the Yukon. There has always been a fear in our minds that the system might be disrupted because it was more or less under the control of several different departments. I am not quite sure which is the boss department of the lot, but the transport department is interested and so are the army and the air force, and there may be some others. At any rate, it is really of vital importance, and now is the time that counts because if it is disposed of or destroyed it will never be replaced.


Colin William George Gibson: The air force is preparing to take over at the present time and tests are being made to find out if it is desirable to continue the land line over that area or whether the same or better results can be achieved with radio. In the meantime, the air force is continuing to operate it.


Howard Charles Green: Is there any plan on foot to connect the line up through the Alaska highway territory with the lines that were put into Prince George, Yanderhoof and central British Columbia.


Colin William George Gibson: Not so far.	*


Howard Charles Green: Nothing in mind on that?


Colin William George Gibson: No.


Angus MacInnis: 
Colin William George Gibson: Yes, these estimates .were revised. I knew they had been revised several times, but I am told they were actually revised five times, after Y-E day and again after V-J day, so that what is before the committee now is the revised estimate to take care of the requirements in view* of the cessation of hostilities. But these amounts of course include a great many commitments which were incurred during the present fiscal year, as well as amounts left over from previous war years.


Angus MacInnis: Then the amounts given on page 809 indicate only the cash payments made and not the commitments?


Colin William George Gibson: 
Angus MacInnis: Then in item 6, which is the one I believe we are dealing with, the expenditure made during the first five months was $2,500,000, which would leave something over $14,000,000 for the remaining seven months. That was the discrepancy which caught my eye. I understand that this sum remaining represents commitments already entered into?


Colin William George Gibson: It really means there are outstanding accounts that have to be paid. It does not mean these are new expenditures which are being incurred. I understand the carryover in March was $21,000,600.


Mr. WINTERS:: I should like to make one statement in connection with the remarks of the hon. member for Nanaimo. When discussing the financial affiliations between a company in Chicago and the British Columbia Telephone company I believe he meant the Automatic Electric company of Chicago. I do not know what the affiliation is, but I believe that correction to be in onder. The A. T. and T to Which he referred is the American Telephone and Telegraph company, with headquarters in New York.


George Randolph Pearkes: I am not familiar with the details, and that may be correct; or they may be associated in some way. I do not know.

Demobilization-Air Services
I wanted to ask one other question, in regard to the wireless link between the Queen Charlotte islands and Prince Rupert. Is that being maintained by the air force?


Colin William George Gibson: I do not know about that. I can find out and let my hon>. friend know. I do not know whether or not we still have that at the present time.


George Randolph Pearkes: When the minister obtains the information will he permit further questions in that connection? It will not be treated simply as a statement by the minister, I presume.


Colin William George Gibson: Yes, quite.


John Bracken: The minister was good enough to say a little while ago that he would put on Hansard on Monday certain expenditures under these items. We are quite willing to make rapid progress to-night, but if we are to pass these items this evening and then only see those expenditures on Monday, I suggest that the minister give the actual expenditures under these separate items for the last fiscal year, so that those who may be interested can make a note of it.


Colin William George Gibson: I have the actual cash expenditures for 1944-45. Will it be sufficient if I give the number of the item?


John Bracken: Yes; and if you wish you can give the round figure.


Colin William George Gibson: The actual cash expenditures for 1944-45 were, in round figures:
Item No. 1. Item No. 2. Item No. 3.. Item No. 4. Item No. 5. Item No. 0. Item No. 7. Item No. S. Item No. !). Item No. 10 Item No. 11 I tern No. 12 Item No. 13 Item No. 14

345.000.	000 26,000,000
40.000.	000
25.000.	000
17.000.	000
15.000.	000
3.000.	000
46.000.	000
163.000.	000
7.000.	000
18.000.	000
647.000.	000
3.000.	000
The total amount was $1,3S1,167,000.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Would the minister make a statement or give his views on the suggestion I advanced when the naval estimates were under consideration and this item was being discussed, as to the possibility of establishing a joint signals school for the three services? As I pointed out at that time, we are being asked to vote under this item for signals and wireless equipment some $40,000,000 for the three services, and in my view a substantial saving could be achieved in the
future if the resources of the services were pooled, particularly for the basic training stages. Would the minister indicate his view as to that suggestion?


Colin William George Gibson: I did not hear my hon. friend make that suggestion, but it is one that might very well be explored. Of course there would be differences in the equipment used in the air force, the army and the navy. Was the suggestion that the three services would combine?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes, so that the equipment used in the initial training of signallers in the three services might be pooled. I can quite well understand that later on specialized training would require different types of equipment; but even that training I should think might be carried on in three different branches of the same school instead of there being three entirely separate schools and three separate lots of equipment.


Colin William George Gibson: I am not an expert on signalling, and I would not want to express my own opinion as to whether or not that would be feasible, but certainly it is a suggestion that should be explored. Probably anyone who was an expert on signalling work would be able to give an opinion, but I can assure my hon. friend that I shall have the suggestion looked into.


Edmund Davie Fulton: One other advantage which might be suggested in support of that contention is that which would follow in the standardization of signal practice. As many hon. members will recall, it was found during this war that the signal practice and procedure in the three services was entirely different. This was responsible for a great deal of delay, and eventually it was found necessary more or less to standardize it. I suggest that this would automatically follow the founding of a joint school.


George Hugh Castleden: What amount was expended in the construction of this type of signal communications of a permanent nature in connection with airports across Canada in 1944 and 1945? A number of stations were supplied with permanent signal equipment and the necessary staff to maintain it. How many airports were so provided, and could the minister break down the expenditure of that amount?


Colin William George Gibson: Does the hon. member mean in connection with lighting v systems?


George Hugh Castleden: Signals.


Colin William George Gibson: Radar systems, and other wireless equipment installed at various airports?
1S00
Demobilization-Air Services


George Hugh Castleden: Yes.


Colin William George Gibson: For direction finding?


George Hugh Castleden: Yes.


Colin William George Gibson: We shall have to get that information.


George Hugh Castleden: I believe the expenditure was $17 million for Canadian equipment. What was spent in Canada in connection with our air force in 1944, and to date in 1945? Has there been any installation of this type of equipment since V-E day?


Colin William George Gibson: There was no additional procurement. I think some of the equipment that had been secured was installed, but I would not be able to say at just what airport that was done. I know we had. to supply some at Vancouver, I believe it was, where they were planning additional work.


George Hugh Castleden: I was referring to airports in Canada. A number of those stations were established near airports, although they were not exactly on the stations. Apparently the purpose was to get some sort of radar or wireless communication across Canada.


Colin William George Gibson: Yes, by beams.


George Hugh Castleden: For flying purposes. What was spent in Canada in 1944 and in 1945, and what, if any, since V-E day?


Colin William George Gibson: I shall get that information and give it later.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: How much of this equipment has been turned over to War Assets Corporation?


Colin William George Gibson: I do not know in what way the hon. member wishes to have it shown. We declare surplus stores to War Assets Corporation, but at the present time I certainly have not a record of the quantity.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Would the department not have some record of the value of the equipment turned over to War Assets Corporation?


Colin William George Gibson: Does my hon. friend mean the purchase price of the material, when it was purchased, or the value of it when it was disposed of?


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I mean that there is surplus equipment. What is the value of the surplus equipment turned over to War Assets Corporation? It is a pertinent question, and the committee should have information -on the point. .


Colin William George Gibson: When the hon. member refers to value, does he mean the value when it was purchased by the air force, or the value of it as turned over to War Assets Corporation?


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The value of it as it is turned over.
While I am on my feet, I would ask another question which deals with an interesting situation, and which would apply to other items. What is the minister's opinion as to the value various boards of education in Canada have been during the war in connection with the training of air force personnel? Perhaps the minister would have some idea of that value; I know I have an idea of what the value of the board of education in Toronto has been. It must have had tremendous value in the help it gave in connection with the war effort.
Boards of education have given their schools and their time, and much of their equipment has been worn out. Under the regulations set down by War Assets Corporation they have opportunities either to buy or to obtain material on indefinite loan. But to my way of thinking the service rendered by boards of education has been of inestimable value, and I do not think they should have to purchase equipment to replace that which has been worn out by men in the services who used that equipment. Surely some recompense should be given. What is the minister's opinion as to the value of those boards of education in Canada in connection with the training which has been carried out by his own department?


Colin William George Gibson: I know
*that in certain centres the work done by boards of education has been most valuable. They have contributed greatly ho the training of members of the forces. I know, too, that the government tries to assist in replacing equipment damaged, and I believe boards of education have been able ho secure equipment which has been discarded as surplus by various service departments. The War Assets Corporation is cooperating with boards of education wherever possible, to let them have the required equipment.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I understand there are certain things they can get by purchase, and_ certain things they can get by indefinite loan. However, I am glad to hear the minister say that, having in mind all the good work these people have done, equipment which has been worn. out by the services will be replaced free of cost.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Before item 6 is passed there is one point I should like to mention. 1

Demobilization-Air Services
believe there is no hon. member who does not know how valuable signals equipment has been in the war. For instance, we have the record of radar, which to-day is classed as signals equipment. Is there anywhere in 'Canada, with the exception of Research Enterprises Limited, which is in process of dissolution, where the air department can purchase or have made the latest signals equipment?


Colin William George Gibson: I am not in a position to answer that. All the purchases of the air force are made through the Department of Munitions and Supply. My colleague would be in a better position to give that information.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Do I understand
that the minister will give me the information in reply to my question concerning the value of surplus equipment at the present time?


Colin William George Gibson: Yes, I
-hall look into that, and find out in what form the answer can be given. I am sure we can give some indication as to the quantity declared surplus.


Douglas King Hazen: When members are discharged from the forces, are they allowed to take any equipment with them?


Colin William George Gibson: No; just their clothing.


Gordon Graydon: You do not take that off them.


Douglas King Hazen: If they go off with anything else they are breaking the regulations, are they?


Colin William George Gibson: That is
my understanding yes.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: But "clothing" would include
a complete kit, would it not? That does not mean only the clothing they have on?


Colin William George Gibson: Clothing
and personal equipment.


Frank Exton Lennard: I would presume that
enough extra signals and wireless equipment is being retained to care for the requirements of the air cadet corps?


Colin William George Gibson: Yes, we keep enough equipment. As a matter of fact our policy all through has been to keep about five years supply on hand. We are trying to retain enough for the auxiliary services and any other services for which we may be asked to provide equipment.


James Alexander Marshall: The figures show that the amount voted in 1944-45 under this item was $34,000,000 in round figures, and that
$17,000,000 was spent. The minister says that he proposes to spend $16,000,000 this year. The figures are about the same for each year. Was any of this amount required to pay for commitments carried over from the previous years? It does seem to me strange that the department should estimate $34,000,000 for 1944-45, spend only $17,000,000, and then estimate $16,000,000 for the coming year.


Colin William George Gibson: Contracts amounting to over $21,000,000 were carried over from the previous year. This is really more than enough to cover the amount estimated for this whole year.


James Alexander Marshall: Is the minister in position to say what part of the commitments from the previous year were carried into 1944-45?


Colin William George Gibson: Twenty-one million dollars.


James Alexander Marshall: And we spent only $17,000,000.


Colin William George Gibson: Twenty-one million was earned forward into 1945-46 from the previous year.


James Alexander Marshall: Yet * the minister is asking for only $16,000,000?


Colin William George Gibson: Yes; that is all we shall have to pay out during this current year.
Mr. A1ARSHALL: How much would be carried into the next year? Just what is the situation?


Colin William George Gibson: The reason is that these estimates have been revised since V-E day and V-J day, and it is considered that there will be a considerable amount of cancellations from the commitments that we had entered into in the previous year. Therefore we shall not be required to pay that $21,000,000 in full.


George Hugh Castleden: What is the policy with regard to wireless equipmsnt that is surplus? What is done with it?


Colin William George Gibson: Any equipment that is surplus to our requirements is declared surplus to War Assets and is disposed of.


George Hugh Castleden: Does the air force destroy any equipment itself?
.Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West): Yes, we have destroyed some. We are getting back to the subject that was brought up before and received some publicity. It is really not the function of the air force to dispose of any
Demobilization-Air Services

surplus equipment, whether it is valuable or not. At one time we did receive instructions from War Assets that certain types of equipment, for which there was no market or which was considered to have no value, should be destroyed and reduced to scrap. That was done and considerable criticism arose. I had it stopped immediately, and I have now made arrangements with War Assets so that they will be responsible for all surplus supplies. If they want us to use our man-power to do the actual destruction of any surplus goods that have no value, we will provide it in order to facilitate doing the work, but only the supervision of War Assets.


George Hugh Castleden: Can the minister give us some idea of the quantity of the equipment that was destroyed? What was the type of instrument involved? Was it usable only at high altitudes? The return tabled in reply to the question I asked said that there were tons of this stuff at Penhold, Alberta. What type of instruments did that involve?


Colin William George Gibson: I sent
an officer out there to make a report on the matter. There were wireless instruments in what was known as category E; that is, instruments in need of repair. It was not considered that they were worth the time and money that would have to be expended to make them usable. The wireless equipment was the type that operated on the engine of the plane; it was not equipment that could be used on the ground with an ordinary battery. It had practically no commercial use except in an aircraft.
It was suggested that the instruments could have been used for instructional, work in schools and educational institutions, but I am told by War Assets that they have plenty of these instruments in first-class condition that would be available if required. It was considered to be more economical to destroy them rather than to spend money in trying to repair them. Everything that was serviceable that could be removed was removed and the remainder was reduced to scrap. I am informed that it might have cost as much as $75 or SSO to make repairs on an instrument or to pull serviceable parts out of an instrument which would be worth only a matter of $10 or $12. It was not considered to be in the best interests to try to salvage this equipment which was in category E or to take out the serviceable parts that were not readily removable.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: Can the minister give us some idea of what an instrument panel on an aeroplane is worth?


Colin William George Gibson: I am
very vague on that because it would depend on the type of aeroplane. The instrument panel would vary on every type of aeroplane, whether it was a large bomber or a fighter. That is a difficult question to answer and I doubt if I can give an answer.


Angus MacInnis: If the equipment was
useless, it would appear to me that it was scrap anyway. Why did we have to be vindictive and destroy it? Surely there was something useful about it and thejr were afraid that somebody might get hold of that useful part and use it. Then in order that that could not be done, the instrument was destroyed. It seems a sort of sadistic approach to the thing and I find it difficult to understand. If the equipment was useless, it was useless, so why take an axe to it?


Colin William George Gibson: I think one reason is that when you reduce it to scrap you reduce it to the smallest volume possible so that it can be readily carted away.


George Hugh Castleden: Were not several hundred thousand pounds of this stuff transported to Penhold, Alberta, from air force camps all over Canada?


Colin William George Gibson: Equipment was brought to Penhold.


George Hugh Castleden: For destruction?


Colin William George Gibson: Yes.


George Hugh Castleden: And freight and express were paid to get it to Penhold. It does seem to me a terrific waste of time and money to pay freight and express to transport several hundred thousand pounds of this stuff to Pen-hold for the purpose of deliberately destroying it. Was there anything else among the material destroyed besides wireless, and, if so, what were the instruments?


Mr. QUELCH:: The complaint that I received from some W.E.M.'s who worked there went farther. They were working there repairing these sets for several months, and then they were sent out to smash the Sets that they had repaired. That is not just a funny story; it is actual fact. The complaint they made was this. If it was considered not feasible to put these sets into channels of civilian trade, each W.E.M. could have been allowed to take one away. I am told that they could be operated on a six-volt battery and would make a satisfactory radio. After repairing these sets, the W.E.M.'s were sent out to smash them with a hammer, and then the debris was covered over with a bull-dozer so that nobody could see what had happened. The minister's explanation is not very satisfactory.
1S03

Demobilization-Air Services


Colin William George Gibson: That
story has been told of trenches having been dug and of the stuff being thrown into them and covered up with a bull-dozer, but I am informed that that is not correct. Destruction took place between August 17 and 28 inclusive. It included many different types of transmitters and receivers as well as radio accessories, but only one type of transmitting or receiving unit. The original cost of the transmitter was $1,000 and only a few of these units were destroyed. The story was going around that $60,000,000 worth of equipment had been destroyed. One of the members referred to the fact that when questioned on the matter I had'said that that was all nonsense and that later had to admit that destruction had taken place. I did get a telephone call from Calgary one night at midnight, and somebody asked me'if it was true that $60,000,000 of equipment was being destroyed at Calgary. I told them that that was nonsense.
. Investigation showed that the value of new equipment would be in the neighbourhood of $600,000. But, the equipment destroyed was obsolete equipment that had ceased to be of use largely .because it had been supplanted by later models. Consequently War Assets decided that it was better to dispose of it in that way than to spend time and money in repairing it.


Victor Quelch: Would it not have beern
possible to allow the W.E.M.'s to have it?


Mr. MATTHEWS (Kootenay East):: I was going to speak very much along the same lines as the hon. member for Yorkton. Public funds have been used to transport this equipment from camps all over Canada to a centre to be destroyed. It does seem to me that where there is smoke there is fire. All over this country there is a great deal of dissatisfaction at what has been going on since the war ended. Equipment is being destroyed, and deliberately destroyed, to prevent it from falling into the hands of people who could use it. Perhaps it is too much trouble to pass equipment into the hands of. War Assets Corporation, but let me say that it is going to take this government a long time to live down the stink over the sale of the Fairmiles. They have been practically given away. There can be no denial [DOT] of that by any minister. There are things going on that wTill not bear the light of day so far as many of these departments are concerned. I am glad that the minister was man enough to admit that some destruction of material had gone on and that he stopped it. I would recommend to him that he look a little deeper and stop more things that are going on. That would be of advantage to every department and to the government itself.


Gordon Graydon: As I listened to the minister's statement I thought that he was defending on behalf of his department and the government the procedure which has just been described in the house with respect to the destruction of what seems to me to be articles that had at least some use and value in the normal course of trade and commerce. May I ask the minister this question? Is he thoroughly satisfied that the procedure taken in this case was in the national interest, and is he defending what was done at Penhold?


Colin William George Gibson: I would say yes, in the national interest. The goods destroyed had no commercial value whatever. While it has been contended, and perhaps rightly, that they might have had some educational value, I understand that there are plenty of other instruments which also have no commercial value, available for this educational work. The cost of storage and looking after this surplus equipment would have been a complete waste of money.


Mr. SHAW:: It is interesting to me to find that after quite a number of days the dis-* cussion is in my own backyard, at the T.S.U. at Penhold. I brought this matter up on a previous occasion, and I did not do so without first giving careful . consideration to all the facts relating to the so-called destruction of . equipment at Penhold. I have been in Pen-hold on more than one occasion. I was there a number of times during the period when destruction was presumed to be taking place, and it was not always known that I was a member of parliament. I have talked to men who have driven the bull-dozers. I have talked to uniformed members of the- technical section; I have talked to civilian employees of Penhold 'T.S.U., and I am thoroughly and completely convinced that the minister has not all the information. I know that Air Commodore Tackaberry was sent to Penhold.
I should like to know just how long he was at Penhold. I think it was a matter of possibly three hours. I should like to know exactly what he did with respect to making an investigation at Penhold. These men that I have mentioned, including uniformed personnel, have told me that they are fully prepared, if an investigation is called, provided that they are given proper protection, to make oath that the charges enumerated last August and in early September by the M.L.A. for Banff-Cochrane were based on facts. I do not want the minister to think for one moment that I am holding him personally responsible for what is going on, but I believe that an investigation should be held.
I am hopeful that when the special committee of the house is set up to investigate War
Demobilization-Air Services

Assets Corporation it will not be restricted in any way whatsoever. I for one as a member of that committee, I presume, when it is set up, am going to press for an investigation of what went on at Penhold, because, if it has gone on at Penhold, I am quite right in assuming that it has gone on in other places.
I should like to ask the minister if Mr. J. H. Ross, of vocational training, was advised that any equipment of educational value was at Penhold, and if he was even invited or permitted to examine this material to see if it had educational value. The minister said that it has some educational value, and I am wondering where he got his information in that respect.
I wish to know whether the representative of War Assets Corporation at Calgary was called into the picture at all. I wish to know whether War Assets Corporation or a representative of that corporation was at Penhold and made an investigation. I should like to know, too, if Air Commodore Tackaberry specified definitely that there was no ground equipment destroyed; that is, no electrical equipment. I think the minister stated that it was all for airborne personnel; but it seems strange to me that, as I have been told, uniformed personnel could sit down and use that equipment on the ground and bring in stations from all over the continent, and they said it tore their hearts to see bull-dozers go over this equipment, which was lined up on the floors of these hangars, and crush it almost into powder. Further, I should like to know where that scrap is going if these materials have been rendered into scrap. I have had some disturbing reports about this. I do not think I should take the time of the committee to deal further with it, but I am not satisfied, but completely dissatisfied, with what has gone on at Penhold.
I do not want the minister to think for a moment that I am holding him personally responsible. I believe that if he were thoroughly aware of what has occurred there he would investigate. Moreover, if an investigation is carried on with respect to Penhold- and the minister has said that bull-dozers were not used to bury anything-I should like to have some of these uniformed personnel go out with us, show us certain spots, and let the government provide us with bull-dozers to unearth some of these things which can be unearthed at Penhold. I believe the Canadian people are justified in their demand that every precaution be exercised in dealing with these surplus assets. They have spent millions and hundreds of millions of dollars on this equipment, and they are extremely anxious to see that every dollar that can be recovered from it is recovered.
TMr. Shaw.]
As I say, I am going to reserve further remarks until the time when the committee is set up. Let me just say that I regret very much that so much time has elapsed without the committee having been set up. I believe it should have been at work long ago; and I urge, regardless of what the reasons for not having set it up may be, that it be set up at once, and that in its deliberations it be not restricted in any sense whatsoever. I can assure the committee that I can give them dii'ections which will probably assist them and the government tremendously in preventing what I am going to characterize now as wanton destruction of certain materials having value.


Colin William George Gibson: Before the committee rises, may I give one answer to the hon. member for St. John-Albert. He asked me how many civilians were employed at headquarters on V-E day. The answer is that there were 1,157. He also asked, how many are employed there now? The answer is, 910.


George Hugh Castleden: Is item 6 carried?
An lion. MEMBER: No.


George Hugh Castleden: If so, I want to object.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No, it is not carried.


George Hugh Castleden: I should like to have the Chairman's word on it.


The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Golding) :: The item was carried, and item 7 was called. Then the discussion went back to item 6 again. If it is the wish of the committee to have item 6 stand, that is all right.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Yes.
Item stands.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Ian Alistair Mackenzie: On Monday, we shall resume the discussion of these estimates.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Monday, November 5, 1945