1948-06-24

[Stage Direction]
act, 1948
Hon. J. J. McCANN (Minister of National Revenue) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 395, respecting an income tax agreement between Canada and New Zealand, signed at Ottawa, in Canada, on the twelfth day of March, 1948.
Mr. MacINNIS:: Explain.


Mr. McCANN:: Mr. Speaker, an agreement has been signed between New Zealand and Canada in reference to taxation. The purpose of the agreement is to avoid, where possible, the double imposition of income and similar taxes where Canadians are carrying on business in New Zealand or otherwise receiving income from New Zealand' sources, and where New Zealanders are carrying on business in Canada or otherwise receiving income from Canadian sources. It also provides that the taxation authorities of the two countries may exchange information which may be necessary to make the agreement effective and to prevent fraud and avoidance of taxes which are subject to the agreement.
The purpose of the bill is to give the agreement the force of law in Canada, and it provides that in the case of inconsistency between the agreement and the operation of any other law, the agreement will prevail to the extent of such inconsistency.
The Minister of National Revenue is given the authority to make orders and regulations to carry out the provisions of the agreement, which orders and regulations shall be published' in the Canada Gazette and laid before parliament.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT



TRANSACTIONS BY CANADIAN RESIDENTS, IN CANADA OR ELSEWHERE

[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 396, to amend the Foreign Exchange Control Act.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Mr. ABBOTT:: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to close what appears to be a sort of loophole in the Foreign Exchange Control Act. When the Foreign Exchange Control Act was enacted the intention was that its provisions should have extraterritorial effect in so far as they relate to transactions by Canadian residents. In other words it was intended, and is indeed essential to the proper operation of exchange control, that certain transactions by Canadian residents should be subject to control whether those transactions are entered into in Canada or elsewhere. In most of the relevant sections of the act, this intention w-as made clear by the use of the words "either in Canada or elsewhere", but through an oversight these words were omitted from sections 21, 22 and 23.
The omission in the case of sections 21 and 22 has recently been disclosed by a decision of a magistrate in Toronto in a prosecution against a Canadian resident for failing to sell to the foreign exchange control board through his bank about $15,000 in United States funds and disposing of them without a permit. The evidence established that the resident was personally in possession of these funds in Niagara Falls, New York, where he used them to buy certain goods which were subsequently smuggled into Canada. The magistrate held in effect that sections 21 and 22 of the Foreign Exchange Control Act did not apply, since the receipt and disposition of the funds took place entirely outside of Canada while the resident himself was outside of Canada.
The effect of this decision-I may say that an appeal has been taken-if maintained, is that any Canadian resident who obtains payment of United States funds while in the United States could dispose of the funds there without committing an offence. This would, of course, defeat one of the primary purposes of the Foreign Exchange Control Act, which is to ensure that United States dollars and other foreign exchange earned by Canadian residents from exports, services rendered for non-residents and from other sources must be sold to the foreign exchange control board where they will be available to meet Canada's foreign expenditures.
Because of the serious consequences which might follow as a result of the apparent defects in sections 21, 22 and 23 the government feels it necessary to ask now for the amendments contained in the bill. They are purely
Questions

of a technical nature, and merely will enable those sections to be applied as originally intended.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Is it the pleasure of the house that the minister shall have leave to introduce said bill?


Mr. FULTON:: On division.
Motion agreed to on division and bill read the first time.



EMERGENCY EXCHANGE CONSERVATION


Douglas Charles Abbott: Mr. Speaker, in Votes and Proceedings of yesterday appears notice of a bill in my name to amend the Emergency Exchange Conservation Act, which was referred to by the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier) a few days ago as one of the bills that the government intended to bring down. I had expected it to be on the order paper today for introduction, but, apparently through some mistake either in my office or in the law clerk's office, it was one day behind the other bill which has just been given first reading. If the house would give unanimous consent, I would like to advance it one stage in order that the bill may be distributed to members and put on the order paper for discussion at whatever time the house sees fit.


Mr. BRACKEN:: On behalf of my associates, Mr. Speaker, may I say that we offer no objection to proceeding with the first stage of the measure now.


James Horace King: By unanimous consent.
Mr. ABBOTT moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 397, to amend the Emergency Exchange Conservation Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: 1.	Have any permits been issued for the importation into Canada from Great Britain of any pictorial postcards, greeting cards, or similar artistic cards or folders, finished or unfinished, or any Christmas seals, stickers, tags and enclosure cards, printed, embossed or otherwise decorated, which articles come under the prohibited list, schedule I of Bill No. 3?
2.	If so, to what company, partnership, person or persons have these permits been issued?
3.	What was the reason for their issuance?
>

4.	What condition of exceptional hardship would result if the permits had not been issued?
5.	What is the nature of the permits?
6.	For what types and quantities of the above articles have permits been granted?
7.	What is the approximate value of the articles under the permits so granted?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Stand.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: Mr. Speaker, this is a simple question and I would like to get the answer today. I do not see any reason why it could not be answered now. There is nothing much involved in it, and we shall not have another opportunity to get the answer. I do not see the reason for the delay.


EXPORT TRADE-ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Has the Minister of Trade and Commerce taken any action regarding the request addressed to him by the Canadian Electrical Manufacturers' Association and dealing with the retention of their former export trade in empire markets, including Great Britain?
2.	If so, what action has been taken to work out some arrangements in connection therewith without any hardship to the British dollar situation?


Mr. McILRAITII:: The request referred to in part 1 of the question has been received and considered, and the answer has been given to the association.


AMMONIUM NITRATE
Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	For what quantity of ammonium nitrate were export permits issued from January 1, 1947, to June 1, 1948?
2.	What quota for the export of ammonium nitrate did Canada hold during the 1947-1948 season ?
3.	What was the value per ton on the above exports?
4.	What was Canada's allotment in the international pool of ammonium nitrate?
5.	To whom were the export permits issued and for what quantities?
Mr. MoILRAITH:
1.	Export permits were issued from January 1, 1947 to June 1, 1948, for an amount of 203,156 short tons of ammonium nitrate material. It is not known what portion of this was actually exported.
2.	There is no quota in terms of specific nitrogen material. Allocations are established on basis of total nitrogen in terms of metric tons N. Export permits are approved on cyanamid, ammonium nitrate, sulphate of ammonia and ammonium phosphate after Canadian requirements are supplied. The exportable surplus of nitrogen, which includes the above products for the fertilizer trade year 1947-1948 amounts to 132,422 metric tons N.

Inquiries oj the Ministry
3.	Export prices vary according to supplying companies and countries of destination.
4.	No allotments of ammonium nitrate specifically. Allocations of nitrogen are set up by the international emergency food committee on a total nitrogen basis, regardless of the nitrogenous material.
5.	It is not in the public interest to disclose the private business of the individual concerns.


PASSPORTS FOR INFANT CHILDREN
Mr. CASTLEDEN:: 1.	Were any passports issued 'by the Department of External Affairs during each of the years, 1944, 1945, 1946, 1947, and up to March 31, 1948, to permit the expatriation of babies from Alberta on the application of the superintendent of child welfare of that province?
2.	If so, how many and in favour of what countries?
3.	How many were issued to each country during each of these periods?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I had a word with the hon. member and explained to him that the information requested by his question had been prepared with respect to the years 1945, 1946 and 1947 and could be supplied at once, but that to prepare it for 1944 and 1948 would take a considerable time. I understood him to say that he would prefer to have the answer for 1945, 1946 and 1947 at once, and on that understanding I am giving that information now.
1.	Yes.
2.	1945, 54; 1946, 64; 1947, 11. United States, Costa Rica, Panama.
3.	1945-United States, 53; Costa Rica, 1. 1946-United States, 62; Costa Rica, 1; Panama, 1. 1947-United States, 10; Costa Rica, 1.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: Have protests been received by the government from federal or state child welfare authorities of the United. States against the granting of passports for the entry of infant children into the United States from Alberta?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: No protest has been received so far as is known by the government.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: 1.	What check is made of infant children crossing the Canadian border with foster parents from the United States?
2.	Are any children permitted to cross the Canadian border into the United States without passports?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: If crossing temporarily, no passports are required by any Canadian citizens. If entry is for permanent landing, children will require passports.


VETERANS AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. H. BLACIvMORE (Lethbridge): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, or to 'his parliamentary assistant, or to the government. Will the minister ascertain and announce to the house at the earliest possible date the answer to each of the following questions:
1. Where is veteran T. Harvey, Regimental No. D76502 and pension No. 550593, known to have been discharged from Ste. Anne's hospital, Ste. Anne de Bellevue, P.Q., on June 14, 1948; known to have been in Ottawa June 17, 1948; known to have been at 507 Place d'Armes, Montreal, some time since June 17?
James Horace King: I suggest to the hon. member a question of 'this kind should foe placed on the order paper.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: Mr. Speaker, the matter is too urgent for the order paper.


James Horace King: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but according to the rules of the house, he is asking the perfect type of question for the order paper.


John Horne Blackmore: It is certainly an
urgent matter.


EXPORTS TO THE UNITED STATES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. W. EARL ROWE (Dufferin-Simcoe):: In view of the change of policy announced by the Minister of Trade and Commerce on June 18 with respect to the removal of price ceilings on Ontario wheat, can he tell us now, especially having regard to the crop year beginning July 1, whether the export of wheat can be made to the United States without permit?


Right Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: It depends on whether the international wheat agreement is implemented. At the moment there is nothing to interfere with the export of Ontario wheat.


William Earl Rowe: In view of the importance of having the matter clarified before harvest, will the 'minister indicate whether Ontario farmers will be free to export wheat to the United States?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I have indicated that at the moment the government policy is that Ontario wheat may be exported. Any change in government policy will be announced in due course.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. STEPHENSON:: May I ask a question supplementary to that asked by the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe? Can buckwheat be exported under the new regulations the minister mentioned?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is my understanding that buckwheat, like other coarse grains, is subject to export control.


POSTAL ROUTES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. ERNEST BERTRAND (Postmaster General):: Yesterday a question was asked by the hon. member for Yukon with reference to air mail. I have the answer today.
Under the arrangements completed for the conveyance of letter mail by air, to be effective July 1, 1948, all letters weighing one ounce or less will be given air transportation when, by doing so, delivery to the addressee can be expedited. While the great bulk of such conveyance will be undertaken by Trans-Canada Air Lines, it is the intention to use also all other feeder air lines which now carry mail. Points removed from T.C.A. main lines and outlying areas generally, including Yukon territory, will thus be brought within the orbit of this new and improved service.


MEAT PRODUCTS-REQUEST FOR IMPOSITION OF CEILING PRICES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. RONALD MOORE (Churchill):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. It is based on a statement made by the minister in reply to a question on price control which will be found at page 1864 and page 1865 of Hansard of March 4, 1948. The question is this. Now that current prices for meat and meat products have increased beyond former ceiling prices, will the minister use the price control machinery which he referred to on March 4 and impose price ceilings on meat products to protect consumers?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The question of imposing a ceiling on the retail price of meat is a very complicated one, as I have indicated in the house before. It involves working out individual ceiling prices on 200 items. The price of meat, as hon. members know, has risen since the end of January or early in March, whenever that statement was made, and the ceiling which had been established at that time would bear no real relation to the present prices. The question whether any such action might be 
taken is a matter of government policy on which I am not prepared to make a statement at the moment.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. DOUGLAS G. ROSS (St. Paul's): I wish to ask a question of the Prime Minister. In view of the fact that the session is nearing an end, and as several questions on the order paper have not yet been answered, will it be possible to have questions called tomorrow?
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: I think my hon. friend's request is quite reasonable. I will ask my colleagues to endeavour to have the answers ready, if possible.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. CHESTER S. McLURE (Queens): I wish to direct a question to the minister of Transport. Is the S.S. Abegweit back on the Borden-Tormentine ferry service? If not, when may we expect it to be back?
Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport):: I am happy to tell the hon. gentleman that the S.S. Abegweit sailed from Montreal yesterday. By today it should be in service on the route between Tormentine and Borden.



TELEGRAPHS AND TELEPHONES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: I should like to reply to the question asked yesterday by the hon. member for Ottawa East (Mr. Richard), with reference to the transfer of government telephone and telegraph services to the Department of Transport, and whether the Bell Telephone company had been consulted in connection with them. The order in council which was tabled yesterday provides for the transfer of the government telephone and telegraph services to the Department of Transport, save and except those telephone services within the area of the city of Ottawa which will be assigned to the Department of Finance. A certain number of the personnel who were in the Department of Public Works will be

Income Tax Act
assigned to the radio service branch of the Department of Transport. I made the answer yesterday that I was not aware of any negotiations which had been undertaken by the Bell Telephone company with regard to that part of the government telephone and telegraph services which have been assigned to transport; and I find that to be the case.



INCOME TAX ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved the third reading of Bill No. 338, respecting income taxes.
Mr. RODNEY YOUNG (Vancouver Centre) :: Before the bill is read a third time I should like to make a few remarks with reference to the three per cent tax on co-operatives. Since I arrived in this house I have been inundated with telegrams and letters about that particular section, which is of immense importance to my constituents.
It seems to me that there is a great deal of difference between the principle of the co-operative societies and the principle of normal business, and that the effect of this three per cent tax is to treat the co-operative societies as if they were in business in a normal sense. The effect of the operation of the co-operative societies during the present period of high prices has been to protect the small income man and protect the consumer from the increase in the cost of living. I suggest, therefore that it would be excellent policy on the part of this house to do what it can to protect these organizations in their efforts to give the consumer a decent break.
I should like to point out that certain hon. members, in discussion since I arrived in this house, have more or less publicly regretted that organizations such as trade unions, which originally existed for non-political purposes, have seen fit lately to assume a political complexion. I should like to assure hon. members who make these references that there is a reason for such action on the part of the trade unions. The reason is that they have felt that in the exercise of their function as trade unions, they have not been given sufficient protection by this government and preceding governments, and consequently it has seemed to them to be -wise to support one political party rather than remain non-political. I suggest that hon. members of the house who disapprove this course should take into consideration past history in dealing with the circumstances of the co-operative societies.


James Horace King: Order.
5849-366i


Rodney Young: I am speaking-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Sit down.


James Horace King: I must call the attention of the hon. member to the fact that on second and third reading of a bill only the principle may be discussed, and not the particular clauses. Discussion on the clauses of the bill should take place in committee.


Angus MacInnis: It is the principle of the whole bill.


Rodney Young: The principle of the bill, so far as I have analysed it, is to regard the co-operatives as normal business houses engaged primarily in trade for the purpose of making progress for their investors, their shareholders, or the associated people in co-operatives. My contention is that it is precisely because the bill regards the co-operative societies in this light that it is not fulfilling the intent of taxation in the normal taxation of the business world. The co-operatives are organizations of consumers designed to protect consumers against the business world, not organizations of consumers to go into business for the express purpose of making profits.


Mr. ISNOR:: Where do they get their reserves?


Rodney Young: In any case where people co-operate in order to purchase or to sell products, capital investment is necessary to the continuance of their business.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Where do they get their reserves?


Rodney Young: They get them by laying aside a portion of the part of the costs which otherwise they would have had to pay to private business in the form of profits.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: That is the word.


Rodney Young: The purpose of this bill is the taxation of profits, not taxation to prevent profits. The members of co-operatives are endeavouring to reduce the cost of the commodities which they have to purchase in order to live. Hon. members on the opposite side of the house may find my contention difficult to understand. I have no doubt that it is alien to their philosophy, but I still believe it is correct.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Profits are profits.


Rodney Young: I believe that in the course of time hon. members will come to see this point of view. Otherwise they will suffer the misfortune which came upon those in Great Britain who took the attitude that is now being taken on this bill. The net result was
Supply-Mines and Resources

that during the first great war the co-operative societies, which formerly had been nonpolitical, were forced into the political field.


James Horace King: Order.


Rodney Young: I am speaking-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Sit down.


James Horace King: I must point out to the hon. member that he is completely out of order. We have before the house an act respecting income taxes. I cannot permit the hon. member to discuss political systems and so on. He should confine himself to the bill which is before the house.


Rodney Young: Mr. Speaker, as you are aware, it is not my intention to break the rules of the house; but, because of the well-placed interruptions of other hon. members I have been diverted from my original intention.
In conclusion let me say that there are a million and a half people engaged in and connected with 4,500 co-operatives. Those people are trying to reduce the cost of living. They are bearing a heavy burden of taxation, particularly in the form of indirect taxation which all those whose salaries and wages are in the lower brackets are compelled to pay. I suggest that any effort the department can possibly make to reduce this three per cent taxation on organizations which no doubt have had beneficial effects upon our national life, would be in the interests of the country as a whole and would do a great deal to prevent the lowering of the standard of living brought about by taxation methods in other spheres.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND RESOURCES

[Stage Direction]
Indian affairs branch-
218. Branch administration, $110,187.
Angus MacInnis: Mr. Chairman, at the adjournment last night I had begun a few remarks in relation to this matter. Those of us who were in the house at that time will recall the remarks of the hon. member for Nanaimo. I had pointed out that the conditions to which he referred in the Indian reservation in his constituency were similar to those in most, if not all, of the reserves across Canada. I suggested then, and I suggest now, that we should not try to force through these important items in the estimates without a thorough discussion on Indian affairs.

For the last three years we have had a committee looking into this matter, and a report has been tabled. Before we deal with these estimates we should have a discussion on that report. We should know what the recommendations are, and what the government intends to do with them. One of the last observations made last evening was that of the hon. member for Essex West, to the effect that he intended to move the motion standing in his name in Votes and Proceedings for the adoption of the report. I regret that when the order for motions was called this morning, he did not so move.
I submit we should have a debate on that report before we can deal properly with these items in the estimates. If the hon. member does not intend to move the adoption of the report, then someone else should do it. Before we leave this session we would have some understanding as to the government's intention in connection with the investigation which has taken two years of joint effort of the House of Commons and the other place.


Mr. CHURCH:: While I am a member of the committee on Indian affairs, unfortunately
I was not able to attend all its meetings. However I wish to compliment the committee on the progress it made in informing the people of the country with respect to those who were here hundreds of years ago, a long time before the coming of the early settlers. They were here hundreds of years before the French came to Canada.
These people have been considered good enough to help serve in our armed forces in two wars, and they should be considered good enough to be made citizens of Canada. I would wipe out the whole administration of the Indian affairs branch, from top to bottom, and make the Indians citizens of this country. Long ago all the restrictions in the treaties with respect to tribes should have been abolished, because the treaties will have to be carried out anyway. The provisions are set out in the act.
A large body of public opinion was represented before the committees of last year and (his year, and the representations made there had the support of the Christian churches of Canada. They supported not only the giving of votes to the Indians, but full rights of citizenship. In my view the joint committee required to answer only two questions: First, are you or are you not in favour of the present system respecting the status of the Indians under treaties? Second: Are you in favour of a modern new day for Indians of Canada, as they have in the United States under the supervision of their secretary of the interior?

Supply-Mines and Resources
The committee has made some progress. Indian affairs are handled by a branch of the administration. Perhaps I should say nothing more this morning, because I want to see the estimates put through as quickly as possible. Too much time has already been wasted in our proceedings.
Credit for the great improvement in the Indian situation should go to the hon. member for Calgary East (Mr. Harkness), who in the first session of this parliament introduced a motion calling the attention of the country to the position of the Indians, following which a committee was appointed. In 1946 the committee received representatives of all the Christian churches in this country, as well as large delegations representing other interests. That work was continued last year and this year. The committee has had a great many meetings, and I appreciate the work that has been done by its members, the chairman and the officials of the department.
This is my policy as far as the Indians are concerned. I would give them full status as citizens and, with that status, all the other services which are corollary to it, social services and everything else. The sooner this country awakens to the fact that there must be a happier day for these people, the better it will be for all concerned. Look at the northern parts of this country, which Frobisher, Hudson, Mackenzie, Fraser and all those other great men explored in the early days. Not a cape was rounded or a river entered without an Indian in a canoe leading the way for these pioneers of civilization. At the present time a large body of public opinion is very much disappointed at the little progress that has been made, at the suffering of the Indians in many parts of the north through lack of hospitals, schools, and nursing and other necessary services.
This government has made some improvement in past years, but I do not believe it has gone far enough. These are the view3 I have always held on this question. One of the recommendations of the committee, I believe, is that the Indians should be given the vote. They should have had it long ago. They were good enough to fight in defence of our country in many wars, and they should be good enough to be treated as citizens and human beings. All too often we forget that they are human beings. While something has been done to improve their condition, I believe a better day should be dawning for the Indians of this country.


George Hugh Castleden: The first question I
would like to ask the minister is whether or
not it is possible for this department to give us a report. I notice that no report has been issued by his department for this year. The last one was for the year ended March 31, 1946.


Mr. MacKINNON:: That matter was thoroughly dealt with when my estimates were discussed in the house yesterday or the day before, and a complete and I think satisfactory explanation was given. It was to the effect that in the preparation of the report there was some delay owing to the scientific information involved, but it is now in the hands of the printer, and may be distributed even before the end of this session. I further stated that it would be the objective of the department in future to have this report prepared as early as possible so that it would be in the hands of members of the house early in the session.


George Hugh Castleden: Without the report it is difficult to estimate the progress that has been made or discuss the estimates of the department. It is particularly difficult to discuss the work of the Indian affairs branch without having before us full information.


James Angus MacKinnon: I do not want to
interrupt the hon. member, but he has the advantage of being on the Indian affairs committee, and I am sure he is well informed on all matters which were discussed there.


George Hugh Castleden: But we have no record, for instance, as to the progress made during the last year in respect to education. I am a member of that committee, where I think a great deal of good work has been done. After years of protestation in this house it was finally agreed that the act would be revised after the war. Finally in 1946 the committee was set up, and began its work about May of that year. For three sessions the committee has been carrying .on its investigations. Last evening, commenting on the progress made, I said I was glad that something had been done. In view, however, of the serious situation prevailing among most of the Indians of this dominion, it is greatly to be regretted that more progress could not have been made. The committee has been sitting for three years; a report has been presented within the last few days, and we expected. it. would be moved today.
After three yeans of work we have the committee bringing in a report recommending that a claims commission be set up to deal with the matter of Indian treaties. If that commission is set up next year it may carry on its work for another three years. If it was the
Supply-Mines and Resources

intention of the committee that such a commission should be created, that might well have been done three years ago and the whole matter could have been dealt with now. I think members of the committee will agree that the matter of Indian treaties is far too detailed and much too broad in its implications to be satisfactorily dealt with toy a committee of this house. A claims commission, somewhat similar to the body 'which was set up in the United States, has been found necessary.
The Indians in Canada are under .treaties, some of them hundreds of years old, and some only fifty or sixty years old. The various bands of Indians have different ideas as to what their treaties mean. Some have copies of their old treaties; some have not. One of the problems involved is the holding of property. The Indians of the Oka reserve, for instance, are under the impression that they own property in that area, but they have no title and no copy of their treaty, which seems to have been lost; -therefore they find their property being taken from them. The Six Nations Indians believe that under treaty they have a right to govern and control that part of Canada entirely on their own. Throughout the whole question of treaties and treaty rights there are complications and implications which must be determined by someone. There is a great deal of dissatisfaction among the Indians because there is no clearly defined line of demarcation.
The time is long past when this matter should be dealt with to the satisfaction of the Indians as well as the white men. Under these treaties, for instance, the Indians were to be guaranteed the right to keep on hunting and fishing. Since the federal government turned over -the natural resources to the provinces, however, the provincial governments have passed legislation prohibiting the Indians from hunting and fishing in certain areas, and they think that is an infringement of their treaty rights. Consequently they are asking for redress, but they do not get much satisfaction from the provincial authorities, who do not recognize -any responsibility in this regard.
I regret very much -that the claims commission was not set up years ago. In the report of .the committee, which we thought would be moved this morning, I find this recommendation:
Your committee deems it advisable that, with few exceptions, all sections of -the act be either repealed or amended. The law officers of the crown would, of course, need to make other necessary and consequential revisions and rearrangements of the act which, when thus revised. should be presented to parliament as soon as possible, but not later than the next session.

I think it is to be regretted that a revised act -was not available to this house this session. As I said before, conditions are so seriously below par, so bad in some areas, that the Canadian people cannot bnlt be ashamed that such things should exist within our own borders.
The committee is also recommending that it continue its wmrk next session. During this session the sittings of the committee have been taken up almost entirely with revision of the act. We went through it clause by clause. We made our recommendations, and discussed matters with the officials of the department. There is a great deal of regret among lion, members that no bill is to be available for presentation at this time. The matter is much too urgent to be delayed any longer. To some of us it seems apparent that it is a matter of policy, that a policy has not been settled upon by the department in connection with many of these -matters. I think it is time that that was done and the matter referred to this house for final settlement.
Another recommendation by the committee reads -as follows:
Your committee recommends -that a commission in the nature of a claims commission be set up, with the least possible delay, to inquire into the terms of all Indian treaties in order to discover and determine, definitely and finally, such rights and obligations as are therein involved -and, further, to assess and settle finally and in a fust and- equitable manner all claims or grievances winch have arisen thereunder.
One of the things basically wrong with the administration of Indian affairs is the attitude of the people of Canada, the government and the officials of the department toward the Indians. They are treated as wards and inferiors. Complaints were presented to the committee by Indians concerning the treatment they had received from many agents, and they revealed a situation which should not exist. We should- take the Indians into our confidence: we should place our cards on the table and discuss with them a solution of this problem.
I regret that this report does not contain more reference to co-operation between those who are determining the -welfare and the future of the Indians, the destiny of the Indians, and the people who are responsible for the administration of their affairs. These people should be called into consultation. If we are to discuss treaty rights, surely the people who signed the treaties, surely those who are concerned with the administration of those treaties, should -have a voice in the council chamber. They should be sitting around the table so that agreement could be reached. The various bands should select those whom they want to repre-

Supply-Mines and Resources
sent them in the council chamber. It is vital that these people should have some say in the shaping of their own destiny. Otherwise they will say: This is just being given to us; we have no voice in it; we have nothing to do with it but accept it; we have no appeal.
We are falling down in not arriving at a policy and determining the future of these people. I think in every case where a claims commission is set up, the Indians who are governed under the various treaties should be permitted to select their own representatives and not be represented by someone selected by the Indian affairs branch.
It is evident that one of the things which causes considerable difficulty in administration is the definition of "Indian". I realize that this may present certain problems, but here again Indians should be selected. There should be a decision as to the line of demarcation between what may or may not be an Indian, whether he should be a full-blooded Indian or whether there would be included those who have been under the treaties for many years but who may not be in a direct blood line from a native. The Indians themselves should have more to say in that regard.
Another matter which causes a great deal of concern among the Indians is their liability to pay taxes without having a voice in the affairs of the country. They are being taxed without being given representation. However, there are two sides to this question. It was apparent throughout the sittings of the Indian affairs committee, particularly during the past year, that the Indians' side of the question has not been presented by the representatvies of the Indians. I am not speaking in any derogatory way of Mr. Norman E. Lickers, who was selected by the committee as a sort of legal adviser and liaison officer. He was employed by the committee and gave valuable assistance in the carrying out of its work. He is proof of the capacities of these people if given the proper education and opportunity. I think he felt, however, that he faced difficulty in trying to represent the 130,000 Indians across Canada.
I think this matter of voting has been badly handled. If you look over the minutes of the meetings of the committee you will find it was unanimous in the view that to offer the franchise to the Indians would in no way interfere with their rights or privileges. But that was not made clear either in the report to this house or in the reports which have gone out across Canada. The result has been protests from the Indians and from their organizations. Many of them do not want the franchise;
they want to remain as Indians. They do not desire to become Canadian citizens with all that that implies. They feel that they have certain rights or privileges which should be respected. My quarrel is that when the recommendation was made to the house that the Indians be granted the franchise, it was not made clear that the exercise of that franchise would not be considered a means by which the Indians would be deprived of any of their rights and privileges.
Another matter is the encroachment of white persons upon Indian reserves. This is something which is causing great concern to the Indians on the reserves. In some parts of Canada the reserve is owned in common; there is no separate leasing of property by individual Indians. In other areas the Indians have been able to get some sort of claim or title to their property and have been able to dispose of it, and in some instances property has been sold to white people. The result is that many Indian reserves are becoming badly split up. Complaints were made recently about white people moving on to the Caughnawaga reserve and building houses.
In order to settle these matters there should be representation of all sides. Great care should be taken to see that justice is done to these people and their welfare protected. The early treaties should be respected in every way.
The ninth clause of the fourth report, which we expected to be moved this morning, reads as follows:
In 1946 and again in 1947 the joint committee on the Indian Act made recommendations with regard to administrative improvements which could be effected without the revision of existing legislation and which, when put into effect, would remove some of the causes out of which arise grievances and complaints of many Indians.
There are still some "administrative improvements" which your committee deems advisable.
Your committee, therefore, again recommends that the administration of all aspects of Indian affairs be placed under one ministerial head.
Your committee reiterates the recommendation made by the 1947 joint committee on the Indian Act, viz:
10. The director of the Indian affairs branch . . . should be named a commissioner who shall have the rank of a deputy minister and shall have at least two assistant commissioners of whom one should be a Canadian of Indian descent.
I hope that every effort will be made to implement that recommendation, and that, as far as possible the choice of a commissioner will be made as a result of the recommendations of the Indians themselves.
The history of the dividing of the authority and the work of the Indian affairs branch
Supply-Mines and Resources

under two heads dates from the time the department decided that the condition of health among our Indians was generally so bad that it would require special care and special work. Last year the government set aside several millions of dollars to undertake a survey of the health of the Indians. The Department of National Health and Welfare did a splendid job, and is continuing its work to remedy some of the deplorable conditions which exist among the Indians, particularly in the outlying settlements.
The proceedings of the Indian affairs committee revealed that the matter of Indian agents was a serious one for the department. The officials of the department agreed that the key to much of the proper administration of the department depended upon the type of agents selected. It was revealed in the committee that many of the agents appointed, some of them part-time, some of them with very little education, had few qualifications for the position. For instance we found an Indian agent in charge of several agencies, some of them three or four hundred miles apart. We found an agent living in one part of a province and his agency in another. It was possible for him to visit some of the agencies, where hundreds of these Indians live, only once or twice a year. How can an agent properly administer the affairs of an agency under those conditions? This is just an example of the neglected condition into which the administration of the Indian affairs of Canada has failed over many years. It has fallen into bleak neglect.
In recommendation No. 11 the committee suggested advisory boards. It said:
Your committee recommends that the government consider the advisability of appointing such advisory board or committees as, from time to time, are deemed necessary for the carrying out of the provisions of the Indian Act.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


George Hugh Castleden: If some of these fellows who called "carried" would come in here ind discuss this matter I should be glad to iccommodate them.


Mr. HACKETT:: Honourable gentlemen 1


George Hugh Castleden: Thank you for the jorrection.


Mr. GILLIS:: When they are in the house.


George Hugh Castleden: The original report of the committee emphasized the need of changing the educational system and the whole set-up of the education of our Indians. If there is any hope for these wards of our country it lies in the administration of our educational facilities and in the way we train them.

The last report that I have received on Indian affairs, which is dated 1946, revealed that about some 18,000 Indians were being trained. It showed that only about 130 reached grade 9 or were attending grade 9 classes. Out of 30,000 Canadian Indian children between the ages of seven and sixteen, only 130 reached grade 10. This fact has to be faced by this government. At the time of the last report, forty per cent of all the Indian children in those ages were receiving no training whatsoever. How can any people expect to attain any status, advancement or progress in a world such as we have today when forty per cent of the children are denied an education?
I appreciate what the government has done in the past year. I have been pleased with the progress which has been made. New blood has been brought into the department, persons who seem to be concerned about the welfare of the Indians. Money is being spent. This year I think an appropriation is being set aside to set up a few schools. But the program is entirely inadequate. I have yet to find evidence that the government has decided upon a policy with respect to education. It is time that a policy was decided upon and brought down to the house and accepted by the house, and something done to tackle the problem. To my way of thinking that is the basis upon which we shall succeed in the treatment of these people and in raising them from their present depressed state. Until this foundation stone is laid, until we have proceeded along some definite line of training, the future is mighty dim for these people.
The records will show that after the Indians pass through what educational facilities are given to them they are not fitted for their new positions; they are not trained to fit into the life of their reserves or to enter into the life of their white neighbours. They are left there, and they are just drifting. Without proper training there is no hope. After three years of study of this matter, surely the officials of the department ought to be able to bring down a policy. The committee has received evidence. The committee has studied the question to the best of its ability. The committee has expressed its opinion on the matter. It is time that a policy was arrived at..
In the past the education and training of our Indians has to a large extent been left to the various church organizations. They have looked after the education and training of the Indian children. Results have not

Supply-Mines and Resources
proved that that system has been to the best advantage of the Indian. Half of the Indians are now being trained in residential schools and the other half in day schools. The religious organizations themselves are not satisfied with the job they are doing. Some of them are willing to withdraw from the field. Some of them feel that the policy is wrong, that they are not able to continue, even with the grants that are given to them, amounting to an average of about $200 per child.


John Thomas Hackett: Will the hon. gentleman say what religious organizations are willing to withdraw from the missionary field?


George Hugh Castleden: I did not say the missionary field; I said the educational field. On two occasions the Church of England and the United Church expressed themselves as willing to withdraw. They said that they were quite unable to cope with the situation. The difficulty with the whole matter at the present time is that there has been a failure to arrive at some policy. Until we arrive at some policy we cannot go forward. The time is long overdue to have this matter threshed out. The government should decide what it is going to do. It should pass these regulations and get the act into operation so that we can lay the foundation for a better day for our Indians.
The most hopeful sign that I have seen in the proceedings of the committee is the changed attitude of the Indians themselves.
I happen to be in close contact with an Indian organization in my own province, the Union of Saskatchewan Indians. I have been in contact with similar organizations in Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, and with the North American brotherhood. After the committee started its operations, after it started delving into Indian affairs, the Indians were asked to appear to present their case. They came and presented their brief in a very fine way. Some of these people are hopeful that a new day is dawning for them, that they are to have an opportunity to be led out of the condition of depression and neglect and hopelessness in which they have been left for too many years-something which is a disgrace to the Canadian people and the government of Canada.
These people are looking with hope to this house and I think it is shameful that we have nothing more to bring forward at this time than a recommendation that the committee should sit again. A draft of the revised act 5849-367
should have been prepared by this time, and, after consultation with the Indians through their organizations, presented to the house. The Indiana have been denied the right to sit in consultation with the committee on the drafting of reports and recommendations. I suggest that before an Indian act is presented to the house the Indian organizations themselves should be given every opportunity to discuss the terms of the act, so that they may feel that their white brothers have considered them of sufficient importance to consult them with regard to their future.


James Angus MacKinnon: Some of the remarks
of the hon. member indicate with approval that there has been considerable improvement lately, with the prospect of further improvement.


George Hugh Castleden: That was my first remark yesterday.


James Angus MacKinnon: The hon. gentleman suggested that an Indian act should have been read}7 by nowT, but no one knows better than he that the Indian Affairs committee concluded its sittings only on Monday of this week, and this is Thursday. The hon. member also argued that the Indians themselves should have an opportunity, before the act is prepared, to sit in and discuss it, I do not propose to follow his speech, but I should like to make some reference to what has been said.
I think the department is doing very much more for the Indians this year than hon. members are aware of. It is quite possible that, as a direct result of the way in which the estimates are handled, partial information is secured by members from the estimates without very much knowledge on their part of what is provided by the department for the year. The hon. member for Nanaimo spoke last evening about conditions on certain Indian reserves on Vancouver island. The department is aware of the conditions to which the hon. member referred, and efforts are being made to improve them.
The hon. member went on to draw an unfavourable comparison between the amounts being spent on certain road and other services in the national parks and the amount included in vote No. 214, which refers to Indian agencies. He indicated that the amount of the latter vote was inadequate for Indian housing. Actually, of course, there is no proper basis of comparison between these two estimates. The Indian agencies vote is used in the main for the payment of the field staffs of the Indian affairs branch. It has nothing to do with housing.
We know that housing conditions on some of the Indian reserves are unsatisfactory, and
Supply-Mines and Resources

we have done something and hope to do much more to help the Indians to change these conditions for the better. We have under consideration a housing program that would involve an initial outlay of some $2,000,000. This program has been delayed for the reason that it has been found impossible to secure the necessary labour and building material to proceed with a worthwhile program. In the meantime, a number of sawmill outfits have been purchased by the department and established on Indian reserves, with the object of providing the lumber, when seasoned, for the construction of houses. The department this year aims at constructing ninety-five additional Indian classrooms for the education of Indian children, and seventy-five administrative buildings-houses	for
agents, warehouses, offices, et cetera.
The house will be interested in having a clear picture of how the expenditure on Indian affairs has been increased in recent years. In the year 1936-37 the total expenditure of the branch was just over $5,000,000. For the present year the expenditure, including supplementary estimates and health services, is almost $26,000,000. There has been a more substantial increase in the expenditures of this branch than in any other major unit of the public service. I am not suggesting that it is sufficient, but the department is concerned with the problem, is giving it its best attention, and is depending upon the Indian affairs committee for guidance.
As I have said before we are not satisfied with what has been done in connection with Indian affairs. We hope, however, that as a result of the work of the joint committee on Indian affairs, it will be possible to proceed with our program of educational, welfare, and other developments in a manner that will bring the maximum benefit to our fellow citizens of the Indian race.
I may add that in the Indian affairs branch alone for this year there is provided through the estimates, including the supplementary estimates, an increase of $4,700,000 over last year, and in addition there is an increase in the health services for Indians of over $2,000,000 as compared with last year.


George Hugh Castleden: Is that in the Department of National Health and Welfare?


James Angus MacKinnon: The last item is. The amount of $4,700,000 is an increase in Indian affairs in my department, and the $2,000,000 is an increase in the department of health.


Mr. CHARLTON:: Does the minister intend to comment upon the resolution I put before the committee last night?


James Angus MacKinnon: The question has been referred to Justice and is under consideration there.


George Hugh Castleden: With regard to the ninety-five new classrooms which it is intended to build this year, has anything been done yet?


James Angus MacKinnon: Tire building program is proceeding immediately, and I am informed that it is quite promising. The program will be carried out in full.


George Hugh Castleden: What have they to expect in the way of a future program? Ninety-five classrooms will not take care of
12.000	children.


James Angus MacKinnon: It is a start.


George Hugh Castleden: Is it intended to extend that next year?


John Alpheus Charlton: In view of the fact that the minister has referred to the report of the Indian affairs committee, I think we should have some assurance from him that there will be an opportunity to discuss it later, or we can have the discussion now. Which does he prefer?


James Angus MacKinnon: I do not think that on my estimates I could object to any discussion of the Indian affairs report.


John Alpheus Charlton: I do not wish to hold up the minister's estimates but I am not sure whether the chairman of the Indian act committee intends to move concurrence in its report. This might be our only opportunity to discuss the report. I want an assurance that we shall have an opportunity later; otherwise I want to do it now.


An hon. MEMBER:: Do it now.


The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN:: Shall the item carry?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian affairs branch-
21!,. Indian agencies, $1,963,366.
George Hugh Castleden: There is an increase here of half a million dollars. Does the department intend to increase the number of agencies in the various provinces in order to take care of the Indians in the outlying areas who .practically never see the agent, or hardly more than once a year?


James Angus MacKinnon: I could not hear the hon. member's question sufficiently well to follow it, but my officials tell me that the inquiry is as to the number of officials that will be required for the establishment of additional agencies.

Supply-Mines and Resources


George Hugh Castleden: How many new agents and employees of the department are there to be, having regard to the increased estimates, in order to take care of Indians in the outlying reserves?


James Angus MacKinnon: A survey is being made by the civil service commission and the department in order to get that information.


George Hugh Castleden: It is a little bit slow.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Immigration branch-
321. Administration of the Immigration Act, $494,733.
Mr. TIMMINS:: I think we ought to have a statement from the minister as to the policy of Canada with respect to immigration.
I should like to place on the record two statements which have been made this year. In Toronto on February 19 last the Minister of Agriculture said :
Canada should set its immigration objective at 509,000 a year and within ten years increase it to 1,000,000 a year. We can more than double our population in fifteen years.
In an address in Ottawa on February 19, 1948, Mr. Glen, a former minister of the department, said:
Canadians have applied for the admission of 25,090 relatives from Europe, but only 2,000 have reached Canada so far.
We know that at the present time Australia has a plan on foot for something like 70,000 immigrants a year from the British isles. As I understand it, they have been pressing Canada to enter into an empire population policy so that we would each in turn get our share of the people who are coming from the old land and from Europe as well. In an address a few months ago, a member of the British House of Commons intimated that Great Britain has a population which is far in excess of the productivity of the country- [DOT] he mentioned an excess of probably 10,000,000 people. What is the policy with respect to bringing from Europe the cream of the people who would like to be here? What is the policy of the government with respect to joining with Australia and New Zealand in bringing people here from the old country? What is the policy of Canada in the light of the fact, which we all admit, that we need immigration of the best people we cam get from Europe and the British isles?


James Angus MacKinnon: The policy of the government is to foster the growth of the population of Canada by the encouragement of immigration, and by legislation, regulation and vigorous administration, to ensure the careful 5849-3674
selection and permanent settlement of such numbers of immigrants as can advantageously be absorbed in our national economy.
Under existing regulations the following classes of immigrants are admissible to Canada:
1.	British subjects from the United Kingdom, Ireland, Newfoundland, New Zealand, Australia or the Union of South Africa, who possess sufficient means to maintain themselves until employment is secured.
2.	United States citizens similarly possessed of means of maintenance.
3.	The husband or wife; the son, daughter, brother or, sister, together with the husband or wife and unmarried children; the father or mother; the orphan nephew or niece under twenty-one years of age of any legal resident of Canada able to receive and care for such relatives.
4.	Agriculturists intending to farm in Canada.
5.	Farm labourers, persons experienced in mining, lumbering or logging entering Canada to engage in assured employment in either of these industries.
6.	A person entering Canada to marry a legal resident,
7.	A person who entered Canada as a nonimmigrant. enlisted in the Canadian armed forces and having served1 in such forces has been honourably discharged.
Provision has also been made for the admission of 30,000 displaced persons from occupied territory in Europe.
Until early in the present year the limiting factor in the movement of immigrants was the shortage of transport. In order to solve this problem active steps have been taken by the government to increase transatlantic accommodation for immigrants. Arrangements were made with the Cunard line to retain the SB. Aquitania in the Canadian service, this vessel to provide 12.000 berths for immigrants from May until the end of the present year. Arrangements were made for the assignment of the D.E.V. Beaverbrae to service between Germany and Canadian ports, carrying 750 displaced persons per voyage.
Last month by an arrangement with Trans-Canada Air Lines the government inaugurated a scheme for the movement of immigrants from the British isles to Canada by air. The arrangement provides for 260 scheduled flights carrying 10,000 immigrants by March 31, 1949.


Mr. McKAY:: Is the minister prepared to answer these few short questions: What is the number of immigrants admitted to Canada so far this year? What countries have contributed most to this flow of immigrants? Has the
Supply-Mines and Resources

minister any record of the number, of emigrants from Canada, such as those who have gone to Yugoslavia and the United States?


James Angus MacKinnon: For the first four
months of this year 32,492 immigrants have entered Canada. They came from thirty or forty countries, with these countries or groups leading: Great Britain, United States, and northern Europe. If the hon. member would like the figures for any particular country, I can give them to him.


Eric Bowness McKay: Could the minister give a
breakdown of the first five groups, for instance? That would be sufficient for our purposes.


James Angus MacKinnon: The first six are:
British isles	 14,942
United States	 2,143
Northern Europe	 3,755
The Netherlands	 2,230
Polish	 2,769
Ruthenian or Ukrainian	 2,917


Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: Could the committee have a breakdown of the countries comprising the group known as northern European?


James Angus MacKinnon: Those countries are:
Belgium	 389
Denmark	 164
Netherlands	 2,280
Finland	 52
France	 236
Germany	 376
Norway	 101
Sweden	 39
Switzerland	 118


Angus MacInnis: Do the figures the minister has given include displaced persons?


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes.


Angus MacInnis: Can he give the number of displaced persons for the same period?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am told it is just under 7,000.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: The minister said that among those who had been brought to this country were 376 Germans. I should like to know whether or not these are German nationals, for this reason. As the minister knows, we have in this country a substantial minority of Canadian citizens of German descent, many of whom still have elderly relatives in Germany who are living under deplorable conditions. These Canadians would like the opportunity of bringing their relatives to this country. Up to the present most of them have not been able to do so, for various reasons, I suppose the most important being that Germans are still regarded as enemy nationals.	,

I need not expand upon the record of Canadians of German origin in this country. In the cases I have investigated I am certain that their relatives in Germany have been as sincerely democratic and at times as fanatically anti-nazi as those in Canada. What ' prospect is there that these Canadian citizens may be able in the near future to bring out their relatives who are German nationals?


James Angus MacKinnon: That matter has been discussed, but as yet no decision has been reached. At the present time, since we have not concluded a peace treaty with Germany, German nationals are not admitted to Canada. I do not want to prolong this discussion, but I am sympathetic to what I believe the hon. member has in mind. I was brought up in the county of Bruce, Ontario, whose early settlers consisted of highland Scots and people of German origin, largely coming from an older generation who settled further down in western Ontario. We did not know those people as anything but Canadians. Some of them spoke Gaelic, some spoke German, but after they went to school at least they all spoke English. At the time of the first world war I would say fifty per cent of the first Bruce battalion were Canadians of German descent. In every way they were the best possible settlers and the best people we could have. They have made a great contribution to this country, not only in western Ontario but all across Canada. I am very sympathetic to the suggestion that carefully selected people with that background should be allowed into Canada as soon as possible.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: As to the 376 persons who came from Germany, were they German nationals?


James Angus MacKinnon: No.


Mr. HODGSON:: Has there been much immigration from Italy?


James Angus MacKinnon: Our offices in Italy were opened very recently. I am told that 167 Italians were admitted during that four-month period.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: I asked the question because I have a settlement of Italians in my riding, and they have been good citizens. They also have relatives they are trying to get into this country as soon as possible.


Clarence Gillis: This matter of immigration is a broad subject. I do not expect the minister to have all the answers, but I am concerned about one thing in connection with our immigration policy as a whole-the displaced persons who are being brought to this country.

Supply-Mines and Resources
The departments of immigration and labour are pretty much involved in that matter.
In the first place the method of screening and selection employed on the other side is slow and uncertain. Transportation also has been slow, though I believe it is improving. I understand the immigration department bring in these displaced persons under contract for certain types of work, and the point I am interested in is whether the departments of immigration and labour are working closely together to see to it that we are not displacing many people in our own country in the matter of employment.
During the past several months, since this session opened, I have received letters of complaint from different sections of Canada to the effect that displaced persons coming here were actually displacing our own people in certain industries. This will create resentment and friction. I know it has interrupted completely the means taken by the Department of Labour to solve the employment difficulties in the maritime provinces. The department had a system under which our unemployed were being siphoned off to other parts of Canada. I believe it was last October that the regulations prepared for the movement of people from the maritimes into central Canada were discontinued. No longer were any people from that part of the country assisted in securing employment in central Canada.
While we are in accord, from the humanitarian point of view, with giving sanctuary in this country to displaced persons, at the same time our first obligation is to see that our own people are taken care of. There is a feeling growing up in the mining, lumbering and railway industries that these people are being used to displace Canadians who normally would be employed in these activities.
I am not being critical in what I say. I know that it is a new venture, and that the mechanics of it are in a stage of development. Great care should be taken, however, by the Department of Labour and the immigration branch, to see that our employment situation in Canada is not adversely affected. I expect that within a year or two we shall not be as favourably placed in the matter of employment as we are today. There will be a roll-back in that field. We must be careful not to aggravate the situation by accepting a policy based upon humanitarian reasons rather than economic requirements. How closely is the Department of Labour working with the immigration branch to see that these conditions are not made worse?


James Angus MacKinnon: There is an immigration-labour committee in Ottawa which decides on the number to be admitted for labouring jobs. That committee is active, and there is close co-operation between the Department of Labour and the immigration branch. In addition there are overseas eight teams connected with the immigration work, consisting of representatives from immigration, labour, national health and welfare, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.


Clarence Gillis: What are the terms of the contracts under which displaced persons are brought in? How long are they under contract, and what responsibility has the government to them after the contracts are carried out?


Mr. MITCHELL:: Perhaps if the hon.
member would leave that question until the estimates for the Department of Labour are being considered, it might be answered then. The matter of employment service cuts across the Department of Labour.


Clarence Gillis: I said that it was tied in.
If the Minister of Labour wishes, I shall leave my question until later.


Eric Bowness McKay: Will the minister answer
the third question I asked?


James Angus MacKinnon: We have no actual
figures with regard to emigrants, and there is no way of getting them except by communicating with the United Kingdom and other commonwealth countries. I am told, however, that we are getting many more.


Eric Bowness McKay: From those countries?


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes, from those
countries.


Eric Bowness McKay: Have any Chinese or Indians been admitted to Canada in the past year?


James Angus MacKinnon: Under the classification of admissible relatives during the past year, twenty Chinese and 116 East Indians have been admitted.


Mr. McCULLOUGH (Assiniboia):: In spite of what the Minister of Labour said following the remarks of the hon. member for Cape Breton South, I believe we should have some report from the Minister of Mines and Resources respecting our policy of immigration.


James Angus MacKinnon: I have just given that information.


Humphrey Mitchell: The hon. member was not in the house.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Does the government take full responsibility for the selection of all immigrants coming to this
Supply-Mines and Resources

country? I have heard of one or two groups working in Europe in the selection of immigrants to come to Canada. While at a later time they may have had the assistance of federal authorities, it would seem that in the first instance selections were made by nongovernmental groups.


James Angus MacKinnon: The international relief organization selects possible immigrants and recommends them for immigration. After screening, they are accepted or rejected.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I
assume that on the international refugee organization teams there are Canadian personnel who make the selections for Canada. I want to be sure of that. Are there nonCanadian personnel who are choosing immigrants to come to Canada?


James Angus MacKinnon: As its name suggests, the refugee organization is an international organization. There are Canadians on the team, and they are all working together.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I wish to be certain that Canadians are choosing the immigrants who will come to Canada.


James Angus MacKinnon: There is no question about it. The final choice is by Canadians.


Mr. GAUTHIER (Portneuf):: I should like to know something about the emigration movement of Yugoslavs leaving Canada to rebuild the Yugoslav republic. It would appear from a statement made by Mr. Yardas, as it appears in this morning's Gazette, that these people are going to Yugoslavia because they have been displaced by newcomer's from displaced persons camps. The hon. member for Cape Breton South has mentioned that some of our fellow citizens may be replaced by the bringing in of too many from overseas. Mr. Yardas has made this declaration after speaking to some of the Yugoslavs returning home.
What is the government's policy respecting those who, having left Canada, return here after a year or two? I know there are not many of them, but there are a few. Is the government taking strict precautions in respect of these Yugoslavs who are coming back? I am afraid they are back here to spread Tito's philosophy. The government will have to take every possible step to see that those coming back will not give us trouble through the spreading of that philosophy.


James Angus MacKinnon: The subject of Canadians of Yugoslav origin who leave Canada is not a matter for this department. Should any of the persons to whom the hon. gentleman has referred attempt to enter Canada again, they

would have to do so as new immigrants. Because of their action on leaving Canada in this way, they would be subject to strict screening.
Mr. 'GILLIS: Has the department had to deport any displaced persons who entered this country within the last year?


James Angus MacKinnon: No.


Clarence Gillis: I am basing my question on a recent press report. The newspapers should not mislead us. According to these reports, five people entered Ontario illegally last year.


Humphrey Mitchell: That is a different case altogether.


Clarence Gillis: It was stated that the immigration branch had to pick them up and return them to the old country. What was the procedure followed on the other side that made it possible for these people to enter this country illegally? Were our own officials tangled up in some way?


James Angus MacKinnon: Most certainly not.


Clarence Gillis: They came in with passports.


James Angus MacKinnon: Anyone familiar with immigration knows that many people get into Canada illegally, with forged passports and in other ways. The officials of the immigration branch are on the lookout for these people all the time. They pick them up and deport them. In some cases they appeal to the minister, and the whole matter is carefully reviewed and a decision given. There is no foundation whatsoever for the statement that any immigration authorities are in any way responsible. I know I am correct in making that statement.


Clarence Gillis: I did not think they were, and that is why I asked the question. My information is that the manipulation was in Great Britain, but the press reports would lead one to believe that our own officials were mixed up in it.


James Angus MacKinnon: They were not.


Mr. HERRIDGE:: I shall take only a minute or two of the time of the committee. I support the suggestion made by the hon. member for Cape Breton South. There is a growing uneasiness among the people of this country concerning our immigration policy. I have had the opportunity to talk with labour and legion officials and with members of other organizations about this, and I trust that the minister and his officials listened carefully to what the hon. member for Cape Breton South had to say.
I am convinced that a lot of people are coming into this country under false pretences.

Supply-National Defence
People are coming in who are supposed to be farmers but who have never been on a farm and who know nothing about farming. That can be proved at any time by anyone who attempts to ascertain the actual facts. At Easter time on the train going west there were a number of displaced persons who were headed for logging camps in northern Ontario. The train conductor told me that he had been told by someone who spoke their language that over half of the D.P.'s had never been in a lumber camp in their lives and that many of them had expressed the intention of getting to a city as soon as possible. I think if inquiry be made of the lumber operators in northern Ontario and northern Manitoba it will be found that some of this labour has been most unsatisfactory. I should like to know what is done to determine whether a man is a farmer, a lumber man or a miner because I am sure many people are coming in under false pretences.
I saw a report in the newspaper some days ago that the government intended to charter a ship or ships to bring British immigrants to this country. I hope the Minister of Labour will make a note of this. What is done to make sure that people are what they claim to be? What has been done to bring British immigrants to this country?
Mr. MacIvIXNON: A statement was made earlier when the hon. member was out of the chamber.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Can the minister give the approximate geographical location of the immigrants who have come in since the war?


James Angus MacKinnon: The following figures are approximate only:
per cent
Ontario	 50
Prairie provinces	 22
Maritime provinces	 5
British Columbia	 14
Quebec	 9


Mr. GIBSON (Comox-Alberni):: How many Japanese or people of the Japanese race have entered Canada since the war?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that there were none in 1947 and one in 1946.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: How many Japanese who were sent back to Japan have applied for permission to come to Canada, and what is the situation with regard to those applications?


James Angus MacKinnon: A few applications
have been received from that class of people for re-entry to Canada.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: What is to happen to those applications? Will that be a matter of policy to be decided in due course?


James Angus MacKinnon: I think so.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at three o'clock.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE General services-
231. Grants to military associations and institutes, as detailed in the estimates, $116,950.
Hon. BROOKE CLAXTON (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Chairman, it is an
appalling thought that although hardly three years have gone by since V-E day, May 8, 1945, ended the war in Europe and brought relief and new hope to the hearts of men in every part of the world, many nations should now be engaged in spending money on armaments on a scale never before known in the history of the world in peacetime. At that time on V-E day the Russians were our allies, and they were respected for the part they had played and the sacrifices they had made for the common cause. Since then the Soviet union has flouted these war-won friendships, obstinately obstructed every move to arrive at understanding, and promoted chaos and disorder and the darkness of the iron curtain as the only conditions in which communism can exist and spread.
This attitude has produced changes in policy and conduct in every part of the world; it has forced the western democracies together, produced western union and the statements of President Truman and of our Prime Minister on March 17. It has produced an attitude in Canada towards defence which is quite different from any that we ever had before in peacetime. Of one thing I am sure, and that is the determination of the Canadian people to defend our country against any attack. That is the view of all Canadians except communists. National defence is not the exclusive concern of the sailor, the soldier or the airman, but has become a matter of major national interest as well as of government policy.
Organization. After the conclusion of hostilities in 1945, the first task of the forces was the orderly demobilization of personnel who served during the war, the preparation of plans for future organization, and the disposal of vast quantities of surplus property and
Supply-National Defence

equipment costing no less than SI'6 billion. These tasks were largely completed more than a year ago.
During the past year we have been advancing the organization a further stage. Perhaps hon. members would like to see on Hansard a chart showing the organization, particularly as it relates to planning. I shall put it on Hansard later if the committee will consent.


William Henry Golding: Has the minister permission to place this chart on Hansard?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.
(See Appendix, page 5838.)


Brooke Claxton: In most countries the forces are still engaged on the change-over from a war basis, but in Canada the department and the three services have been put on a completely new basis. Since September 30, 1947, all men in the armed forces have been permanent force personnel. Canada has gone further in unification and elimination of duplication than any other country.
Because of our singular position as a member of the British commonwealth and as the friendly neighbour of the United States, it is in our interest to have the maximum cooperation with the forces of both countries. The armed forces of Canada work more closely with the armed forces of the United Kingdom and of the United States than do those of any other countries. We have interchanges of information, staff, training officers, equipment, designs and so forth. These arrangements are, I believe, entirely satisfactory to all concerned.
Training of officers. There have been interesting and progressive developments in connection with the training of officers. With the opening of the national defence college at Kingston in January we began an institution for the advanced study of problems of war and security and their relation to other aspects of government action and policy. At the first course senior officers of the three services and officials of the departments of justice, external affairs, trade and commerce, the R.C.M.P. and Canadian Arsenals Limited, are working together for thirty-one intensive weeks on the major political, economic and military problems of national defence and on bringing these problems into the perspective of their regular work.
During the year we completed setting up the training establishments necessary for the navy, army and air force, so that now training is being carried on in Canada in every branch
of the army and air force and very nearly every branch of the navy. There is close co-

operation regarding training and exchanges of staff and students with the corresponding British and United States schools. Selected officers from the three services are given postgraduate courses at Canadian and other universities. As to cadet training, Royal Roads at Esquimalt last fall started operation as a joint R.C.N.-R.C.A.F. college, and this September will begin training officers for all three services. R.M.C. Kingston will reopen in September also as a tri-service college. There were 405 applications to fill the 183 vacancies for entrance next September. Having officers for all three services trained at the same colleges is an original and bold innovation which we believe will prove to be fully justified. The habit of co-operation found so necessary in war is more easily and securely learned at this early age.
A further source of officers for the forces, both permanent and reserve, is the universities. A student member of the Canadian Officers Training Corps can qualify for a commission in the permanent force on equal terms with a graduate of one of the service colleges. There are similar arrangements for the navy and the air force. This program is in full operation, with 3,144 potential officers taking three and a half months training this summer as part of their courses, which will include the equivalent of a full year's full-time practical work in addition to their regular university work. Applications far exceed the number of vacancies.
Men in the ranks suitable for commissions will be assisted in securing the required standard of senior matriculation and sent at government expense, if under twenty, to a service college; if over that age, to a university.
Because of its paramount importance we are setting standards for officer training that have not been excelled in this or any other country.
Educational standards for recruits in the ranks have been correspondingly high. Until recently junior matriculation was very generally required, and even though the requirement has been lowered for some classifications, our men must have more formal education than is ordinarily required in other countries. This is desirable because they form the core or nucleus around which we must build large forces should the need for them arise. Opportunity is given to the men to advance their education while in the forces.
Reserve training. With regard to reserve training, all three services have been set up on a post-war basis with modern equipment and full-time training officers. Many units have

Supply-National Defence
most of their officers and N.C.O's. and about fifty per cent of their establishment. In addition. we still have over a million trained men and women who saw service in the second world war.
Defence research. The importance of defence research and of the development of new weapons is shown by the appropriation of $16,000,000 requested for this purpose. Our personnel work closely with other research scientists engaged in allied fields of research in this and other countries. We are concentrating on research problems in which this country has a special interest or for the solution of which she has special facilities.
Industrial defence. The recently appointed industrial defence board includes representatives of government departments and associated agencies, as well as outstanding industrialists who made a great contribution to industrial organization during the second world war. The primary purpose of the board is "to advise the government of Canada and the Minister of National Defence on all matters relating to the industrial war potential of Canada". During the last war Canada became an arsenal of democracy. In the event of another war, that would again be necessary but would present quite a different problem. Since 1939 we have more than doubled our industrial capacity and added greatly to our skills. At that time, however, the economy was operating at something like two-thirds of its then capacity. Today the economy is operating at practically the full limit of its greatly increased capacity, and there are still shortages of essential materials. In an economy working at full capacity any increase in production for defence purposes could only be achieved by a corresponding curtailment of civilian production.
Canada has a strong interest in the standardization of training and operational techniques, communications procedure, classification and handling of stores, industrial standards and the adoption of common weapons and equipment. Discussions have been taking place with the United States towards this end. Similar discussions have been carried on with the United Kingdom. Progress is being made.
Housing and construction program. Among other matters I should mention is defence housing.
My predecessors realized the desirability of providing the conditions of normal family and community life for armed forces personnel
as far as that could be done. A trip across Canada in April 1947 showed me the need of additional married quarters, and we pressed on with an accelerated program of conversion and construction. In a statement in the house on May 27, 1948, I referred to this year's program, calling for completion this year of 2,350 new houses in 36 localities at a cost of approximately $20 million. On January 1, 1947, the armed forces had 1,241 married quarters. By March 31, 1948, 2,863 units were added and 1,864 were under construction, of which 1,179 were new houses, making, with the 1,171 to be begun after April 1, 1948, a total of 7,139 married quarters. These new houses are allocated on the basis of need, not rank, and rental rates will be the normal quarters allowance.
Progress already made indicates that the great majority of the houses will be finished and occupied before the winter sets in. The effect of this home construction on the morale of the men was evident when I was at the joint air school at Rivers, Manitoba, a few weeks ago, where 'houses are being completed at the rate of one a day. At Churchill, the building program includes 44 married quarters and barrack and messing accommodation for 600 men. The construction season there is only a hundred days, and work was planned so that materials and labour were on the job before the beginning of the construction season. We expect the whole program at Churchill to be completed before next winter.
The construction program will soon meet the most pressing need for married quarters. As it does it will alleviate civilian shortages, because each service family moving into married quarters will make another dwelling unit available for a civilian family. We will then go on to replace with more permanent structures some of the war-built temporary buildings which are difficult to maintain in good shape. We are beginning with the construction of new barrack accommodation for the navy at Halifax.
Recruiting. Hon. members will recognize that accommodation, 'like other conditions of service, has a definite bearing on .recruiting. Im line with the policy of doing everything possible to put the members of the armed forces on an equal footing with their opposite numbers in civilian life, the pay and allowances fixed in 1946 were increased by an average of approximately ten per cent, with effect from

_________Supply-National Defence
October 1, 1947. Pensions are already on a generous scale-the government contributes nearly twice as much as the individual. Improvements have been made in the quality and scale of clothing.
Now authorized	
Authorized for additional commitments ...
Total authorized	
Strength May 31, 1948	
Per cent of total authorized	
The active forces are six times as large today as they were on the average during the years 1930 to 1939. Moreover, many jobs previously done by soldiers are now done by civilians.
Today we have 3,756 civilian workers in the dockyards at Halifax and Esquimalt, where there were 394 in 1939. We have 6,918 other civilians engaged at prevailing rates on construction and maintenance work in addition to the men employed by contractors. There are also 8,728 who may properly be called civil servants. There are 1,100 civilians In the defence research board. The total of service personnel and civilians in the department today is 56,250 compared with the average figure of 8,072 for the years from 1930 to 1939, or about seven times as great.
The position of the reserve forces is as
follows:	Navy	Air Force Army Aux.	TotalAuthorized target ...	4.400	47,102	2,632	54,134Strength ..	3,873(1)	35,518(2)	848	40,239Per cent ..	88	76	32	70(1)	Includes 1,154 U.N.T.D. personnel.(2)	Includes 1,897 C.O.T.C. personnel.


Mr. GREEN:: When the minister gives the target figure, can he give the total authorized figure as well?


Brooke Claxton: I have the total authorized as it has been authorized by the government, and that is the figure I have.


Howard Charles Green: Is that what the minister means by the target figure?


Brooke Claxton: Yes. That is the figure authorized by the government.
The figure authorized for the naval reserve for 1948-19 is being increased to 7,500.
Shortage of men to do the essential ground crew work in the air force auxiliary squadrons has delayed their organization. Eight

During the year ending March 31, 1948, 7,029 recruits were obtained for the three
services.
At May 31, 1948, the strength of the armed
forces were as follows:
Navy	Army	Air Force	Total7,'500	18,750	12,075	38,325375	1,329	2,12,1	3,8257.875	20,079	14,196	42,1506,995	16,462	12,291	35,74889	82	87	85
squadrons have been made active and it is expected that at least two more will be set up in the next few months, one at London and the other at Calgary.
We need numbers of good men for the active and reserve forces, especially men who were too young to see service in the last war. Everyone in Canada must recognize the importance of the armed forces. Every fit young Canadian should recognize his duty to serve his country. I know of no better life and I know of no better opportunity. Members, veterans and others should encourage young Canadians to serve in either the fulltime active force or the part-time reserves.
External policy and defence. I come now to the defence needs and objects of Canada.
The prime purpose of the external policy of a nation which is not aggressive is to ensure the preservation of our peace and our freedom by peaceful measures and thus make the use of defence forces unnecessary.
It follows that as external prospects darken, defence forces have to be increased. They have to be increased in order to make it clear that, if war breaks out, our side will win.
The close relationship between external affairs and defence is exemplified by the Secretary of State for External Affairs being a member of the cabinet defence committee. The Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs attends cabinet defence committee and chiefs of staff committee meetings. There is also a close working relationship between External Affairs and the intelligence and planning agencies of the armed forces.
For a power of middle rank, situated as Canada is, there is no possibility of Canada fighting alone. Today there is only one possible aggressor; the only war in which Canada would take part would be a world

Supply-National Defence
war, a total war. If Canada is attacked, it will be as an incident of a world war, a total war.
Canada's defence policy is based on the assumption that our armed forces will be used only in association with those of friendly great powers. Hence our close working arrangements with the United Kingdom and our joint defence agreement with the United States. Hence our declared willingness to join in creating a new collective security league, under article 51 of the charter, composed of states of western Europe and of the north Atlantic.
The Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for External Affairs have stated our position in as clear terms as it can be stated. That position is generally accepted by the people of all parts of Canada; we are united in support of our country's foreign policy because it is based on a realistic recognition of what are our major national interests.
Defence objectives. Our immediate defence objectives can be simply stated. They depend on certain assumptions from known facts. But first I start with one assumption from known feeling. It is this, as I have stated: Every Canadian wants to do everything that i3 necessary to defend his own country; that is, every Canadian who is not a communist. There are, as you know, a great many ways to defend Canada against communism, and none of them must be neglected. Today I have to do with military defence, and I am going to adopt a rather unusual course. I am going to state some of the military assumptions on which our plans are based. They are frankly matters of opinion on which there may be several views. The views I am putting forward here are based on the best advice we can get, the advice on which the government has been acting.
This is a difficult subject to deal with at any time, but never more so than today. There never has been a period in history when the time factor has been so important, or so difficult. We are in a period of change and development, but no one can yet say with accuracy when a given development will occur or exactly what its consequences will be. We must be ready to cast aside out-of-date ideas and plans, just as much as out-of-date weapons. For these reasons I wish to assure the committee that we are constantly considering future possibilities. Twice a year the chiefs of staff present a joint appreciation and plan to the cabinet defence committee. Their planning teams are at work all the year round. Possibilities, probabilities and plans
are under review on the assumption that war might take place at dates ranging from the present time on into the indefinite future.
The "push-button war." For a moment, however, let me speak of the present. New weapons, such as guided missiles, atomic bombs, jet-propelled aircraft and high-speed submarines, have naturally excited speculation. The "push-button war" has become so widely accepted as a phrase that many people have come to think, as a fact, that its day is already here. It is reported that the United States has made improvements in the power of the atomic bomb and that planes have passed through the sonic barrier. Theoretically it is possible for missiles to be guided by various devices to their destination hundreds if not thousands of miles away. The submarine which under water can do something like twenty-three knots is known to exist. But these new developments have not in fact yet been carried to the point where it is possible for them to change the character of war or make out of date either existing concepts or existing equipment.
It should be remembered that it is just three years since V-E day, the end of the war in Europe, and not quite three years since the first atom bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. During that time it is true that many people in many nations have been working intensively to perfect old weapons and develop new ones. But this takes time. Subject possibly to one or two exceptions, no plane was used in the second world war which was not on the drawing boards in 1939. It is a startling fact that the British Meteor and Vampire planes, which are today among the best in the world, were both produced four years ago, in 1944, and they were built to designs begun a good many years before that.
The view of every responsible and reputable scientist and soldier I know of is that the day of push-button warfare has not yet come. Let me quote an outstanding authority, the man largely responsible for the organization of the work on the atom bomb, Dr. Vannevar Bush, chairman of the joint research and development board in the United; States. Writing to the armed services committee of the United States senate on April 1, 1948, Dr. Bush said:
There is talk of a push-button war, and only too much of an inclination to regard such a war as one in which we alone would be pushing the buttons. There is sometimes even a tendency to believe that the advances of science and their applications to war have decreased the need for men. It is highly important that these fallacies should not be allowed to interfere with realistic thinking on the subject in these days of tension.
Supply-National Dejence

Dr. Bush went on:
If we were to enter a war tomorrow it would be a tough slugging match, much the same sort of tough slugging match from which we recently emerged, with some improvement of weapons in various categories it is true, and with new features, but nevertheless a rigorous trial of strength that would test the staying power and fighting ability of this country to the utmost in every department of its activity. It would be a war in which we would need to gird ourselves by all means for sustained rigorous effort. It would be a war in which we would need men and armies as well as implements with which they could fight.
That is the view of one of the world's outstanding experts.
A second and similar point is that our own exercises and experience confirm the view held, I believe, by most authorities, that in the immediate future any attack on North America would be diversionary, designed to panic the people of this continent into putting a disproportionate amount of effort into passive local defence.
A third point is that a potential aggressor, if it had atomic weapons at all, would use them on targets of the greatest strategical importance, and it is very unlikely that in the near future such an aggressor would use any such weapons he had on many targets in Canada. In this short-term period Canada is almost certainly'going to be neither the Belgium nor the Bikini of the next war.
These statements are made in the light of all the knowledge available and on the best possible advice. What must be realized, if we are to play our role sensibly, is that there is neither an easy nor sudden solution to the problem of our national defence. There is no easy guarantee of security; it cannot be bought for a billion a year. Rather it must be patiently and anxiously striven for. The signs point ahead to countries like Canada having to face a long period of great uncertainty. We cannot live with our problems day by day without clear heads and stout hearts and mutual support.
One danger is that the Soviet union, without any genuine change of attitude, may suddenly appear to be seeking co-operation in a deliberate effort to induce the people of North America and of the western union to say, :'Why bother about all this defence business." A second danger is that we should come to regard war as inevitable. A third danger is that we should commit our future resources to expenditures, equipment and plans that will be out of date when needed.
Role of Canada's forces. Because we live alongside the United States, it is often thought that our role should be the same. Canadians are prone to expect our country to spend or 
arm on a corresponding scale and to act in much the same way as the United States, just because we have so many common interests at. heart. But in fact the difference of size makes many of the problems, and still more the possible course of action, of the itwo countries very different. The Unitedi States is the world's greatest power, with all the consequences that result from this fact in every corner of the world. Canada has shown in two world wars her capacity to make great, even amazing, contributions to victory; during and since the war we made contributions to the conditions of peace, proportionately as great as or greater than any other country; but the fact is that by themselves our forces could never deter the Russians, nor in a general conflict could they deliver a knock-out blow. What we want are forces which can defend Canada and enable us to play such part as parliament and the people may support in any efforts for common defence with other countries.
Against this background it is now possible to set down Canada's present defence aims and objectives. They are: (1) to provide the force estimated to be necessary to defend Canada against any sudden direct attack that could be or is likely to be directed against it in the near future; (2) to provide the operational and administrative staffs, equipment, training personnel and reserve organization which would be capable of expansion as rapidly as necessary to meet any need; and (3) to work out with other free nations plans for joint defence based on self-help and mutual aid as part of a combined effort to preserve peace, and to restrain aggression.
In the United Kingdom a white paper on defence issued last February summarized their objective:
His Majesty's government are determined to maintain balanced forces adequate to fulfil their responsibilities in peace and to serve as a nucleus of expansion in war.
In Canada we are planning so that the three services and our great agricultural and industrial resources each has the means to play its role to meet the needs of the particular time. All these forces must work as a team, together and with others.
The business of defence has become very complicated. You may remember how Switzerland prided herself, and rightly, on her citizen army, when each man after his year of service brought home his uniform, his rifle and his cartridge belt, ready to serve his country again. But this cannot be done .by a modern army. Today only about ten per cent of the fighting effectives of any modern force are riflemen, and even those riflemen now use six other weapons. But how would

Supply-National Defence
a man bring home one-sixth of a tank, one-fifth of a radar set, and so on? The same question may be asked about nations. No one country can be fully enough armed to meet and master the onslaught of modern war; each has its fraction of power to contribute to the common defence.
Defence today is a complex business which must be balanced, integrated and planned. Our plans are being made now for up to five and even ten years ahead, with changes provided for to meet expected developments. We are trying to ensure that everything we do today will be a sound basis on which to make future developments of any kind and at any time. Our plans are flexible. If, as we hope, western union grows into a North Atlantic security understanding, this may involve further modifications, just as in the more distant future there might be modifications resulting from any more general arrangement under the charter of the united nations which was agreed to by parliament.
For the short term, however, our roles are clear and evident. At sea our role would largely consist of guarding the lines of communication as the Royal Canadian Navy did so well during the last war. Canadian ships once again would be called upon to provide the vital protection for troops and supplies travelling the northern seas our sailors know so well.
Recognizing the importance to us of the northern waters, an exercise will take place with the new arcticized aircraft carrier Magnificent, two destroyers and a tanker going north into Hudson strait this summer. The destroyers will go on to Churchill, the first Canadian warships ever to enter Hudson bay. We are also constructing for the navy a large modern icebreaker. During this last year the navy carried out training cruises totalling 91.366 miles. Fourteen fighting ships were in commission and twenty-two in reserve, with 58 auxiliaries in commission and 67 in reserve, most of these auxiliary vessels being small craft.
The active army, in the first place, is to include a brigade group or later such additional force as may be considered necessary, trained and equipped to deal with any diversionary attack. Secondly, the active army is to provide the administrative and training staff-the cadre of officers, N.C.O.'s and tradesmen-to train the reserve army and with it form the nucleus for as large a force as Canada may need.
In the air, only three countries are at present able to maintain an effective strategic bombing force. We are, however, maintaining one permanent and two auxiliary bomber squadrons
In this way we will keep abreast of modern trends and development in the art of bombing. Our main peacetime task will be to supply interceptor fighter squadrons and ground forces necessary to deal with attacks on Canadian territory. These will be valuable units from which to draw the nucleus of larger forces should the situation demand it. The R.C.A.F. will activate two regular fighter squadrons during the next twelve months. The operations of these units will require the activation of additional bases in Quebec and New Brunswick, located at Chatham, Mont Joli, and Bagotville. In this way we will fill in our chain of bases across Canada, and will be able to get experience in operating conditions in all parts of the country.
During the year we completed taking delivery of 85 Vampires, 30 Mustangs, 23 North Stars, 20 Firefly IV's, 27 Seafuries, 3 Sikorsky Helicopters, 3 Chipmunks, and 36 Austers, bringing the total number of planes of all types to something well over 1,000. An idea of the cost of present-day defence equipment may be gained from the cost of these 237 planes at today's prices, not less than 835,000,000. Work on the "Chinook" jet engine and the airframe of the two-seater fighter is being accelerated to bring this plane into production in Canada as speedily as possible should it test out satisfactorily. This powerful jet plane is specially designed to meet Canadian conditions and is the first fighting plane to be designed and made in Canada. Work on new planes, modifications and overhaul was provided for a number of Canadian industries to enable their essential organizations to be kept together.
In recognition of the increasing importance of the air this year for the first time we shall be spending more on the air force and fleet air arm than on either the navy or army.
Form and amount of estimates. The form of this year's estimates shows a number of changes from last year. Considerably more detail is given and there is a new provision for current year commitments as an addition to the amount to be appropriated.
Putting together all the relevant items of defence in the main estimates there is authority for an appropriation of 8232,408,239.95, and for a commitment of $20 million, or a total of 8252,408.239.95 for 1948-49, where last year there was an appropriation of 8239,960,617.40. While the final figures are not in, it is estimated that the amount expended in the year 1947-48 will be 8196 million.
As I pointed out, our plans are subject to constant examination and development. The supplementary estimates which were put before you yesterday will seek an additional
Supply-National Defence

$15 million in cash appropriations for the air force and further authority to commit, of $17238.578 for the three services for 1948-49 and $31,505,959 for navy and air force in future years. The supplementary estimates will also seek an additional $3,800,000 for defence research to accelerate development work on the jet engine and frame. Further supple-mentaries will be sought later if necessary to carry on the program as planned or as it may be altered to meet changing circumstances.
Putting these various items together, the total cash appropriations sought for defence for 1948-49 are $251,208,239.95, with authority to commit for an additional $37,238,378 this year and $59,938,028 for future years, which will permit an increase in defence activity generally greatly in excess of the increase in cash expenditure over last year of $55,000,000 or approximately 28 per cent.
As you will see from the figures I gave earlier, we now have 85 per cent of the active forces at present authorized. These targets have not in any substantial way limited our recruits or our efforts this year. As we near the target, however, that might happen. We shall continue to recruit above the announced target figures, using the additional men as they are obtained to activate more ships, to bring the brigade group nearer to strength and to re-activate several air force stations. The government will do everything it feels to be required to meet the defence needs of Canada as these may change from time to time.
Civilian activities. Service personnel-officers and men and nursing sisters-when they become full-time servants of their country do not cease to be members of the community. That has been dramatically brought home this year. The work of the three services in connection with civil activities included the heroic rescue of Canon Turner; the photographing of 111,043 square miles of territory by vertical camera and 293,000 miles by tri-camera to provide maps for mining and other civilian as well as military purposes; assisting dominion observatory officials to re-locate the magnetic pole; putting a weather ship near Greenland; search and rescue work at sea by the R.C.A.F.; flying on fifty operations, twenty-three of which resulted in the rescue of persons in distress; the construction of Bailey bridges by reserve units of the Royal Canadian Engineers; maintenance of the northwest highway system, the northwest staging route and the northwest territories and Yukon telegraph system; continued work on winter living and testing winter equipment at Churchill, and the highly creditable job by active and reserve units of the navy, army and air force in fighting

the flood conditions and providing relief in British Columbia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. These all meant more in service to the country than our forces have been able to do before in peacetime.
Conclusion. During this last year it was my privilege to visit most of the establishments of the navy, army and air force across Canada. There I met not only officers and men, but also members of the civilian community. With all of them I discussed the relationship of the forces to the community. I had one conviction. The closer the civilian comes to the armed forces, the more inclined he is to like them and to give them his approval and support. I imagine that the people of the Fraser valley will say the same thing. On that account we have encouraged visits, arranged for open-house occasions, such as visits to ships and camps and air force day, and done everything possible to bring the services and civilians closer together. In sport there was a good example in the Olympic champions, the R.C.A.F. Flyers, who on and off the ice gave a good account of themselves and their country.
There can be no doubt as to the quality of the forces we are building. It is essential, not only that our forces be trained for duty, but also that their own people, the citizens of this country, be proud of them, respect and admire their efficiency, and realize that even when the headlines are not threatening and the march of armed feet is silent, the defence forces of this country are continuing to do their work in maintaining peace.
Two wars and a world-wide depression have shown that we cannot dissociate ourselves from the security of others. We shall continue to work with other nations to preserve peace and to create the conditions in which peace can be preserved, at home and abroad. We are building defence forces in accord with what any self-respecting Canadian would regard as our need and our responsibility.


Mr. PEARKES:: Mr. Chairman, for the past fifty-five minutes the minister has been reading a statement regarding the estimates and the future defence policy of Canada, in the preparation of -which he has had the assistance of an adequate staff. It is not easy for anyone to rise immediately after such a statement has been made and offer adequate criticism or comment thereon, but I consider it my duty to endeavour to offer such criticisms as I feel are necessary and to comment upon one or two of the statements that -have been made.
Before doing that I should like to offer my sincere congratulations to the minister upon his return from hospital where he has been

Supply-Xational Defence
57S7
incapacitated for a few days with what is described as a minor ailment, but which I believe has been quite painful. Also I join with the minister in the remarks he has made with regard to the work done by the defence forces in assisting civilian life in this country, particularly in the flooded areas of the province from which I come. I am quite certain that the people of the Fraser valley and the interior of British Columbia will appreciate what the sailors, soldiers and airmen have done during their trying experiences. If I were to offer any comment upon these operations it would be to express some regret that there were not more men available and that the troops from the prairies who were made available were not sent earlier. However, it is not fair to offer that comment, because I have not the correspondence that passed between the premier of British Columbia and the government, and I do not know whether the premier asked for more troops than were actually available.
I turn now to the estimates which are shown on page 32 of the blue book, the main estimates. By a strange coincidence we find the items for national defence on the left-hand page, while those for national health and welfare are on the right-hand page. It is interesting to note that the total amount authorized for national defence is some S30.000.000 less than a single item, that for family allowances, at the bottom of the opposite page. While the minister opened his remarks by referring to the necessity which many countries feel of having large expenditures for national defence, I somehow am of the opinion that no Canadian should think we are spending an undue amount on national defence this year. Even with the supplementary estimates, which total some $18,-
800,000	for this department, the total amount does not equal that one item for family allowances.
When we begin to examine these various items we find that the total figure is not quite as impressive as it might seem to indicate. Going down the list, you find various grants to rifle associations, military institutes and so forth, and then a series of pensions which are authorized to the dependents of various persons who have served the department. You come then to the main item which is under the rather peculiar title of "Demobilization and Reconversion". It is necessary to refer to the details shown on later pages before a thorough examination can be made.
On referring to these details, I find that there are many items which could hardly be described as contributing directly to the defence of the country. For instance, there
is an item of $9,000,000 for pensions. I know that these pensions have been paid, but I think we should call attention to the fact that all this money is not immediately available for the actual purposes of national defence; the words "national defence" being used with the rather limited application to actual defence.
The announcement was made a short time ago that some $20,000,000 were to be used for the construction of certain houses to accommodate officers, non-commissioned officers and men of the active forces. I could not help smiling when the .minister referred to the fact that the necessity of providing this accommodation had been recognized by his predecessor, because it came to my memory how-I ithink it was in 1945 or 1946-in commenting on the estimates at that time, I had emphasized the necessity of providing good quarters for the permanent force of our country. At that time the minister definitely pooh-poohed the idea and said that that could still wait. However, cognizance has been taken of the necessity and it is right that we should provide this accommodation.
Under various headings of acquisition, construction, purchases, maintenance, repairs and rentals of property which are given in the details, I notice that there is a sum of approximately $40,000,000. These are necessary, but let the .committee remember that that is hardly contributing actually to the defence of the country. Then there is the question of civil salaries and wages. In the various branches of the department they total something approximating $3,000,000. These are items which must be subtracted from Canada's amount, however, so far as actual defence requirements are concerned. They are necessary adjuncts to include in any estimates, 'but I do not think we should be misled-(and I am not suggesting that the minister has tried to mislead us-into assuming that the whole of this amount of money is actually availaJble for really legitimate defence purposes.
We are told that in the past year some $200 million was actually spent out of a total appropriation of $243 million. A somewhat similar policy is being followed here, I believe, in that a sort of floating reserve is being made available. I notice that it was given in a press release made by the minister some time ago. There are no material changes in that.
As the minister said, this way of presenting the estimates is novel. I think we shall have to ask him how he proposes to deal with one major item, namely, item 243. If everybody rises in his place and discusses first of all the
Supply-National Defence

navy, then, 'the army and then the air force, and back again, it will lead to a great deal of confusion. I hope the minister will have some way in which we can deal with that big item in an orderly manner and take it step by step, so that the estimates can be examined in a straightforward, .methodical and orderly way.
Turning to policy, one would expect to find the foreign policy of the nation reflected in the defence estimates, as the minister rightly said it would be. There is no 'time to make a long statement on the foreign policy of this country. That has been defined in announcements to this house and in various press dispatches. It was not very long ago that the Secretary of State for External Affairs stated in this 'house:
The best guarantee of peace today is the creation and preservation by the nations of the free world.-under the leadership of Great Britain, the United States and France-of an overwhelming preponderance of force over any adversary or combination of adversaries.
These are proud words. I suggest that they were proud words which the minister used in his memorandum, and we must examine these estimates to see whether they "were proud words supported by something more than mere words, or whether they were just idle vapour-ings which would really carry no weight in the country.
I do not think I should be over-simplifying the case if I said that the Secretary of State for External Affairs and also the Minister of National Defence, in his statement today, would lead the country to believe that we were ready and willing for any emergency. Perhaps some doubt might be expressed as to the willingness, because of the uncertainty and the indecision which was voiced a few days ago and, I think, repeated by the minister today, in the statement that Canada would not be willing to join in any defence pact, in so far as western Europe wTas concerned, unless the United States were also in that pact. All I can say in that respect is that it is a very good thing for Canada, and a very good thing for this world, that w7e did not wait for the United States in 1914 or in 1939.
We must examine the figures which have been given to us and see whether they support the statement of our readiness. The three military objectives which the minister announced this afternoon were-I jotted them down briefly-one, to provide against a sudden attack; two, to provide the staff necessary to enable a rapid expansion of our forces, and, three, to join in the making of joint plans to ensure and preserve the peace of the world. I have no comments to make upon the third objective. The minister has explained that

there is a planning staff, consisting of officers of experience, who are studying continually the plans which are necessary for the preservation of world peace, and no doubt to consider also the other two items. But when I come to examine the figures which have been given to us at various times regarding the availability or the readiness to meet a sudden attack I fear that I am not satisfied, and I cannot help saying I believe that to meet a sudden attack at the present time Canada is impotent.
Today we have been given certain figures regarding strength. I am not able to remember all these figures-I do not know that they are very important-but earlier this session questions were put on the order paper as to the strength of the forces at that time, and the strength given as at March of this year was considerably less than the figures w'hich were given today. Naturally, recruits are coming in. But remember that a man who has joined the forces since March of this year can hardly be considered thoroughly trained and ready to take his place in the field. Therefore, in order to meet a sudden emergency, I think it would be wiser to take the figures of last March than the figures given today, which include the latest joined recruit.
As regards the Royal Canadian Navy, it was [DOT] shown that there were 6,782, while in the naval reserve there were 3,247. We know there are not enough personnel in the Royal Canadian Navy to provide full ships' complements for the vessels we have.
When we return to the army, the total number given in March was 15,409. We have a reserve army of 28,743. The minister in his statement gave numbers slightly in excess of that. About 1,000 would have joined the active force since then, and the reserve forces have increased to 35,000.
The minister gave target figures to which he referred. Frankly, I do not understand those, because they were different from the limited establishments which he imposed in 1947. A further reduction seems to have been made in the targets at which we are now aiming. I would, however, bring this fact to the attention of the committee. While we may have 15,000 or 16,000 men in the active army, we must remember that only a very small proportion of these can be termed combat troops; that the large majority of these men are employed on- administrative work around headquarters, driving lorries, acting as clerks and so forth; and that even in the combat regiments there are always personnel who have to be employed on administrative duties.
As I said earlier, I have not the full details regarding the correspondence which may have

Supply-National Defence
been exchanged between the Premier of British Columbia and this government; yet it is significant that the combat units of British Columbia and the prairie provinces had' to be pretty well drained of active personnel in order to provide approximately 2,000 men who were fighting in the flooded areas.
But the point I wish to emphasize as strongly as I can is that we must not be misled by the idea that 15,000 or 16,000 men are readily available.
When we pass on from there we come to the Royal Canadian Air Force. There were in March some 11,636; I believe the number has now increased to 12,296. I think that was the figure the minister gave. But also in March there were, according to the figure he gave, only 1,282 actual flying personnel. That gives some idea of the large number of men it is necessary to employ on administrative duty in order to provide a small fighting force in the air; and if that figure of 1,282 which was given to us as being correct in March is still approximately correct, that gives us some idea of the extent of the force we have available now to meet a sudden attack.
If one wishes to see what opportunities there are of expanding that force rapidly, I suggest that we take the figures for March. I find that there are only 692 personnel in the Royal Canadian Air Force auxiliary squadrons. That is not a very hopeful indication that the small number of active air force personnel could be rapidly expanded. I am sure I am correct in saying that these 692 are certainly not all flying personnel. There would be only a limited proportion of these flying, because the squadrons would have to have a certain number of ground personnel as well.
It is not only numbers that we have to consider. We have to consider the efficiency of these forces. If we are to rely entirely on the active army, there are, as I have shown, only very small numbers; but I believe that by recruiting at large now we could get many men-I believe the minister said many hundreds of thousands of men-who were trained along the lines of 1944 and who would no doubt come back and join the colours. As soon as they could be welded into units they would be available, but that would take time.
I suggest that, although we may have that large number of men who were trained in the war, they could not be as readily organized as they were in 1939, because our reserve army units have not had the same opportunities of training as units that were available prior to the outbreak of world war II.
I have here a publication known as the Canadian Army Journal, issued under the authority of the chief of the general staff,
which was sent to hon. members with the compliments of the Minister of National Defence. With reference to training which was carried out in my own province, I notice that the composite camp which was held at Chilliwack for reserve force units of British Columbia, other than artillery, engineers, armoured regiments and the Canadian Scottish regiment, lasted for a week at that centre. That embraces infantry units in the city of Vancouver, and so on, and they were able to send into camp a total of fifteen officers and ninety-nine other ranks.
Rather naively the officer who wrote this article said that the administration of this camp was no problem. I should not think it would be. Turning to the training of other units, the Canadian Scottish regiment-I ask hon. members to realize that this is a regiment, a full battalion-went into camp with thirteen officers, fifteen warrant officers and men, and sixteen rank and file, making a total of forty-four.
The report states that it was not possible to carry out the regular training, but all ranks received general military training and the program culminated in a platoon exercise.
I bring this up only to let this committee know that there is a considerable question in my mind as to the readiness of our defence forces to meet this sudden attack to which the minister refers.
Then I come to two even worse cases than that, and I am sorry that I have to quote British Columbia figures exclusively because I have not them for elsewhere. Two regiments in the interior, the Ninth Reconnaissance regiment, an armoured unit which one might expect to be sent early in order to meet any sudden attack, trained exactly three officers and nine other ranks; while the Rocky Mountain Rangers trained three officers and thirteen other ranks. That is the condition of the units in British Columbia; and from conversations I have had. I have reason to believe that it is materially worse in other parts of this country. It is a fact, as disclosed by what the minister was saying, that the emphasis has been placed on the training of officers, noncommissioned officers and specialists at certain schools of instruction. That is all very well; but we must not, ostrich-like, believe that we have in the active army units which could be made readily available, and we certainly have not such units in the reserve army.
When we refer to the reserve army we must not be misled by that name. Usually "reserves" give the indication that they are men who have passed through a period of training and are held in reserve readily available to fill the ranks of some unit which is in
Supply-National Defence

existence. That is not so in Canada. We never used to refer to our non-permanent units as reserve units. They are separate units, largely composed of only partly trained personnel.
We have a naval force about half the size of the force which was indicated in 1946. We have, as hon. members know, the Magnificent, on loan from the British navy, which has just joined us in the last few weeks. We have one cruiser capable of sailing the high seas; the other is in reserve. We have no complement of men ready to man her immediately. Half our destroyers are in reserve, and it would take time to bring in the naval reserves and fit them into their places in the ship's company in order that those destroyers might take their place in the event of a sudden emergency. If we are to guard our sea lanes, as was suggested, we are short of trained personnel in the fleet air arm, and it is to be remembered that we have no submarines. While we may have sent a few officers and ratings to the Royal Navy for training, we have nothing like experienced crews to man any submarine, should that necessity arise.
I have already referred to the air arm. I am pleased to hear the minister say that more emphasis is to be placed on the air arm than has been shown in the past, because I have firm ideas with regard to its necessity and importance. While it may be possible for us to raise a force that we might be able to send across the seas or use for the defence of Canada, we must recognize the fact that at best this will take two or three months; and a force which requires two or three months at best to raise the first nucleus is not a force which is capable of dealing with a sudden attack which might come now or at any time in the near future.
I think the failure, and it is a failure, on the part of this government to provide that force is mainly because the government has consistently refused to recognize our changed position in the general make-up of the world organization for defence and the changed geographical position of Canada in view of the new inventions which have appeared on the defence scene in the last few' years. I cannot help feeling that there is a certain wilful blindness to the lessons which should have been learned from Pearl Harbor, Czechoslovakia, Poland and many other places where such attacks were launched. Campaigns are won by nations doing the impossible, in exactly the same way as battles are W'on by units and individuals accomplishing the impossible.

I will cite only one instance. It was declared impossible for an expeditionary force from Great Britain to land on the coast of France during this war until a port had been captured. Our raid at Dieppe showed the great hazards and risks entailed in the capture of a port. What did General Montgomery and General Eisenhower do? They built a port- it was called "Operation Mulberry"-and towed it across the English channel. By this means they had a ready-made port from which to launch their offensive against Germany.
I issue a serious warning against basing one's plans on the fact that certain things are not possible. I do not believe it is likely that a push-button war could be initiated bj? any country in the immediate future. But I am equally convinced that countries may spring a strategic or tactical surprise which, w'hile not going to the length of push-buttor warfare, might find us in an extremely unfortunate position. I feel that this blindness which has been adopted has had a tendency to make us adhere to time-honoured, though perhaps time-worn formations. I do not know that w-e are alone in that respect.
I should like to read a paragraph from a report published by the air policy commission of the President of the United States, under the chairmanship of Thomas K. Finletter. It is entitled "Survival in the Air Age", and is an official publication of the United States. This is what the report states, at page 30:
We view with great anxiety the pressures from many sides directed towards the maintenance of yesterday's establishment to fight tomorrow's war; of unwillingness to discard the old and take on the new; of a determination to advance the interest of a segment at the sacrifice of the 'body as a whole. All this is understandable. For it comes in large part from loyalty of each service to its traditions. But we can no longer afford the waste it involves.
I feel that we are trying to build on the old formations of days gone by, which were designed to meet circumstances entirely different from those of today, defence organizations to meet situations which were never present in the time of our forefathers but which are definite realities today. I do not like all this talk about Canada's defence forces being so stream-lined, that everything has been so nicely integrated. It is easy to talk like that; but at the invitation of the Minister of National Defence, which I greatly appreciated, an opportunity was given hon. members to visit the main ordnance stores here in Ottawa. They are up to date in many respects, but time-honoured and time-worn traditions still prevail. We saw men using new and modern

Supply-National Defence
equipment to pile the stores. Then we came to a barrier, and the ordnance officer said, "Now I must hand you over to an officer of the army medical corps, who will show you how the stores there are .piled." We went on and came to another barrier, where we were handed over to an officer of the army dental corps, who showed us how the stores were piled by his corps. This was all in the one building, but of course it was necessary to have the building divided into compartments, because the ordnance corps reported to the master general of the ordnance and the quartermaster general, while the army medical corps and the army dental corps reported to the adjutant general. And who could expect a man accustomed to piling bundles of puttees to be able to pile bundles of bandages? Who could expect a man who kept accounts as to how chairs, barrack room, were issued, to know how to account for the issue of chairs, dental?


Brooke Claxton: How about a man mixing medicine as well as paint?


George Randolph Pearkes: I hope that situation has been changed. I am sure the minister is working in that direction. I just say these things to show that we have not yet reached our goal, and I am sure the minister agrees that much work remains to be done in order to do so. I should add that naval personnel were working there, and perhaps naval stores also were issued.
Then 'I want to refer to one statement made by the minister which I do not find supported by the estimates. He said more money was being spent this year on the air force than on either of the other two sendees. I do not think that is correct, according to the figures contained in the estimates. As I total them, we are spending $80,000,000 on the air force, whereas the total being spent on the army is $95,241,000.
I have emphasized the importance of the air force. As a soldier I would welcome greater emphasis being placed on our air arm, because I believe it is of primary importance. We must find a means of stopping the enemy bomber from reaching its target. That is the first requirement as far as the defence of Canada is concerned. To do that we must not only have an interceptor force readily available; we must also have the means of obtaining early warning. A week or so ago I had an opportunity to attend the industrial fair in Toronto. I do not know whether the minister attended personally, but I know some of his officers were there. At that fair three radar sets were displayed; and I regret to say that, while Canada was far ahead in the radar field during
the war, the British equipment demonstrated,
I think by a group of firms known as Cosser, was far ahead of the radar sets made by our Commercial Corporation or Arsenals Limited.
I hope we are not losing ground in that allimportant field; but the difference in definition was so marked that a layman could see how far we were behind the British sets, and it really was not funny.
Finally I want to say just one word about the important subject of civil defence. I believe some nebulous plans are being made, though they have not gone beyond the blueprint stage. I would urge the importance of developing the civil defence of this country, because if w'e are ever threatened the civilian population of our cities may have to take the brunt of the enemy's onslaught just as much as the actual fighting forces. To mention one very small field, just as an example of the direction in which preparation for civil defence might be attempted, I would refer to the co-ordinating and unifying of fire-fighting forces throughout the country. As it is now, in the province of Ontario you have in some towns fire departments which are incapable of rendering assistance to firedighting detachments in other towns only a few miles away.
I have perhaps over-emphasized lack of numbers, or have devoted more attention to that point than I should, because I am not sure that the shortage of numbers is the main shortage we are experiencing. I feel that shortage of equipment and shortage of the means of producing equipment in this country, particularly air force equipment, is one of our greatest handicaps; and that supporting industry which, as the minister said, turned this country into one of the arsenals of democracy during the last war, seems to have been allowed to slip back, so that it cannot play its all-important part in the national defence of this country.


Mr. SKEY:: I am one of those who was pleased this afternoon to hear the Minister of National Defence refer to the close connection of his department with the Department of External Affairs; and I am also pleased to see the minister back in the house supported, as he was at one time, by the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance and the Secretary of State for External Affairs. That in itself is significant, to see the minister's statement listened to with interest by those who have perhaps the most responsible positions in Canada's government. That has not happened for many a long month in this house.
I hope the minister's colleagues took note of some of the things which were missing
Supply-National Defence

from his statement. I refer in particular to one paragraph:
Canada has a strong interest in the standardization of training and operational techniques, communications procedure, classification and handling of stores, industrial standards and the adoption of common weapons and equipment. Discussions have been taking place with the United States towards this end. Similar discussions have been carried on with the United Kingdom. Progress is being made.
He reports in four words the most important aspect of the whole defence picture- "Progress is being made". Canada is expected to be satisfied, and hon. members are likewise expected to be satisfied with the words, "Progress is being made". I ask him today: What progress?
Referring again to this statement, may I point out the extreme fallacy in the arrangement of these different things he has mentioned. Standardization; of training, operational techniques and the like all depend upon the adoption of common weapons and equipment, which is placed at the end of this list. All these other things will fall into their proper slots as soon as we start to use common weapons and equipment. It is as simple as that., I hope the attention of the minister's advisers will be called to that one reference which I make at the beginning of these remarks.
I go back to the matter of co-operation with the United States and the United Kingdom. AVe have noted the purchase for Canada of eighty-five Vampire fighters which, I understand, are first-class operational aircraft, the finest perhaps in the world today in that field. Although we hear many reports, we still know that Britain continues to make a workable, able and efficient aircraft, and that she is some years in advance of other countries in the world in the production of jet engines for aircraft.
The pity seems to be that these aircraft had to be shipped to us from the United Kingdom for assembly here in Canada, and that we are without the means to produce them in our own factories by Canadian labour. There, it seems to me, is the essential weakness in purchasing our equipment abroad. If the producers of these aircraft could be persuaded to make them in Canada, and to continue to keep their production up to date, in Canadian aircraft factories, we would be able to have a source of supply here at home of a modern air weapon, and in that respect achieve standardization with the United Kingdom.
On the other hand, I notice that we bought twenty-three Mustang fighter aircraft from the United States. These aircraft and the spare 
parts for them can be obtained on this continent. That is a step forward, although I regret that they are not produced here in Canada by Canadian labour, so that our industrial machine could maintain production in the event of any difficulty, and the additional supplies and spares could be obtained from our own industrial machine.
I should like now to make a suggestion to the minister in both these fields. If we are to co-operate with the United States and the United Kingdom, Canada has scarcely the financial resources sufficient to keep its air force equipped with modern weapons by buying them from either the United States or the United Kingdom. \Are already have a tremendous adverse balance of trade with the United States. If we are to standardize our equipment and if we must buy our equipment from them we shall never rid ourselves of that adverse financial balance. Therefore, if we would seek to standardize, and if they will accept co-operation, it w-ill be necessary for the American aircraft industry or the American defence department to let contracts in Canada. They could let contracts for aircraft with which we could equip our forces, and deliver to them any surplus quantities for the equipment of their own forces with one particular type of machine.
To my mind this is essential, because I believe Canada's air defence should be based upon North American industry and equipment. It means that our government should adopt a policy of integrating our air equipment with that of the United States forces. The joint defence board should be asked immediately to decide the respective defence roles of the Royal Canadian Air Force and the United States air force.
Our Canadian representatives would be well advised to adopt for the present a policy which would be primarily defensive, because of our size and our inability adequately to undertake more than one specialized role in the defence of the continent. When these decisions have been taken our government should arrange for the mass production in Canada of the type of aircraft selected for Canadian defence in a program of North American cooperation. As I have said, part of this production could be absorbed by the United States forces.
When this suggestion is made to our cousins south of the border there will probably be a distinctly negative reaction. That is not surprising, because their aircraft industry has been hit as hard as, if not harder than our own Canadian industry, and has need of sustenance by means of new contracts. I understand from reliable sources, however,

Supply-National Defence
that about 65 per cent to 70 per cent of the content of any aircraft built in Canada is of United States origin. That is, Canadian aircraft manufacturers must buy from United States sources up to 70 per cent of the value of the aircraft they are making. So it can be seen at once that the American aircraft industry will not be greatly damaged by the suggestion I am about to make, and our own process of co-operation and standardization will be immeasurably assisted.
I rise frequently in the house to advance the idea of adequate air defence, for the simple reason that I believe that, through the continued development of our air force, we can protect this continent. We can do something more; we can protect the peace of the world. I say this, because in history we have had two examples where the peace of the world has been maintained by strong military forces. The first to which I would refer was the Roman empire, which was based upon the Roman legions. They kept the peace by keeping at bay the barbarians who threatened the frontiers of their empire. That was known as the Pax Romana.
The second example is the Pax Britannica, which followed Nelson's great victory over Napoleon's fleet at Trafalgar. It was based upon the British navy, a navy which devoted itself to clearing the sea lanes of the world of pirates and privateers in the navies of those countries which did not wish to trade peacefully.
In this new era of world development, many legions are too few and fleets of ships are too slow to cover the space and distances necessary to secure our western civilization. The only disciplined arm of national defence which can be devoted economically to peace is our air force. If that single thought can be projected beyond any service or national prejudice we can accomplish a Pax Americana based on air supremacy.
That is the thought which I should like to leave with this committee today. I urge the minister to ask his defence advisers to sit down again with the United States members of the joint defence board to see if some degree of standardization and co-operation cannot be worked out.
On April 16 I asked the minister some questions about joint defence. I noted at that time that the house of representatives of the United States had voted 417 to 5 to spend over $3,000,000,000 on air defence in order to raise their air force to 70 groups for the protection and security of their country. I went on to ask him if he was endeavouring to arrive at any joint agreement by which Canada might assist in the over-all defence of this continent. The minister replied that it would be almost inconceivable for the United States to request any action by us or to suggest that we should co-operate with them. To me that was a foolish reply. We do not need to fear our friends, and surely we can work with them. It seems to me that it is too bad if that effort has broken down and1 we are to be a party to letting the situation remain as it is.
Earlier I commented on the fact that the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance and the Secretary of State for External Affairs were in the chamber while the minister wa3 speaking. At this point I should' like to place on the record a statement by General Eisenhower, contained in his official report of February 7, 1948, as follows:
I believe we have finally learned that national defence is not the exclusive property and con- . cern of men in uniform, but the responsibility as well of labour, management, agriculture, industry and every group that goes to make up the national complex.
And a little later on, he said:
The United States army supports the theory that air power occupies a dominant position in modern warfare.
Whenever I have an opportunity I rise in this house to put forward, not old worn-out ideas but new ones, to make constructive suggestions to the minister in order to try to achieve the thing we all want, namely, the security of our country by the .proper defensive equipping of our armed forces. I have finished for this afternoon except to quote an old Hindu proverb, which reads:
A man without a stick will be bitten even by a sheep.
We want Canada to have a stick. We want these international wolves who may be appearing in sheep's clothing at the present time to know we have a stick. We know a great many who have suffered from their attentions in the past now realize that they have long fangs.


Angus MacInnis: Mr. Chairman, I rise at this time, not to attempt to analyse the minister's statement or to criticize it. Some analysing and criticizing has been done by the hon. gentlemen who preceded me. The minister's statement was a sombre one. As he said, after no more than three years from the end of hostilities we now have to think of our defences against aggression which may come any day. I think hon. members will agree that this is indeed a deplorable thing. I am satisfied that this has not been part of our making and for that we indeed can feel thankful. '
Supply-National Defence

The position of the Minister of National Defence is not an easy one at this time, for many reasons. The danger of war is here and we must try to prepare for an emergency without adding to that danger. Canada has never been a military country, although our exploits in wars that we have engaged in have been considerable, when one considers our population and our resources. If we are to prepare adequately for an emergency I assume that we should have some knowledge of how great that emergency may be. That is something we do not know, nor do we know from what direction or at w-hat time it may come.
I gather that there has been some difficulty in getting men for the various branches of the armed services on a voluntary basis. If we were to try to get them on any other basis I am satisfied that it would only make the world situation worse and add to our own difficulties. I was glad to hear the minister say our defence policy is closely associated with our external policy. I am satisfied that, no matter what happens, at some time we shall have to get down to world co-operation. We must work for that with those who are willing to work with us, and we must offer every inducement to those who will not work with us, to come in with us and work for peace.
We are now planning the defences of Canada which I imagine every hon. member feels is necessary. It is amazing that those who are so keen on planning for national defence should be so much opposed to economic and social planning, not only on a national but on an international basis. Unless we do that we shall never have freedom from the fear of aggression. As a matter of fact, I think one comes before the other. If we are to get the world into a position where we can avoid war we can do so only by getting the world together and planning for the improvement of the economic and social conditions of mankind. I hope that we shall never leave that out of the picture.
I read an article the other day, but I cannot remember the name of the periodical which contained it. The author was showing that in the matter of its natural resources the United States was not in a position now to put the same effort into a war as it did in the last one, simply because of the lack of these natural resources which are today called upon in a great war such as the last two. These wars are the wasters, not only of our human resources but of our natural resources which are needed for economic development. We should not-I am glad that the minister did not do so-in our preparation to defend ourselves, consider that war is inevitable. Today there are strong forces working for peace

as well as those forces which we believe are working for war, or at least working for that kind of economic chaos which naturally leads to war.
I do not know that there is anything further I can say or need to say on this matter, except I hope that the government will do everything within its power while it is preparing the defence of this country, associating ourselves with other countries that are of like mind, to build up the economic and social conditions of the world wherever we can, because I am satisfied that that is the only way in which peace can be maintained.


John Horne Blackmore: 
Brooke Claxton: I am not quite clear whether the hon. member suggests that the Department of National Defence has anything to do with this man. I say that, because it would not appear that the Department of National Defence had anything whatever to do with him.


John Horne Blackmore: It may be that the Department of National Defence does not have anything to do with the case. I am not exactly sure, but I cannot see how in the world the Department of National Defence can conduct its affairs in preparation for world war III effectively, unless the Department of Veterans Affairs is taking proper care of the people who fought in world war II.


The CHAIRMAN:: Order.


John Horne Blackmore: For the reason which
I indicated-


William Ross Macdonald: Order. The question which the hon. member is raising is one for the Department of Veterans Affairs. I gather from what he has said that the man to whom he refers has been discharged from the army. If that is correct, the matter should be taken up with another department and not with the Department of National Defence. There is nothing in these estimates that would enable the hon. member to go into that question.


John Horne Blackmore: If that is your ruling, Mr. Chairman, and if that is the desire of the minister, then I shall defer consideration of this case until a more appropriate time. I have brought the name of the gentleman to the minister's attention and the minister has kindly listened to the questions. I would urge upon him that he take some sort of measure to see that injustices similar to those which I fear have been perpetrated upon veteran Harvey shall be removed from all veterans before long.


Brooke Claxton: I will ask my colleague (he Minister of Veterans Affairs to look into the case at once.


John Horne Blackmore: I thank the minister. I have little else to say. I will say no more regarding this particular matter.
May I conclude, however, by saying that I am well pleased with the minister. I have been watching him closely as the man upon whom the fate of Canada and perhaps of the British empire hangs or will hang in the future. Naturally, being a citizen of both these units, I am deeply concerned. I believe the country's military affairs are in good hands, and I assure the minister that we will do all we can in our group to support him in the arduous task to which he has been called. At the same time, whenever we see anything in his department that calls for criticism we will not hesitate to bring the matter to his attention with all the emphasis we may find it possible to summon.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The minister has made a lengthy and important statement of defence policy in introducing his estimates this afternoon. Certainly, to those of us who for some years have strenuously advocated that there should be regular statements and discussion of defence policy, the minister's practice, last year and again this year, is a source of satisfaction, and we should like to express our agreement with the course he has followed. But inasmuch as the statement is so important, we would not be discharging our part of the duty that rests upon us all if we let it go without some comment.
Supply-National Defence

Critical analysis has already been made by the hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Pearkes), and the hon. member for Trinity (Mr. Skey), but there are other features of the statement which require some analysis and comment because, although it is a source of great satisfaction that we have had the statement, and are not left with the feeling that defence matters are being treated inadequately in that respect, I feel that some aspects of the policy outlined in the statement are inadequate. It is the inadequacy of the policy that I should like to examine for a few minutes before going on to the other question that I wish to discuss, namely the position of our reserve force.
In analysing the statement the minister made this afternoon, and statements he has made on other occasions in this house and in speeches outside the house, one can only gain the impression that the present assumption of the department is that the next war will probably be fought on the same terms as the last one; that is to say, any war which might be thrust upon us in the near future wall be fought on the same basis as the war which was concluded just three years ago.
There seem to be two parts to that assumption. There are some signs of planning or willingness to plan* for a war which might be thrust upon us in ten or fifteen years' time-what might be called a deliberate war. I think, however, it is safe to assert that the assumption is that what is regarded as an accidental war, or what the department calls an accidental war, which might come within the next two or three years, shall we say, will be fought on exactly the same general basis, the same general plan of campaign, as the war we have just finished.
That, to my mind, is a basically unsound assumption, and any plans for Canada's defence based upon that assumption are unsound and inadequate. It seems to me that there are many factors which when analysed should convince us that any war, whether it comes in the next one, two or three years, or in fifteen or twenty years' time, will be fought on a basis vastly different from that on which the war that started in 1939 was fought. It follows, therefore, that Canada's defence policy should consist of much more than plans for what I believe is called a deliberate war, a war in the fairly distant future.
With regard to an immediate or accidental war, I suggest that if war came at any time in the near future it would be an accident as far as we are concerned, although we can depend upon it that in the minds of those nations which would be the aggressors there would be

nothing accidental about it. It would come because they thought that by a sudden war they could obtain an initial advantage which would make it a short war.
So long as we continue to base our plans for defence on the assumption that war, if it came, would be fought on the same basis as the last w'ar; so long as our plans are predicated on that idea, I suggest that any war in the next two or three years would in fact be a short one because our preparations would be totally inadequate.
That means that even the short-range defence policy must be so designed as to take into account the progress made in weapons, armaments and tactics during and since the last war. Here I would refer to the minister's statement of this afternoon. He said that "a second danger is that we should come to regard war as inevitable." That, of course, is quite true; it is a mental attitude that must be resisted. But he went on to say that "a third danger is that we should commit our future resources to expenditures, equipment and plans that will be out of date when needed."
Of course that is a danger; nevertheless it is a fact which we must face. We- must have some equipment and some plans, and we must make some expenditures to meet the possibility of war in the immediate future and, as I have said, to meet the fact that war when it comes will be fought on a vastly different basis from the last one. What seems to be happening at the present time is that the department is so much concerned not to build weapons and prepare plans which will be out of date ten or fifteen years from now that it may fall into the trap of having virtually no plans and no weapons adequate to meet an immediate war. If the assumption of the department that an immediate war would be fought on the same terms as the last one were correct, the danger I see would be minimized. But certain as I am that an immediate war would be fought on a different basis, the weakness in the department's analysis becomes evident, and that is the main weakness in the defence policy being at present pursued.
Another point which shows the weakness to which the policy exposes us is contained in another part of the minister's statement where he analyses Canada's present defence aims and objectives. He lays down as a first objective:
To provide the force estimated to be necessary to defend Canada against any sudden direct attack that could be or is likely to be directed against it in the near future.
This objective, to my mind, if we accept it -and I think it is a sound objective that should be and will be accepted-obviously imposes on us the necessity of having forces

Supply-National Defence
adequate to meet that sudden attack. That attack may come in the immediate future- in one, two or three years. On the other hand, if we are so obsessed' with the idea of not having out-of-date plans and equipment that we have virtually no plans, equipment and forces at all for the near future, then obviously we shall not be in a position to meet that danger and to achieve our first objective.
The first requirement in order to meet that first objective is obviously that we should have sufficient forces with which to meet the danger; and because of our peculiar position, that involves the necessity of strong and prepared reserves capable of immediate mobilization and formation into an effective fighting force. Here again, when we analyse the figures with regard to our reserves, as I shall do in a moment, it seems to me that we can see the weakness in the department's plans for meeting the immediate war.
In further analysis of this weakness, I should like to refer the committee to the minister's statement where he discusses the possibility of a push-button war. I agree with him to some extent that, to talk of a pushbutton war and to concentrate on that as an immediate likelihood, might lead1 us into dangers and wrong courses of action. On the other hand, I think the minister and the department have been led into discounting altogether the possibility of such a war in the immediate future, and into going so far as to say in effect that in the immediate future there will be no substantial change in the weapons and tactics from those with which we started the war just concluded.
I wish to refer to a passage of the statement the minister made this afternoon in which he said:
Theoretically-
And I should like to emphasize that word. -it is possible for missiles to be guided by various devices to their destination hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away.
It is not only theoretically possible; it is actually possible. It was being done at the end of the last war. V-l rockets were used for one and a half years before the end of the last war. V-2's or guided missiles were being used at the end of the last war. Those who have had practical experience in the matter and know the over-all picture, have said in no uncertain terms, that had it not been for the fact that by 1945 we had attained land and air superiority over the enemy so that we could overrun his territory and take over his bases, thus preventing him from using those guided missiles, the outcome of the war might have been much different from what 5849-368
it was. Certainly the fate of London and of other cities in England would have been horrible to contemplate. The point is, of course, that these missiles or weapons were in existence, were being used at the end of the last war and will be used1 in larger numbers, and in more perfectly developed form, at the beginning of any war in the future.


Brooke Claxton: On ranges of about 200 miles.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I think that is an entirely unwarranted assumption when one remembers-


Brooke Claxton: I admit they were used. But I asked if it is not true that they were used at the end of the war on ranges up to about 200 miles?


Edmund Davie Fulton: That is not my impression. I should not care to engage in an argument on that basis, but my recollection is that the ranges were considerably more than 200 miles. But we must remember this fact. Russia is the country which took over that portion of Germany in which experiments on those weapons were being carried on. It certainly would be a false assumption to suppose that Russia, as well as ourselves, has refrained from any further development of guided missiles.
The minister went on in that portion of his remarks to say this:
But these new developments have not in fact yet been carried to the point where it is possible for them to change the character of war or make out of date either existing concepts or existing equipment.
That statement is, I think, typical of the weakness in policy which I have been pointing out. Those weapons were changing the character of war. They were making out of date existing equipment. I am not saying that the department is totally blind to the importance of research or of adapting our methods to meet possible new weapons and equipment. It would be foolish for me to make that statement categorically. But I suggest that the frame of mind which would lead to the formulation and expression of such a statement as that, indicates that at the moment we are not preparing our defence plans to meet an immediate war in any realistic fashion; that we are not bearing in mind that the character of warfare is being changed every day; and that we are in fact making no effective plans to meet the next war which, whenever it comes, I am certain will be characterized by a totally new, much more rapid, and in many respects totally unexpected, form of attack.
The whole tenor of the minister's statement in that regard indicates the belief in the minds of the department that we shall again have an
Supply-National Defence

minister gave a reason this afternoon why in his view we could not have a large and highly trained reserve force. In my opinion that reason is nothing short of laughable.
I shall read the passage from his remarks where he compared the situation today with the situation as it existed in Switzerland where, as he said, the Swiss reservist used to go home with his rifle, and have it and the ammunition with him at home. The minister said he was in fact a highly trained and organized reservist of the army of those days. Then he proceeded to say that today's equipment is so complicated and so ponderous that we cannot have an adequate reserve force.


Brooke Claxton: I am sure my hon. friend would not wish to misquote me. I did not say anything of the kind whatsoever.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I certainly do not wish to misquote the minister. At the moment I do not seem to be able to lay my band on the passage where he made his statement. I believe, however, that I can state fairly that the minister did give that outline of the Swiss reserve force, and said this sort of force would not be of any use today in view of the complications in our equipment and weapons. He said you cannot take home one-sixth of a tank or one-fifth of radar machine, or any thing similar to that.
Of course you cannot take home one-sixth of a tank or one-fifth of any other machine and say you have a proper reserve force. But that is not to say that we cannot train our men in the use of tanks, that we cannot train them in the use of radar. Certainly a large part of our defence force today consists of other than riflemen. Only riflemen can take their rifles home with them. One cannot, of course, take home a piece of an aeroplane, if he is in the air force.
I have succeeded in finding in the minister's remarks at page 21 of his prepared text:
Today only about 10 per cent of the fighting effectives of any modern force are riflemen, and even those riflemen now use six other weapons. But how would a man bring home one-sixth of a tank, one-fifth of a radar set, and so on?
The argument simply does not apply, because in order to have training in tanks, radar, the handling of aircraft and any other line of military training required by our forces, one does not have to bring the equipment home at night. He goes down to train with that equipment, and uses it during the period of training. The force is organized into a well-trained and formulated reserve unit.
As the hon. member for Nanaimo pointed out today, we have practically no such trained units in Canada at the present time. He gave figures of the number of men who have

gone to camp, and indicated that in one rifle battalion there were only thirty-three. In that respect I refer to Colonel Goforth's requirement that a real reservist is a well-trained reinforcement.
In addition to trained men, to be adequate a reserve force must have organization; the units as well as the formation must be complete. As Colonel Goforth pointed out, our reserves must be given an allotted place in those units and formations, so that in the event of sudden attack we may have a reserve force capable of being sent out, capable of rapid mobilization-not leisurely, but quickly -and ready to meet an immediate threat.
In conclusion, I should like to read from the white paper on defence published last year under the authority of the present Minister of National Defence. It is based largely on the speech he made in the house on July 9, 1947, when introducing his defence estimates. Speaking about the reserve force, he is quoted at page 11 as follows:
We can never express too warmly the appreciation this country owes to the officers, N.C.O.'s and men and their civilian friends who by their voluntary support maintained our reserve forces through the difficult period of the years between the wars.
In outlining the defence objectives last year, he mentioned these two as numbers 5 and 6:
5.	Development of reserve forces of an age and with educational and physical standards *and training approximating those of the active forces and who will in time be capable of entering speedily on active service at sea, on land or in the air.
6.	Provision for reserve forces of the most modern training methods, administration and training officers, and adequate equipment.
In view of the figures given this afternoon showing the serious disproportion between the men actually on strength in the reserves and the authorized strengths, and in view of the figures given by the hon. member for Nanaimo as to the appallingly low number of men in our reserve units who went to the various training camps, it can be safely and certainly said that neither of these objectives is being carried out or fulfilled, nor are we fulfilling the debt of gratitude outlined by the minister himself.
I realize that in the remarks I have made as to the necessity for an adequately trained and organized reserve force there is a fundamental problem which must be faced. We have not the men in the forces at the moment and our program is deficient in that respect. The reasons are numerous and certainly they are highly controversial.

Supply-National Defence
First, I think we should reject entirely and I think the minister should reject entirely the words which he uttered in this house on March 16 with respect to "good progress" being made in connection with recruitment and organization of the armed forces. I suggest that that is not a fact. Then we must contemplate more far-reaching steps than are at present being taken to bring our reserves up to strength. We -must face the problem and find a means of solution. The problem involves a recasting of our outlook and of our whole appreciation of defence needs at the moment. It involves our having the courage to resort to the measures necessary to fulfil our plans and fill up our ranks.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that the minister has recently undergone an operation and is not feeling too well, and therefore I shall not speak at any length. I must say I do not claim to have the knowledge of staff principles and military organization, strategy and tactics evidenced by the previous speaker, and therefore I shall not presume to advise the minister and his advisers as to the necessary military organization for this country.
From what I have heard and observed I think the Minister of National Defence in a quiet and efficient way is doing all that is considered necessary according to the best advice he receives. The impression I get throughout the country is that the Minister of National Defence is recognized as one who does not do things with fanfare and trumpets, but is quietly working in a more efficient way than possibly a great part of the public is aware of.
I rise at this time to ask a question which I asked the minister last year. I and several other members of the house observed a military force marching past the parliament buildings some 2,000 strong. One section was bearing the latest model of Lee-Enfield rifles, while other sections showed crowns and stars on the shoulder-straps of the men. They were in full uniform. I asked the minister at that time if those troops came under the jurisdiction of the Department of National Defence and his reply was that they did not. I then asked the minister if it was legal to uniform, drill and equip troops -with arms, and he said that that matter would receive his consideration and was being considered by the judge advocate general. He told me that he would give me an answer at a later date.
I have not received that answer, and I rise this afternoon to ask the minister if in the period of twelve months he has finally been able to evolve an answer.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, if the minister is not answering the hon. member for Kootenay West at the moment I should like to place two questions before the minister. The first is this: Is the minister prepared to recommend that there be set up a committee on defence matters? This has been recommended ever since 1945, and on each occasion we have had the support of all opposition parties, and in fact the support of the Prime Minister on one or two occasions.
I would point out to the minister how important it is to have a group of members of this house who understand the nature of our defence problems and the steps that are being taken to meet them. Under our present set-up, we have these estimates up for discussion for the first time within two or three days of prorogation and hon. members have no opportunity to go into the question thoroughly. Yet this work of defending Canada is of vital importance to the nation. The minister of external affairs and the Minister of National Defence have emphasized the seriousness of the international situation, and the minister went so far today as to name countries.
It is vital that there should be a group of members in this house who are informed on questions of defence. We are attempting to fill up our ranks through a system of voluntary recruiting. This means that right across the country there should be people who know the facts and can urge our young men to join the forces. If we had a committee on defence matters there would be a group of members in a position to take a lead in assisting with recruiting. Two or three years ago we set up a committee on external affairs, and the fact that that committee was set up has greaty increased the interest taken in this house in matters having to do with external affairs.
My second question is this: Why do we not have a mobile brigade up to full strength? That plan was announced by the previous minister of national defence on October 16, 1945. At that time the then minister, after referring to the reserve army, went on to deal with the active army in these words:
The second will be the permanently employed active force, whose duty it will be to assist in the training and administration of the reserve army and to supply the necessary staffs, services and scientific research and development personnel, augmented by a small formation of essential field units. This formation will be maintained as a trained field force, fully equipped, ready to meet -whatever commitments may arise. Until we know more about our international obligations and consequent requirements, these active force units will be retained as a minimum and would be subject to whatever expansion
Supply-National Dejence

might later be required in the light of any obligations which we might accept to assist in maintaining the peace of the world. Preliminary estimates indicate that the numbers involved in the active permanently employed force will be between 20,000 and 25,000 all ranks.
Of course that is much higher than the number we now have. The minister pointed1 out today that the main duties of the army were, first, to prepare a force to defend Canada against sudden or direct attack now or in the near future. He went on to say that this brigade group was to be a trained and equipped force to deal with any diversionary attack. I think we are all agreed that this is the minimum of the force we should have. I cannot understand why we do not bring this brigade up to full strength and keep it at all times ready to fight. I should like to know why it is that we have deviated from the original intention, which was that this brigade group should be up to strength, fully trained and ready to fight on short notice.


Brooke Claxton: May I have a word before we rise? I should like to express my appreciation to the hon. member for Nanaimo and to others who have been good enough to make kindly references to my recovery from a recent operation. As hon. members know, I am blessed with unusually good health, and therefore any interruption of it is upsetting, but I am very glad to be back in the house.
I should like also to express appreciation of the constructive and helpful way in which the debate has proceeded. A number of points have been raised to which I should like to refer, and I shall do that at the earliest possible moment when the committee next sits, which will be at eight o'clock.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


William Henry Golding: Item 231.


Brooke Claxton: Mr. Chairman, before the committee rose at six o'clock, some questions were raised to which I should make reply. The hon. member for Nanaimo, in his interesting remarks, referred to a matter also referred to by the hon. member for Kamloops, with regard to the readiness of the armed forces of Canada to meet sudden attack, which was the first point I made as one of the objectives of the defence forces of Canada.
When this question is raised, it is desirable to examine, however briefly, from what sources there could come a possible attack. As I said in my opening remarks, the only possible

aggressor is the Soviet union, and the only way the Soviet union can attack Canada is by sea or by air. By sea, since the Soviet union has no large fleet, attack would be possible only by submarine. Of the two, I think we may regard air as the more likely means of attack.
Without going into this in any detail, I would ask hon. members to consider the probabilities of any such attack in view of the distance, the strategic objectives that might be achieved, and the air lift the Soviet union might have.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Would the minister permit one question in order that he might deal with it in his reply? Would he concede the fact that the sea distance between Soviet Russia and the outer islands of Alaska is less than fifty miles and conceivably an attack might come that way, a short sea attack, followed by a land attack?


Brooke Claxton: If such an attack occurred it would surely be made on the territory nearest to the Soviet union, that is the territory of the United States in Alaska. How they could bypass that and attack the coast of British Columbia is rather difficult to see. Should such an attack occur, the only possibility that need be considered at the present time is that of an attack by air, and there we would have to estimate the ability of the Soviet union to give an air lift that would enable such an attack to be made, and then see what would be likely to be the result of that attack.
It is difficult to say how many four-engine planes the Soviet union has, but I am sure my hon. friends are thinking of something in the neighbourhood of a division.


Edmund Davie Fulton: No, much more.


Brooke Claxton: I see. Well, let us take a division. A division would probably take
1.000	four-engine planes one way, and I should think the result of that would be that the planes would be lost and that the people who landed would be lost too.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Has the minister not contemplated the possibility of a shuttle service?


Brooke Claxton: A shuttle service over a distance of something like 4,000 miles is inconceivable. The attackers could be mopped up stage by stage as they come along.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What about the twenty-mile barrier to Alaska?


Brooke Claxton: That is another problem, the problem of the United States of America. We are talking about Canada at the present time.

Supply-National Defence
I imagine that tfhe United States forces are adequate to deal with that. If they are not, the Americans will see to it. But when you consider the prospects of such an attack on Canada, you have to consider the possible strategic benefits which might result from an attack of that kind. The only result would be that the Soviet union would lose the
1.000	planes they had sent over, if they had
1.000	planes of that type to send over, which I doubt, and then they would lose the men they had landed.
That is why I made the point I did on the advice that was available to me, that the only kind of attack which is envisaged as possible should war break out in the immediate future is an attack of a diversionary nature which would be cleared up quite speedily.


George Randolph Pearkes: Before the minister leaves that point, would he permit a question? I see the possibility of the loss of these 1,000 planes, provided that we have something whereby to inflict those casualties upon the enemy. I should like to know what we have in our air force at the present time, or in any other air force, which might reasonably be expected to inflict 1,000 casualties on planes coming here, if that were the case. And I presume those 1,000 planes would be at least-escorted by protective aircraft, fighters of some sort. I cannot believe that they would just crash for the fun of it.


Brooke Claxton: There are no fighters in the world that can go 4,000 miles or anything like the distance that would be involved. I do not even suggest -that the planes would be knocked down as they came, because everyone knows that one, two, three or any considerable number of planes can get through in any area of the world. But the question is what happens after they do get through. I suggest that the probability that has to be taken into account in our calculations of any such attack is so slight at the present time that it is something that hardly needs being counted in the realm of active possibility; for, as I suggested, the outcome would be certain and the strategic advantages would be nil.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Why?


William Henry Golding: Order.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Why would the strategic advantage be nil?


Brooke Claxton: Because the forces would be destroyed within a short time.


Edmund Davie Fulton: By whom?


Brooke Claxton: By our Canadians.


Edmund Davie Fulton: By our 25,000 men?


William Henry Golding: Order.


Brooke Claxton: Then my hon. friend spoke about the number of officers and men in the reserve army who were at camp during the season 1947-48. As he knows, the purpose of the reserve army camps in 1947-48 was to give training to officers, N.CD.'s and a small cadre of tradesmen. The numbers which he referred to-which were small, of course- were the numbers of officers, N.C.O.'s and tradesmen who were available to take that training at that time. In this connection and also in connection with the reference made by the hon. member for Kamloops to the article by Mr. Wallace Goforth on the nature of our reserves, I might suggest that the remarks which have been made about our reserves might have been made with equal truth about any of the reserves, let us say, the national guard in the United States or the territorial army of the United Kingdom. To indicate as clearly as I can the state of preparation arrived at in Canada in comparison with that in other countries, I should like to refer to the remarks of Lord Nathan, the government leader in the House of Lords, in a speech he made in a debate on defence on March 17, 1948, in which he said:
The forces are still in the throes of the extensive reorganization which is inevitable at the end of a great war.


Edmund Davie Fulton: When were these remarks made?


Brooke Claxton: On March 17, 1948. To
continue:
The enormous temporary element which constituted the great bulk of the strength in 1945 has had to be released as speedily as possible, and at the same time -the much depleted regular element built up. During such a period ot drastic reorganization, the forces cannot use their manpower to the best advantage. Personnel in units are constantly changing. Trained and experienced men have to be replaced by untrained men and, as a result, a disproportionate amount of manpower and time has to be allotted to the training of individuals We are now at the moment of transition, and obviously that must inescapably be a most difficult time for the services.
Then he went on later to say:
. . . the regular forces have been building up. and they have already been built up to a figure of upwards of 350,000, which tops the prewar figure . [DOT] [DOT] The various auxiliary forces have been re-established on a voluntary basis. A start has already been made and nearly
43,000	recruits have been obtained to date. On the whole, I do not think that is too bad. In the territorial army in particular, it has been necesary ... to build up slowly, pending the provision of accommodation and other facilities.
Supply-National Defence

In the United States the national guard, which is the equivalent of our reserve forces, has a present strength, for the army and air force together, of 234,000. Australia and New Zealand will begin recruiting for the reserve force on July 1, 1948. I suggest to hon. members that against this background the record of achievement of our reserve forces since the war has been good. It is not as good as I should like to see it, but it reflects great credit on the officers and men who have been giving their time to this important work. When we compare the present situation with the situation as it was after the first great war, when I myself was in the non-permanent active militia, we can see a great change in the size, equipment, training facilities, pay, strength and quality of the reserve forces. Our hope is that, with the support of hon. members and others, the reserves may be built up just as speedily as possible, so that they will be an effective fighting force to take their part in the defence of Canada and serve as the nucleus of a larger force should it be necessary.
The hon. member for Nanaimo remarked on the fact that we had no submarines. That is quite true. We have never felt it necessary in Canada to have submarines, except for the purpose of anti-submarine warfare training. We feel that it is much easier for us to borrow or obtain the services of a British or a United1 States submarine when that is desirable, rather than to go into this business ourselves and try to establish a submarine service which inevitably would be dependent on either British or United States sources for the submarines and also for the modifications necessary to bring them up to date.
The hon. member for Nanaimo made an agreeable reference to the ordnance corps depot here. He remarked on the fact that, while certain men were piling puttees, different men were needed to pile bandages. That is an easy reference, if I may say so, and I interjected, "Can we use the same personnel to mix paint as we use to mix medicine?" At the depot here we have the central medical stores for all three services of Canada under the command of an officer of the Canadian army medical corps. He is in charge of the medical stores there and of their care and distribution, and also a large quantity of drugs is manufactured and quantities of supplies are made up. This work requires specially trained personnel. However, the close working relationship with .the members of the Canadian ordnance corps is indicated by the hon. member's own remark, that when he came into the part of the building that was devoted to the central medical stores, he was shown over the
[Mr Claxton.]
place by a medical officer. I do not know who else should have shown him over it.
The hon. member also referred to the question of civil defence. We have had this matter under consideration for some time; and, as hon. members know, it is a matter to which the greatest attention must be devoted to secure, first of all, close co-operation between the federal government agencies that may be concerned, which would include national defence, justice-namely, the R.C.M.P.- national health and welfare, and transport. From there we move into the field of close working relationships with the provinces and, through them, with their agencies, the municipalities. That work is in hand; preliminary studies have been made. I can assure hon. members that it is not proposed at present to set up civil defence establishments across Canada, as we believe this would be a waste of effort and time. The work will be directed to seeing what should be done, and to arrive at sound plans that can be put into effect with people with whom they have been discussed and worked out so that, in case of need, anything necessary may be done in good time. In this regard, United States secretary of defence Forrestal last May announced the appointment of a similar agency; and we shall get into touch with the people there who are actively engaged in this work as well as the people in England, and correlate their experience with our own during the last war. Then we will -work out a plan which will be constantly kept up to date as part of the war book, in preparation for any emergency.
The hon. member referred to shortages of equipment and shortage of the means of producing air force equipment. This was also referred to by the hon. member for Trinity and the hon. member for Kamloops.
Mr. SKEY,: I did not refer to any shortages. I said we should produce the equipment.


Brooke Claxton: That is right. On the question of shortages referred to at some length by the hon. member for Kamloops and mentioned in passing by the hon. member for Nanaimo, I should like to know what equipment we are short of, which we should have, and which it would be useful for us to have at the present time. As far as I know, we are not short of any such equipment. We had large stocks of the latest equipment at the end of the second world war, and, in addition, since that time we have acquired considerable quantities of equipment of various types. I repeat,
I should like to know what equipment we are short of for the active or reserve forces. If we are short of any equipment which we should have we shall be glad to look into the question and see whether it would be useful for us to

Supply-National Defence
acquire that equipment now rather than run such risks as there may be-and there may be risks which we may have to run-in waiting until, in the not too distant future, we may have or be able to obtain something much better. I point out that if we follow every type of equipment we have, or that any nation which might fight in a future war has or might have, through every modification it will take a great deal more money than this country will be willing to spend on defence. The fact is that we have to make our estimate of the risks involved, and keep up to date with knowledge, information, plans and designs, and from time to time make modifications or introduce such new equipment as we feel may be justified by the need.
The hon. member for Trinity referred to the question of standardization, and one of the points he made was that the matters listed in my statement were in the wrong order, that I should have put the last thing first. I am quite willing to put it first. I assure him that his interesting and useful remarks are along the line of the discussions that have been entered into by the officers of the department from time to time with their opposite numbers in the United Kingdom and the United States; and they are the subject of constant consideration.
There was one point, however, on which I should make one comment. The hon. member did say he thought it would be a good thing if we could produce in Canada some of the planes we have to acquire either from Britain or from the United States, the Vampires from Britain and the Mustangs from the United States; and he suggested that it might be possible to have a British firm come to Canada to manufacture Vampire planes here.
That is an interesting suggestion, but I wonder what would be the implications. If such a firm came to Canada it would have a market here to the extent of such Vampire planes as we were ready to buy. They would be very expensive, because the Canadian producer would have to tool up and produce a limited number of such planes, since our needs are not large. If the planes were produced for sale in sterling bloc areas, then the British government or the purchasers would have to find Canadian dollars with which to buy the product of their subsidiary in Canada. That is not an attractive proposition, and I doubt very much whether any British firm would enter into such an undertaking. With regard to the production in Canada of American type planes, there again it would be much more economic for us to purchase the planes from the United States.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: But what about the loss of exchange, and the loss of employment?


Brooke Claxton: My hon. friend himself said that, even if the planes were produced in Canada, some sixty per cent of the content-I think that was the figure he indicated -would have to be purchased in the United States.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: At least we would break even.


Brooke Claxton: That would still leave the out-go to the United States as a considerable item.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: If the minister will permit, I suggested that we produce machines here for sale to the United States as well as for use by the Canadian air force.


Brooke Claxton: It is an interesting proposition which we are exploring in every direction, I can assure the hon. member-but not with Mustangs-*


Lawrence Wilton Skey: I would not think so.


Brooke Claxton: -because that would not be profitable. Also the Mustang is an intermediate plane which will soon be replaced by something else. No; our attitude toward this matter is that the right course for us to follow is to produce in Canada a plane designed particularly to meet Canadian needs. Toward that end we have been working for several years. Through A. V. Roe in Toronto we have produced in the Chinook engine the prototype of what looks likely to be a very good jet engine. The airframe is being tested; and if that two-seated long-range fighter tests out satisfactorily, that will be the kind of plane which we should produce in Canada. But until we can find out whether we have or have not a good plane, it would probably be wise on our part to postpone all possible purchases or ventures in this field'; not to the point of danger, but postpone it to the point where we may be able to get a Canadian plane at about the same time as we might get a plane of British manufacture. If we placed orders for Vampires or other British planes now it would be a considerable number of months before they were delivered.
I can tell the hon. member that the subject is being thoroughly explored and followed up.
The hon. member for Kamloops referred to the question of equipment as if we were short of modern equipment or modern plans. We have quantities of the latest equipment in use at the end-not the beginning-of the second world war. Our officers are in communication with their opposite numbers both in the United States and in the United Kingdom, not only revising plans but examining designs of equip-
5806
Supply-National Defence

meat, and generally keeping their fingers upon the latest developments.
The hon. member suggested that my phrase that the Canadian forces "could by themselves never deter the Russians" was ill-advised. I shall stand by my phrase. I think that is common sense. No nation of 12,000,000 people could alone deter a powerful nation, one apparently with the aggressive inclinations, and having the resources and the strength of Russia.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I, too, will stand by that statement so far as our present forces are concerned.


Brooke Claxton: Yes. Then the hon. member made some reference to the air force. I made perfectly clear the reason why the air force auxiliary was not as large as we would like to see it, namely, a shortage of ground-crew. The reason why we are short of ground-crew is that there is full employment in industry, and it is difficult either to recruit trained tradesmen as regular air force personnel or to get men to join the auxiliary force and to do at night, part time, the same kind of work they are doing in the daytime. However, recently much better progress is being made, and techniques of recruiting have been developed which we hope will cure that situation.
The hon. member referred to Mr. Goforth's article, and particularly his references to the desirability of there being officers and men from the French-speaking section of the population. With that, of course, I agree. With regard to the first six points of Mr. Goforth's article, I suggest that he might have made them with equal accuracy respecting the United States, the United Kingdom or any other country, as he did respecting this country.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Oh, no.


Brooke Claxton: Oh, yes. But the matter of the French-speaking personnel is a special Canadian question, and is one which I must say I have had under my own personal consideration ever since I was appointed to the department. It involves difficulties, and we are doing everything possible to meet those difficulties. May I add that we are trying to have the largest possible number of Englishspeaking officers in the armed forces learn the French language. At every headquarters throughout Canada there are voluntary classes, one of which was at national defence headquarters here in Ottawa. I believe at one time there were 276 officers taking lessons in French. We regard that as desirable, and hope that Canada will have, as nearly as possible, a bilingual army. What Mr. Goforth stated with respect to senior officers might be technically correct; but there is an associate deputy minis-

ter holding the rank of deputy minister, who is French-speaking. I refer to Colonel Matthieu, a gentleman with a distinguished war record. Two of the area commanders, Brigadier Bernatchez at Winnipeg and Brigadier Allard at Quebec, both with fine war records, are French-speaking.
The hon. member tried to make some play on my reference to the Swiss reserves. The point of my remark was to show how much more complicated the process of defence had become as compared with what it was when that kind of reserve force obtained in Switzerland. Our own reserve force units are equipped with tanks, radar apparatus, anti-aircraft guns and all the latest equipment to a point where some of them are being almost crowded out of their armouries because they have so much equipment. That is one of the points we shall have to follow up, in an endeavour to provide more accommodation.
The hon. member referred to the fact that back in March I had said that "good progress" is being made with regard to recruiting. That was an encouraging and proper kind of remark to make. I also wish to see better progress made with regard to recruiting. But the fact that in one year we have recruited a number of men roughly equivalent to the total strength of the permanent force, on the average, between 1930 and 1939, particularly at a time of full employment, is an indication that the armed forces have an appeal for the young men of this country. We hope the armed forces will continue to have that appeal, and that more of our young men will enlist.
The hon. member for Kootenay West referred to a question he raised on July 9 last with regard to the drilling of some uniformed personnel who were not members of the armed forces and who had, as he said, the latest model of Lee-Enfield rifles. At that time, following his question, I thought I had given him all the information available on the subject. A full investigation was made, but by the time he brought the matter up it was not possible to find out the full particulars. Under section 99 of the criminal code the governor in council may issue an order prohibiting drilling in uniform. I believe such an order was issued back in 1916, and since then it has been rather difficult to trace what has happened. We are not aware of any unauthorized body of men in Canada being equipped with Lee-Enfield rifles. There is a report that some Ross rifles were disposed of as surplus immediately after the first great war to some organization, and it is possible that is what his question relates to. If I have not answered him sufficiently I will try to get further information and answer him privately later.

Supply-National Defence
The hon. member for Vancouver South again raised the question as to whether the government would entertain the possibility of having a committee on defence matters. As I pointed out when that question was raised last year, my own personal inclination would be in favour of that course. I can see quite a few advantages from my own point of view as minister in having an opportunity of talking things over and having them explained in such a committee. I must say, however, that the suggestion raises considerations far greater than any such personal inclinations, and those considerations I have put before the house and this committee on a previous occasion. I do not do so in any final sense, but I must say this, that once you get into the appointment of functional committees dealing with the work and operations of a single department of the government, you begin to approximate our system of government much more closely to that of the United States.


Howard Charles Green: What about the committee on external affairs?


Brooke Claxton: I am not going to defend the appointment of that committee, and I do not suggest that it should necessarily form a precedent for others, but I do suggest that our system of government, with the executive responsible through parliament to the people and modeled on the British system, is something we ought to cherish and to watch most carefully. The appointment of functional committees of the type suggested tends to approximate our system much more closely to that of the United States and therefore should be watched with a careful eye. However, once again I can assure the hon. member for Vancouver South that his suggestion has a lot to commend it, and I shall be very glad indeed to call it to the attention of my colleagues. But there again the appointment of committees is a matter for the judgment of the house and it is for the house to decide.
The other question the hon. member asked was with regard to the mobile brigade. That mobile brigade still forms, as I indicated in my statement today, the main agency by which Canada would deal with any direct attack on Canada. There has been no abandonment of it whatever. It is in training now. The armoured and infantry battalions have been grouped together at Petawaiwa for the first time and this summer will engage in unit training. The other branches of it are at Rivers, where the army-air co-operation school is located, at Chilliwack where there is the engineers' school, and at Shilo the artillery school, and other branches are at other places.
The brigade is being trained. We have got through the stage of training the trainers, which is the first stage, and now the men themselves are receiving unit training.


Howard Charles Green: My question was, why is the force not recruited up to full strength?


Brooke Claxton: It is being recruited, as fast as the recruits come in, toward full strength. I hope I have answered the questions raised, and if there are any others I rfiall be glad to answer them.


George Randolph Pearkes: Mr. Chairman, we appreciate the 'minister's returning tonight to give answers to the various questions which were raised here this afternoon, because I understand that he is really breaking doctor's orders in being here, that he is, in military language, A.W.O.L. from hospital. There are various other questions I should like to raise and I believe other members have questions but perhaps we can raise them on other items. No doubt an opportunity will be given when these estimates are before us again.
There is just one thing I should like to say before the minister goes, and that is to point out what seems somewhat of an inconsistency between the statement that he read and the remarks that he has made this evening. This afternoon he referred to the fact that it was now possible to set down Canada's present defence aims and objectives. They are (1) To provide a force estimated to be necessary to defend Canada against any sudden direct attack that could be or is likely to be directed against her in the near future. When we pointed out the fact, as we gathered it from other parts of his statement, that we felt Canada had not anything in the way of a defence force to meet this attack, the minister this evening said:	Oh, there is not going to
be any such threat. That is like putting up a coconut-shy just for the purpose of throwing balls at a coconut.


Clarence Gillis: I hate to get into this discussion with military experts. The only practical suggestion made this afternoon and this evening was that made by the hon. member for Vancouver South when he suggested, as he has done on previous occasions, that a committee of this house be set up for the purpose of studying the defences of Canada in co-operation with the military authorities. Over 100 members of this house are ex-service personnel with war experience in varying capacities, and they could contribute something to the headquarters personnel in mapping out the defence requirements and defence
Supply-National Defence

estimates of the country. I would strongly urge the minister to give that suggestion his serious consideration.
But what really prompted me to get up at this time was the repeated emphasis by hon. members to my right that the defence plans of Canada must be based on a threat of aggression from Russia. I think that is absolutely wrong.


Mr. MERRITT:: The minister said it.


Clarence Gillis: I think it is absolutely wrong for any member of this house representing the public of Canada to take the attitude that the defence of Canada must be built on the possibility of aggression by Russia.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Our whole point was that it should 'be built against aggression from any point, including Russia.


Clarence Gillis: That is not what you said.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I know what I said. You were not here when I said it.


Clarence Gillis: I remember when you made your first speech and your second speech. I listened carefully-


Edmund Davie Fulton: It shows how wrong you were.


Clarence Gillis: Just a minute; wait until I am through.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: Not a man overseas.


Clarence Gillis: I am going to tell you something about your own part of the country with regard to defence which I think is essential at this time, and I hope you will be doing something about it before I am through. Defence, as everything else, is a practical matter. It is not a matter of dreaming or of theories. It is only about three years since we finished a war, a war to end wars, a war against aggression and tyranny, and we broke the only force in the world that threatened the world. All the nations which are united today in the united nations were allied together for that purpose. We succeeded in a common objective, namely, defeating the forces of aggression. Since the end of that war we formed the united nations. That is the cornerstone of Canada's foreign policy, and also the cornerstone of Canada's defence policy.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: It is more like a millstone.


Clarence Gillis: All right; when we accepted the charter of the united nations we decided to band ourselves together for the purpose of bringing the nations together in one world, of setting up a common front of the nations of the world, which were allied together, to save
CMr. Gillis.]
democracy and freedom and to expand it. We formed ourselves in what, in my opinion, is the basis of government at the international level. There are quarrels, and all that kind of thing, but under the united nations charter Canada and all the nations which are within that machinery today, decided that certain things were to be done to secure the peace of the world.
An international peace force was to be set up. We had a common objective; we said we would crack down on aggressors, and Russia as part of the international machine-


Lawrence Wilton Skey: She is the brakes.


Clarence Gillis: Just a minute, now. She may or may not be. Do not forget this. It is not as simple as all that. You are dealing with people of different nationalities, different languages, different outlooks on life, different experiences, backgrounds and environments. Perhaps her thinking is conditioned on her experiences, her background and her environment. I am very hopeful. I am not prepared to stand up in my place in this house at any time and advocate, or listen to someone advocate, that the basic policy on defence in Canada should be built up on the fear of aggression from one of our former allies. I do not think it exists. I am not afraid of a major war from any direction in your lifetime or in mine.
What my hon. friends fail to realize is that the war which they fear has been going on since 1945. It is an economic war.


Edmund Davie Fulton: All we are afraid of is that, after fighting a war from 1939 to 1945, we may have to do so again. We do not want to have to do so again.


Clarence Gillis: We are not going to have to fight another war unless you promote it.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: What are you advocating
-disarmament ?


Clarence Gillis: No. If you listen for a minute I shall tell you.


William Henry Golding: Order.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: Give in to the commies and you will not have to fight another war.


Clarence Gillis: I am not giving in to the commies at all, and my hon. friend has too much sense not to know that.


Edmund Davie Fulton: You are not realistic.


Clarence Gillis: I am trying to be realistic. This standing up in the house and saying we are afraid that someone is going to attack us just will not do. I am telling you I am not afraid that someone is going to attack us.

Supply-National Defence


Mr. FERGUSON:: That is fine.


Clarence Gillis: You are being swallowed up every day, and you do not realize it. There is an economic war going on.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Speak for yourself.


Clarence Gillis: Russia has been kidding you that she is going to shoot you some day. In the meantime you are putting the clothes over your head in bed at night and are afraid that the bogey man will get you.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Is that the way Czechoslovakia was kidded?


Clarence Gillis: Certainly it is.


An hon. MEMBER:: Is that what the Minister of Defence thinks?


Clarence Gillis: I am not worrying about what the Minister of Defence thinks. He has no more responsibility for this than you have. Little countiy after little country has been absorbed while you sat down and urged the Minister of Defence to build more and bigger planes, bigger tanks and bigger something else.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Nonsense.


Clarence Gillis: While the other fellow came along and took you over; that is all.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Certainly if you were here he would.


Clarence Gillis: There is going to be no shooting war. You do not need to worry about that. There is an economic war on now. The faster you fellows get that through your heads, the better it will be for Canada and for the world.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Certainly if we go on as the hon. member suggests we would have a shooting war.


William Henry Golding: Order.


John Ewen Sinclair: Filibuster.


William Henry Golding: I ask hon. members not to interrupt the hon. member who has the floor.


Clarence Gillis: If you would only get down to realities and talk common sense.


Mr. LAPOINTE:: Hear, hear.


Clarence Gillis: Some hon. members never seem to learn much in this house. I think the minister is being realistic. He has brought forward a pretty reasonable program of defence for Canada. He is not preparing for war. He has not told anyone in the house so far that he is afraid of an attack from Russia or from the United States. If we are to learn something about national defence I think the only
sensible proposal that has been put forward in the house was put forward by the hon. member for Vancouver South. Let us appoint the hon. member for Kamloops, the hon. member for Trinity and the hon. member for Vaneouver-Burrard, who is so much interested in national defence and in arming against the aggression from an imaginary enemy that does not exist, on a board with officials of national defence, and let them have a look at things as they really are, things that cannot be brought up in this house. I am reasonably sure that if that were done it would convince them that the thing that has to be done in the future to prevent war-


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Czechoslovakia was not taken over?


Clarence Gillis: She was taken over because of stupid people-


Edmund Davie Fulton: Like yourself.


Clarence Gillis: -who hung on to something that did not exist in life. They created a form of thinking along the lines of that which hon. members are thinking tonight, and the other fellow walked in, in the meantime, and took things over while you were asleep.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: My friend, you are asleep.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: Took it over with machine guns.


Clarence Gillis: No, there was no shooting. He just took it over from the Tories who were asleep. They went sound asleep with the clothes over their heads worrying about an attack from an imaginary enemy, and in the meantime the enemy walked in and took them over.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Just as you are doing in this country.


Clarence Gillis: We are not doing so badly on this matter of defence.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Just the way you are doing in this country.


Clarence Gillis: I think we are being fairly sensible about it. I think the government of Canada and the sensible people of the North American continent realize that the thing that will offset war in the future is living up to the charter of the united nations, feeding hungry people, raising their standards, eliminating insecurities and fears that drag half the world down into the ashpit. That is what will avoid war in the future; not building up armies and preaching wars against a people who a short time ago were very respectable in this house as our allies.
Supply-National Defence

There is one thing of a practical nature I should like to say to the minister. He mentioned tonight that in the field of jet aircraft he was carrying on an extensive development at the A. V. Roe company in Toronto. I know this does not come within his jurisdiction, but I point out to him that on Sunday-this is -Jiiursday-a strike vote is to be taken in that -plant. The government has considerable jurisdiction over" that plant. There is apt to be an interruption on that aeroplane in which the minister is so much interested. I am suggesting that he get in touch with the Minister of Labour and try to offset any labour difficulties there, so that we may get the necessary planes to offset the inevitable war that my hon. friends to the right are talking so much about.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The subject which was before the committee, as I understood, was the defence of Canada, but the hon. member who has last spoken has sought to supplant it with another issue altogether. With him I would be glad to enter into controversy at any moment, because his ideas are so erroneous that they really should be answered. He has spoken about the economic war, which of course has no relation to the question of national defence. He has spoken about people being asleep in this country. Perhaps we were asleep in this country until what went on in Czechoslovakia and other countries woke us up. If we were not wakened up, as perhaps we were not by what took place from 1935 to 1939, and between 1939 and 1945, I hope we have been wakened up by what took place in 1948 in Czechoslovakia, where, under the guise of so-called economic war, which was fostered by those who wanted Russia to take over their country, we saw Russia step in and take that country without a shot being fired, as the hon. member says. However, that situation does not prevail in Canada. There is opportunity for all in Canada, and the only people who are concerned to go around and say a situation exists in Canada which justifies Russia or anyone else taking us over are my hon. friends to the left.


An hon. MEMBER:: That is not true.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I know it is true.


Clarence Gillis: Stick to national defence.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The hon. member for Cape Breton South says, "Stick to national defence". I was sticking to national defence until he introduced this extraneous issue. I wish, as does the hon. member for Nanaimo, and every other member of this house, to see the Minister of National Defence released for the moment from his responsibility; and, had it not been for what the hon. member for Cape Breton South

said, which was so erroneous that it required some answer, I would not have spoken at the moment. But the fact is that those who were alseep from 1935 to 1939 and those who, like my hon. friends, have been asleep from 1939 to 1948, are asleep no longer. We know the issues. We know that this economic war they talk about is just phony as far as Canada is concerned, and we are not going to allow ourselves to become the prey to any phony economic war or any actual war of aggression with armed forces. That is why we have been discussing the defence of Canada, and that is why we have been criticizing the policy of the Minister of National Defence.
With respect to the minister, I have this to say. Imperfect as I think his policy is, it is so much nearer perfection, so much more realistic and so much more attuned to the best interests of Canada than the sort of nonsense talked by my hon. friends to the left tonight that I will say no more about it at the moment, but reserve my right to discuss it at a later day.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Special-
Indian affairs branch-
22Jf. Fur conservation, and development of native crafts, and to authorize, subject to the approval of the governor in council, the appointment of such extra temporary officers, clerks and employees as may be necessary for the purpose of this item, $286,000.
John Alpheus Charlton: In view of the remarks made by the hon. member for Yorkton this morning, and in view of the remarks made by the minister regarding the report of the committee on Indian affairs, I consider it essential that I should say something about that question at this time, since I was a member of the committee from the time of its inception in 1946.
Since 1867 there have been only two parliamentary inquiries into Indian affairs. One took place in 1920 and another in 1926; and, since that time, until 1946, a period of twenty years, no attempt has been made to rectify the injustices that exist in the present act.
I am not blaming the officials of the department, because I believe that most of them are sincere and conscientious in their efforts under the existing legislation. They do the best they can, as evidenced by the co-operation given to us during the sittings of the committee that considered the Indian Act. In that committee, after listening to all the delegations and studying the briefs presented, we tried to recommend amendments to the act which we felt would be accepted by the majority of the Indians of Canada.

Supply-Mines and Resources
I tried to be fair this morning. I did not wish to make any remarks under the estimates of this branch; I wanted to defer them until concurrence in the report was moved. I gave the minister a chance to assure us that concurrence in the report of the Indian affairs committee would be moved, but that was not forthcoming, and I can only say that it is now obvious that concurrence will not be moved.
It is incredible that after three sessions, with this committee sitting and this house considering Indian affairs, this report is not to be concurred in before the end of the session. It simply means that the work of the committee has been a failure, if this parliament will not adopt that report before the end of the session. The work of the committee has been useless.
Representing the largest and, I might add, the most advanced Indian reserve in Canada,
I say on their behalf that I disagree with the general idea advanced in most of the sittings of the committee that there should be complete assimilation of the Indian population.
I most heartily disagree with that. The Indians of the Six Nations tribe are a very proud people. They do not wish to be completely assimilated, thereby losing their identity as Indians. The Indians of the Six Nations reserve have proven their ability to govern themselves. They have set an example that could well be followed today throughout the world, in the fact that six tribes which were at war at one time were able to settle their differences and are now, as they have been for many years, living in complete harmony with one another.
It would seem almost futile to discuss this report at the present moment, because if a motion for concurrence is not forthcoming, then the whole thing will be thrown out.
As I said before, it seems to me a most ridiculous situation, after this committee has sat for three sessions and has done the amount of work it has done, that this report should not be brought forth and concurred in.
I wish to say just a few words with regard to a couple of the recommendations in this report. The first is No. 8 and is headed "Social and economic status of Indians and their advancement." I will just read it:
Your committee recommends that the govern ment consider the advisability of granting a pension to aged, blind, or infirm Indians. This is in addition to recommendations previously made with regard to the social and economic advancement of Indians.
I was greatly disappointed to note that the committee thought they hadi to recommend that the government consider the advisability of this sort of thing. It should have passed
that stage many years ago. It should recommend that these aged Indians be considered the same as any other people in this country and be given the old age pension.
The committee recommended that the Indians should have the vote on the status of urban dwellers. That recommendation, however, did not find its way to the House of Commons, through the neglect or failure of someone to see that it did. Some days ago in the house an amendment was moved to the Dominion Elections Act, and it was voted down. Why should these people not be given the vote, especially those on the Six Nations reserve at Brantford who, as I have said, are more advanced than most across the country? Why should these people not be allowed to vote? The only tax they do not pay is the land tax on their reserve. They pay the other taxes, such as sales, excise, and gasoline taxes, and income tax on money earned off the reserve. Therefore I think it is time these people were given representation.
Since coming here and acting as a member of the Indian Act committee, I have always taken the stand that Indians of ability should be given positions in the branch, and I still stick to that stand. I am glad to see the recommendation made that the assistant deputy, or commissioner, should be a Canadian of Indian descent.
In conclusion, I urge the government to see that the motion for concurrence in this report is made before the end of the session; because, if that is not done, the committee might just as well not have met these past three sessions.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Immigration branch-
228. For expenditures in connection with looking after Canadian interests abroad, $100,000.
Douglas Gooderham Ross: I do not know whether I am in order, but I want to urge on the minister that he do something to increase his staff overseas, so that the technicalities in connection with immigrants may be overcome more quickly. I know the staffs over there are short-handed. We want all the good immigrants we can get in this country. If we do not make it a little bit easier and make it possible to get over the .technicalities more quickly, we shall lose out in this matter. I urge the minister to do something along the line I have suggested.


Mr. HAZEN:: I have in my hand an editorial from the Telegraph-Journal of Saint John, dated June 16, 1948. I do not propose to read it all; in fact, I do not know whether I would be in order if I did so. But I should
Supply-Mines and Resources

like to draw it to the attention of the minister. It is headed "Intelligence not wanted", and it goes on to say:
Ten Baltic and Polish young women who have just disembarked in Canada, after a trip from displaced persons' camps in Germany, make the bitter complaint that this country seems to put a premium on stupidity. To get here, they claim, they had to hide the fact that one girl studied commerce for two years in Riga, another was a student nurse in a hospital, another a clerk, another a pharmacy worker. They were quietly advised by their friends to appear "good and dumb"-and so they were allowed to come to Canada. Meanwhile, Australia is gladly taking girls with brains as well as brawn.
The editorial goes on and points out:
. . . those who_ are doing the selecting in Europe have been trying to pick out girls who will not use maid's work as merely a subterfuge to- get into Canada and then try immediately to quit their jobs and seek "white collar" work.
That may be the object the immigration authorities have in view in selecting these girls. Then the editorial goes on to say:
But it would be interesting, just the same, to know what work Australia is able to offer to intelligent and educated D.P. girls that Canada too, can't offer.
Does the minister care to make any comment on that editorial or to throw some light or. what happened? If that is correct, why is it that girls with some education and some intelligence are not allowed in the country, or apparently they have to play dumb to get in here?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am quite sure the hon. member for St. Johm-Albert is not taking that editorial or that newspaper story at its face value. We in Canada have ten girls for every one that has gone to Australia, I am informed. They are girls of intelligence. They are girls who are, for the time being, at least, doing domestic work in Canada and working in institutions. We are encouraging people of intelligence; that is the type of people we want here in Canada. The reporter in this particular case-and I have read the editorial.
I believe it is, or the newspaper article-must have got hold of the odd crank there always is in any movement of immigration.


Douglas King Hazen: Is any intelligence test required before these girls are admitted?


James Angus MacKinnon: There is a general screening, I may say; and some of our rejections are on the basis of lack of intelligence.


Angus MacInnis: Can the minister give an answer to the question if it is put in this way? In selecting girls for admission to Canada, if a girl said that her occupation was secretarial 
work, typist, schoolteacher, or something of that kind, would she have the same chance of getting in as a girl who said her work was domestic service?


James Angus MacKinnon: She would have a better chance to come to Canada if she could convince us that she intended to work as a domestic or in an institution, temporarily.


Angus MacInnis: Then that would mean that the girl who would not work as a domestic would have a poorer chance of getting into Canada?


James Angus MacKinnon: I think that is quite right.


Angus MacInnis: Then I imagine the point made by the editorial is correct, that in selecting persons to come to Canada we do not want educated women who will not work in domestic service. We want girls who are not so well educated, who cannot fill jobs which require a certain amount of education or training.


James Angus MacKinnon: That is not quite fair or quite correct.


Angus MacInnis: Then will the minister please explain it?


James Angus MacKinnon: We are desirous of getting intelligent girls to come to Canada in this immigration movement, but girls who for a term are willing to do domestic work or work in institutions. There are plenty of intelligent prospective immigrants to select from, and that is the kind we get.


Angus MacInnis: We should not confuse the words "intelligence" and "education". A person with no education at all may be very intelligent, but she is limited in the services she can render. She cannot offer the same service as a person with more formal education or more specialized education. A stenographer, a schoolteacher, or a girl trained in secretarial work can do housekeeping, but a girl who has not been trained cannot do those jobs. According to the minister's answer, as I see it, the girl who has had training in office work has a poorer chance of obtaining entry into Canada than a girl who has not.


Mr. HLYNKA:: I realize that the minister has just taken over this department and that it may be difficult for him to reply to certain questions in detail. However, should he be in a position, with the assistance of his officials, to answer certain questions which I should1 like to ask, I would be grateful to him. Has the minister figures showing the percentage of the proposed immigrants from among the displaced persons who have been rejected on medical grounds.

Supply-Mines and Resources
The second question is, what are the health requirements or health standards off the department as applied to displaced persons and refugees? To put it in another way, what are the required minimum health standards which must be possessed toy displaced persons and refugees before they are admitted- to Canada?
In this connection I would point out to the minister that the officials of the preparatory commission of IRO are of opinion- that the health requirements of most countries are excessively high. Having in mind the conditions under which these people have lived for the past nine years, I consider it unreasonable of us to ex-peot them to be in perfect health. In cases I find the department usually refuses to admit displaced persons for health reasons. Then, when these persons refer the matter to me they explain that if one member of the family is just below the standard required the entire family is refused entry. At its sittings in Geneva last January, the preparatory commission of IRO felt that something should be done about this matter of the excessively high health standards required by a number -of countries. In one part of the report I find this statement:
It is the opinion of the executive secretary, that if the family unit can become self-supporting in a new country, the presence of one sick member of the family should not debar the whole family.
Then it goes on:
It is undoubtedly true that at present selection missions are removing the best of the refugees from the point of view of physical fitness, and are in themselves creating a hard core of the unfit. It is the view of the executive secretary that the standards imposed -are excessively high.
I could quote many passages fro-m- this lengthy -report, but I think -it will suffice if I refer to only one other, -which says that if the calorie intake of any section of the population falls below this emergency subsistence level- for any length of time, serious consequences must Ibe expected.
The daily calorie intake that should be provided for displaced persons is set -at 1,900. According to the report, I find that in -the French zone of Austria, fo-r instance, at times the people receive less than 1,000 calories a day, while the amount required by a normal person is about three thousand. So the minister will -realize that at this time it is not fair for us to demand that displaced -persons come up to the health standards we set prior to the second- great war.
There are so many arguments in favour of setting lowered health requirements for displaced persons that I do not think I should mention many more, but I believe the
humanitarian aspect should enter into this problem. The Canadian immigration teams and the department have been taking the attitude that they are dealing with persons as so much physical labour or so many numbers. We are not treating them as human beings; and I feel that at this time we certainly ought to take the human element into consideration.
I have before me a number of letters which I selected at random from the group of more than a thousand I now have running currently. An elderly lady finds herself in a displaced persons camp in Munich, Germany, which is in the United States zone. She is sixty-five years of age. She has been refused admits tance to Canada; yet this old lady has not a single relative anywhere in Europe. She has two sons in Windsor, Canada, and a daughter in St. Catharines. Her two sons and her daughter are willing to put up any guarantee that the department may wish to set. Yet, just because this woman is sixty-five years old and not in the best of health, she is denied the privilege of coming to Canada. She has no contagious disease of any kind, and I for one cannot see why the department could not admit this woman to Canada, so long as her sons and her daughter are prepared to take care of her.
Surely that would be a proper thing to do. Yet we treat these people as if they were not human beings. I have here another case; and I received three letters in one day from this person. He states that, because the medical examiners have found that his son's child was not in the best of health, it has been ruled that this family cannot come to Canada until and unless the child is completely cured.
Let me say to the minister that if he had an opportunity to see the conditions under which these people live he would know that the majority of them have to live in a space of about thirty-six square feet per individual. No child can become healthy under conditions of that kind. There is no hope that the child can recover, or that any other person could recover, unless they are given better quarters to live in and better food to eat.
Then I have the case of a young man on whose behalf someone has applied for entry into Canada. But, no, he was too light. His weight was not what the Canadian health officials thought it should be, with the result that he was rejected. The same man was accepted -by the United States army, and is today in the armed services of the United States. If he is heavy enough for the United States army, surely we should not have refused him admission to Canada.
Supply-Mines and Resources

And so on, down the line. I have with me a chart which has been drawn up by the preparatory commission of the international relief organization. When the medical examiners of that organization take down their records certain health standards are indicated. This chart sets forth an exacting health standard, a high standard indeed. However, even though the international relief organization approves the health standard of certain proposed immigrants, Canadian doctors refuse it. Surely, if a person is healthy enough to satisfy the doctors of IRO he should be healthy enough to satisfy our Canadian doctors; unless, of course, we want to rule out completely the humanitarian consideration, and various other considerations which enter into this matter. If we are not interested in the future of these people, and if we do not want them to be interested in the future of Canada, then that is the way to proceed. But if we want them to build up their homes in Canada; if we want them to spend their future years here; if we want them to be citizens of this country, then, even if there are one or two members in a family who may be a little weaker than the others, we should allow the weaker ones to come with the stronger ones.
The minister knows very well, coming from the same province as I do, the progress the pioneers of these various stocks have made in western Canada, and the contribution they have made to the development of our country. Surely we should have no doubt that they will be able to look after themselves, once they get here. All we have to do is to look at the relief records between 1930 and 1939. I can say with pride that we shall not find many names on those records of people of European origin. They got along as best they could, and perhaps on a little less than other people would require.
I say, therefore, that we should not require so much from them. When I take my seat I should like to have the minister comment on what I have said. I have been receiving letters every day from all parts of Europe and Canada. People are panicky because of the attitude of the Canadian medical men who examine these people, and who set up such rigid standards. It is unreasonable-and I say that frankly.
Would the minister explain to the committee the situation with respect to what is known as form 55. I have before me many letters, and I have others in my files, all of which state that sons, brothers or other relatives have remained in Europe for a long time, having failed to receive approval from the immigration authorities because form 55 has been lost. What does this mean? It was

explained to me by one of the Canadians who worked for the preparatory commission of IRO that a Canadian immigration official will call at a certain camp with the purpose of questioning a certain number of persons. The doctor will have a certain number of persons to examine medically. He may bring with him 100 files so as to examine 100 persons in that camp. However, the doctor becomes tired and decides to move on to another camp perhaps fifty or one hundred miles away. Having examined only fifty, he will not examine the other fifty, but will just leave them and take the documents along with him, moving off to the far end of Germany.
Another examiner will come to the same camp a few days later. Then, when these people ask him if they should appear for examination and questioning they receive the obvious answer, "We are sorry; we cannot deal with you because your form has been lost". Surely some system should be organized to see that only so many forms are taken by officials at a time, and that all are dealt with. Then these persons could be advised that they have to appear at a certain camp, and they would know where they stand. But this procedure of dragging the matter along month after month is not fair.
I have the case of a man here whose brother-in-law is at Bonnyville, Alberta. He states that his application was approved nearly two years ago. He has been waiting for the last six months in a transit camp, and he states that his form 55 is missing. Therefore he has to wait.
I do not like bringing up these matters. I would rather wish to be able to rise in my place and thank the government and the department for doing their best in dealing with this tragic problem-because it is a tragic problem. I appeal to the minister and to the officials of his department to do something, and to see that these things are organized on a somewhat better basis than they have been prior to now.
I know, for instance, that the Canadian immigration branch has an office in Heidelberg, Germany, in the United States zone. That is the Canadian immigration headquarters in the United States zone of Germany. These poor Canadian officials-I call them poor because they are asked to do an almost impossible task-have to take their typewriters and a large number of files along with them and drive in a car from camp to camp to examine prospective immigrants. They have no office; they simply call at a camp and are given a room where they can sit down and examine the people. They spend a little time in a camp and do not know where they are to

Supply-Mines and Resources
sleep or where they are to eat. The situation is not at all what it should be. If we are really serious about this thing, we should establish smaller stations where our officials can examine the people, so that they will not be forced to wait for months and months in a transit camp until some official comes along and examines them. The situation is bad;
I am sorry I must say that, but I feel that these unfortunate people deserve more consideration than they have been getting.
I have another question. Has the department medical examiners attached to Canadian embassies in Poland, Roumania, Hungary, *Czechoslovakia and the U.S.S.R.? If not, where should prospective immigrants residing in these countries go for their medical examination? They should be instructed exactly where to go. As it is now, they write all over creation trying to find out to whom they should apply for exit visas and permits to *come to Canada or to whatever other country they wish to go. Again, what procedure should be followed by these prospective immigrants residing in the countries I have named if settlement arrangements in Canada are found satisfactory? That procedure should be fully explained and the instructions set out clearly in the regulations, or perhaps a bulletin could be issued to the press.
I have another question which the minister is not obliged to answer. It has to do with the assistance which IRO is supposed to give to cover the transportation costs of an immigrant from a displaced persons camp. In the speech I made in this house on May 29 I quoted a paragraph from the minutes of the preparatory commission of IRO, in which it was clearly stated that, as from the middle of January- I think that was the date-even individual immigrants might apply for assistance to cover their transportation costs. That information has not been made public. I know a man in Winnipeg who is working on the railroad as an ordinary labourer and who has paid the fares of nine members of his family whom he is bringing over from Europe. Nobody had told him that part of the transportation costs may be covered and should be covered by IRO, according to the decision of the preparatory commission of IRO, by the money voted by IRO for that purpose. Surely that information should be made public. A shrewd person who knows about this assistance will take advantage of it, but those who know nothing about it pay the transportation costs themselves.
Again, any firm which brings out a group of workers is reimbursed by IRO for the transportation costs. Most industrialists know about that. As a matter of fact, I suppose
that IRO itself gets in touch with the industrialists and tells them: You paid out so much for transportation costs, and here is a cheque to cover it. But the ordinary individual does not know about this assistance, and so, I say, more light should be thrown on the various procedures that should be followed by the ordinary people, so that they will be told what they ought to know.
I cannot for the life of me understand why we treat this matter so lightly. To bring out an immigrant from a displaced persons camp to Canada is like pulling a tooth; it is so difficult. Certain cases which I referred to the department nearly three years ago are still pending. I have written and written to the department about them, and finally I get almost a stereotyped reply that the matter is now out of the department's hands and that I should apply to IRO. Then I write to IRO in Switzerland, and I get an answer from them that, so far as they are concerned, they have approved the application, and that it is out of their hands. Then I write to the Canadian immigration office in Europe and they tell me that they have approved it. The net result of all this is that the prospective immigrant is kept waiting for months and months before final action is taken.
The most unfortunate group of all in these displaced persons camps is the one composed of middle-aged and older people, fifty years of age and over. For those over sixty years of age there is absolutely no hope. After six years of war and three years in a displaced persons camp, living on the rations they have had to live on, their chances are very slim indeed unless some country will take up their case from a humanitariain standpoint. I appeal especially on behalf of these older people. If there is a relative in Canada who is willing to guarantee that his mother or father or uncle or some other relative in a displaced persons camp will not become a public charge in Canada, Canada should accept that guarantee and let the immigrant come forward.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Just before the minister answers the able remarks just made by the member for Vegreville, I should like to put in a word in support of what he said regarding form 55. These forms are filled out here; once they are approved, they go overseas, and then the merry-go-round begins. Form 55 is lost, or it is never where it is wanted. It is a terrible disappointment to Canadians in this country who want to bring members of their families to Canada to find that when they can provide for them, when they are acceptable under our laws, they still have months and months to wait, while they chase form 55 halfway around
*

Supply-Mines and Resources
Europe and finally track it down, Once they are approved and examined there, they have to wait for many -more hard months. I know of the shipping difficulties that the government have, and I have some sympathy with them on that score; but it seems to me that this administrative set-up could be a little more expeditiously handled.
I should like to endorse the remarks made by the hon. member for Vegreville in that respect particularly, and a lot of other things that he said tonight to the minister.


James Angus MacKinnon: I have listened attentively to the most distressing picture painted by the hon. member for Vegreville, and supported by the hon. member for Trinity. It is quite possible that, because the minister and the officials are sympathetic, we appreciate the distressing nature of the situation.
The department officials, and particularly Mr. Jolliffe who is in front of me, can tell a much sadder story than the one which has been recounted by the hon. member for Vegreville, because Mr. Jolliffe is a man of a large heart, patient, sympathetic, capable and1, I think, is doing a wonderful job as head of the immigration branch. I can assure hon. members that the department's approach to this problem is one of sincere sympathy.
In dealing with the various points mentioned by the hon. member for Vegreville, I shall be as brief as I can and still give what information I can. A question was asked as to the proportion of immigrants or displaced persons who have been rejected for medical reasons. It may be possible to get those figures, but I am sorry we have not them at the present time. If we can get them I shall be glad to give them to the hon. member or to any other hon. member interested.
I was asked as to the minimum health standards set up by the department. There are two tests, the tuberculosis test and the venereal disease test; otherwise people are expected to be in good mental and physical health.


Mr. FRASER:: They are X-rayed.


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes, they are all
X-rayed. The comment has been made that the standards are excessively high. I question that statement, but I believe that the standards should be kept high. Certain allowances are made, when we get our medical reports that the state of an immigrant's health is directly attributable to the life he or she has lived since becoming a displaced person, so long as there are not serious health difficulties such as tuberculosis or communicable diseases.
We do not break up families. If one member is much below the standard or is

sufficiently below the standard that he or she cannot be accepted we do not accept the other members of the family. That is the policy of the department. Whether it is right or wrong it is the policy arrived at after a great deal of earnest thought.
I may say that our doctors examine the applicants for admission to Canada and our immigration authorities take the advice of these doctors. Canada has done more for displaced persons than all other non-European countries put together. We have already admitted approximately 25,000 displaced persons.


Anthony Hlynka: How many of these came in group movements, and how many as individuals?


James Angus MacKinnon: Nineteen thousand
came in group movements, and about 7,000 as close relatives.
The matter of what is to be done with displaced persons who are substandard in health will have to be settled in some kind of international agreement.
In connection with form 55, the application forms are all sent to the teams in Germany by air mail as soon as the application is approved. In addition, the approved names are sent to the international relief organization by air mail. The IRO is responsible for bringing the immigrants to the immigration teams.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Have we a representative on the IRO?


James Angus MacKinnon: A number of Canadians. The question was asked as to what procedure was taken on applications in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and the U.S.S.R. These go to the Canadian missions where they are examined by a doctor approved by the Canadian authorities. We have no missions in Hungary or Roumania.
Comment was made on the cost of bringing these displaced persons to Canada, and reference was made to the fact that their relatives are being asked to pay for them where they are able to do so. The international relief organization has a limited budget and has to stretch it as far as possible. Canada has contributed $3,000,000 up to February of this year. That is more than anyone else has contributed except the United States of America and the United Kingdom.


George Hugh Castleden: Are any companies reimbursed for the cost of bringing them out, and are any private individuals reimbursed? The hon. member for Vegreville brought up that point.

Supply-Mines and Resources


Anthony Hlynka: That, of course is the
responsibility of IRO, not of the immigration branch. I brought it out for the purpose of clarifying the issue, so that this information would be published by the IRO or perhaps by the immigration branch, in order that the people would know who is responsible for the cost. Of course IRO is responsible.


James Angus MacKinnon: I have answered briefly, Mr. Chairman, but I have covered the principal points raised by the hon. member for Vegreville. I want to assure the committee that this whole problem is approached with the greatest sympathy. It is an overwhelming problem. I cannot understand how some of the officials in the immigration branch have stood up under the pressure to which they are being subjected. They are doing their utmost, as I say, with a difficult problem, and they deserve a great deal of credit.


Angus MacInnis: I listened with great
attention, as I am sure the committee did, to the hon. member for Vegreville. He made some points that are worthy of careful consideration by the immigration branch. One of the points that impressed me was the turning down of a whole family because one person in the family was not able to make the grade, to put it that, way, from a physical standpoint. We should look at the question somewhat differently from that of ordinary immigration. These are refugees. A refugee, if I understand the term, is a person seeking sanctuary, and when you give sanctuary to that person you are not doing so in order to benefit yourself. When we allow immigrants to come in; when we urge them to come to this country, we do so ordinarily because we want them, because it is good for us and not necessarily because it is good for them. It is purely a business proposition.


James Angus MacKinnon: It is not altogether selfish.


Angus MacInnis: There is no harm in being selfish as long as a person is intelligently selfish. The fact of the matter is that we are doing it because we want these people here. But when we are doing something for refugees wre are doing it for their benefit and not for ours, and it is hypocritical of us to take credit for the fact that we allow healthy persons from the refugee camps to come in, in order to make good producers in Canada. After every country has taken the cream-I do not know how many were there in the first place, a million and a half or so-who will take the rest? Who will take the cripples, the maimed, the ill. who cannot be productive in any country? If we are to do this in a
Christian charitable way, we Should be prepared to take our share of the sick and the afflicted, as well as those who can become good producers.


Douglas King Hazen: Is there any screening in the case of a parent who comes to Canada from the United Kingdom if a son living here undertakes that the parent will not become a public charge? Does the parent coming into the country have to be screened? Is he allowed to come in' if the son undertakes that he will not be a public charge?


James Angus MacKinnon: The only screening is to safeguard health. It is purely a matter of health.


Douglas King Hazen: Is there any screening of the son who lives in this country, or is his financial condition gone into to find out whether he is in a position to take care of the parent to see that that parent does not become a public charge?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that in such cases exceptions have been made.


Douglas King Hazen: I do not wish to go into particular cases, but I wish to bring to the attention of the minister or of the head of the immigration branch a case which I shall ask him to look into, because it is one in which, in my opinion, there was not proper screening, and in which the financial position of the son, who must have undertaken to look after this parent, was not carefully investigated. I refer to people who formerly lived in this country, who had to be looked after while they were here, and who went back to the old country. Now they are in this country again and are a cause of some worry to charitable people in the neighbourhood.


Mr. McCUAIG:: Is it a fact that no record is kept of people emigrating from Canada and going to other lands? Is no record kept by the government?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that we do not keep any record of people going out from Canada.
Mr. MACDONNELL OMuskoka-Ontario): I wish to say one word by way of agreement with the the remark made by the hon. member for Vancouver East. I understand that the United States has undertaken to receive a substantial number of displaced persons, and I wish to know w'hether we have considered our duty in the matter, because if we leave the whole of the task to those who are less able than ourselves it will never be done.


Duncan John McCuaig: With reference to the question I asked, I was informed that the dominion bureau of statistics gave information to the

Supply-Mines and Resources
senate that over 6,000,000 people had left Canada since confederation. Where did they get the record?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed, from the United States figures.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Immigration branch-
229. Repatriation of wives and dependents of members of the Canadian armed forces overseas, $117,000.
George Hugh Castleden: With your indulgence, Mr. Chairman, and that of the minister, may I ask a question with reference to item 225. It has to do with aerial photography. How much of that $1,240,000 was spent for commercial companies, how much for the Royal Canadian Air Force, and how much represents inter-departmental committee expenses? With the indulgence of the minister, I should like to get an answer. I beg your pardon for reverting to the item.


James Angus MacKinnon: Is that for last year's work?


George Hugh Castleden: It is the same item as last year's.


William Henry Golding: Order. I think we should dispose of the item that has been called, and if the hon. member wishes to revert to an item already passed that can be done when the present item is carried.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
James Angus MacKinnon: Mr. Chairman, I understand that the hon. member for Queens wanted to say something on item 224 and I would ask that we revert to that item.


William Henry Golding: Item 224, Indian affairs branch.


Mr. McLURE:: With your consent, Mr. Chairman, I can go ahead. Under this item I wish to discuss fur conservation for a moment or two. I have before me the answer to that now. I want to know how much of this vote was spent on fur conservation. I am informed that the bulk of it is spent on fur conservation, but I had a request that I find out what benefit this is to the Indians. A letter was written to me a short time ago to which I tried to give a fair answer, and with the information I can get here this evening it will be a good record. One fur conservation project which the department has had under its care is known as Summerberry. It was intended to conserve muskrats and it has turned out to be of great profit to the department. When I say "great profit" I mean that it is paying its own way. I wish to put on record the fact that this year, from the Summerberry rehabilitation of musk-

rats project, 103,000 skins were sold which realized 1294,580. If the department can continue this work of fur conservation it will do a great deal to benefit the Indians.
Another question which I would ask the minister to answer is this. Of what benefit is this to the Indians, and how many Indians are employed in the trapping of these muskrats? I understand from one of the officials that one-third of the trappers each year are Indians and that they earn enough money each year to equal a monthly income throughout the whole year. The reason I asked to have this put on the record is that I want to send' it to those who have been making the inquiry; and I know it is a good thing to send out, because the department has made a wonderful success of its fur conservation proposition in Summerberry near The Pas in Manitoba and also in any conservation areas it has under its control.


James Angus MacKinnon: The hon. member has asked what benefit this project is to the Indian. We require that one-third of the trapping licences will be reserved for Indians.


George Hugh Castleden: The question I wish to ask the minister has to do with item 225, $1,240,000. The item is for three different things: to defray the expenses of the interdepartmental committee on air surveys, payments to commercial companies and payments to the Royal Canadian Air Force for air photography. I should like to know how much is spent on each part; whether or not this commercial work has been let by tender to commercial companies; and whether these photographs, when they are finished, are available to commercial companies, we will say, for surveying tinfiber limits.


James Angus MacKinnon: I have not the exact figures before me, because the contracts have not all been let for this year. But the proportion will be about three to one; that is, three in favour of the R.C.A.F. to one in favour of the commercial companies. The work done by commercial companies is all let by tender. What was the other question?


George Hugh Castleden: The amount to defray expenses of the inter-departmental committee on air surveys.


James Angus MacKinnon: I am told that is a small item, practically nothing.


William Ross Macdonald: Carried.


Clarence Gillis: May I ask a question on item 229?


James Angus MacKinnon: Make it short, please.


Clarence Gillis: 
George Hugh Castleden: Will the minister give us a breakdown of that half million dollars in the supplementary estimates?


James Angus MacKinnon: May I give this explanation. That item is to provide for increased wage rates for employees paid on an hourly basis. There is also the sum of $70,000 for maintenance of highways in the following parks: Banff national park, $35,000; Kootenay national park, $20,000; Yoho national park, $15,000. These additional amounts are required for maintenance and replacing culverts on highways within these parks as the result of flood conditions in these regions.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian affairs branch-
770. Indian agencies-further amount required, $231,128.
George Hugh Castleden: The amount in the original estimates for Indian agencies was an increase of some $545,000 over the previous year, and this is for an additional $231,000. In the details of service at page 175 of the estimates, a decrease is shown in the number of Indian agents, superintendents, inspectors, et cetera. Today the minister said that the Indian affairs branch was following closely the recommendations of the committee on Indian affairs. The committee was somewhat disturbed about the fact that we did not have enough Indian agents. Here the department is asking for an additional sum of almost three-quarters of a million dollars, while there is a decrease in the number of Indian agents. Can the minister give us information as to what the increase is for, and whether or not it is the intention of the department to increase considerably, if not to double, the number of agents so that they can give us a little bit more supervision work among the Indians of Canada?


James Angus MacKinnon: The principal items
included in this increase are: supplies and materials, $10,000; telephones, telegrams and
postage, $7,000; printing, stationery and office equipment, $10,000; and then the large item, construction of buildings, works and structures, $137,500.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
137.	Expenditures for vocational training under the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act, 1942, and agreements between the dominion and provinces approved by the governor in council, including projects for training of persons to fit them for gainful employment, youth training, apprenticeship training, vocational training at the secondary school level, foremanship and supervisory training, as well as to provide for undischarged commitments of previous years (including certain items formerly under demobilization and reconversion), $3,377,500.
Mr. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):: I wish to ask for more information about that. May we be told something about it? There is a large increase, and I should like to know just what the point is.


Humphrey Mitchell: If my hon. friend will wait for a couple of minutes, I will give him a breakdown of the increase-


William Henry Golding: Shall the
item stand?


Humphrey Mitchell: -if the hon. member does not mind coming back to that.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: No.
Item stands.
Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940-
138.	Administration, including expenditures incurred in connection with the activities of the national employment service as delegated by the Minister of Labour in accordance with section 88 of the act, $18,465,000.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I realize that the administration has gone down in cost, but I want to get an idea about this. For example, I notice on page 144 of the estimates a considerable number of new posts set out. Might we have an explanation of the reason for these additions?


Humphrey Mitchell: The reason is the tremendous expansion in the coverage of the Unemployment Insurance Act. It is almost a paradox, but it costs the government more when we have full employment than when employment is below normal. By the very nature of things the organization is increased, together with the contribution by the government to the unemployment insurance fund. At present more people are employed.
Supply-Labour


James MacKerras Macdonnell: As the minister says, dt does seem a bit of a paradox. One would have thought that in a time of full employment, when you are [DOT]merely on the receiving end, there would not be nearly as much to do as when you are faced with the problem of unemployment. Is the answer that when you have unemployment all the fund does is automatically to make certain payments to those who are out of employment, or is any other duty carried on by the fund?


Humphrey Mitchell: One must not forget the tremendous numbers who pass through the employment offices. We spoke of the displaced persons this evening. The placement of those people is undertaken through the agency of the employment service. In the last year about seven hundred thousand people have passed through those offices, going from one job to another. One must remember that there has been almost a complete disappearance of what might be called private employment agencies. Most of the people brought from Great Britain under the Ontario immigration scheme were placed at work through the instrumentality of the employment service.
Another activity that has been carried on is the placement of university students in employment during the summer months. In fact almost every activity that has for its purpose the placement of men and women in employment is undertaken by the employment service. Today we have reached the point where some of the Canadian trade unions have made it part of their agreements that the employment agency Shall do the actual employment, rather than the old office at the gate we used to see in days gone by. A big organization like General Motors of Canada, for instance, uses the employment service exclusively. Then we have had the transference of labour, during the summer months particularly, from the western provinces to the east and vice versa, which is handled by the employment service.
I mentioned university students, and in that connection I brought along with me a letter from the students' administrative council, Hart House, University of Toronto, addressed to one of my officials in that city. It reads:
It is particularly difficult, in fact it is almost impossible, to express adequately in a letter the great debt of gratitude that this department owes to you and your department for the magnificent work which your officers and your department have accomplished nothin the university in placing this great student body in summer work.
The statistics which I have received from you speak for themselves. They are most impressive and such a tremendous job would have been im-

possible without devoted application to duty on the part of your officers who were at the university. Your own interest and co-operation has left nothing to be desired and I can only say that I look forward with the greatest of pleasure to renewing this association next year.
I do wish, however, to place on record my appreciation of the very valuable work done by Mr. Halse who for the past two seasons has been with us at the university. I have been stopped in the corridors, on the street, and elsewhere by the students who are grateful for the time and energy he took in their particular cases. I know that Mr. Halse spared no efforts towards anyone who was interviewed by him in seeing that they were suitably placed. He has done a magnificent job and we owe him as well a very great debt of thanks.
I will include the statistics of placement in my report to the president of the university whieh is sent to t'he provincial and dominion governments. I will be glad to send you a copy of this report when it is completed.
Yours sincerely,
"E. A. Macdonald" General Secretary-Treasurer.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I should like a little further information, and I am speaking to the minister as a man who, I believe, largely shares my own feeling that we want people to do as much as possible for themselves.


Humphrey Mitchell: Certainly I do.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: On pages 144 and 145 of the estimates I observe a whole list of new officials who have been appointed. Frankly I always have the feeling that, unless it is carefully watched, a department can grow, and that new jobs can grow also; and at the same time I feel that eighteen and a half million dollars is a lot of money. Would the minister turn to page 144 and look at these appointments? I take it that those shown for 1948-49 but not for 1947-48 are new appointments. About half way down the page I see these positions: assistant supervising inspector; chief contributions officer; chief planning officer; administrative officers, grade 1. I take it that this whole group are new appointments.
While I am on my feet, may I ask the minister also to explain the whole group at the top of page 145, who apparently also are new, since no item is shown for 1947-48. Can the minister explain just what new activities have been undertaken?
There is also this other question. Is the government taking over expenses which should be borne by the companies themselves? The minister said the companies were very glad to use this service. If it is relieving them of expense, that may well be so. If this is the only efficient way to do it, I am answered; but I should like to know.

Supply-Labour


Humphrey Mitchell: These are people who were previously temporaries and who are now made permanent, rather than additions to the staff. As a matter of fact, the strength of the employment service has been reduced by some 1,500 in the last eighteen months. I agree with my hon. friend that sometimes we forget that every time a civil servant is employed he becomes a charge upon the living standards of the producers of this nation. It is said that we are doing things for the employers. I believe the employers did a great many things for us, as a government; and that goes for all governments. Perhaps it is not too bad if the wheel turns the other way sometimes. My mind goes back to the old days in my hon. friend's city, when you saw on Bay street outside the Telegram office, and on the street where the Star is located, lines of people waiting to get the papers in order to look for jobs, and then running off to look them up themselves. Even in those days the Ontario government had an employment service. It is much more satisfactory if you can channel these people through an agency under the jurisdiction of the government. I believe that is better than the old days of the private employment agencies, when the worker paid for the service rendered.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I agree with the minister to this extent, that I have no desire to see queues on Bay street, which he described so well. I think he has answered my question. Do I understand that the list at the top of page 145 are people who were previously temporary?


Humphrey Mitchell: That is right.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Did 1 understand the minister to say there had been a shrinkage of 1,500 in the staff?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: On a rough calculation that would be a reduction of about $2,000,000 in salaries. I am taking 1,500 employees at $1,000 each, which would give $1,500,000. The reduction in the item is 8695,000. I realize there may be other additions. First of all, will he tell me the actual reductions in salaries.


Humphrey Mitchell: This represents reclassifications, increases in salaries and promotions. This was approved in the past couple of years. The figure is taken care of in that way.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I wish the minister would explain a little more fully his statement that this service is more expensive in a time of full employment.


Humphrey Mitchell: I think that is correct. The fewer people employed, the smaller are the contributions to the fund. The greater the employment, the greater are the contributions. There are contributions by the employer, the employee and the state.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I should have thought that was a comparatively small amount compared with the service required in finding employment or in making transfers if, in fact, there is a great deal of that going on.


Humphrey Mitchell: The administration of a fund covering 3,250,000 people is a man-sized job and takes a big organization. That is not the only part of it. There is the placement end of it. You have also the insurance end, and the contributions being made by the three parties to the fund. In addition to that, you have the payment of insurance benefits to those people who are entitled which, in turn, entails a good deal of bookkeeping.


Angus MacInnis: Perhaps it would clarify matters for the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario if it were pointed out that the payment of unemployment insurance benefits makes placement officers necessary. The recipient of unemployment insurance must come to the placement officers in order to find out if there is employment. The two must go together.


Clarence Gillis: This afternoon I asked questions of the Minister of Mines and Resources regarding the amount of co-operation between the Department of Labour and the immigration branch concerning displaced persons. I asked if they were being admitted into Canada after due regard to employment conditions in this country, and seeing to it that our own people are not displaced. The Minister of Mines and Resources stated at that time, as did also the Minister of Labour, that the matter would be answered by the Minister of Labour when his estimates were before the committee. I presume he is now in a position to do so.
I should like to ask a question regarding the unemployment insurance commission and its place in the field of the placement of employees in Canada. During the war, selective service performed a useful function. One could seek employment and be placed through the placement officials of the selective service personnel. Employers were compelled to register their requirements. The office performed a useful function, because employers were obligated to register their requirements, and selective service had the right to direct employees to employment.
Supply-Labour

This condition no longer obtains. I think it is a function in the unemployment set-up which at some time in the future will have to be restored.


Humphrey Mitchell: Do I understand the hon. member correctly, -that he believes there will have to be a restoration of direction of labour?


Clarence Gillis: Absolutely. If that is not done, the minister cannot stand in the house and tell me or other hon. members that he has a placement branch in his unemployment insurance set-up. He has no such thing. All he has is a group of officials who can interview prospective applicants for employment, and tell them where they may secure employment. In the great majority of cases the employers in this country are not placing their requirements in the unemployment insurance offices. They are picking and choosing to suit themselves. No longer has that office the right to direct employees to employers. I am saying that must come back some time; because I believe that in the not distant future we shall face a situation in Canada where these offices will have to perform that kind of function.
We have pockets of unemployment across the country, all the way from Vancouver in British Columbia to Louisburg in Nova Scotia. Immigration authorities are bringing to this country displaced persons from Europe. In the first analysis we decided we were bringing them in for humanitarian reasons. I should like to know from the minister under what type of contract these displaced persons are being brought in. What is the length of contract? What are these people obliged to do?
For example, I received a letter from a mining camp in northern Quebec advising me that displaced persons had been taken on in that camp. Under the terms of their agreement they were obliged to work for their employer for one year. During that time they were not permitted to join a union. Is that true?
Secondly, is the Department of Labour checking closely with our own unemployed pockets across the country to see to it that Canadians are placed first in employment, before people are brought into this country under the guise of relieving displaced persons camps in Europe, for humanitarian purposes, while actually they are replacing Canadians who should be employed? The minister said this afternoon that he would answer these questions. I would ask him to do so now.


Humphrey Mitchell: That is a pretty long bill. If I miss any, I shall come back to it later.


Clarence Gillis: I will remind you, if you do.


Humphrey Mitchell: First of all, I think my hon. friend tipped his hand as to the kind of state we would have to live in if his party were ever in power. I do not think he did it deliberately.


Clarence Gillis: Yes, I did it deliberately.


Humphrey Mitchell: Well, so long as we know-


Clarence Gillis: But not what you have in mind.


Humphrey Mitchell: Now, just a minute. In all humility, I suppose that during the war I had more power over the lives of men and women in this country than any other man has had in the history of North America. That was made necessary by war conditions. I can remember the objections my hon. friend raised, and quite properly, against directions given in the mining industry, but I always used to say to myself that the do's and don'ts and shalt's and shalt not's which I had to set in motion would not be allowed to impair the basic freedom of the people of Canada. I believe in the right to strike, but you do not allow that right when you say to a fellow: You are directed to such and such a job. That is a police state. When I said at the conclusion of the war that selective service would go down the drain I was convinced, against the opinions of many of my friends and others, that the resiliency of the Canadian people was such that over 1,000,000 men and women could pass out of the armed forces into industry and commerce and agriculture in this nation without the necessity of controls. I disagree with my hon. friend on his approach to this problem.


Clarence Gillis: Disagree on what?


Humphrey Mitchell: I was born in Great Britain, but I do not have to live there. However, I will say this, that when you start pushing people around and keep on doing it for a decade, particularly when those people are in the young and formative stage of life, you are not far from the kind of state that I am sure my hon. friend does not believe in and I do not believe in.


Clarence Gillis: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I asked a couple of questions and I would ask the minister to answer them. I do not understand what he is talking about when he is speaking of a police state.

Supply-Labour


Humphrey Mitchell: I have a perfect right to draw my own conclusions. I believe in the right of a man to quit his job if he wants to, and to refuse a job if he wants to.


Clarence Gillis: If he has a job. What about the 30,000 unemployed in the maritimes?


Humphrey Mitchell: My hon. friend has
asked me a good many questions and I will try to answer them all. At the moment we are providing transportation to jobs for people in Sydney, Halifax, Pictou, New Glasgow and Vancouver, and that movement has never stopped. My hon. friend will remember the situation in Windsor not very long ago. We received representations from the mayor and council of the city and from our own officials, and accordingly we made provision for the movement of men out of that area, but for some reason best known to themselves the men did not want to leave it. I suppose that is quite natural. We have paid transportation for about 2.800 people from the area to which my hon. friend referred.


Clarence Gillis: I thought that was discontinued last October.


Humphrey Mitchell: No, it is in operation at this moment.


Clarence Gillis: It was announced in the house that it was being discontinued.


Humphrey Mitchell: There has been some mention of displaced persons. I think it is fair to say of the three newly elected members of the C.C.F. in this house that they are, like myself, to all intents and purposes displaced persons. I gather that from the inflection in their voices.


Angus MacInnis: That is right.


Humphrey Mitchell: Most of us left the old country to better ourselves in this dominion, and it is only a matter of degree whether you come from the old country or from Latvia or Poland or some other country.


Mr. McIVOR:: Or Ireland.


Humphrey Mitchell: Or Ireland, as my good friend suggests. I was much impressed with what my good friend the hon. member for Vancouver East said when speaking of the problems of displaced persons. But what he said did not agree with what was said by the hon. member for Swift Current when he spoke not long ago in this city. I quote from the Ottawa Citizen, which I rarely do:
Mr. Bentley labelled the bringing of D.P.'s to Canada as a kind of fascism. "It was not kindness that prompted the action but an effort to bring in competition for Canadian organized
labour and to bring down wage bills. If carried on long enough it will end up with them all on the soup line."
That was the statement made by the hon. member for Swift Current, as reported in the Ottawa Citizen. I do not think he believes that any more than any other man in this house does. The government and the people of this country were motivated by the highest ideals when they assumed the obligation of taking a certain proportion of these displaced persons in Europe; and to say that they were brought out here to undermine the living standards of our own people is not a statement of fact.


Clarence Gillis: No one said that.


Humphrey Mitchell: I was just reading what the hon. member for Swift Current said, as reported in the Citizen. I hope he did not say that.


Clarence Gillis: That is just a sentence taken out of the context.


Humphrey Mitchell: No, it is not. I do not do that sort of thing. I will send the clipping over to my hon. friend. There is an old saying that when you accuse the other fellow you should take a look in the glass at yourself.


Clarence Gillis: You have not yet answered any of my questions.


Humphrey Mitchell: I am afraid my answers are not to my hon. friend's liking.


Clarence Gillis: What about the contract with displaced persons? It is nearly eleven o'clock now.


Humphrey Mitchell: I shall be here tomorrow. It is not a contract. It is an understanding. It is not a contract enforceable at law. I was charged with the responsibility of developing that idea, and it was done solely for the purpose of protecting the people involved. We took the position that these people should not be brought to Canada to undercut the living standards of our own people. I think it has worked out remarkably well. I have no knowledge of the denial of the right to any of these people to belong to any organization: I know a certain political party in this country-I am not referring to my hon. friend's party-which has gone out of its way to try to influence these people into a line of thinking such as they have left behind them in their home countries. On my own street I have seen girls who came to this country only six months ago from displaced persons camps, and you would never recognize them now for the same people. They look healthier; they are better dressed; they are happier; they are glad to be here. I have
Supply-Labour

in my files scores and scores of letters from men and women who have come to Canada from displaced persons camps and who are happy to be living in this land of freedom.
Let me say to those who talk so much about conditions in this country that I have some knowledge of the people who want to come to Canada. I have some knowledge in my department anyway of the people who want to come to Canada. I do not know of any applications to go back to the countries to which I have referred. Everybody wants to come to North America or to go to somewhere in the British commonwealth. Not long ago I talked to the minister of immigration of Australia. They are anxious to get these good people to emigrate to that country. I think they have set a target of 75,000 for the coming year. The only thing that is holding them up is the provision of shipping. In the years to come, I think these good people from these camps in Europe will give full credit to the Canadian people for the contribution they made to permit them to make a new start in life. Let us be decent about the matter. Let us approach them as human beings. I think it can be truthfully said that, as far as the government is concerned, we are doing our very best to see that these people are placed with good employers, without in any way impairing the living standards of the men and women engaged in industry.
I know, and the hon. member knows, there are people in this country who say that if you are not a communist you are a fascist. I know there are people in this country who are going up and down this land and giving statements to the newspapers. I know them by reputation. They say that everybody who does not agree with them is a fascist. I have never taken that point of view. This country could very well get along without these people. If they do not like the country in which they live, for goodness sake let them go to the country they like.


Clarence Gillis: I do not want the committee or the minister to get the impression that I was quarreling with the government for bringing displaced persons into this country. What I had in mind was whether, in the face of the unemployment problem in Canada, there was co-operation and understanding between the immigration branch, which is bringing them in, and the Department of Labour to see to it that they were brought in and placed in sections of Canada where they would not displace our own people? The minister did not answer that question.


Humphrey Mitchell: One thing at a time.


Clarence Gillis: Perhaps he will answer tomorrow. I have a great admiration for the selective service department which was set up during the war. I do not think the minister had a more effective section of his department in Canada. They did an excellent job. I was disappointed because, as soon as the war finished, the offices were closed. The greatest contribution that that section of the minister's department could make was in the transition from war to peace when it was really necessary, to a large extent, to a greater extent in fact than it was during the war, to direct the employer and the employee. That function dropped off.
When I said that I thought that, sooner or later, these employment agencies which work in co-operation with the unemployment insurance offices would resume that function. May I say that I believe they will in the not far distant future-I was not suggesting the police state. It is much better for a young fellow or a young girl to walk into an office in any section of Canada, speak to the placement officers and ask them if they have anything on the board in the way of employment in the town or city and to have the clerk in the office refer to the board and say, "Yes, So-and-so wants so many people", and be able to call that employer and have some authority to direct the boy or girl that is on the street to some kind of gainful employment under some kind of government supervision than to have what we have now, these young people walking the streets.
You have these offices set up across Canada, but employers are not using them. They are not placing their requirements in your employment insurance offices and in the hands of the placement officers. They have gone back to the point where they say they will hire whom they like, with the result that there are a lot of boys and girls on the road in Canada today with no employment, although there is employment if they were directed to it. For the minister to construe that kind of attitude as advocating the police state is not fair. I do not think he did so deliberately. I think he did so because he misunderstood exactly what I meant. What I meant was a place to which the unemployed of any town or city in Canada could go and receive some kind of intelligent direction into employment that exists in that city; but because of the haphazard method adopted now by employers and by those agencies, those who want work have no direction in finding it, and those who need employees are not in the position where they can place their orders with some recognized

Supply-Labour
responsible body to which the employees could be referred. That is all I meant by that.
The minister has not answered for my benefit the question on the type of contract under which displaced persons are brought to this country.
As I said this afternoon, when I made a few remarks to the Minister of Mines and Resources, if we are bringing displaced persons in from Europe for humanitarian reasons, for the purpose of rebuilding them and getting them back on their feet from the standpoint of health and the building of morale, that is fine. I am all for it. But the first obligation of the people of Canada and the government of Canada is to our own people, especially when one considers the unemployment that we have in the maritimes. As 'the minister knows, there are approximately 27,000 registered unemployed seeking work in Canada. It is the responsibility of the government of Canada to see that they are placed. To all intents and purposes they are displaced persons. We lose approximately 15,000 of these young people to the United States every year. In fact, we have been doing that for the last fifty years. It is time that we started to keep these young people at home in Canada. That is our best immigration.
The minister says that the policy of the government is not to undermine the standards of the people of Canada by bringing displaced persons in. I am not suggesting that it is government policy, but I am suggesting that some employers in this country will use these people for -that purpose unless the government is on its toes and sees that it is not done.
The main object of my questions this afternoon to the Minister of Mines and Resources was to make sure that the Minister of Labour, through whose department these people are brought in, consults with the lumber industry and the union in that particular industry to see that wages, conditions and standards are kept up in so far as these people are concerned. The same thing applies to the textile mills. There should be co-operation with the textile workers' union.
The minister made a statement in the house at one time that they had done that with those who were brought in for the needle trades. He said they were brought in with the co-operation and understanding of the garment workers' union. If that is still done, that is fine. But I pointed out to the minister a few moments ago that I received a letter from northern Quebec to the effect that in the gold mining industry of that section of the country displaced persons who were brought in there were under a year's contract, and during that year
they had practically no freedom to do anything except to work out the year under whatever conditions the management of the industry laid down. It is on these points that I want to be assured. My principal objective in asking these questions was to find out what will happen to the 27,000 displaced persons in the maritimes who are seeking employment in other parts of Canada.
A few moments ago the minister said that the arrangements in his department to move them to other parts of Canada were still in effect. Well, I remember distinctly-and I am now speaking from memory-questioning the minister on this point during the present session. He informed the house at that time that the regulations under which they had moved some 4,000 people from the maritimes into central Canada expired in October, 1947. As far as I know, until the present time these regulations have not been re-enacted or revised, and it is on these points that I want some assurance.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Eleven o'clock.


William Henry Golding: The hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario asked for leave to discuss item 137, though we had passed it. That discussion took place, and I think we should pass 137. Item 142 is the one before the committee.


Angus MacInnis: I think you must be moving very fast, Mr. Chairman. I can follow fairly swift counting, but I have only got as far as item 138.


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes, item 138.


William Henry Golding: The hon.
member for Muskoka-Ontario asked to have item 137 discussed, and we were past that. We were past item 141. He also wished to say something on item 138. Item 137 we should pass now, and item 142 is the one before the committee.


Angus MacInnis: I am agreeable to item 137 passing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Angus MacInnis: On item 138 I wish to ask the minister some questions.


Humphrey Mitchell: I wish to reply to the hon. member for Cape Breton South and the hon. member for Vancouver East, and I think we had better wait until tomorrow.


Clarence Gillis: We may be in a better humour tomorrow.
Progress reported.

Supply-Mines and Resources



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: Tomorrow we
shall consider the amendment of the senate to Bill No. 338, respecting income tax. Then we shall proceed with Bill No. 395, which is an income tax agreement between Canada and New Zealand; then Bill No. 396, the Foreign Exchange Control Act, then Bill No. 397, to amend the Emergency Exchange Conservation Act. Then we shall go into supply on the estimates of labour, fisheries, national revenue, defence, public works, legislation and veterans affairs.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:

[Stage Direction]
Indians affairs branch-
213.	Branch administration, $110,187.
214.	Indian agencies, $1,963,366.
215. Reserve and	trusts-administration, $129,237.
216.	Welfare of Indians, $2,271,787.
217.	Grants to agricultural exhibitions and Indian fairs, $7,500'.
218.	Education-Indian education, $3,166,778.
219.	Grants to residential schools, $1,994,140.
220.	Grant to provide additional services to Indians of British Columbia, $100,000.
Immigration branch
[Stage Direction]
221.	Administration of the Immigration Act, $494,733.
222.	Field and inspectional service, Canada, $2,632,232,
223.	Field and inspectional service, abroad, $661,232.
Indian affairs branch-[DOT]
224.	Fur conservation, and development of native crafts, and to authorize, subject to the approval of the governor in council, the appointment of such extra temporary officers, clerks and employees as may be necessary for the purpose of this item, $286,060.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch-
225.	Payments to Royal Canadian Air Force and commercial companies for air photography, and to defray the expenses of the interdepartmental committee on air surveys, $1,240,000.
226.	Construction and equipment of an extension to the metallurgical laboratories, Booth street, Ottawa, including consulting, engineering and design fees, $130,000,
Lands and development services branch-
227.	Land division, Alaska highway-legal, survey and other costs of acquiring right-of-way, flight strips and easements; and for the rental >f lands leased to the crown, $9,000.

Immigration branch-[DOT]
228.	For expenditures in connection with looking after Canadian interests abroad, $100,000.
229.	Repatriation of wives and dependents of members of the Canadian armed forces overseas, $117,000.
230.	British evacuee children, $2,000.
744.	Departmental administration - further amount required, $20,543.
Bureau of mines-
745.	Mineral resources investigations-further amount required, $215,582.
746.	Investigations of radio-active ores-further amount required, $17,260.
Dominion forest service-
747.	Forest research and investigations- further amount required, $54,669.
748.	Forest products research - further amount required, $55,851.
Geological survey of Canada-
749.	Geological surveys-further amount required, $58,440.
Surveys and mapping bureau-
7)50. International boundary commission- further amount required, $4,090.
751 Legal surveys-further amount required, $15,220.
752.	Map compilation and reproduction-further amount required, $17,270.
Dominion water and power bureau-
753.	Dominion water and power bureau, including the administration of the Dominion Water Power and Irrigation Acts-further amount required, $20,060.
754.	To provide for studies and surveys of the Columbia river watershed in Canada-further amount required, $20,069.
756.	Geographical bureau-further amount required, $21,500.
Dominion observatories-
756.	Dominion observatory, Ottawa-further amount required, $9,560'.
757.	Dominion astrophysical observatory, Victoria, B.C.-further amount required, $6,500.
Lands division-
758.	Administration of dominion, ordnance and admiralty and public lands; seed grain collections-further amount required, $37,130.
Northwest territories and Yukon services- Mackenzie division-
759.	General administration, operation and maintenance of services, including Wood Buffalo park-further amount required, $46,815.
760.	Forest conservation, including Wood Buffalo park-further amount required, $20,060. Roads, buildings and water systems-construction and improvements -
761.	Roads-further amount required, $50,000.
762.	Buildings-further amount required, $40,000.
763.	Arctic division-buildings, $35,500.

Supply-Labour
Yukon division-
764.	Administration-further amount required, $4,100'.
765. Buildings-further	amount required,
[Stage Direction]
National parks services-
766.	National parks and historic sites services *-further amount required, $524,850.
Dominion wildlife service-
767.	Wildlife resources conservation and
development, including administration of the Migratory Birds Convention	Act-further
amount required, $40,150.
768.	Special projects-To provide for dominion's share of joint dominion-provincial survey of Yictoria-Patricia airport road in British Columbia, $4,000.
769.	To provide for the 1948-49 dominion contribution to the. cost of section B, Cranberry Portage to Cuprus mines, of the proposed road between The Pas and Plin Flon in Manitoba for which a dominion-provincial agreement is pending, $100,000.
770.	Indian agencies-further amount required, $231,128.
771.	Reserves and trusts-administration- further amount required, $205,101.
772. Education-Indian	education-further amount required, $474,710.
773.	Grants to residential schools-further amount required, $458,000.
774.	Administration of the Immigration Act -further amount required, $77,840.
775.	Field and inspectional service, Canada- further amount required, $198,658.
776.	Field and inspectional service, abroad- further amount required, $685,699.
777.	To provide for the costs incurred in carrying out the immigration-by-air plan, over and above the net amounts received as fares, and to provide authority for applying the net amounts received as fares to the reduction of the total cost of the plan, $1,340,940'.
778.	Grant to Mrs. Dorothy L. Livingstone, widow of Hugh Livingstone, whose death resulted from an accident in the bureau of mines laboratories, $1,000.
779.	To complete the printing of a report on the natural resources and development of Canada's northwest region (revote), $1,450.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE General services-
231.	Grants to military associations and institutes, as detailed in the estimates, $116,950.

[Stage Direction]
131.	Departmental administration, $701,241.
132.	Annuities Act, $671,606.
133.	Fair wages, conciliation, industrial relations, industrial disputes, investigations, including the administration of legislation relating thereto, and for activities re promotion of cooperation in industry between labour and management, $283,431.
134.	International labour conference, $42,000.
135.	Labour Gazette and other publications authorized by Labour Department Act, $83,164.
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act, 1942'-
136.	Administration (formerly under demobilization and reconversion) including expenses of vocational training advisory council, $55,800'.
137.	Expenditures for vocational training under the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act, 1942, and agreements between the dominion and provinces approved by the governor in council, including projects for training of persons to fit them for gainful employment, youth training, apprenticeship training, vocational training at the secondary school level, foremanship and supervisory training, as well as to provide for undischarged commitments of previous years (including certain items formerly under demobilization and reconversion), $3,377,500.
Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940-
138.	Administration, including expenditures incurred in connection with the activities of the national employment service as delegated by the Minister of Labour in accordance with section 88 of the act, $18,465,000.
139.	Government's contribution to unemployment insurance fund, $17,000,000.
140.	Reinstatement in Civil Employment Act. 1946; placement of labour planning; history of war services; custody of records and coordination of stevedoring, $164,075.
141.	Manpower statistics unit, $30,000.
{See page 5780).

[Stage Direction]
Friday, June 25, 1948