1953-04-17

Hon. F. G. Bradley (Secretary of State):: On Monday last, April 13, the hon. member for Royal (Mr. Brooks) asked me if the government had arranged to meet representatives of the national council of Canadian prisoners of war and if so when such meeting was to take place. I only received notice of the question as I came into the house and did not have the relevant details. During the last few days I have been absent from the house but I would now like to answer the question by saying that my colleague, the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Lapointe), received representatives of the national council of Canadian prisoners of war on February 18 last, after which he brought their representations before the government. After a great deal of consideration I was authorized to address a letter to the secretary of the national council of Canadian prisoners of war, a copy of which I now table.


Mr. Knowles:: May I ask the Secretary of
State a supplementary question concerning the reply which he has just given to the question of the hon. member for Royal? Has consideration been given to the recent request of that association that a committee of theirs be given an interview with a committee of three members of the cabinet?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Some days ago three members of the organization did call at my office, and asked me if I would give consideration to a further interview in connection with these matters. After giving some consideration to the subject I came to the conclusion that, unless there was some further material which had not been submitted, no good result would be served by any further conferences with the government, and I advised this organization accordingly.


Mr. Maclnnis:: May I ask a further supplementary question? As this letter is in answer to a question asked on the orders of the day could it not be printed in today's Hansard as part of the minister's reply?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I have no objection.


Mr. Speaker:: Is that agreeable to hon.
members?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
(For text of letter, see appendix, pages 4070-71.)


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. A. Bradeile (Cochrane):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a request to the Secretary of State for External affairs (Mr. Pearson), of which I gave him notice.
Would the minister care to comment on the important statement made by President Eisenhower yesterday on the subject of world peace?


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, the president's statement to which the hon. member has referred is, I think, an inspiring and heartening declaration of the specific purposes and policies of the United States and as such it is of very great importance indeed. With the consent of the house it might be useful if I did put on the record one or two sentences from that statement because I think they embody principles to which we would be glad to subscribe in this house and in this country.
The president emphasized in his statement the "readiness of the free nations to welcome sincerely any genuine evidence of peaceful purpose enabling all peoples again to resume their common quest of just peace." Then he went on to state in this connection that a new leadership has assumed power in the Soviet union. "This new leadership," he said, "confronts a free world aroused, as rarely in its history, by the will to stay free," and "this free world knows-out of the bitter wisdom of experience-that vigilance and sacrifice are the price of liberty." Mr. Eisenhower then added:
This is the kind of free world which the new Soviet leadership confronts. It is a world that demands and expects the fullest respect of its rights and interests. It is a world that will always accord the same respect to all others.
The president stated that "the first great step along this way must be the conclusion of an honourable armistice in Korea," and that "this means the immediate cessation of
4006

Inquiries of the Ministry hostilities and the prompt initiation of political discussions leading to the holding of free elections in a united Korea." In that connection, Mr. Speaker, some additional hope has been given to the possibility.,, at least, of an armistice taking place by a unanimous decision of the United Nations political committee yesterday on a resolution on this subject.
The president went on to indicate in eloquent words that "the peace we seek, founded upon decent trust and co-operative effort among nations, can be fortified not by weapons of war but by wheat and by cotton; by milk and by wool; by meat and by timber and by rice. These are words that translate into every language on earth. These are needs that challenge this world in arms. This idea of a just and peaceful world is not new or strange to us." Then Mr. Eisenhower made a proposal which must, I am sure, arouse the interest of all peoples, to the effect that the United States government "is ready to ask its people to join with all nations in devoting a substantial percentage of the savings achieved by disarmament to a fund for world aid and reconstruction. The purposes of this great work," he added, "would be to help other peoples to develop the undeveloped areas of the world, to stimulate profitable and fair world trade, to assist all peoples to know the blessings of productive freedom." He said:
I know of nothing I can add to make plainer the sincere purpose of the United States.
This statement of purpose which I have just mentioned is one to which I am sure, Mr. Speaker, this house and the people of Canada would be glad indeed to subscribe.



INTERNATIONAL WHEAT AGREEMENT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. L. E. Cardiff (Huron North):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce which relates to a press report appearing in this morning's Globe and Mail in which the minister is reported as having said he had no intention of making a special trip to London in an attempt to get Britain's approval of the new international wheat agreement. Does the minister not consider the signing of the wheat agreement by Britain as of vital importance to Canada and the Canadian farmer?


Righi Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I subscribe to that statement and consider it is important to Canada that Britain does sign the wheat agreement. I believe also, however, that we


in Canada must make our decision and Britain has to make hers. I know of no new facts that I could put before the British government if I went to Britain. All we Canadians could do during the long negotiations was - to make the facts known and let the United Kingdom government reach its own decision.


Mr. J. G. Diefenbaker (Lake Centre):: I
should like to ask a supplementary question arising out of the reply the minister has given. Would he be prepared to comment on a story appearing in yesterday's Winnipeg Free Press, which reads:
As matters stand at present Canada Is entitled to sell 250 million bushels to participating countries and the United States 270 million bushels, in a total market which includes Britain.


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


John George Diefenbaker: If I might just add one more line, then I can base my question upon that.
However the United States will not accept this ratio with the British staying outside the agreement.
Is the minister prepared to say whether or not, if Britain does not enter the agreement, Canada would be entitled to the ratio of 250 million bushels as compared with 270 million for the United States?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The United States, Canada
and Australia are signing the agreement. There are about 600 million bushels spoken for under the agreement. Without Britain, there will be around 400 million bushels. I might say that in arriving at the 600 million bushel quantity we received applications for something over 75 million bushels from importing countries, which was in addition to the amount that could be provided under the allocations the exporters were willing to make. In any consideration of the future, we must keep in mind that the British will require 200 million bushels of wheat from the world supply. Whether they purchase it under the agreement price or the class II price does not alter the fact that the United Kingdom will require wheat. I do not think Canada, the United States or Australia would like to commit themselves, within the agreement, to the point where they cannot take care of Britain's needs. I do not know what the agreement will look like. If after the middle of July it is found that Britain has not acceded there will have to be a meeting and a new allocation made. Just what that will be, I do not know.
. INCREASED FREIGHT RATE



CROWSNEST PASS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. I. Hetland (Humboldt):: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Trans-

port. In view of the board of transport commissioners' intention to lift the ceiling on rates on grain moving in the west to Canadian markets, according to a report in this morning's Ottawa Citizen, will the minister say whether or not this constitutes a threat to the Crowsnest Pass agreements?


Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport):: The hon. member was kind enough to send me a copy of the article which appeared in this morning's Citizen. I have read it and, from my understanding of it, it would not appear that the Crowsnest rates are affected in any way whatever by the application now before the board for equalization. In any event, it is this parliament which determines whether or not the Crowsnest rates are to be changed, and thus far there has been no move in this house to amend the Crowsnest rates agreements.



POST OFFICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Postmaster General whether or not he has received from the historical and scientific society of Manitoba a request for the reopening of the post office in the old home of William Ross in Winnipeg?


An hon. Member:: Order paper.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is the Postmaster General in a position to make an announcement on this matter?


Hon. Alcide Cote (Postmaster General):: received the hon. member's notice of his question on my way to this house. Unfortunately, I have not had time to communicate with the department. I shall take this as notice of a question and will give him a reply as soon as I receive the information.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Is the Minister of Resources and Development aware of the strike of lending institutions in Winnipeg against lending money for the building of small homes? What steps does the government intend to take to make sure that the purposes of the National Housing Act are fulfilled?


Hon. Robert H. Winters (Minister of Resources and Development):: There is no such
08108-254J
17, 1953
Co-operative Credit Associations strike by lending institutions against the lending of money for the construction of small homes in Winnipeg.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is not the way we hear it.



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. F. Higgins (St. John's East):: Mr. Speaker, is the Minister of Fisheries now in a position to answer the question which I asked him on Wednesday and which he could not read?


Hon. James Sinclair (Minister of Fisheries):: The hon. member was good enough to repeat the question to me afterwards. It had to do with the report of a committee which he had thought was inspecting storm damage in Newfoundland. The committee down there is making a report of the losses over recent years in the hope it will be able to suggest a policy of insurance for fishermen's boats. It has nothing to do with the specific storm losses of last winter.



CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT MEASURE PROVIDING FOR ORGANIZATION AND SUPERVISION OF ASSOCIATIONS

Hon. Douglas Abbott (Minister of Finance) moved: the second reading of Bill No. 338, respecting co-operative credit associations.
He said: Mr. Speaker, this act provides for the establishment of co-operative credit associations operating in more than one province under the supervision of the superintendent of insurance. Before any such national association may operate it will have to come to parliament for incorporation by a special act.
This legislation is introduced at this time because a group of provincial central cooperative societies has announced its intention to apply to parliament to be incorporated as a national co-operative association. It is the government's view that if parliament is to approve such legislation it is desirable that there be available suitable safeguards.
The main object of a national association will be the receiving of deposits from its members and the loaning of money to its members and making other approved investments. This is the fundamental function of provincial co-operative credit associations. Hon. members will realize that at certain times there will be surplus cash on deposit with a member operating in one part of the

Co-operative Credit Associations country while there may be a demand for loans in another part of the country. However, with the establishment of a co-operative credit association, it will be possible to loan surplus funds to members requiring cash for loans on a national basis thereby overcoming the present provincial limitation.
The members of an association will be cooperative credit societies incorporated by special act or declared by parliament to be eligible to become members of an association, not more than ten co-operative corporations (not being co-operative credit societies) and not more than fifteen natural persons.
It is provided that before an assocation commences accepting deposits and making loans it must obtain a certificate from the treasury board. This certificate will be granted only after the association has satisfied the board that it has complied with the provisions of the act.
The lending and investment powers of an association are subject to adequate safeguards in order to prevent its assets from being too heavily concentrated in one particular form and to preserve liquidity. For example, an association may not make any loan or investment if its cash on hand and on deposit with the chartered banks is less than five per cent of its own deposit liabilities.
There is provision for the appointment of auditors in a manner similar to that in the Bank Act. In addition there is a requirement for submitting annual reports to the government. The superintendent of insurance, who now has supervision over certain insurance, trust and loan companies, will have supervision over an association, and penalties are provided for violations of the provisions of this act.
I believe that hon. members are fully aware of the necessity of this legislation. The growth of co-operative credit societies in Canada in recent years has been widespread. As the operations of these organizations will undoubtedly include operations which are clearly of a banking nature, it is desirable that if these associations are going to operate on a national basis they should be under federal legislation as are the chartered banks.
I propose that when this bill receives second reading it be referred to the banking and commerce committee. At that time the superintendent of insurance and the officers of my department will be available to explain its provisions and discuss them with members of the committee.


Mr. J. M. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, from what the minister has said it

will be clear to hon. members that this is an important bill. It has eighty-five sections. It has come into the hands of members, I believe, only within the last few minutes. Notwithstanding the fact that it is proposed to refer this bill to a committee, it does not seem to me that we should be asked to give it second reading with no chance to hon. members to have digested it or to have put themselves in a position even to make general comments on the principle of it. For that reason I hope the minister will agree that we shall not be asked at this time to pass the motion for second reading and to refer it to the committee.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Mr. Speaker, the principle of the bill is an extremely simple one. I have outlined it. Under ordinary circumstances I would perhaps be only too happy to accede to my hon. friend's request; but as he knows, it is necessary for me to leave tomorrow and I shall be away for over a week. I am attending the NATO meetings in Paris. I would hope that this bill could be given second reading, the principle approved, and that it could be referred to the banking and commerce committee for detailed study. It was announced in the speech from the throne. The reason that it has not been presented earlier is that the drafting has been going on in consultation with the Department of Justice, the superintendent of insurance, the officers of my department and the officials of some of these provincial co-operative societies, and it has been a longish job. While it is a long bill, in the main most of the provisions are closely analogous to the supervising provisions in the Trust Companies Act and the Loan Companies Act. I think we should try to give it second reading today.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Speaker, I do not want to be un-co-operative but I would point out to the minister that if the motion stands until Monday, only one day will have been lost in the committee proceedings; certainly it can go forward while the minister is away and should do so. When the resolution came before the house, it was passed automatically. This is the first time there has been any explanation. I still hope, Mr. Speaker, that the second reading may wait over until Monday. I assure the minister that there will be the utmost cooperation then in dealing with the matter. I would hope that he would agree, and I therefore should like to move the adjournment of the debate.


Mr. Argue:: Mr. Speaker,-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. If there is a
motion-


Douglas Charles Abbott: Mr. Speaker, ordinarily I would agree to the suggestion which has been made but, under the circumstances, I really do not feel that I can do so. I am sure my hon. friend can have ample opportunity to speak on the bill on third reading. The principle of the bill is extremely simple. We provide, by special act, for incorporation of these credit societies and allow them to operate in the general way that I have indicated. The detail is extremely important, but the principle is extremely simple.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker-


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I just want
to add one thing, Mr. Speaker. It is perfectly true that in one sense the principle is familiar because these co-operative associations have been operating in various provinces, as we know, with the concurrence of everybody. But I still maintain that, however simple the principle may be, to have an important matter of this kind taken through the resolution stage and the second reading with no opportunity for informed discussion is a procedure that is unsound.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Green:: Mr. Speaker, if I may be
permitted to say one word, I should like to suggest to the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) and to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) that they should not press for this second reading this morning. After all, the debate on second reading is the main debate on any measure. When the Minister of Finance says that the matter can be debated on third reading, that is setting a practice which is extremely unsound. I believe that we are being reasonable in asking that the second reading be allowed to stand over until Monday so that we can at least read the bill.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It was announced last night
as part of today's business.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker, I rise at this
time to support the second reading of this bill.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. If there is to be
a motion for adjournment it will have to be dealt with. I might point out that at the moment there is no motion regularly before me.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker-


Douglas Charles Abbott: With some reluctance, Mr. Speaker, I must take the position that I think we should proceed this morning. I cannot agree to the suggestion which has been made.


Mr. Fleming:: May I ask the Minister of
Finance a question?
Co-operative Credit Associations


Mr. Coldwell:: Mr. Speaker, I wonder who has the floor? It seems to me that my friend the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) has been trying to get the floor for some little time but has not been recognized.


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member for
Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell) is not going to speak further, I will call on the hon. member for Assiniboia.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the principle of this bill. I believe the principle is simple, namely that of establishing, by law, provision for central credit societies. While I have not had the opportunity to look at the bill carefully, clause by clause, I feel that the principle is a good one. I for one can support second reading of the bill at this time. I believe that our credit unions have provided excellent credit facilities and a real service to the membership in the various credit unions in the different provinces in Canada.
Credit unions are in the intermediate and short-term credit field. They are prepared to lend money to their members, many of whom could not obtain loans through the regular lending facilities of the chartered banks. I feel that they have provided a very beneficial service, a service that is not provided and will not be provided to the same extent by the chartered banks.
Another thing, the membership of credit unions support the co-operative philosophy. They believe that by banding themselves together and forming a co-operative for the purpose of pooling their available cash so that it may be lent to their members upon application they are taking profits out of this particular business, namely, the lending of money. They feel that the philosophy of credit unions, the philosophy of co-operatives, is good and sound philosophy, and so they support credit unions not only because of the facilities they provide but because they believe in the principles behind co-operatives and credit unions.
I have had some experience in my own province with the workings of credit unions, and I know countless people who have been able to obtain money from credit unions without security, who would not have had any opportunity to obtain that money through chartered banks, and who, if they obtained the money from small loan companies, would have had to pay an excessive rate of interest. There are many farmer members of credit unions who have been able to borrow money to pay off their obligations when they had an opportunity to pay them at a considerably reduced amount because of a cash discount that was provided.

Co-operative Credit Associations These credit unions are making loans to their members tor the purchase of home furnishings, automobiles, farm machinery, and, as I said, have lent money for the purpose of paying off indebtedness on their property.
It is difficult for a single credit union to have the necessary reserves each and every year and each and every month of the year. So within the provinces, or within certain provinces, central credit societies have been established. In that central credit society the membership is composed of credit union associations. By a hundred or two hundred individual credit unions becoming members of the central society they can pool their funds; they can provide for credit unions that need a large amount of money for the purpose of loans, moneys in addition to that available in the local credit union.
This bill is merely extending the principle that now prevails in the central credit societies within the province. When this bill is finally passed, as I am sure it will be, and becomes the law of the country, and after credit unions have made available to them the provisions of the act by forming cooperative credit associations, I believe they will provide greater stability and greater security for the functioning of the various individual credit unions.
I have before me a publication of the Department of Agriculture for 1951 called "Credit Unions in Canada". It shows the very large number of Canadians who are now members of various credit unions in Canada. For example, in 1945, 590,000 Canadians were members of credit unions. By 1951, six years later, that number had almost doubled to
1,137,000	members. Credit union history is short in Canada; it extends back only 50 years, but progress has been rapid. In 1920, for example, there were only some 30,000 members in all the credit unions in Canada. That shows the phenomenal growth of credit unions and the fact that they are playing an increasingly important role in Canada.
I believe that credit unions are very desirable and that this bill will assist in the functioning of the credit unions in the various provinces. I know that the bill will be referred to the banking and commerce committee, where we shall have an opportunity to go over it clause by clause. If there are any questions on any specific items that we wish to raise I know that we shall have an opportunity to do so and shall receive a full explanation.
I am prepared to support the second reading of this bill today; but if it should be the desire of the house to postpone discussion to another day I would have no objection to that being done. My main interest is to

welcome the bill and to see that a bill of this kind becomes law in Canada, because I feel it will serve a very useful and important purpose.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I should
like to make clear that I was opposing only the procedure; that I, like others, am in favour of the principle of the bill. What I am against is this hurried procedure.


Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River):: I feel
that we should have had the bill in our hands earlier than we did in order to be able to give it some study. But if it is thought desirable to go ahead with the second reading today, as the minister indicated he should, then I should like to say a word on the principle of the bill, although it might have been better to leave it over until the first of the week so that we would have had more time to study it.
I listened to what the minister said in his short statement. With his exposition of the principle of the bill I found myself in complete agreement. On behalf of my group I should like however to reserve the right to enter into a somewhat longer discussion of the bill at another time, if that can be arranged; when clause 1 is called in committee I presume that will be possible. We shall have an opportunity of studying the bill in the banking and commerce committee and of hearing any evidence that anyone wishes to give in that committee.
I support the principle of the bill; I think it is excellent. Anything that will strengthen and stabilize the individual credit unions throughout this country is good; it will help them to extend the services which they have been giving to the people of the country.
The credit unions, many of which are being organized every year throughout all of Canada, are organizations for the extension of short-term loans mainly to those who may require accommodation but who may not be considered to have enough of the kind of security that is asked for by the chartered banks. No source of small loans has as yet been provided for this type of borrower except by the small loan companies in Canada, and everybody knows that most of these small loan companies are nothing but loan sharks. They do prey upon the unfortunate who seem to have no other source of short-term financial assistance.
I want to say that anything we can do to extend and encourage the principle of cooperative self-help upon which credit unions are based is providing assistance to those people who now have to go to the loan sharks. Under the law of Canada these small loan companies are able to charge 24

per cent-they call it 2 per cent per month. But I want the house to know my investigation shows me that by compounding on their monthly balances they raise that interest to a rate of more than 30 per cent simple interest per year.


Mr. Nowlan:: Service charges.


Solon Earl Low: Yes, service charges. I say it is not right that we have not provided in this country some organization that can extend to those borrowers who are forced into the hands of the small loan companies the amount of accommodation they require at a decent rate of interest they can afford to pay.
I say that anything that will encourage co-operative self-help, the basis of the principle of credit unions, is good. For that reason I welcome the introduction of this bill, and certainly I shall give it very careful study between now and the time we go into . committee.


Mr. F. H. Larson (Kindersley):: Mr. Speaker, co-operative credit unions hold a high position, and the government obviously is supporting that position by the introduction of this bill. I do not feel the bill will interfere particularly with the operation of commercial banks or with banking business generally because, as has been said before, these co-operative credit unions are not normally operating in the fields in which banks would be interested. The financing of the purchases of heavy machinery for individual farmers and for others is covered by farm improvement loans which have been instituted by the government.
It has been stated before that these unions cover a field which normally is not covered in any other way. My reason for believing that there is a certain amount of urgency in connection with the immediate passage of the bill, and the setting up of the legislation, is that these co-operative credit unions have a large amount of money on deposit, and they are and for some time have been making loans. They do not appear to fall into any classification under which they would be brought into line with normal banking procedure and banking regulations.
As I understand the principle of this bill, the intention is to do that. The bill gives protection to depositors who put money into these credit unions, and sets Up some sort of regulation as to what percentage can be lent to private individuals, without security, and what percentage must be held on deposit for reserve. This is timely legislation. I think it should be hurried through as quickly as possible, because even the co-operative
17. 1953
Co-operative Credit Associations members themselves, who sponsor these unions, realize that regulations such as are set up in the bill are necessary and vital to the health of the co-operative unions and to the successful carrying on of their business for a number of years, no matter how economic conditions may vary one way or another.
I support the bill and believe it should be brought before the committee as quickly as possible.


Mr. W. J. Browne (St. John's West):: Mr. Speaker, as one who has had something to do with the formation of credit societies in Newfoundland, and who is familiar with their growth in that province, as well as in the neighbouring province of Nova Scotia, I feel that while this is a good measure it does not pay a great compliment to those who are interested in the co-operative movement, when they are treated in this cavalier manner by having the bill rushed through in a hurry. This is a subject of such vital interest to so many people throughout the country that in my view it deserves a full-dress debate, so that many of the features and ramifications of the measure might be brought out, and hon. members could be informed about the value of the co-operative movement, as well as the benefits it has extended since its organization many years ago in the province of Quebec by the celebrated Alphonse Desjardins who, in my opinion, is deserving of a monument somewhere in this country for the great work he has done.
This is a wonderful movement, and I regret time does not permit our giving more careful consideration to a measure of this kind which has historic significance. It was only yesterday the Minister of Public Works gave notice that this bill was to be proceeded with this morning. I made inquiries to see if I could secure a copy of the bill, but it was not until this morning at eleven o'clock that our copies were received. How can we give proper consideration to a measure comprising 28 pages and 85 sections, which is going to affect the co-operative societies and credit unions throughout the country, when we are permitted to see the bill only a few moments after the house opens in the morning?


Donald Methuen Fleming: A bill no one has read,
except the minister.


William Joseph Browne: Yes, that
is so. We are told the minister has to go away, but surely his presence is not necessary to effect the passage of a measure of this kind. He has a parliamentary assistant who has shown his ability to handle much more complicated legislation than that now before
4012	HOUSE OF
Co-operative Credit Associations us. Therefore I feel sure that he could with great confidence delegate to that hon. gentleman the handling of this measure.
However, since the minister appears to be adamant, and we have no recourse except to accept his dictatorial decision that we go ahead this morning, even though the heavens fall, I should like to say a few words about this great movement.
The debate on this measure affords an opportunity to pay a tribute to the marvellous work accomplished by St. Francis Xavier university in Nova Scotia in creating what has been known throughout the world as the Antigonish movement, in which the chief workers have been the Rev. Dr. Coady and Father Tompkins, or Dr. Jimmy Tompkins as he was popularly known throughout the maritimes, as well as in Newfoundland.
These men between them acquired a great knowledge of the business of, and an insight into the needs of the workers, the farmers and the fishermen, in their respective environments. They had the ability to inspire those people to assist themselves. I do not know how far hon. members are familiar with the humble beginnings this movement had in Nova Scotia. In the days of the depression following the first world war, when the fishermen did not know what to do to earn a dollar, Dr. Tompkins came to them with the idea that they might help themselves, and showed them that if they would pool their resources and ship their lobsters alive to the Boston market they would get a greater return. Soon they would be able to lift themselves out of the depression and poverty which had been their lot for generations.
One can imagine the enthusiasm with which they greeted the first cheque returning from the Boston market showing them that they had received many times more for their produce than they would have received had they carried on in the traditional way and sold to the merchants. This credit union movement, which deals with money, sprang from that humble beginning in the little village of Canso. The credit union movement has spread throughout the country as well as in the United States. In that country they have a national association with headquarters at Madison, Wisconsin. Their organization is known as CUNA, the Credit Unions National Association.
There is another feature about the movement that is of particular interest, in that there is complete harmony between the members of credit societies in this country and those in the United States. Not only is there harmony, but fraternity, co-operation, and an anxiety and willingness to help


one another. It is a marvellous movement and one which is not merely confined to dollars and cents. When you are dealing with a co-operative it is not like going to a banker who will look at you with a cold eye trying to appraise your resources. When you go to a co-operative credit union officer you go to a person who is a friend, and if he possibly can, he is going to find a way by which he can help you, not only in such cases as were mentioned by the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) but also in the case of medical and hospital expenses, money for holidays and for the building of houses. Money has been furnished in all these instances by such credit societies.
The growth of the movement in Nova Scotia, particularly in the island of Cape Breton, has been miraculous. I have seen houses being built there co-operatively which were financed partly through co-operative credit societies or credit unions. People obtained loans from the credit union to buy the land and they all worked together to build their homes. These societies have financed the building of many homes in the island of Cape Breton and in other places where the movement exists.
The progress of the movement in the province of Quebec is not so well known to members who do not come from that province. They may not be so familiar with what has happened there. The growth of the credit union movement or caisse populaire in the province of Quebec has been astonishing. It exists all throughout the province and is just as much a part of the business life of the communities as the banks themselves. While I recognize the desirability of having legislation to provide for the proper inspection and supervision of' a national movement of this kind, yet I feel, as I said at the beginning of my remarks, that it is a pity that we have not had more time to go into the matter. I am only speaking now extemporaneously and without giving any lengthy consideration to the matter, but I want to repeat that it is a marvellous movement and anybody who has been connected with it knows that. The spirit that can be and has been developed amongst members of co-operative societies wherever they have been established and the benefits that have been brought to the members are really astonishing.
I think of a case now of a man who came to me last summer and asked me for a loan. I said, "Do you not belong to the civil service co-operative credit society?" As I happened to be one of the prime movers in establishing it, I knew all about it. He said, "No." I said, "All you have got to do is to

go to the treasurer and ask for a loan and you will get it in a very short time without any trouble at all. I will tell you what I will do. I will send you to the treasurer and you go there, join the credit society, ask for a loan, and see what happens." He went to the treasurer and got his loan. I have seen that happen many times.
It is a marvellous thing for people with large families who get into financial difficulties and are not able to go to the bankers. They cannot go to the bankers but they go to their friends in the credit society. It is a pity that this movement is not better known, and I am astonished that it is not when one realizes how important it is.
I am sure that careful consideration will be given to the clauses of the bill in the banking and commerce committee, and I only regret that time does not permit us to give greater attention to it at this stage.


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, as a member representing a constituency which has a very highly developed credit union movement, I personally am particularly interested in the bill, as are a good many of my constituents. I want to take this opportunity to say how pleased I and my constituents are to see this legislation come before the house. I happen to be a member of a social credit club-


Douglas Charles Abbott: Of what?


Mr. Casselman:: Truth will out.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, that was
slightly inaccurate. I meant to say that I am a member of a credit union which was one of the first in British Columbia to study the question of the necessity for central credit associations and legislation such as that now before the house. That was some twelve years ago. I remember being at a meeting of the organization which gave considerable thought to the question. I am sure there are a good many people who have worked hard for the credit union movement- I must be careful to remember to use the right words-in my constituency who will be very pleased to know that the minister has introduced this legislation.
The credit union movement in Kootenay West has been of great value to industrial and office workers in the constituency and now it is spreading widely among the farming population. I want to pay a tribute to the half a dozen or so people who some fifteen years ago started out to organize the movement. It was hard going at first and on occasion they were ridiculed by those who thought that the movement would not amount to anything. As a matter of fact, at the present time we have credit unions with
Co-operative Credit Associations hundreds of thousands of dollars on loan all the time. Once again, may I say that I am very pleased to see this legislation come before the house because I believe that it is another step in widening the field of cooperative action in Canada.


George Clyde Nowlan: Mr. Speaker, since the hon. member for St. John's West (Mr. Browne) referred to Nova Scotia,
I should like to speak on this matter for a minute, and also because of the fact that I have been associated professionally with the credit union movement and the co-operative unions of the maritimes as solicitor and counsel for some ten or fifteen years in the past.
I perhaps would be misunderstood if I did not support the passing of this legislation at this time. I concur entirely in what the hon. member for St. John's West has said. I think it is rather cavalier treatment that a matter of this importance should be rushed through on such short notice, and really without complying with rules of the house for proper consideration of the legislation.
I should like to refer to the work which has been done in Nova Scotia by societies such as these, and particularly to the great leadership given by Dr. Tompkins, and by Monsignor Coady, who has given his whole adult life to the co-operative and credit union movements and to whom the people of Canada owe a tremendous debt. He will be recognized in years to come as one of the great citizens of North America, a world citizen and a leader in Nova Scotia. I am very proud to pay this tribute.
The work of credit unions is so extensive today that some legislation such as this is absolutely necessary. There is no doubt that a set-up must be created on a federal basis whereby the work can be properly supervised. As the hon. member for St. John's West has said, the spirit is tremendous; but spirit alone is not sufficient to control financial institutions, and sometimes a little less spirit and more control may be better. Therefore I welcome the legislation, as I am sure we all do on this side of the house. I know that it will receive consideration by the committee and I trust that it will deal with it rapidly so that the machinery will soon be available.


Mr. J. A. Ross (Souris):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say a word on this matter. First of all I should like to say how surprised I am that the minister should only present this bill at eleven o'clock this morning and ask to proceed with it now. After all, when we have dealt with the principle of the bill and the committee has given consideration to the clauses, of which there are some 85, and it comes back for third reading, that will hardly be the proper time to debate the merits and
4014	HOUSE OF
Co-operative Credit Associations demerits of the legislation. However, it is to be proceeded with right away and I want to say that I am entirely in agreement with the principle and endorse all that has been said about the wonderful work that has already been accomplished by credit unions throughout the country. There is a great deal of credit coming to those who pioneered in the setting up of these organizations. They have accomplished a very worth-while work in many sections of the country. I do not want to take more time to repeat what has already been said. I am in favour of the principle and am wholeheartedly in support of the measure.


Mr. Stuart (Charlotte):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask one question. When the bill has gone through the committee and comes back to the house can it not be discussed in the house at that time just as well as now?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: If the minister speaks now he will close the debate.
(Translation):


Mr. P. H. Spence (Roberval):: Mr. Chairman, I would like to say a few words regarding this bill, which we have not had time to study. Following the comments I have heard, may I say that in my opinion, this bill will render new services and facilitate the development of co-operative credit associations, that is our "caisses populaires" as we call them in Quebec, our credit unions.
Mr. Chairman, I have taken an active interest in the credit union movement for the past fifteen years or so. I myself founded a credit union of which I was manager for seven years. As you are no doubt aware, credit unions were started in the province of Quebec over forty years ago by Commander Alphonse Desjardins, and they have been greatly beneficial to the rural and working people.
The credit union movement in the province of Quebec stems almost entirely from good citizenship and the practice of the virtue of charity. That is why in the last fifteen years or so, the number of credit unions has increased threefold and their capital has expanded from thirty or forty million to the present total of approximately $300 million, if I remember well.
I hope that the bill now before the house will not interfere with the development of the "caisses populaires" in the province of


Quebec nor dampen the spirit of collaboration that must exist between those and the credit unions in other provinces. I like to think that the government, before introducing this new bill, was wise enough to consult experienced people who were anxious to safeguard, so to speak, the autonomous character of the "caisse populaire" of the province of Quebec.
The services rendered by credit unions, as I said a moment ago, have been extremely valuable to the people. I would like to point out to the members of this house, for their guidance, that the first loan granted by the "caisse populaire" at Dolbeau was a $10 loan. It enabled a poor workingman, who was then earning only $15 a week, to pay the hospital a $25 bill. When he handed in the $10 which had been lent him by the "caisse populaire", he managed to settle this $25 account, thus saving $15, plus charges. Later on he paid back the credit union through bi-monthly one dollar payments, with almost no interest charges whatever. He therefore managed to get rid of this debt at no hardship to his own family. On another occasion, thanks to the Dolbeau credit union, about twenty citizens of that community were enabled to build houses, through loans of approximately $300. Of course this was some years ago when construction costs were lower than they are these days. The credit union made loans of $300, the borrower buying materials for that sum until there was no money left. Then he came back for another $300 loan. In this way the credit unions caused a large number of houses to be built.
They are still rendering extremely useful services in a field where banking institutions are unable to act. In the case of larger loans, the banks must require repayment within 12 months, while co-operative credit unions grant their borrowers the privilege of repaying these sums according to their means. In other words they may repay a $2,000 loan through monthly payments of $25.
It is with pleasure that I have taken this opportunity to say a word about our "caisses populaires"-co-operative credit unions-in Quebec, for they perform very laudable work and have rendered great services. Therefore, I hope that under this bill our credit unions may be able to increase the services they have already rendered in Quebec since their inception.
(Text):


Mr. R. R. Knight (Saskatoon):: Mr. Speaker, in supporting this bill, very briefly, it occurs to me that the French term for this institution

is much better than the English-much more expressive. Caisse Populaire means in direct translation "the people's bank". It is owned and operated by the people, and perhaps small people in the financial sense of the word. Its benefits go directly to themselves.
Representing a constituency in a province in which business is becoming more and more co-operatively owned and operated I cannot do other than support this particular bill. The credit union is just another manifestation of the co-operative idea. It is the manifestation of that idea applied to the lending of money. As an active teacher a number of years ago I was one of the first members and, if I remember rightly, I was the president of the first teachers' credit union in my own city of Saskatoon. Many other groups of employees, for instance the employees on our newspaper there, have credit unions of their own. The credit union is only an instance of people helping each other and by so doing directly helping themselves.
Another thing which has perhaps been mentioned here already is that these unions tend to keep the small borrower out of the hands of the small lending companies whose reputation as far as I can see-although I have had no direct connection with them nor direct experience with them-is not always so savoury. Small people are fortunate in not having to rely on such institutions when they can lend each other money as the occasion requires and then receive it back. If there is any profit in the matter may I say that it is not profit in the ordinary sense of the word but rather a saving to them through their work.
For these reasons I have great pleasure in supporting this bill and I shall look forward with some interest to studying the details.


Mr. Clarence Gillis (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, I would consider that I was remiss in my duty if I did not say something on this bill.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Clarence Gillis: I consider it to be one of the most desirable pieces of legislation which have been introduced in the House of Commons since I have been a member of the house.


Mr. Ward:: Let us get along with it then.


Clarence Gillis: That is what we are doing. We are trying to push it along and we are trying to give the banking and commerce committee some information for their use when they are considering the bill in case there are too many like yourself on the committee. The bill requires a little elucidation.
17. 1953
Co-operative Credit Associations


William John Ward: We have not heard anything fresh this morning.


Clarence Gillis: As I say, Mr. Speaker, I consider it to be one of the most desirable pieces of legislation to come before the house since I have been a member of this house. I know something about the early stages of the credit union movement in this country. It had its roots back in the days of the depression when the banks were not pushing any money out and there was no Household Finance, and the people of this country realized that they would have to do something for themselves.
I have always been convinced that the future of this country and the future of this world depends on more ownership on the part of more people.


James Arthur Ross: You are coming along now.


Clarence Gillis: In this bill the ordinary people are linking up the community to co-ordinate developments that took place away back in the early days of the depression when there was no money available for their needs- for any purposes. These men and women banded themselves together at various places across this country, and formed these credit union organizations. In the very early days, I had the pleasure of working for that movement with men like Dr. Coady and Dr. James Tompkins-those are the Nova Scotia people, but there were others right across Canada doing the same kind of work. This bill today is the means, on a national scale, of tying up all these community and provincial organizations which, in my opinion, will be a challenge to the regular banking system of this country in the days to come. It at least has driven them into the small loans field. All these new chains, like the Household Finance and many others which exist today, are attempts to duplicate or offset the credit union movement.
When the industrial development bank was proposed in this house, I said that it was a waste of time to establish another branch of the chartered banks which would merely underwrite doubtful investments in the aftermath of the war. I suggested at that time that a national co-operative bank should be set up to co-ordinate these credit unions. Then, this new chain of finance should be thrown open to the people on a share basis with shares of anywhere from $10 to a maximum of $100, thus enabling all the people of this country to become shareholders in that chain of finance and to develop subsidiary industries across this country for which capital cannot be found. The industrial development bank was set up and our ideas at that time were not accepted. I am glad
4016	HOUSE OF
Co-operative Credit Associations to see that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) is now introducing this bill, which will enable hundreds of thousands of small people across this country, through their membership in their local credit societies, to share in this new chain of finance which is being set up at this time.
I hope that the banking and commerce committee will realize how important it is in the future development of society in this country, and will not only accept the bill as it is but will improve it. I believe it can stand some improvements, but it is a long step in the right direction. I have no desire to hold up the bill. I merely wanted to say these few words, because it is one subject in which I am particularly interested, and I am going to watch its development with a great deal of interest.


Mr. Speaker:: If the minister speaks now, he will close the debate.


Douglas Charles Abbott: First let me thank hon. members for their co-operation in proceeding with this measure this morning. I should say that if it were not being sent to the banking and commerce committee I would not, of course, have insisted or urged that we proceed to give it second reading today. But I feel we should do so for a variety of reasons in addition to the ones I gave. I am informed that the various provincial co-operative credit societies are very anxious to proceed with their application for the special act which will be authorized under this bill, so I think it is desirable that the banking and commerce committee should start consideration of the bill as soon as possible, get it back to the house and then to the other place so that the complementary piece of legislation, that is the application for incorporation by special act of the national credit association, can be proceeded with at this session.
As the house will appreciate, this bill is a purely enabling measure. It permits the incorporation of a national credit association by special act, and outlines the powers of such an association. It provides for inspection and supervision by the superintendent of insurance. I agree with what has been said about the splendid work which is being done by these credit unions, and I think it is now desirable that there should be federal legislation to authorize the incorporation, organization and supervision, as the member for Annapolis-Kings (Mr. Nowlan) has pointed out, of these financial institutions. I hope that the bill will commend itself to the members of the banking and commerce committee and, as the member for Peace River (Mr. Low) has suggested, when it comes back to the house it will be quite proper for members who wish to elaborate on some of its provisions to do


so on the first section of the bill when it is in committee of the whole.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on banking and commerce.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Robinson in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OP NATIONAL DEFENCE Defence services-
241. To provide for the Canadian forces, the defence research board and other expenditures relating to defence, including contributions toward the military costs of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; to authorize expenditures in the current year out of the amount hereby provided, not exceeding $324,000,000, under the provisions of section 3 of the Defence Appropriation Act, 1950, and to provide that, notwithstanding subsection 3 of that section, where equipment or supplies acquired by the Canadian forces after March 31, 1950, are transferred, the estimated present value thereof shall, if the governor in council so directs, be credited to this vote instead of being paid into the special account mentioned in the said subsection 3, and when so credited may be expended for the purposes of the Canadian forces; and notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act to authorize total commitments for the foregoing purposes of $3,994,895,578 regardless of the year in which such commitments will come in course of payment (of which it is estimated that $1,971,926,275 will come due for payment in future years), $1,960,159,633.
The Deputy Chairman:: The committee was considering the subheading "navy", page 298 of the blue book.


Mr. Harkness:: Mr. Chairman, some considerable time ago I received information from two sources that some new Cadillac ambulances were being driven about by the defence forces. My informants looked upon this as a needless extravagance in the provision of ambulances, and requested that I look into the matter. I therefore put some questions on the order paper which were answered first on March 4, in this form as recorded at page 2603 of Hansard. The first question was:
How many ambulances have been purchased by or for the defence forces, since January 1, 1952?
The answer was 95 units. Question No. 2 was:
What was the number of each make, e.g., Ford, Dodge, etc., and what was the price paid for each make?
Now, the answer to that was that there were 36 purchased from the Ingersoll Body Corporation at a price of $5,390 each, and there were 37 purchased from the Flexible Funeral Car and Ambulance Company of Canada, at a price of $5,950, 22 from Chrysler Corporation of Canada, Limited, which were f ton 4X4, M43, at a price of $5,833.83 each. These latter 22, of course, were field am-

bulances adapted for cross-country work and so forth. It is the other 36 and 37 to which I refer.
I put another set of questions on the order paper in this form which appear at page 2958 of Hansard for March 16, 1953. The first question was:
Of the 36 ambulances purchased for the defence forces from the Ingersoll Body Corporation, what was the make of the chassis and engine, or if more than one, how many of each make, and the cost per ambulance for each make of chassis and engine.
I asked the same question concerning the 37 purchased from the Flexible Funeral Car Company, and the answer given was as follows:
The 36 heavy cars ambulance purchased from Ingersoll Body Corporation were supplied with standard Commercial General Motors chassis and engines for which Ingersoll Body Corporation metropolitan type body was designed.
The same answer was given for the 37 ambulances. I should like to ask how many of these ambulances were actually on Cadillac bodies with Cadillac engines, and how many were of other makes, and what was the cost of each?


Mr. Campney:: I understand that the chassis of the 36 Ingersoll Body Corporation ambulances which were purchased were Cadillac chassis. These ambulances are standard metropolitan ambulances. The quotations by the Ingersoll Body Corporation were on the Cadillac chassis $5,390 and on the Dodge chassis $6,434. The lower price was accepted.


Douglas Scott Harkness: If I understand this matter correctly, the cost of a Cadillac ambulance is less than that of a Dodge ambulance.


Mr. Claxton:: That is right.


Ralph Osborne Campney: The quotations on the chassis showed the difference which I have quoted.


Douglas Scott Harkness: In spite of the fact that an ordinary commercial Cadillac car is, I think, three times the price of a Dodge?


Brooke Claxton: That is right.


Douglas Scott Harkness: That seems to be remarkable.


Mr. Adamson:: Last night I was about to ask about the major item in the navy estimates, namely $140 million for ships this year. The question I should like to ask is this. I do not see the matter referred to very clearly in the white paper. Can a progress report be given of the ships expected to be delivered or some progress report on their construction, or as to what we might expect in this calendar year? I gather that the new carrier, the Bonaventure, is to be paid for by Canada. I wish to compliment the navy on that fact because I think we have grown out
Supply-National Defence of the stage where we can borrow ships from the United Kingdom. I think we have got to build our own ships and own our own ships, and not be in a position of borrowing them. Can the minister say what the situation is?


Brooke Claxton: Yes, Mr. Chairman. The
estimates include the Arctic patrol vessel, $1,635,000. That is expected to be delivered.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That is not the C. D. Howe?


Brooke Claxton: No.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That is the new one?


Brooke Claxton: That is the Labrador. It was launched last year. On the 14 escort vessels the estimate of further funds needed is $124,605,000; on the 14 coastal minesweepers, $10,060,000. Ten are expected to be delivered. Eight patrol craft, $1,700,000. Two are expected to be delivered. Thirty-nine auxiliary vessels, $9,389,000. Thirty-one are expected to be delivered. On the Bonaventure, the estimate is $11,700,000. On the modernization of 16 frigates, $7,800,000. Fifteen are expected to be delivered. On the modernization of 18 Bangors, $3,400,000. Ten are expected to be delivered. On other incidental expenses in this connection, $1,155,000.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The minister did not say- or if he did so I did not catch the figure- what was the cost of the escort vessels.


Brooke Claxton: A further $124,605,000.


Agar Rodney Adamson: For how many?


Brooke Claxton: Fourteen.


Agar Rodney Adamson: About $10 million each?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: And for the Bonaventure, $11 million?


Brooke Claxton: A further $11,700,000.


Agar Rodney Adamson: What percentage is that of the total cost? Can the minister tell us what she is likely to cost altogether?


Brooke Claxton: Of the order of $20 million, without aircraft.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That is an escort vessel. I suppose that includes armament?


Brooke Claxton: Complete.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Then I suppose an escort vessel costs approximately half the price of a carrier?


Brooke Claxton: We got the carrier at less than the cost for a carrier that commenced today because it had been partly completed at a time when prices were lower.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I am asking approximately what would be the cost of the carrier or the
4018	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence increase in cost if it were built now or if we had to pay full price for her.


Brooke Claxton: It is extremely hard to say because these are all special jobs. I do not think any of them are done on a tender basis. But for a fleet carrier, equipped as this one will be, the cost might be in the order of $30 million, or probably $35 million, without aircraft.


Agar Rodney Adamson: And the cost of the aircraft for the carrier will be what?


Brooke Claxton: Again it is extremely hard to say because they are only beginning to produce jet aircraft for carriers. Also that is in part a matter for the Department of Defence Production. There are only two types of aircraft so far developed for use from carriers, the one American and the other British. The British is a heavier one than the American. I would think they would cost about half a million dollars each.


Agar Rodney Adamson: How many of them does the carrier hold?


Brooke Claxton: Thirty-two on the carrier itself. Then as a rule there is a group on shore of another thirty-two. Then there are the reserves to provide for maintenance and wastage for at least a year. That would be,
I should say, another 50 or 60 aircraft. Altogether there would be about 120 aircraft at $500,000 each-say $50 million approximately for the aircraft.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That means then that your total capital cost of the modern carrier, including aircraft, would be in the nature of say $50 million or $60 million, plus $35 million, or approximately $100 million?


Brooke Claxton: Something under $100 million for a carrier of this type; but for a carrier of the type of the Forrestal, my recollection is that it would be about $1J billion.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The Forrestal is the new United States carrier?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: And it is-


Brooke Claxton: A super carrier.


Agar Rodney Adamson: 
Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: It seems to me that an extremely large number of eggs are riding in one hull.


Brooke Claxton: Then of course, before a carrier like that can move safely to sea, it


must have an attending appendage of destroyers, battleships, cruisers and a complete galaxy of vessels to protect it.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes, the minister is correct. I just wondered whether the minister is correct in saying that the cost of the Forrestal was $1| billion or $1,500 million?


Brooke Claxton: That is what I understand.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Then there are the auxiliary craft. In other words, when one major carrier goes to sea, it is almost a fleet action?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: With all its auxiliary craft and everything?


Brooke Claxton: That is right.


George Clyde Nowlan: Last night the minister said he could give us some information with respect to the cost of the seaward defences at Halifax. At the same time, in view of what has been said about the Bonaventure, I would ask the minister if he would comment on the suggestion that there will be built at Eastern Passage a pier or wharf for the accommodation of possible aircraft carriers in the future. Just what is to be done? Is that construction starting now and what will be included in it?


Brooke Claxton: Yes. That is intended; and the provision is made in these estimates for the commencement of a jetty. That has been approved also by treasury board, so we anticipate to begin work on it this year. As regards the seaward defences, up to December 31, 1952, $2,467,000 has been spent in Halifax harbour.


George Clyde Nowlan: What is the estimate of the cost of the pier which is to be built at Eastern Passage?


Brooke Claxton: 


Mr. Pearkes:: I should like to ask one question supplementary to that which has just been asked with regard to the progress of vessels. Of Course there is a great deal of difference between the launching and the commissioning of a ship.


Brooke Claxton: Quite so.


George Randolph Pearkes: Can the minister give us any idea as to how many of these escort vessels will be commissioned this year?


Brooke Claxton: None.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the subheading "navy" pass?


Brooke Claxton: I beg your pardon; I am subject to correction. It may be possible to commission the first late in 1953, but I doubt it. That would be very good progress, and it

would'be escaping with a minimum of difficulties that are likely to arise.


George Randolph Pearkes: I realize that.


Brooke Claxton: I have one answer I should give the hon, member for Greenwood in reply to his question yesterday about major construction projects. I mentioned in my speech that we had 1,048 major construction contracts. By this we mean contracts involving more than $10,000. They vary from several million down to $10,000. We have information available for each of the three services, navy, army and air force, detailing each major construction contract showing the items comprising the contract with the expenditure incurred as known at the end of the year. That is the end of the calendar year, December 31, 1952. A great part of this information has already been put before the defence expenditure committee, and if anything further is desired it can be dealt with there in detail.
A breakdown of construction contracts which might be useful here is that showing those supervised by Defence Construction Limited or other agencies which constitute the major construction contracts. We have no major construction contracts that are let by the Department of National Defence itself. They are handled for us by Defence Construction Limited or by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. The only contracts that we supervise are those for renovation, repair, alteration and the like, and most of these are under $10,000. The number and value of major construction contracts since April 1, 1950, are: major contracts supervised by other agencies, 968; under construction during 1952-53, 749. Major contracts supervised by the Department of National Defence, total 1,100; under construction 1952-53, 299. The totals are 2,068, or under construction in 1952-53, 1,048, the figure I gave at the outset.
In addition there are contracts for married quarters which are constructed by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which is responsible for design, layout of the contract, inspection and supervision.
The question of standard buildings was raised, and it was suggested that in view of the fact that we use to a great extent standard building designs that have been worked out, we shall not require the service of consultants. This unfortunately is not so. The standard buildings have to be modified to suit the site condition. This involves the design of foundation in each case. There also has to be supervision by engineers and architects during the course of construction
Supply-National Defence for which they receive the fees that are set by the architectural association and which are current in civilian practice. I might point out that in major construction in apartment housing, it is estimated that rather more than 50 per cent of the cost today goes for what is called engineering, a much bigger proportion than in building up to recent times. Therefore, in almost every case it is necessary to have an engineer. The normal design fee in commercial and industrial practice for individual buildings is 3 to 4 per cent of the cost.
Owing to the use of standard buildings as high a percentage as this is not usually paid for design in the case of buildings for the Department of National Defence. For example, in the case of 460 standard buildings constructed by the R.C.A.F. from standard designs the consultant fee paid represented approximately 1 [DOT] 5 per cent of the cost, or much less than half of the cost usually paid by civilian purchasers on individual contracts. Already the total number of buildings constructed or being constructed to designs which are standard is 754. One design has been used 45 times, and 27 designs have been used 10 or more times each, so that this practice of having standard designs, which we started as far back as 1948, has paid off very substantially from the point of view of saving money and also of speed in getting on with the job.
I should add in answer to the question about the commissioning of ships, it is hoped that eight new minesweepers will be commissioned in 1953-54.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That is to the end of the calendar year 1954?


Brooke Claxton: No, that is the fiscal year.


Agar Rodney Adamson: By March 31, 1954?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: While the minister is on that can he give the committee an estimation, apart from these minesweepers, of the total number of ships that we expect to be commissioned in 1954?


Brooke Claxton: Fifty-six.


Agar Rodney Adamson: What are they? They are the minesweepers-


Brooke Claxton: I have given a great deal of information about the battle order of the navy. Does the hon. member really want me to spell them out?


Agar Rodney Adamson: No. I mean the minesweeper is the largest-
4020	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence


Brooke Claxton: No. These are not all new ships. The total number that will be commissioned by the end of the fiscal year 195354 is 56.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Are these the total number of ships that will be in commission at the end-


Brooke Claxton: That is right. These are naval vessels quite apart from auxiliaries. In addition there will be 83 auxiliaries.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That was up to 1956?


Brooke Claxton: No, by March 31, 1954, we will have a total of 56 naval vessels; that is vessels entitled to fly the white ensign. We will have a considerable numb'er in reserve, but in addition we will also have 83 auxiliaries in commission.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister gave a lot of figures in answer to my question last night. I am afraid that it has got me groggy because there were so many. The one thing I want to stick to, the one bit of solid ground I can get on for the moment, is this. I understood the minister to say that the definition of a major project or contract which I asked about last night is a contract of $10,000 or over. Incidentally I do not know how the minister can get down to that because we were just talking about a ship costing $1| billion-


Brooke Claxton: I have no exact information about the cost of a ship. That must be understood. I am giving my recollection of what I have read in the press. I am sure that no official figure has ever been given.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I realized at the time that the figure was of a great magnitude but I thought that it included one nought too many. I can hardly grasp an amount that large. I thought he meant $150 million. But apparently that is nothing. Now the minister gets down to small figures and he calls a contract at $10,000 a major contract.
I confess that even from where I sit it does not look major even in our scale of expenditures. I would recall to the minister that I am interested in the fact that we have 200 or 300 architectural firms called in on these jobs to assist. I should like to have some yardstick to establish what a major contract would be, and which would meet with the judgment and the common sense of an ordinary man. I would say that one of $10,000 would not be major. I would say even that, considering what you get for $100,000 today, that would not b'e major. Therefore, I would like to ask how many contracts or projects there are over, we will say, a quarter of a million dollars. Perhaps 

the minister would let me have that information after the lunch hour.
And when I ask that I would ask also to have the minister let us know at what stage he feels it necessary to call in an engineer and an architect. I would presume that on a $10,000 job he would not have an engineer or an architect-and if I am wrong he will correct me. I do not wish to labour the point.
I was taken aback last night when I found that there were 1,048 major projects. I realize of course that it all depends upon how one defines the word "major". I cannot believe that in any man's language $10,000 would be considered major; so I have selected at hazard the figure of $250,000. Perhaps he could tell me how many are in that category.


Brooke Claxton: I shall be glad to get the information. However, I can tell the hon. member that I am sure he will have found in his own experience that in most contracts made by individual users involving the construction of houses costing $10,000 or more, they would use an architect, and the architect would probably employ a heating engineer. That is ordinary practice.
We do not do that, because we have houses by the thousand.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Yes, that is what I mean.


Brooke Claxton: And, in connection with our housing projects, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation employ all the people necessary. I do not think they use architects even on the big camp sites.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Now the
the minister is getting right along to the point. He has answered one question when he says that where a private individual spends $10,000 he certainly has to have someone to look after it. Yet, here we have units by the score being built. However, I shall wait until I receive the answer to my question. I have taken an arbitrary figure when I have defined my understanding of the word "major", for my own purposes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: My reason for asking about the capital cost of ships is that, as the minister knows, I have advocated that Canada should at least consider the advisability of having a submarine branch in the navy; and that now, with the atomic submarine apparently costing about $19 million, it is not a very great sum in comparison with the cost of major ships.


Brooke Claxton: I am prepared now to give the hon. member for Greenwood some figures. The number of consultant contracts in

existence since April 1, 1952, is 334. A consultant contract is where a consultant has been employed for the Department of National Defence. We do not employ them; they are employed for us by Defence Construction Limited. We do not ever engage an architect or engineer as a consultant directly. The number of consultant contracts, or contracts involving the use of consultants, awarded between April 1, 1952, and February 28, 1953, is 123, making a total of 457. During this period, 87 of the contracts involving the use of consultants have been completed. So that the total number of contracts, under administration today, involving the use of consultants is 370.


Mr. Calherwood:: Has the turkey producers association made any request to the department to have turkeys served on the menus of military establishments across Canada and in the armed services at least once a week? This matter was brought to my attention by the organization. We all know turkey is a real delicacy on any menu. I hope the matter is being considered by the department.


Brooke Claxton: I do not know whether it has been coincidence, or whether they have been dressing up because the boss is around, but I have never gone into a cookhouse without seeing either steak or turkey.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Did they not have Lake Winnipeg goldeye?


Brooke Claxton: I am sorry to say there are not enough of them.
Canadian Army-Active force and general.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I should like to inquire first about the educational standards required in the army, and the way in which they have been changed. Some time ago I placed a question on the order paper, to which I received an answer on February 5. In that question I asked the following:
1.	What are the educational standards at present required for enlistment in the (a) navy; (b) army; (c) air force?
2.	On what date were these educational requirements put into effect?
The answer I received dealing with the standards required by the army was as follows:
The suitability of applicants for enrolment in the Canadian army is tested by aptitude and intelligence tests.
In other words there are no educational requirements at all. As a matter of fact I understand that a certain number of men who were unable to read or write were taken into the army. On the other hand the educational requirements of the navy stipulate the completion of elementary schooling. The
Supply-National Defence same applies to the air force, except for aircrew, where junior matriculation is required.
Why were the educational requirements for the army abolished on November 13, 1951? How can men who cannot read or write, and who are taken into the army, be usefully employed; because, in the light of the technical development that has taken place in that branch of the service, it would seem to me that educational requirements equal to those of the navy or the air force are necessary in the army for practically all jobs, particularly those jobs in any of the technical corps.


Brooke Claxton: I have never heard of there being in the Canadian army any soldier who could not read or write. If the hon. member has knowledge of that, it is news to me. Such a case has never been brought to my attention. I have never heard such a suggestion before, and I would doubt it very much.
I would agree with him that it is quite inconceivable that useful work could be found for anyone in any of the three services who could not read and write. The educational standards are precisely the same as those for the soldiers in the second world war, namely the aptitude test and the M-test, and the same score is now required as was required at that time.
It is difficult to relate a common educational standard to school grades. It is even difficult to talk in terms of grades because there are ten provinces in Canada and the grades, as we find, do not correspond. Generally speaking, however, a man who passes the aptitude test and gets the required score is likely to have at least sixth grade and probably more likely seventh. In the navy and air force the educational requirements are just about the same. They both use a combination of grade measurements and aptitude tests.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I should like to ask the minister if it is not a fact that up to the 13th of November, 1951, there was an educational requirement of elementary schooling, in the army as well as in the other two services, which has now been abolished. He has not explained really why there should be this difference between the services.


Brooke Claxton: At the time of Korea, in June, 1950, we had raised the standards to a very high level because we were getting more men than were needed to provide for the planned build-up of the three services, and intake was controlled by raising the standards. However, in the case of the 25th and 27th brigades we applied the wartime standard and that has been applied since.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I want to get at this point. Is this one of the cases in which the standardization as between the three forces, which was

Supply

National Defence put into effect some years ago, has now been departed from?


Brooke Claxton: No; it was never achieved. The three services each had their own methods of selection, There is a committee which has worked on common standards but the navy and air force prefer to keep their own separate systems because of different requirements, including a higher proportion of other ranks in the navy and air force able to take technical training, and I mean technical in the precise sense, to train as artificers, mechanics and electricians. In view of the fact that these standards were well worked out and well known in the three services, I did not feel anything was to be gained by making them uniform- In fact we would have lost rather than gained by it.


Douglas Scott Harkness: In a dispatch by Bill Boss a few days ago I noticed that the great majority of the people in the brigade had educational attainments of less than grade 8, and that a considerable amount of work was being done, or proposed to be done, to provide education for these people in the army. Can the minister tell us what progress has been made? According to the article, the majority of afternoons are spent in educational activities and so forth. Has the minister any definite figures as .to how m.uch the educational standards of the men of that brigade have been^raised? I think it is, an excellent thing- to be doing.


Brooke Claxton: I made a statement on this matter the; other night in [DOT] answer to the hon. member for Cape Breton South.


Douglas Scott Harkness: So that there will be no repetition, perhaps I might interject, that what I want more particularly is the number of people taking educational work and what progress has been made.	*	.


Brooke Claxton: I would have tp get the precise information from abroad. We have arrangements made under which education is carried on by. correspondence courses in the same way. as during the second world war when the .system was organized by the Canadian Legiop,. which, had. an excellent committee on the subject under the chairmanship of Colonel Wilfrid Bovey, who is well known to a number of hon. members. We have carried that on since with the co-operation of the Canadian Legion and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
My recollection is that at the present time there are about 1,500 courses being taken. In the case of the 27th brigade, it would probably be a fair estimate that the other ranks are all about grade 8. If you consider the matter, that is a very good grade indeed for peacetime forces and for people engaged in corresponding work in civilian life. The men there are encouraged to take voluntary work and we


are instituting a system whereby compulsory education is given to other ranks to bring them up to grade 8 as a minimum. That is just being instituted now. The facts I gave are to be found at page 3924 of Hansard for April 15. There are 5,360 serving personnel taking D.V.A. courses in the army alone.


Mr. Fair:: It seems to be almost one o'clock, and I want to discuss with the minister the question of housing at Wainwright camp. J wonder if we might call it one o'clock.


Brooke Claxton: I am afraid I cannot be here at 2.30. I would be glad to answer the hon. member because I have been at Wainwright camp.	...


Robert Fair: For quite a few months the
question of housing in the town of Wainwright has been under discussion and has been causing quite a little dissatisfaction. Because of the building up of the camp over past years there has been quite a heavy influx of civilian personnel with their families into the town of Wainwright. As a result thereof and because there is insufficient accommodation, it has made it particularly hard for some of the residents of Wainwright who do not have their own homes, and the necessary housing is not available. On the 12th of February I received a letter from the secretary. of; the Wainwright and . district chamber of commerce and agriculture, dealing with this matter. He reported that at a recent meeting they had representations from ' the Wainwright branch of the Amalgamated -Civil Servants of Canada with respect to the matter.	. -	*
The chamber pointed out to these representatives that the, only reason for the high rents and lack; of accommodation was that the camp was not a permanent one. I asked the minister about the matter, of permanency a couple of weeks ago and he told me it was permanent, in the same w,ay as Camp ipeta-wawa and pertain other camps are permanent. But apparently that has not fixed the trouble. Is any provision being made by the department to provide housing for married men on the permanent staff there and also for civilians working in the camp in a civilian capacity?


Brooke Claxton: As I said in answer to the hon. member the other day, Wainwright is a permanent camp, but we do not expect to have large units or numbers of soldiers there permanently. It is to be used for training units in field operations. These will be sent there, as has been done in the past two summers, for periods of one, two, three or four months. Generally speaking they wi)

be under active service conditions and will be engaging in field operations on a very large scale.
Therefore we do not plan to have a very large permanent staff in the camp the year round. In the winter the camp will be used for winter exercises as was done, for example, in preparation for exercise Sweetbriar when we had some 2,200 men there for ten days. But it will not be used in the same way as Petawawa or Camp Borden where troops are stationed permanently. Therefore it will not have a large permanent staff. The staff who will be living there throughout the winter will be the minimum necessary to keep the buildings and the camp going. So far we have 26 permanent married quarters for which contracts have been placed. If we see any need for building any more we will build them, but so far that need has not been seen. Generally speaking, it is not our practice to build married quarters for civilian employees. We think that it is difficult enough for us to be in the landlord business on the scale we are with regard to service personnel Without going into it for civilians as well. It is very unusual for us to have 'civilians in married quarters.	,
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The'committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.


Robert Fair: Mr. Chairman, when the committee rose at one o'clock I was endeavouring to seture from the Minister of National Defence some favourable consideration with regard to the housing situation for permanent officers and for those people who have moved into Wainwright in order to work at the camp. The information I received from the minister was not very satisfactory. He pointed out that the camp was mainly used for three or four months during the summer, and was occupied in the wintertime by a staff of caretakers, if one could use that term. He did not feel that the department wanted to provide homes for the people concerned with civilian work at the camp. The people of Wainwright are not satisfied with that explanation.
I pointed out to the minister that I received a letter from the Wainwright and district chamber of commerce and agriculture informing me of the delegation from the Amalgamated Civil Servants of Canada, and that letter in part reads as follows:
The chamber could only inform the delegation that high rents were due to two things: first, to the inability of the town to provide rent accommodation for more than a small fraction of those who
Supply-National Defence desired it; and, second, the failure of the depart* ment of defence to make Wainwright a permanent military camp.
Much rental property, some of it of a very unsatisfactory nature, has been provided by the permanent residents at considerable cost. As long as the use of the camp as a permanent training grounds remains in doubt, the owners of this rental property will seek to recover their capital investment in as short a time as possible to avoid serious loss. It would seem, therefore, that it is the duty of the government of Canada to protect their employees against excessive rents by providing a proper amount of competitive housing in order to force rents down to a more reasonable figure. If the department of defence would provide living quarters for married personnel on the permanent staff of the camp, the same result would be achieved.
The letter goes on to say that the rents being charged are very high, and in some cases there, is a dearth of the most elemental conveniences, and then adds:
Therefore, the morale of those who live in town is generally low. It is particularly unfortunate that our men in uniform should feel Unfairly treated in their own country. The high ideal of the western allies in the "cold war" must lose some of its idealism in the eyes of those who, understandably, become disgruntled. '
After the delegation went back and discussed the matter again with their own organization, I received this resolution from the secretary of the Wainwright branch of the Amalgamated Civil Servants of Canada, under the; heading "Housing-Wainwright, Alberta." It reads as follows:
Whereas, the present housing and rooming shortage in the town of Wainwright, Alberta has led to exorbitant rentals being charged for existing inferior accommodation; and
Whereas, the Wainwright chamber of commerce and agriculture maintain that this condition is due to two things; first, the inability of the towh to provide rental accommodation for moVe than a small fraction of those who desire it; and second, to the failure of the Department of National Defence to make Wainwright a permanent military camp; and
Whereas, it is generally agreed that the town of Wainwright cannot, under these temporary conditions, adequately take care of the influx of both arfny and government civilian personnel seeking accommodation; therefore
Be it resolved: That the government, oil behalf of the said army and government civilian personnel, investigate immediately the housing conditions in Wainwright and render all possible assistance in the promotion of a low rental housing scheme to alleviate present conditions.
I may say that condition has existed for many months, and the troubles are not yet cleared up. I was hoping that today I would get some encouragement from the minister with regard to this matter. In any event, his answer was not very satisfactory.
While I am dealing with this subject, perhaps I should deal also with the matter of education of the families of these men in the military camp as well as the families of those civilian workers who moved into Wainwright, seeking work at the camp itself.
4024	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence This movement has been the cause of a lack of accommodation in the schools which is costing the school board a great deal of extra expense. The board is now compelled to build more classrooms because of the presence of these people in the town who are not by any means permanent. As soon as the work at the camp is completed, then these people will move out again. I was wondering whether or not the government has considered giving any assistance in this connection. Perhaps the associate minister could give me some information on that, and then I may have one or two more questions to ask.


Ralph Osborne Campney: As has already been
intimated to the hon. member, Mr. Chairman, the department seeks, so far as possible, to house its permanent service staffs at permanent camps, and those civilians who must necessarily remain at the camp practically all the time. Otherwise, the department tries to engage local civilians on the civilian side and most of these people look after their own housing needs. I might say that the situation at Wainwright is under consideration at the moment, and the particulars which the hon. member has mentioned will be considered and discussed with the housing authorities. Until now there have not been enough service children permanently located at Wainwright to justify considering school facilities, but I can assure the hon. member that both the problems which he has mentioned are being reviewed.


Robert Fair: I thank the minister for that information. I hope that no time elapses in having both these matters investigated, because I do know from the letters I have received, and from a personal visit there not many months ago, that conditions are not satisfactory. The additional number of children present in the town as a result of workers moving in to take part in the building program at the camp has caused the members of the school board to make provision for additional classrooms. I believe those rooms are to be built just as soon as it is possible to do so. I think the department has some responsibility in that connection. If we should have peace in Korea-which is hoped for by many people, although not by some-then the camp may be closed or perhaps cut down materially. That would leave the ratepayers of the Wainwright school division putting up money that would not be necessary. I therefore hope that the department will see to it that an early investigation is made and that something definite is done to relieve those conditions which I have brought to the attention of the department.
There is another matter with respect to which I have had questions on the order


paper for some time, namely the supply of milk to the Wainwright camp. I have asked for the price being charged to the camp during 1950, 1951, 1952 and 1953 to date. I understand an exorbitant price is being charged there, and I wanted to have that understanding confirmed before saying anything further about it.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I have not particulars of any contracts of that nature. I assume that tenders for milk supply would be called for and contracts let by the Department of Defence Production. The Department of National Defence would not necessarily have the details of any of those contracts. The question should be addressed to the Department of Defence Production.


Robert Fair: I have placed those questions on the order paper. 1 realize that the departmental officials have been extremely busy providing information for the defence expenditure committee that is now sitting dealing with these matters, but I hope that information will be brought down soon because I want to say something about the matter before the session closes.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Last evening the minister promised me an answer to a question I asked. Possibly the associate minister could give it today. It is in connection with the amount paid for 14 minesweepers. I suggested to him that the cost of these was estimated as $950,000 each whereas the actual cost was $3 million each. The minister promised to look the matter up and let me know today. I have not received the answer.


Ralph Osborne Campney: With reference to the hon. member's question, may I say that I understand the figure of approximately $900,000-


Gordon Francis Higgins: 


Ralph Osborne Campney: -was not really an estimate of the completed cost of a minesweeper. It was only a preliminary estimate of the first elements, which go to make up a minesweeper. The ancillary things which go to make up a minesweeper's equipment and armaments, etc., were not included. The figure was in other words the initial estimate of the partial cost of a minesweeper. I am told that the cost of a completed minesweeper of the type to which the hon. member referred is in the order of $3 million.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Is that not an extraordinarily large discrepancy? I refer to the difference between $950,000 and $3 million?


Ralph Osborne Campney: What I endeavoured to tell the hon. gentleman was that the $950,000 figure was not really at any time a full estimate of a completed minesweeper. It was a

preliminary estimate made of the first elements of a minesweeper when the construction program was being set up. It was not the full estimate of the cost of a completed minesweeper at any time.


Gordon Francis Higgins: I am not disputing what the minister says. But was it not announced, at the original time the announcement was made of this fact, that the cost would be $950,000?


Ralph Osborne Campney: Not to my knowledge. I have no recollection of any announcement to that effect.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: That is not an answer at all.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I think the hon. member for Greenwood asked for some further information from the minister during the morning session. He asked what were the number of construction projects involving a cost of a quarter of a million dollars or more. The figures which I have been given show that from April 1, 1950, to February 28, 1953, the number of such projects was as follows:	In
the navy 29, having a dollar value in the aggregate of $28,579,438; in the air force 319, having a dollar value of $364,035,050; and in the army 102, having a value in dollars of $88,042,107; or a total of 450 projects having an aggregate dollar value of $480,674,595.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I hope hon. members on the other side of the chamber will not think anything has gone wrong with me when I say that I am rising to extend a compliment to the Department of National Defence. It arises out of a matter which a number of hon. members have referred to during the course of this discussion with regard to the army estimates. I refer to the provision which is being made, or which some members feel should yet be made, with repect to the education of children of service people stationed permanently in various locations.
The compliment I wish to extend is in respect of the arrangement made between the Department of National Defence and the school board of the city of Winnipeg. As the associate minister knows, the department has stationed a large number of service personnel permanently at the Fort Osborne barracks. That fact created a tremendous problem for the school board of the city of Winnipeg. Perhaps I must qualify my compliment by saying that negotiations seemed to be unusually protracted and that the chairman and the members of the school board of Winnipeg thought at times that it was taking too long to complete the arrangement. However, when the arrangement was finally completed, it was highly satisfactory. It involved, in
Supply-National Defence the main, a considerable contribution of federal money to the school board of the city of Winnipeg in order to enable it to put up the necessary building and to provide the necessary equipment.
I may say further that the members of the school board of the city of Winnipeg are perfectly satisfied that there will be no interference with their handling of the affairs of this new school and that there is no interference with provincial jurisdiction over education involved in this financial assistance. In other words, I rise to offer this compliment and I express the hope that other members who are concerned with similar problems in their locality will take heart from the fact that in this case a satisfactory agreement was concluded. Of course, we have an extremely progressive group of people on the school board of the city of Winnipeg, and they pressed the matter until there was this satisfactory agreement. I want to say also- as I said the other day-that in a case like this we are glad to know that the government's reluctance to provide federal aid to education did not interfere with the need for dealing with this problem. We in the city of Winnipeg are pleased with the arrangement, and we hope that this principle of federal financial aid to education will be extended.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I wish to thank the hon. member for his kindly words.


Mr. Dinsdale:: I should like to ask a few questions of the associate minister. They arise out of a return that was tabled yesterday concerning welfare services. I have a fairly comprehensive report on the present situation of welfare in the various services. Question No. 2 reads:
What staff at unit level is detailed exclusively to welfare service duty in (a) Korea; (b) Germany?
I find that the reply indicates that one officer and an assistant is delegated exclusively to welfare work. My specific question is this. Does that indicate that there is on foot a move to militarize welfare services? It seems to me that formerly there was no officer designated as such for welfare services. My question is, does it mean that welfare is going to become an integral part of the military organization?


Ralph Osborne Campney: In response to the specific question, it is my information that in each battalion or equivalent unit-I know it was so when I was in Korea a year or more ago-there is an officer and an assistant who is delegated to carry out what might be included in the general term of welfare duties in that unit. I think that has been
4026	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence the established practice and has been fairly generally used for quite some time.
The question of welfare, as the hon. member knows, is one that is under continual study, and up until the present time it has been felt, after much study and consideration, that to carry on these services within the service itself-the army in this case-is the most satisfactory way of handling the situation in the circumstances which obtain at the present time in our Canadian army.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: It does not necessarily mean that it is going to be a process of militarizing welfare. If voluntary services would appear to do a better job, they might be resorted to, if circumstances change?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I think it would be fair to say this. In the consideration of this problem there is no intention at all, as the hon. member puts it, to militarize welfare services. If we are convinced at any time that whatever arrangement is worked out by study and experimentation could be improved upon, we shall give consideration to that fact, but up to the present we have felt that the present method of handling that part of the interests of the troops is best.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I should like to bring up the matter of desertions. I got a return on December 18 which showed that at that time a total of 2,005 persons were listed as deserters from the armed services. There is an article in the Calgary Herald of November 29 which bears that out. I will read part of it. It says that the armed services really make no efforts to apprehend deserters or to deal with them. This particular article deals with a soldier who came back from Korea. He was a deserter for some three or four months during that period. Whilst he was a deserter he drew $260 in gratuities which were paid over to him anyhow. He went across the border through our immigration people, and so forth, came back and eventually, after several months, gave himself up. After dealing with all these circumstances the article says:
During that time-
That is the time that this man was a deserter. I continue:
During that time my acquaintance was making fruitless attempts to persuade the army to collect its missing soldier, providing them with information Which would have made it quite simple for him to be picked Up. At no time did the army display the slightest interest in the matter, and one letter from, the adjutant-general's department in Ottawa makes the astounding statement that "the primary responsibility of an absentee of the Canadian army is for him to return to his unit or to the nearest
Canadian army establishment"	It is in the
absentee's interest to report as soon as possible and thus terminate his offence.	*	'


The comment on that is:
This is like saying that it is the duty of all offenders against the laws to surrender themselves to the police.
What steps are taken by military authorities, by the department, to apprehend deserters and to cut down on the number of deserters? The number of 2,005 is quite a large one; in fact it is approximately a little more than 2 per cent of the total number in the services, or it was at the time this article was published.


Ralph Osborne Campney: The question of deserters of course is a serious one in any service. I suppose it is reasonable to say that it is likely to be much more common in a cold war than in a hot war. The problem is with us, and I am informed that we do try to apprehend all deserters. But as to the degree of the effort that is put into the search, the number of people required in the provost corps to carry on such duties in addition to their regular duties is an important consideration. Generally speaking, we do apprehend as many as we can as quickly as we can. The figure of 2,005 quoted by the hon. member includes I am told a considerable number of deserters who have since been apprehended. Naturally I do not know the specific facts about the case to which the hon. member has just referred.


Douglas Scott Harkness: On that point, the statement in this return put out by the department is that the deserters not subsequently apprehended or returned to duty were 2,005.


Ralph Osborne Campney: As of that time, yes; but we still continue to apprehend them as fast as we can, and have obtained a good many of them since, I am told. I am also advised that in connection with the apprehension of deserters the provost corps work with local police in the cities and provinces and also with the R.C.M.P., and that they do continue at all times to search for the missing men.


Douglas Scott Harkness: What does the minister say about this article I have just quoted, which states that the soldier's absence and his situation, where he was staying, were reported to the army and no action was taken.


Ralph Osborne Campney: Frankly I would not say anything until I looked at the case and the file.
I do not want to express an opinion on an excerpt from a newspaper article, but if the hon. member will give me particulars I will have the matter looked into. I would not care to comment further on the case until I know more about the actual facts.


Clarence Gillis: I'have a question which has to do with this problem. A lot of the service personnel returning from Korea arid being

discharged from the 27th brigade are boys who went into the service with no previous employment. They are now coming out of the service and they are still unemployed. The government has set up a system whereby their unemployment insurance credits are paid for them while in the service, but when they register for employment or unemployment insurance, it is necessary that their record of credits come down from Ottawa to the unemployment insurance commission office. I have had cases myself that go back over the last year. In one case the boy had anywhere from two months to five months of his unemployment insurance commission credits returned to the local office. I have had considerable correspondence with the defence department, and I do not think the trouble is there because the mechanics that have to be gone through are that national defence reports the discharge. Then veterans affairs have something to do with it, but in the final analysis it must come through to the Department of Labour. I have seen boys who were married and unemployed who waited all that time to get those credits through. Is any progress being made in linking up the three departments necessary to get these credits through as quickly as possible?


Mr. Gregg:: Speaking on behalf of the unemployment insurance commission, this is the first time that such a complaint has come to my attention. For my part we will certainly look into it to see what can be done to prevent any delays of that kind occurring in the future.


Clarence Gillis: I have written the minister's department, through the deputy minister, and apparently there is no co-ordination there. I do not know where the roadblock is, but it is somewhere between national defence and the Department of Labour.


Milton Fowler Gregg: I should be glad to look into it.


Douglas Scott Harkness: To return to this matter of deserters, the total number listed as not having been apprehended at November 20, 1952, for the previous year was 2,005. Can the minister tell me how many of these have been subsequently apprehended, and what is the total number of people listed as deserters at the present time?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I will try to get that information later.


Mr. Fulton:: I should like to ask the minister some questions regarding two pieces of army property. The first of my questions is concerned with tbe armouries at 'Quebec dity. I noticed, according to an article in
Supply~i-National Defence the Ottawa Journal of February 11, that there had been three explosions in the armouries in that city. The implication in the report, as I understood it, was to the effect that while the authorities did not wish to express any official opinion at that time, they did use words which raised the question as to whether or not those explosions had been set, or whether they were accidental. I am particularly interested in knowing whether anything has been found out since that time which would establish whether they were deliberately set, and the damage done by the explosions.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am informed there were three separate fires which originated in the armoury to which the hon. member has referred. I think no great damage was done; but each of those fires is now being investigated. I have no report as to the causes of any of the three fires as yet.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Was I correct in understanding that the words used were to the effect that it was felt investigations might establish that they were set deliberately? If so, has anything further developed?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I think that was the view of a newspaper. We will have no definite views in the department until we receive a report.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The impression left by the article was that it had been based on a statement by the authorities. Would the minister let the committee know, as soon as he can, what the exact situation is?
Then I have a further question concerning the ordnance depot at Plouffe park. It has come to my attention during this week that certain buildings there are being dismantled. They are not part of the main structure, although they are within the fence around the depot. These are buildings which, I understand, were erected at some considerable cost, and they are now in process of being dismantled. What is the reason for their dismantling, and what did it cost to erect them?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am not aware of the circumstances to which the hon. member refers, but I shall be glad to get the information.


Edmund Davie Fulton: This is not based on personal observation, but on the observation of someone who reported direct to me that this is in fact the case. I would be interested in knowing the reason for it. They are being dismantled, and I should like to know how much they cost, because I am informed they were constructed within the last year and a half.	<	*	* **'*

Supply-National Defence


Ralph Osborne Campney: I shall be glad to obtain the information.


Howard Charles Green: I have two questions to ask the minister, the first of which has to do with benevolent funds. It has been my understanding that men who have served in Korea with the army do not have the same privileges in the matter of benevolent funds as are available to the men from the air force and the navy. On March 30 answers were tabled to the following question I had uSksdi
1.	Are veterans with Korean service eligible tor assistance from the navy, army and air force benevolent funds?
2.	Is there a difference in the treatment of such veterans depending on the branch of the service to which they belong?
3.	If so. for what reason is such distinction made?
The answers I received were as follows:
1. (a) Canadian naval service benevolent trust fund: Yes.
So it appears that the Korean veterans of the navy have the widest possible privileges. The answers continue:
(b) Army benevolent fund: No.
The army benevolent fund was established by act of parliament to administer funds remaining from canteen operations during the second world war. It provides assistance for veterans who served in the Canadian army during the period September, 1939 to September, 1946. To be eligible for benefits, a Korean veteran must also have served during the above period.
Then, the answer in respect of the air force was that their veterans were eligible. From these answers it would seem clear that a difference is made, and that the young lads who served in the army in Korea cannot get any help from the army benevolent fund.
During the discussion of the estimates on April 15 the Minister of National Defence made a brief statement on the point, which is reported at page 3928 as follows:
I should add, however, that it has been decided to institute a Canadian army welfare fund similar to the benevolent funds for the air force and navy for the purpose of extending benefits to serving personnel. That has been set up and a statement to that effect will go out tonight.
Will the associate minister tell us exactly what provision has been made, and the method in which these funds are to be made available to the Korean army veterans?


Ralph Osborne Campney: The statement by the hon. member is essentially correct. The difference in utility of the benevolent funds depends upon the terms of charters under which they were organized. The navy benevolent fund and the benevolent fund of the air force are fairly wide in their scope, and include service after world war II. The army benevolent fund, on the other hand, as indicated by the hon. member, was set up to deal only with


funds accumulated during world war II. As the minister stated in the house, a benevolent fund is now being established to be known as the Canadian army welfare fund. This will be a continuing fund, will be administered by the same officials and trustees as the army benevolent fund, and will operate in respect to army personnel subsequent to world war II in the same way and under the same conditions generally as the army benevolent fund operates in respect of those who served in the army in world war II. I am not sure if the fund is actually in operation, but if it is not it soon will be.


Howard Charles Green: At the present time are there not greater privileges for men from the navy and air force than there are for men of the army who served in the second world war? I understand the navy and air force funds are operated by private trustees, whereas the army fund is administered by one of the government departments, and that the soldier is not able to get loans or help of other kinds to the extent it is available to sailors and airmen.
If that is so, the present plan merely stretches out that disadvantage to include the Korean veterans of the army. I should think that from now on Korean army veterans should have exactly the same privileges as are enjoyed by Korean navy and air force veterans.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I might not be correct but I was of the view that the army, navy and air force funds to which we have been referring were administered almost on the same basis. I believe the army benevolent fund is administered under the direction of the army benevolent fund board and that at the present time General Murchie is the chairman of that board. I cannot say categorically that the hon. member is not correct as to there being some difference in methods of application of the three benevolent funds, but I was not aware of it. I shall be glad to look into the matter.


Howard Charles Green: I think the minister will find that there is quite a wide difference. I would ask him to find out, for example, whether a soldier can get a loan from the army benevolent fund. I may not have the correct information but it is my understanding that the army man cannot get a loan whereas the navy man and the air force man can do so from their funds. I also understand that the army benevolent fund is administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Is that correct, or is it not?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am informed that the hon. member is correct in stating that the army benevolent fund does not make loans, but

the Canadian army welfare fund now being established is being empowered to make such loans. I shall look into the situation.


Howard Charles Green: Is it the intention that the Canadian army welfare fund now being set up will be used to give the army veterans of Korea exactly the same privileges as are enjoyed, and properly so, by naval and air force veterans of Korea?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I understand that is substantially correct.


Mr. Cruickshank:: What is the procedure with respect to packing plants tendering for the provision of supplies such as meat at army camps? My understanding is that the contracts are given to a select few, and I cannot quite follow the reason for that. I would presume that any licensed packing plant should be permitted to tender, but apparently that is not the procedure. Why is that not so?


Ralph Osborne Campney: As I mentioned in reply to another question some time ago, the question of tenders for supplies is entirely within the hands of the Department of Defence Production. All we do is requisition what we want. The obtaining of such supplies, whether by tender or otherwise, is in the hands of that department. I am afraid therefore that I cannot answer the hon. member's question as to the basis on which the commodity to which he has referred is obtained.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Then I think it would be a good idea if we left Korea for a while and some of the departments got together. I have a series of letters in my file, and the Department of Defence Production says that it is the Department of National Defence that has the say. The Department of National Defence sent me to the Department of Agriculture, and I expect to land in the Department of National Health and Welfare or maybe external affairs before a concern in the province of British Columbia is able to obtain the opportunity of bidding. I am not suggesting that any particular firm should get a contract but I do insist that any packing plant which is fully licensed by the federal and provincial governments should have the opportunity to bid.
The correspondence does not merely date back a week or two. It runs over a period of months, and if it takes that long for the department to decide among themselves who has the authority, possibly Russia will have declared peace before this concern is able to sell any meat. I am asking for a definite answer. If the minister cannot give it now, then I ask him to have some of his officials- and I understand from the records that there are plenty of officials-check and find out 68108-255
Supply-National Defence why any licensed packing plant in the Dominion of Canada cannot tender on meat supplies particularly for the Department of National Defence. As has been said by someone behind me, Canada Packers and Swift's can get contracts, but Canada Packers, Swift's and Burns should not be the only concerns in the packing line recognized in Canada. If they are, I want to know why they are. Will the minister get me that information?


The Chairman:: Order. I allowed the hon. member to put his question and to comment upon the reply, although he received the answer from the minister that tenders are called for by another department. Obviously the minister will give the same reply.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Mr. Chairman, this is the first time I have taken part in the debate.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Order. It is not a matter of how many times; it is a matter of whether or not the hon. member is in order. He was in order when he asked his question the first time. I permitted him to comment upon his question although he had received a reply, but I tell him now that if he insists upon getting a repetition of a reply he has already had he is not in order any more. In any event, if the minister wishes to comment-


George Alexander Cruickshank: All right. I should like to ask another question if I may, which will be in order. Will the minister get for me the names of the packing plants supplying meat to each camp in British Columbia and the amounts of the contracts awarded by each camp within the last fiscal year? Will he also get for me the names of any packing plants in the province of British Columbia which have not been awarded contracts but which have applied? Surely that is in order.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I do not know that it is in order for me to get that information, but I will certainly call the attention of the Department of Defence Production to the inquiry of the hon. member. I cannot speak for them but I assume that the information he wants will be given him. We do not even have it in our department and I can only refer the question to the people who do have it. I suppose they will have to determine whether they are able to answer all or part of the question.


Howard Charles Green: There is one other matter I should like to place before the associate minister. Press dispatches some weeks ago indicated that Canada is to erect a building in Washington, D.C., for the Canadian joint staff mission. Would the minister tell the committee how much the building, site and

Supply-National Defence equipment are to cost, and also how many people will be occupying the building when it is completed?


Ralph Osborne Campney: A site has been acquired in Washington, and I am trying to get the exact figure of the cost of that site. In view of the very extensive and close relationship that exists between our defence forces and those of the United States, and the staff that we have to maintain in Washington in that connection, it is proposed to construct a building on the site and I understand that the estimated cost of the building, for which plans are being prepared, is approximately $2 million. I am also advised that between 150 and 200 people will constitute the staff who will be using the proposed joint staff building. I have not got the price of the site but I will get it. By way of further explanation, the building will be utilized for offices not only for the representatives of the Department of National Defence but also for the representatives of the Department of Defence Production, which maintains a considerable staff in Washington.


Howard Charles Green: What accommodation do these people have now in Washington?


Ralph Osborne Campney: The present situation is that all these people are accommodated in rented quarters. One of the things that has precipitated the necessity of constructing this building is that one of the larger buildings now being occupied by our people is owned by the Australians, who want it and have served notice on us that they wish to repossess the building.


Howard Charles Green: What rental is being paid for the present accommodation?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I shall get that in a minute.


Howard Charles Green: The minister has said that the building is to cost about $2 million, and as he is going to get the cost of the site will he also get the cost of the equipment for the building?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am informed that there ought not to be any, or at least very little new equipment required beyond the equipment in our various offices which will be transferred to the proposed building. The cost of new equipment will therefore be very small.


Howard Charles Green: How many officers does Canada have in Washington?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I will have that in a few minutes.


Howard Charles Green: I would like to know the respective duties of those officers in Washington.


Gordon Francis Higgins: I have a question to ask the associate minister which I asked the minister on two occasions yesterday, but he overlooked
fMr. Green.]
replying. May I preface by saying, so that the associate minister will understand, that I am informed unofficially, but I believe quite correctly, that in Canada today there are some 1,500 armouries. There is an armoury in every capital city in each of the provinces, and there are two or three in some of them. The terms of union between Newfoundland and Canada provide that Canada will provide for the maintenance in Newfoundland of appropriate reserve units, which will include the Newfoundland regiment.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Order. My recollection is that the hon. member has asked this question before.


Gordon Francis Higgins: It was not answered.


Louis-René Beaudoin: There was a reply iby the Minister of National Defence.


Gordon Francis Higgins: He did not answer it-or at least I cannot read it in Hansard.


Louis-René Beaudoin: It may not be a satisfactory answer to the member.


Gordon Francis Higgins: It was not answered at all.


Louis-René Beaudoin: I heard an answer.


Gordon Francis Higgins: May I put the question to the associate minister again so that I may have an answer.


An hon. Member:: It was answered.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I think the hon. member's statement of the total number of armouries in Canada is not far off the mark. As far as additional armouries are concerned, it is largely a question of priority based on relevant necessity. There are a good many places where armouries are actually required. The rate at which we can build them is governed by the conditions which obtain. The order in which we build them is a matter of study of the priorities established. I cannot go beyond that.


Gordon Francis Higgins: It is rather inconclusive. May I ask whether study is being made at the present time of St. John's with reference to the building of an armoury for reserve units.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I cannot give any specific information in regard to any specific location offhand beyond saying that we are reviewing all places where armouries appear to be called for. Those are matters which are considered by the relevant officers of the army and recommendations are brought forward in due course. What they are actually considering at the present time I do not know.


Gordon Francis Higgins: One final question. Whom would I have to ask to find whether it is being considered or not? Who would know whether the matter is being considered?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am informed that the question of an armoury at St. John's has been and is being considered.


Gordon Francis Higgins: That is all I wanted to know.


Clarence Gillis: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister if he will explain why it takes approximately five months for a man being discharged from the service to receive a return of his contributions to the pension fund. This may sound like a small thing but it is not. For example, some of the boys who have returned after spending a year with the 27th brigade in Europe are released from the service after having put in two and a half or three years. When they come out they receive no clothing allowance and, as some of them went into the service at 18 or 20 years of age, they are much bigger when they get out and the clothes they left behind are now no good to them. They need the money to purchase clothing. In correspondence with the department I was told that it takes approximately five months to refund that money. Why should that be? All the documents of the boys are there when they are discharged and the amounts coming to them are known. I think it is unreasonable that they should have to wait that length of time for the return of their contributions. Can the minister explain why it is?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I do not know that I can explain why it is, but I can say that I agree with the hon. member that it certainly should not take that length of time. In recent months that whole situation has been studied and reviewed and the time is being shortened very materially.


Clarence Gillis: Thank you, sir.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Chairman, I have here a return entitled "Canadian firms receiving large defence orders during the period March 16 to 31, 1953", which is put out by the Department of Defence Production. On page 5 I find this item:
Petawawa, Ontario. Removal of ashes, $18,600.
How many tons of coal are required to produce ashes which cost $18,600 to remove?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I imagine that would require the assistance of the dominion coal board or some organization able to compute coal in terms of ashes. All I would be prepared to say at the moment is: that is a lot of ashes.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Chairman, I think it must be an enormous amount of ashes and it is why I think perhaps we should know the amount of coal necessary to produce those ashes.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I want to ask the minister about another matter in connection with the
68108-255J
Supply-National Defence 27th brigade in Germany. I am sure the minister and all in his department will have been reading with great interest a series of dispatches from Bill Boss, Canadian Press representative, who has recently gone there. In this particular dispatch, reported in a number of papers, and I am reading from the Ottawa Journal of April 13, in dealing with the difficulties the correspondent states that unit commanders-the three battalion commanders-are experiencing difficulties in connection with the maintenance of regimental traditions and affiliations within their units. The minister will be aware, of course, that when the policy of recruitment of this brigade was announced it was stated that the three infantry battalions-the rifle battalion, the highland regiment and the infantry battalion- would recruit each company from a separate reserve force unit in Canada. That policy was designed to maintain regimental traditions although we on this side said, and I remember that I personally raised the question, that it would in fact make it impossible to preserve regimental tradition. Nevertheless the official answer was that it was felt it would preserve regimental tradition and give each reserve force unit in Canada a spur to recruitment and also an incentive to look after its affiliated company in the corresponding battalion in Germany.
This article reports that cross postings within the battalions from one company to another, which of course are absolutely necessary in the administration of a unit, create enormous difficulties because these men have to take down shoulder patches and, in the case of the highland regiments, they have the wrong kilts, the wrong cap badges and so on. He instances certain cases where complications have arisen as a result of these facts. It is concluded here that the only way to overcome these difficulties is to do what, in fact, we forecast would have to be done, and that is to tell the men to forget that they came originally from the Seaforth or 48th Highlanders or the Royal Regina Rifles, whatever it may be, and tell them that they now belong to simply the First Canadian Highland Regiment or the First Canadian Rifle Regiment, as the case may be.
I want to ask the minister whether, in view of these difficulties which are reported, the department is taking a good look at this system and policy of recruiting, and whether it is not now realized that this system, which was designed to preserve regimental traditions, is in fact having the very opposite effect in making it necessary to tell the men that they can no longer regard themselves as having any affiliation or connection with the

Supply-National Defence parent regiment from which they may have been recruited in Canada.


Ralph Osborne Campney: The hon. member has
touched upon a very difficult and serious problem; there is no question about that. The whole matter is, of course, under consideration. I might say that the system of rotation has added to the difficulties the hon. member has enumerated. The principle that was involved when the idea originated is, I think, a good one, and it is sound because it interests every unit across Canada. These difficulties are being studied with a view to seeing what might be done in that connection. The difficulties are great, and the matter is quite complicated, as the hon. member knows.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Does the associate minister not think that ultimately the solution will have to be to name the units over there as entire units, that is if you do desire to maintain regimental traditions and perpetuate that which has been so valuable in infantry formations, that is the regimental spirit? It will be necessary, I believe, to name the units over there by one or other of the reserve force unit names in Canada, that is the whole battalion, instead of trying to keep five separate companies of the five separate regiments. Is it not logical that you will have to arrive at that sooner or later? I want to ask the associate minister whether or not that is the thought in mind, as I hope it will be, rather than that they will simply go on calling it the First Canadian Rifle Regiment or the First Canadian Rifle Battalion, which has no significance or connection with any past Canadian military formations whatever.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I appreciate the views and suggestions of the hon. member, but at this time I would not care to hazard an opinion as to what the ultimate solution will be. I do recognize, as do all the officials of the department, the difficulty to which the hon. member is referring.


Edmund Davie Fulton: May I ask the minister whether consultations on that question are going forward between the department and the reserve association of the infantry corps, so that their views may be known and considered.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I understand that it will be taken up by the association at its next meeting.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I should like to ask the minister a question or two on the expropriation of land for defence purposes. A constituent of mine in Saskatoon has a lot in Winnipeg, about which I have recently written the minister and I have not yet had time to receive an answer. I make no apology for raising the
IMr. Fulton.]

matter here because I have written once or twice since October, 1952, when the matter was drawn to my attention. I am concerned, of course, particularly in regard to this man's case, but I am concerned also about what I think is the general slackness of the department in attending to either payment or compensation for these various expropriations.
I am referring now to the district in Winnipeg known as the parish of St. James. This lot is in a section close to or adjoining the Carpiquet barracks. There is no necessity for dragging the owner's name into this, but I shall give the minister the number of the lot, lot 18 in block 15, plan 935. This expropriation took place in the year 1941, no less, and is dated December 12. According to a letter which I have, and I think it is over the signature of Mr. Drury, that expropriation was stated to last for the duration of the war and twelve months thereafter. I suggest that many more months have passed since that time. Then, in a letter which I have from the Minister of National Defence himself, dated some time in October, 1952, he said that arrangements have been made now with the city by which this arrangement was to continue until 1956. Well, he mentions arrangements which had been made with the city of Winnipeg, but he did not mention any arrangement made with the owner, and that is exactly the complaint the owner wishes to have brought up in this house.
Then in October, 1952, I have a letter from the assistant deputy minister, one Basil B. Campbell, in which he says to the owner that if the owner will settle on some reasonable price every effort will be made to expedite the transaction. Well, that is fair enough, but so far as I know it has not yet been translated into action.


Ralph Osborne Campney: What was the date of that last letter?


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: It was October 21, 1952. The letter reads in part as follows:
If you will make a prompt reply to this letter setting out the price that you wish to receive for the property, the subject will be given careful consideration and if the price is acceptable, every effort will be made to expedite completion of the transaction.


Ralph Osborne Campney: Was there a reply to that letter?


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I have no idea as to that, nor have I any idea as to whether or not the lot has been definitely bought. As I said at the beginning of my remarks, I am introducing this matter not so much because of this particular case as because I think the whole method is somewhat slack when a man is permitted to go along for 12 years in this state of uncertainty.

I may state that, to my own personal knowledge, a few years ago this man had a definite offer from a potential purchaser. I even knew the price he was offered. He was prevented from making the deal because he could not turn over title to the property. This man is now 74 years of age, and this little bit of property was what he looked upon as his security for his old age. The property has been tied up since 1941 without one cent of compensation being paid. Further, to add insult to what I think is undue injury, this man has had to pay the taxes on the property in the meantime. I can see no justification for that. If that is the system, I think it should be changed quickly. If the government defence department or other departments want to take an option on a piece of land, when the due date for the option comes along, why does not the department take it up or let it go? Why do they not do it by that method and either decide to abandon the property and return it to its rightful owner or pay the agreed price in the terms of the offer?
That is all I have to say in the matter. I hope that this particular case will receive attention. In all fairness to the minister I want to state that the minister has not yet had time-or at least he has not yet found time-to reply to my latest communication and I am looking for that reply in due course. But as I repeat again, I raise the matter in particular to show the general attitude towards expropriations of this nature. I had one close to my own city which had relation to a farm close to Dundurn military camp. We had something of the same sort of trouble about that. I wish to ask the minister to take this matter under his consideration and to let us know what the score is.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am sorry that I am not personally familiar with the case cited by the hon. member but I will undertake to have it looked into at once. I am not personally familiar with the case.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: There is a long file about it.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I wish to ask a question with relation to this large pile of ashes. The only information we have from the minister is that it must have been a large pile. I think we must all agree with that statement. I wonder whether he could produce figures showing the amount of coal that was consumed there to produce this pile and also the price which was paid per ton or per cubic foot to remove these ashes. I ask this question because it seems to be an amount which is out of proportion. Possibly the minister could get those figures and produce them a
Supply-National Defence little bit later, along with the other information he was going to get me with regard to deserters.
While we are on the subject of Petawawa there is another matter which I should like to take up. It concerns the sawmill which was built there and in regard to which I have had three separate questions on the order paper. In answer to one of those sets of questions the minister made a statement at page 2509 of Hansard. The numerous questions elicited information that, during the time that the mill was being operated by the Department of National Defence, lumber was produced to the amount of 1,550,000 board feet, which was valued at $100 per thousand, which makes a value of $155,000. During the first year that this mill was operated, it was operated by day labour, according to the return. During the second year it was operated on contract, at a contract price of $16.30 per thousand. If we assume that the contract price and the day labour price were the same, or approximately so, the cost to cut this amount of 1,550,000 board feet would be $16.30 per thousand multiplied by 1,550, which gives $25,265. The cost of logging in 1949-50 was given as $6,400 and in 1950-51 it is given as $39,999.25. So the cost of logging to provide the logs for this operation was $46,399.25. The total cost of the operation to the department was therefore $71,664.25. To that I would add the cost given for erecting the mill, which was $5,000. Hence the cost to the department of the 1,550 thousand board feet was $76,664.25. They estimated that the value of that was $155,000. Therefore they made a profit on it, or at least they got the lumber for $78,395.75 less than it would have cost them to go out and buy the lumber on the market, according to their own figures.
In spite of that fact, the fact that they got this lumber for less than half of what they valued it at or what they would presumably have had to pay for it on the market, on June 2, 1952, the policy was changed and the
500,000	board feet of lumber which they had on hand and which had cost quite a considerable sum to log off-


An hon. Member:: Write them a letter.


Douglas Scott Harkness: We will not bother going into the exact figures, but the 500,000 board feet which they had already there on hand in the form of logs were sold at $29 a thousand to another firm which presumably has cut or is cutting those logs into lumber. If this amount of 500,000 board feet had been cut into lumber, the cost per thousand for cutting the logs into lumber, according to these figures-$16.30 plus $20 they sold them for-

Supply-National Defence would have been $45.30, a saving of $54.70 from what they could have bought the lumber for. The question which therefore arises is this: Why was the policy changed? If they were getting that lumber for half price, why did they change the policy, sell off these logs at a bargain price and then presumably go ahead and buy lumber at twice what they could have produced it for or more than twice what they could have produced it for? The whole operation just does not seem to make sense. Possibly the answer to the thing is to be found in the answer to one of the questions I put on the order paper about this matter. The question reads as follows:
For what purposes was the lumber, produced at the Department of National Defence sawmill at Petawawa, used, giving the amount used for each project or building.
The answer to that question is a wandering one. It is as follows:
The lumber was used for such things as forms for concrete for the construction of sidewalks, sewers, manholes, etc, the rehabilitation of temporary buildings and temporary married quarters to accommodate the units under training, routine maintenance, summer camp buildings such as shower stalls and field kitchen shelters and other miscellaneous projects, such as targets. Since the lumber used in these projects was drawn from day to day as required over the last four or five years, it would require a great deal of research and analysis to determine the specific quantities used on each particular project.
I just wonder whether all that means is that this large amount of lumber which was produced here they found just dribbled away and they were unable to produce any figures in answer to this question because they did not know what had happened to the lumber; and that possibly the reason that the policy, which seemed to be such a profitable one, was changed was that a great deal of the lumber was lost or had disappeared, and therefore they decided the best thing to do was not to carry on because they were losing the lumber anyway. I should like the minister to answer these questions I have posed and give us some information with regard to this sawmill.


Ralph Osborne Campney: Mr. Chairman, I hope the hon. gentleman did not expect me to follow his arithmetical calculations throughout as he read them. Generally speaking the situation is this, as I understand it: this operation was carried on by the army for some time, possibly not as efficiently as private industry could carry it on. The fact that it is an unusual industry for the army to engage in, plus the fact that there was a large accumulation of lumber at Petawawa, plus the fact that the price of lumber was falling, all together led to the change in policy which led to closing down of the sawmill at Petawawa.
[Mr. Harkness.l

As to the details which the hon. member has mentioned, I am not going to attempt to deal with them because I did not follow them completely.


Douglas Scott Harkness: It is not a question of dealing with the details. The question is: When lumber was being produced, according to the figures provided by the department themselves, at half or less than half the cost at which they could have bought it and less than half of what they estimated it was worth, why did they change the policy, and go ahead and sell off the logs they had on hand at a bargain price?


Ralph Osborne Campney: As I have mentioned, I think the principal reason for a change in policy was that we had a sufficient stockpile of lumber at Petawawa.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The minister says they had a sufficient stockpile for immediate purposes at Petawawa. They are still carrying on building at Petawawa, I believe, and I have no doubt they are using more lumber. They are certainly carrying on building at numerous other places. Why should this lumber, costing them, according to their own figures, less than half what they could have bought it for, have been discontinued?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I would have to check the hon. member's figures. I am not accepting his conclusions, not that I doubt the hon. member's arithmetical capacity, but he has come to a deduction from a long calculation which may or may not be right. I am not admitting his proposition at all.


Douglas Scott Harkness: These calculations are not long or complicated; they are very short, and they are not over four or five figures. As a matter of fact they are taken directly off the return which the minister supplied himself.


George Randolph Pearkes: There are two matters which I wish to receive information about. In the minister's speech on April 14 and in the white paper on page 17 he referred to the regular officers' training plan, R.O.T.P., part of which includes the encouragement given to cadets at the services colleges. Part of that plan includes the fact that from now on service at these services colleges will be pensionable. That is a new departure from what has been the practice in the past. This new departure comes into effect only this year. The result is that there will be certain young officers who have graduated from these services colleges in the army in the future who will be able to count their service at the Royal Military College or Royal Roads, as the case may be, for pension; whereas there will also be young officer graduates of those services

colleges who will not be allowed to count their service for pension. I raised this point during the debate on the speech from the throne before Christmas and asked that consideration be given to permitting all these officers who are graduates of these colleges and who are today serving in the forces to count their time at the services colleges toward pension. May I have a reply to that question, please, because at the time I was told it would receive consideration, and that was several months ago.


Ralph Osborne Campney: The question that my hon. friend refers to involves this consideration, as I understand it. Those who sign on in the services when they enter service college become contributors to the pension scheme, which is a contributory scheme. If their entry into these institutions does not involve that, then they are not eligible for the benefits of the pension scheme. In other words, if they are committed to the service by signing up, they become contributors then and though they are attending these institutions, the time counts. If not, they do not become eligible for the benefits of the pension scheme and do not contribute.


George Randolph Pearkes: I am perfectly aware that it is a contributory pension scheme; but a young graduate from the services colleges now going into the regular army has the privilege of contributing to that pension scheme; but the graduate of last year, before this new plan came in, does not have, as far as I know, the privilege of contributing toward the pension scheme. I am asking that all those who are now serving, whether they graduate four years hence, or whether they graduated last year, be permitted to count their services at the college and make a contribution to cover that time toward their pension scheme. Can that be done?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am informed that that matter has been given study, but up to the present time it has not been deemed advisable to accede to the position that the hon. member takes. I do not know whether it has been finally considered-I would not want to say it has been finally and irrevocably considered-but it has been considered and it has not yet been deemed advisable to do it.


George Randolph Pearkes: I hope it has not been given final consideration. The injustice and unsatisfactory conditions of having two men serving in the forces under such totally different conditions should be reconsidered.
My other point has to do with the policy in connection with the construction of the permanent quarters. I raised that question
Supply-National Defence in a general way yesterday but I was not satisfied with the answer that I received. Barracks and permanent stations are being built to take care of these forces which we may expect to be permanently stationed in Canada. The information I would like is: Are the plans going ahead to prepare quarters for the airborne brigade so that all the units of the airborne brigade will be closely associated when serving at what one might call their home station, or is the old-fashioned policy, which has been in existence for many years, of building barracks in various parts of the country whereby the units in the same formation did not associate closer together, being continued?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am informed that the airborne brigade referred to by the hon. member as the mobile striking force will not operate as a brigade. It operates as a series of service units stretched across Canada. I believe that the various units which will constitute this mobile striking force will have permanent establishments at different points in Canada.


George Randolph Pearkes: Can the minister say where the various units will be permanently established? For instance, we have the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry, the Royal Canadian Regiment, the Royal 22nd Regiment, the artillery regiments, the Royal Strathcona's Horse and the Royal Canadian Dragoons. Where will the permanent stations of these units be?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I understand that the units of the mobile striking force change from time to time in view of the considerations involved in our other commitments. I do not want to convey the impression that there is a permanent establishment for each given unit. They will be distributed in accordance with the requirements. In other words, the mobile striking force I would say internally rotates similarly to the units abroad.


George Randolph Pearkes: I should like to make this observation. I was hoping the minister would be able to say that there were permanent quarters for these various regiments. If they are going to be changing from one place to another, then I have this to say. I would call attention to the fact that 40 per cent of the personnel of these units are married, and these constant changes in stations will add a great deal to the expense of maintaining the units, particularly in the matter of married quarters. Again, I think there should be careful consideration as to whether it would not be advisable to allocate to these different units a permanent home.

Supply-National Defence


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am glad to have the hon. member's views.


Clarence Gillis: I would bring to the attention of the associate minister a matter that has been brought to his attention, and to that of the deputy minister, on previous occasions. I am wondering if anything has been done to protect the member of the permanent force who contributes to the superannuation fund while he is in the service. In the case to which I referred on at least two occasions, the man was in the service ten years before he died, leaving a wife and two children. No pension can be established because the commission has decided his death was not directly attributable to military service, due to the fact that he died from heart failure. The widow is not eligible for war veterans allowance because she is too young.
His contributions made to the pension fund while he was in the service have been returned to her, but the income tax branch has deducted as income tax the sum of $600 from the contribution which was returned. Both the deputy minister and the minister will recall that I raised this matter in the defence committee when we were revising Q.R. (Can.). I brought it to the attention of the committee and said that, at least on the grounds of service loyalty for the benefit of those who had been in the service, some action should be taken as between the Department of Finance and the Department of National Defence.
It is most unfortunate to leave a young woman under those circumstances, and then to add insult to injury by deducting $600 by way of income tax from the contributions made by her late husband. On the occasions I mentioned this matter before, the Minister of Finance indicated that he did not know anything about it. I suggest that, in the interests of those in the permanent service, something should be done to protect those who contribute to the fund and who may run into a similar situation in respect of dependents who are left behind. Has any thinking been done in the matter, and is any action contemplated?


Ralph Osborne Campney: The point the hon. member has raised has been the subject of discussions between this department and the Department of Finance. I cannot tell the hon. member at the moment just what the results have been, or whether the decision has been finalized. However I do recall his observations, and I can say that we have initiated discussions to see what can be done to remedy this situation.


Clarence Gillis: Continue the pressure.


William Joseph Browne: I should like to draw two or three small matters to the


attention of the minister. The first of these has to do with seaward defences. A great deal of damage has been done to the south side wall at the city of St. John's. This matter was discussed before with an official in the department. Has anything been done? The road in question was subject to unusually heavy traffic in the nature of trucks loaded with stone, and the like.
Then I would support the position taken by my colleague the hon. member for St. John's East in connection with the armoury. I know that members of the Canadian army have been looking for an armoury at St. John's. They did inspect a building of which I had knowledge, but for one reason or another they did not find it suitable. I have heard reserve army officers complain about the embarrassment and difficulty they have with the facilities available in connection with the training of men. They say the present accommodation is not suitable, and if we want to have a reserve force down there we should give serious consideration to the question of the armoury. I support that view strongly.
My third question is a much broader one, and has been raised before. It has to do with our troops in Korea. Have they had associated with them at any time any South Korean troops, as has been the case in connection with United States forces? I understand that about a third of the personnel under United States army control are South Koreans. Has the Canadian government given any consideration to the idea of training South Koreans by integrating them with the Canadian forces, or giving them training elsewhere, or by supplying them with arms and other equipment?


Ralph Osborne Campney: With reference to the hon. member's first question, let me say that negotiations are now going on with the city, and we hope to work out a satisfactory solution so far as the road is concerned. Then I have noted his further representations with regard to the armoury.
In connection with the training of South Koreans, I am informed that steps are being taken in that direction through the commonwealth division, and that we are now waiting for a further report from our own officer commanding in regard to that question.
Then replying to the hon. member for Calgary East, I would say that the contract for the removal of ashes at Petawawa to which he referred also covers refuse generally. The fuel burned at Petawawa amounts to approximately 8,500 tons per year. In addition to other buildings, this includes the heating of 517 permanent married quarters and 415 temporary married quarters.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The minister did not mention the number of tons or cubic yards of ashes removed for this sum of money.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I have not that information.


Douglas Scott Harkness: If one can judge from the cost of removing the ashes, it would seem there were more tons of ashes than tons of coal burned.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I would have to get the information from the officials of the Department of Defence Production. I do not have it here.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I find here large figures concerning equipment of all kinds. I shall not deal with all of them, but there is one item about which I would ask for the figures because I believe if we had them it might be possible to make useful comparisons. We cannot compare airplanes or tanks with other items, of course; but I would like to have the figures showing the amount spent throughout the whole service on photographic supplies and photographers. I see there are photographers in the army and the navy, but I have not been able to pick out, and I doubt whether the minister can, the amounts showing what has been spent. I want the over-all figure for photographic supplies and persons employed, so that we may have some idea of the total expense in that respect for the services.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I shall be glad to see what can be done about providing the information the hon. member has requested. I might point out that there are many categories; for example, air photography is done for the geodetic survey and guns on our fighters are equipped with cameras. There are all sorts of supplementary forms of photography. I am not sure how we can narrow it down, but we shall do our best to give the information.
While I am on my feet, I should like to put on Hansard the reply to a question raised by the hon. member for Kamloops regarding dismantling buildings at Plouffe park, although I see that he is not in the house at the moment. I am informed that the two buildings to which he referred were temporary shelters erected after the fire there to compensate for some of the storage space that had been lost. These shelters, two large and one small, were of wooden frames with galvanized roofs and tarpaulins over the sides. I understand that the materials cost $12,250 and the labour $6,600 and that the materials are over 90 per cent salvageable. The buildings are now being dismantled because accommodation is becoming available at the new ordnance depot at Cobourg for the stores that have been housed in them throughout the winter.
Supply-National Defence


Douglas Scott Harkness: Referring specifically to some of the items on page 307, I notice that a number of these items are down considerably from last year, particularly clothing, personal equipment, and barrack, hospital and camp stores. I presume that reflects the fact that mobilization stores of all these items have now all been laid in and that what will be required in future is chiefly what you might call monthly or yearly needs. However, I notice one very large increase in ammunition and bombs, an increase from $38 million to $71 million odd. I should like to ask the same question in connection with this item that I asked with respect to naval ammunition. Does this represent the laying in of mobilization stores or, as in the case of naval ammunition, is it merely ammunition to meet current needs in Korea and for each unit to have a normal stock on hand?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I understand that the
increase will not serve to provide a war reserve but that we are increasing our initial stocks because production is now running fully in many of these items. We are really just completing the accumulation of our necessary permanent stock.


Douglas Scott Harkness: How much of the heavier calibre gun ammunition is included in that amount? I refer particularly to 25-pounder and/or 105-millimeter and 155-millimeter shells.


Ralph Osborne Campney: While that information is being sought, might I put on Hansard some observations with respect to the question of the hon. member for Fraser Valley as to how a meat packing plant can qualify to tender. The information I have been given is that in order for a meat packing plant to be eligible for listing with the Department of Defence Production and to receive invitations to tender for the supply of meat and meat products for the Department of National Defence, it must be approved by the dominion Department of Agriculture and is subject to the acts administered by that department. In addition, the prospective tenderer must meet the requirements of Canadian government specifications board, and in order to obtain certification to enable it to tender the packing house must therefore make application to the Department of Agriculture, health of animals division, Ottawa, for plant inspection and approval.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Still on the matter of
ammunition and bombs, can the minister tell us how much of this ammunition is being supplied to our forces in Korea? I think the Minister of National Defence said yesterday that 200,000 rounds of 25-pounder ammunition were supplied in the first year of the Korean war. This amount is not really for war
4038	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence stockpiling. The minister said that all this ammunition really is for current needs and therefore I would think that a considerable proportion of it possibly is going to Korea. Could we find out what amount that is, if any?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I understand that the 200,000 rounds referred to by the hon. member were a contribution we made to the commonwealth pool, but that generally speaking our ammunition, so far as the British type is concerned, is being obtained for Korea at the present time from Great Britain and Australia where some of it is manufactured, and the American type is of course being obtained from the United States. The ammunition covered by the items to which the hon. member referred is mortar ammunition, 60-millimeter, 81-millimeter heavy, ammunition for 90-millimeter anti-aircraft, 105-millimeter howitzer, 105-millimeter recoilless rifle, small arms, ammunition for 3-5 rockets and some other miscellaneous items.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am not clear from the associate minister's answer whether any of the $71 million is for ammunition which will go to our forces in Korea.


Ralph Osborne Campney: This item does include the cost of ammunition of the various sorts I have mentioned which we will use in Korea.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Can the minister give any indication of what proportion of this total that amounts to?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I understand about 2J per cent, in rough figures.


Douglas Scott Harkness: 
Ralph Osborne Campney: I understand some is to enable us to build up our initial stock, as I mentioned a few minutes ago, and I think it includes certain tooling in some plants that have to do with new types.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: 1 have more than once expressed concern as to the over-all organization of this tremendous enterprise, and I want to draw attention to a few of the departments that I find in the telephone directory of the Department of National Defence. I want to draw attention to the extraordinary division of functions there is now, and then I want to ask a general question. How do we satisfy ourselves that the departments do not become like parallel lines 'Mr. Harkness.]

which, produced ever so far both ways, do not meet? In other words, how is there over-all liaison and inspection and dovetailing of the departments?
First of all let me deal with the directorate of organization which has a personnel of about 30. Then I want to come back and draw attention to some of the departments which are quite heavily staffed. My question again is the broad question of who is responsible, with all the burdens that various people are carrying for their individual work, for saying: This is a good organization; it is functioning as it should, and its relationship is as it should be. I have asked that in the past and I will not take up the time of the committee but I say that there should be fresh outside minds brought into this, even if they are no better than the minds inside.
Having said that, I turn to some of the groups I find here. On pages 11 and 12 I find the inspection service with personnel of about 60. Now, I have no reason to think that is too large.


Louis-René Beaudoin: To what document is the hon. gentleman referring?


James MacKerras Macdonnell: This is the telephone directory of the Department of National Defence setting out the personnel. On page 13 there is the directorate of civilian personnel, and there are 20 there. On page 15 I find the director of central registries. I am not quite sure what central registries are but there are something like 15 people there. On page 23 I find the director of publications and printing, and there are a dozen or so in that directorate. On page 26-and here you may be getting after me, Mr. Chairman, but it only takes a second to say what I have in mind-I find the directorate of naval information and the directorate of naval intelligence. The directorate of naval information has 9 and the directorate of naval intelligence has 15. I do not know just what the difference between them is.
By anticipation I find a partial answer to my question of a few minutes ago on page 30 I find that there is a superintendent of photography with a staff of about 10. I realize that the question I am asking is a very difficult one to answer, but I feel that it stands out. I feel that when we have this tremendous organization we should in some way be satisfied that people skilled in that sort of thing are used to vet this organization. The most gallant officer in the world, the best man in the field, the man you would choose above all others to command men going into action, may not be good at organization. My own belief is that a man,

unless he is a genius, has to learn organization as he has to learn anything else. I throw that question out and leave it to the minister to answer as best he can, and I believe it is an important question.


Ralph Osborne Campney: May I just make this general observation, Mr. Chairman, on the point raised by the hon. member, which I am sure he does not expect me to develop in detail. These different branches have been set up for specific purposes. For example, in the inspection service there is a controller of inspection who is responsible for the activities of that branch. These branches have been correlated and knit together as time has passed. In addition, there is the director of organization of the civil service commission who, in the Department of National Defence as in every other department, is continually making surveys along the lines of the observations of the hon. member and bringing to our attention suggestions for improvement and change. There is also the treasury office which, just the same as in other departments, is constantly making suggestions and reviewing the operations of these phases of the department. The fact that the department is large is occasioned, of course, by the magnitude of the things it is endeavouring to do. I do feel from my short association with the Department of National Defence that the different groups are co-ordinated and are under continual surveillance so that the standard of efficiency that is being developed is high and compares very well with other departments. Beyond that I do not know that I should make any detailed comment at the moment.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am not
going to labour the matter, but I just make this point. We have something here that is as far as the east is from the west from the situation in an ordinary department by reason of (a) its magnitude, and (b) the rapidity with which it has to be developed. I realize, as I said before, that I cannot ask the minister to give me a detailed statement of how these things fit, but I shall reiterate what I said before. I think the situation cries out for the best outside brains that can be brought in to assist. That is not without precedent in this government, as I understand it was done in one quite small department. At the risk of being tiresome I am going to reiterate that it should be done, unless there are reviews going on that I know nothing about and of which we have not been told.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall we pass on to air force?
68108-256i
Supply-National Defence


Douglas Scott Harkness: No. In referring to the details on page 307, I notice an amount of $17 million odd this year for tanks and armoured fighting vehicles. Last year it was $22 million. I wonder if the minister can tell us how many up to date tanks, Centurion tanks, we secured last year and how many more it is expected we are going to get. Also, what other items might be covered by this particular expenditure in addition to the Centurion tanks.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I think the hon. member will appreciate why I do not wish to give the figure in regard to tanks either for stocks or anticipated purchases. I think they have not been given at any place or at any time, and probably it is not desirable to do so.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I might just say that at this time last year the Minister of National Defence gave the number of Centurion tanks we had purchased up to that time. I have forgotten it exactly, but it was a small number and it was given.


Mr. Churchill:: Would the minister agree to say whether or not the two permanent active force regiments, Lord Strathcona's Horse and the R.C.D.'s, are going to be equipped with Centurion tanks?


Ralph Osborne Campney: The answer is yes.


George Randolph Pearkes: Before we pass from the army to the air force I want to ask one question regarding the northwest highway system which is allocated under army. Are any funds placed under the heading of the northwest highway system allocated to that portion of the system known as Haines cut-off?


Ralph Osborne Campney: The appropriations for the northwest highway system includes an appropriation for that.


George Randolph Pearkes: Is there any intention to keep Haines cut-off open all year round in the future? In the past it has only been kept open during the summer months.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am informed that this particular phase of the highway system is a joint operation by Canada and the United States. At the present time it is intended to continue keeping it open throughout the summer season only.


George Randolph Pearkes: Can you tell us how much was spent on the Haines cut-off last year? I know it is a joint operation between ourselves and the United States, but from the point of view of national defence it can hardly be considered a contribution to the defence of northern Canada, although I realize it is a very considerable contribution to the defence of Alaska.

Supply-National Defence


Ralph Osborne Campney: I will have to get that figure for the hon. member and I shall do so. I have not got it with me.


George Randolph Pearkes: The reason I am asking this question is that it must be realized that if we are spending a great deal of money on this Haines cut-off, it will be in direct competition with the White Pass and Yukon Railway which runs through Canada, and which operates on a very narrow margin. If considerable traffic is going to be trucked over the Haines cut-off it will affect the interests of the railway.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Reverting to this matter of the armoured fighting vehicles, the minister told us that two reserve force armoured units are being equipped with Centurion tanks.


Ralph Osborne Campney: Those are regular force units.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Did I say reserve? I am sorry; I meant to say regular force units. My question is, are the reserve force armoured units to be equipped with these Centurion tanks also?


Ralph Osborne Campney: We are endeavouring to complete arrangements to provide for the training of reserve forces on Centurion tanks.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am glad to know that the reserve units are going to get some Centurion tanks for training purposes. I hope they will get them at an early date.
There is an item for mechanical equipment, including transport, which is up from $30 million to $33 million. In the defence expenditure committee last year we received details concerning a number of vehicles which had been ordered at that time. When we were dealing with the matter at that time very few of these vehicles had been delivered. I wonder if the minister could tell us how the deliveries of these vehicles have been, and whether the vehicles on order at that time are now in the hands of defence forces.


Brooke Claxton: I can get the details if the hon. member wants them, but I can say that very substantial progress is being made. If my recollection serves me correctly I think one type is completed, and they are all very close to being completed.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Those are the ones with which we were dealing in the committee last year?


Brooke Claxton: That is right.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Then this $33 million represents the sum available for more vehicles of the same sort; is that correct?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The next item is armament equipment, which would be guns and so forth. It is merely $23 million this year and was $17 million last year. Last year the minister said very good progress had been made toward beginning to produce 105- and 155-millimeter cannon in Canada. I wonder if he can give us a progress report on that and let us know to what extent that type of equipment is being substituted for the 25-pounders and 4-5's and 5-5's which were used within the last year or two.


Brooke Claxton: We are still making good progress with the 105 and 155's. We have an order for our own account as well as that of the United States under production.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Would the minister care to give any figures on the production of those?


Brooke Claxton: There are no deliveries yet, except of what might be called tool room or prototype models.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The minister says we have not yet got into production?


Brooke Claxton: They are producing, but we have not had deliveries yet.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Then this item of $23 million covers chiefly cannon and things of that sort, or is there any appreciable portion of that for small arms? If so, what type of small arms would it cover?


Brooke Claxton: A large amount, more than $15 million, is for Are control equipment in the 90 millimeter ack-ack guns to which I referred before. It can be understood that that is very expensive equipment. For engineering, bridging, boats and so on, there is about $12 million; field artillery equipment of various types, $10 million; small arms, mortars, $4 million; maintenance, spare parts, ancillary, $8 million; that is a total of $50 million.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Excuse me, but where does the minister get this $50 million? That must be the expenditure for the past two or three years.


Brooke Claxton: That is the commitment authority and forward program. The actual cash to be spent out of that is $22,950,000 but it is not allocated, because how much cash is spent on each item will depend on the progress we can make.


Douglas Scott Harkness: In connection with the $4 million which is for small arms-


Brooke Claxton: Yes, but none of it is for rifles.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I was just going to ask what type of small arms was meant.


Brooke Claxton: Almost entirely for mortars of new types.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I was going to ask particularly if anything had been done in regard to submachine guns. I had a question on the order paper back in February as to what type of submachine gun was issued to Canadian troops in Korea. I asked if this type of submachine gun was found satisfactory in action, and if not, what were the deficiencies. Has a different type of submachine gun been issued? The answer I received at that time was that the carbine machine Sten 9 mm. Mk. 2 was being used. It was stated that, while not entirely satisfactory, it is regarded as being as satisfactory as other available types. It has certain disadvantages, particularly in the magazine. I was informed that a different type of submachine gun had not been issued for operational use, but a more recent type has been issued for user trials.
I wonder if any progress has been made in arming the entire brigade with this new and, I would take it, more satisfactory type of submachine gun?


Brooke Claxton: There is not yet, that I am aware, a better submachine gun than the ones we have. We are subjecting both a British type and an American type to trials at the present time. The Bren gun is still a very satisfactory weapon.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Could the minister say what is this more recent type which has been issued for user trials, and what have been the results of those trials?


Brooke Claxton: I would have to get some technical details on that. I am not in a position to give very much information. We are in the hands of our friends the Americans and the British who designed the weapons, and we could not give very much information on the results without their concurrence.
I have one answer that I wanted to give to the hon. member for Nanaimo. He asked the principle upon which married accommodation was being provided for the active forces. We have made an actual count of the number of people in the active forces as presently constituted, and arrived at an exact figure for all for whom accommodation is to be provided in the program. It has not yet been provided, but we are working toward it, and the figure is just over 25,000.


Mr.   Baler@: Mr. Chairman, before passing on to the next item I notice that there is an item on pages 309 and 310 relating to the northwest
Supply-National Defence highway system, amounting to nearly $9 million. I take it that refers to the highway from Edmonton through to Alaska. If so may I again avail myself of this opportunity of suggesting that the department add to that highway the portion of No. 5 highway running from Edmonton to Winnipeg. We have been discussing this afternoon many of the various kinds of mobile units, not that we hope we shall have to use them in our own country, but a time might come when we would be glad to roll them from the east to the northwest. I think consideration should be given to the inclusion of No. 5 highway from Winnipeg to Edmonton, leaving Winnipeg and going through Saskatoon, North Battleford, Battle-ford, Lloydminster and on to Edmonton. I would suggest to the minister that this proposal still be given serious consideration.


Brooke Claxton: The hon. member for The Battlefords and other hon. members have drawn this matter to the attention of the government on a number of occasions. It came up for consideration during the course of the discussion on the estimates last year. In addition, representations have been received from the governments of the three prairie provinces.
I am afraid I must say there is little likelihood of the federal government or the Department of National Defence ever reaching that satisfactory position with regard to its defences-equipment, construction, manpower and everything else-where it would be able to engage in such an activity as the grading, from the defence point of view, of a highway for which the provinces should ordinarily be responsible. Everything which adds to our communications or transportation system is, of course, of some benefit in defence. But having said that, I must say there are so many more things that we cannot afford to buy and do not expect to be able to afford to buy for our defence and which are more urgently required, that the highway is fairly low in priority.


Howard Charles Green: Will the minister tell the committee the present situation with regard to the Canadian Rangers? As he will remember, there were units known as Pacific Coast Militia Rangers during the second world war, and they served a useful purpose in outlying districts of British Columbia. A few years ago the defence department decided to establish ranger units again not only in British Columbia but also in the Northwest Territories. Can the minister tell us how many units there are at the present time and the number of men who have been enrolled?


Brooke Claxton: The purpose and general scope of the activities of the rangers have been described on previous occasions, so I know
4042	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence the hon. member does not want any information of that nature. At the present time the strength is something over 1,500 which is intended to be a nucleus to which we could add quite rapidly. Companies are being formed quite regularly from time to time wherever we can get people in an outlying district to agree to serve. They are issued with a rifle and some ammunition and some instructions; and they form a part of the defence forces in places where there are no organized defence forces.


Howard Charles Green: How many units are in being? The minister said that 1,500 men are enrolled.


Brooke Claxton: I would have to get that information.


Howard Charles Green: In what part of the country are they located?


Brooke Claxton: Very largely in the western part of the Arctic, west of Hudson bay out to the Pacific coast. There are some east of Hudson bay, but very few.


Howard Charles Green: The minister will get the number for me?


Brooke Claxton: Yes. I shall be glad to give that information to the hon. member.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I have just one further question which I think might come here. I want information with regard to contracts where the plans and specifications have been amended in the course of a contract and where that has inevitably involved additional expenditure. I am not going to carry that to extremes, into every small contract. I am quite ready to accept a suggestion as to a floor, so to speak; but I should like to get information as to the important cases where that has happened.


Brooke Claxton: This would involve an analysis of every construction contract, in detail; and it would be necessary to go to my colleague, the Minister of Defence Production-


James MacKerras Macdonnell: If I may
interrupt, I want to make it clear that I am willing to accept a reasonable floor so we will not run into useless work.


Brooke Claxton: Even with a reasonable floor you would get hundreds or thousands.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I do not
suppose we will run into thousands that have been amended.


Brooke Claxton: No; but in order to find out whether or not it is amended you have to look at it; and this would mean an examination of individual contracts through the Department of Defence Production and its agencies, Defence Construction Limited and Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I would think that in a considerable number


of contracts there had been additions and amendments made in the course of the construction which had led to additional expense. We would be glad to arrange for that information to be worked out and put before the defence expenditure committee, if it was desired.


An hon. Member:: Carried.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: No, it is not
carried. I am informed that there is a question as to the amount of work involved.
I am not dropping this matter; I shall not pursue it at the moment. I am ready to accept a suggestion as to a floor. I am willing to make it, within reason, as high as the minister would like. I am ready to accept a suggestion as to only those cases where there has been a substantial addition. I do not want to run the department into a lot of unnecessary work, but I want some information on that matter.


Brooke Claxton: I have given the hon. member the information I have. I have checked with my colleague the Minister of Defence Production, who has more knowledge of this matter than probably anyone else in the country, and I am told that it is hard to recall a single contract where you do not have some additional expense. It would therefore mean bringing forward details with regard to every contract, or virtually every contract, no matter what floor was set. If the hon. member wants us to do that, we could do it. The Minister of Finance informs me that this afternoon they had at least 50 for consideration at treasury board. If that is a useful exercise, then I suggest that the place to do it is in the defence expenditure committee.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I myself was going to make that suggestion. If that is satisfactory to the minister we will leave it there. I should like to add that I like to think I am fairly reasonable, and I think we can work out something so there will not be a whole lot of useless clerical work to do.


Brooke Claxton: My officers in charge of the matter will be glad to see the hon. member and find out exactly what he wants.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall we pass on -to the air force?


Edmund Davie Fulton: There are two questions which I asked earlier this afternoon.


An hon. Member:: They answered one.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I understand that one has been answered. I was going to ask that, if the information is not available, we should have the right to revert to the army later on.


Brooke Claxton: We shall be glad to give the information as soon as it comes to hand.


Edmund Davie Fulton: There might be some other discussion, although we may then have passed the army details.


Louis-René Beaudoin: The further debate we would have would be with respect to the question or the reply to the question of the hon. member.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Subject to that understanding, shall we pass on?


Brooke Claxton: I am afraid that we cannot fairly hold out to the hon. member any hope of getting any additional information. In the cases of the three fires to which he referred, there is a court of inquiry at work investigating them. It may be a matter of weeks before the information is available, so I cannot promise to have it today. But as soon as it is available I will give it to the hon. member.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I had to be out of the chamber for a minute or two. Do I understand that the question with regard to Plouffe park has been answered?


Ralph Osborne Campney: Yes. I put it on Hansard in the hon. member's absence. I did not know whether he was coming back.


Edmund Davie Fulton: If the information with regard to it is now here, can the minister tell me for what reason the buildings are being dismantled?


Ralph Osborne Campney: Perhaps the hon. member would look at the statement I made, or does he want me to make it again?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No. I was waiting for the reply before asking certain other questions. Let me put it this way. The minister told me he did not have the information here. There were certain other details I was going to ask him about which I forbore to ask about at that time. Has the removal of these buildings anything to do with fire precautions?


Ralph Osborne Campney: These were temporary
buildings, which were erected at the time of the fire to provide adequate storage facilities. They were made of wood with galvanized roofs and tarpaulin sides. They are salvageable, and as the ordnance depot at Cobourg is now ready to receive the material that these temporary shelters were covering they are being removed.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I should like to be certain that their removal now is not being done prior to what had been intended with respect to them. Is their removal at this time being influenced in any way by the fact that representations have been made with respect to their constituting a fire hazard?
Supply-National Defence


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am not aware of that factor entering into the situation at all.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Is there any information on hand which would show whether or not the fire marshal of Ontario or any of his officials in Ottawa have discussed this question with the minister or with the department?


Ralph Osborne Campney: No, none whatever.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Is the minister saying there were no discussions or no information?


Ralph Osborne Campney: No information.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Will the minister have that question looked into?


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall we pass on to the air force?


Howard Charles Green: The associate minister was to get some information for me concerning the army benevolent fund, and also the new building for the Canadian mission in Washington. Has he that information?


Ralph Osborne Campney: Yes. As far as the facts constitute an answer I thought I had answered the hon. member with regard to the army benevolent fund. The other question he asked had to do with the cost of the site and the new building in Washington. I am informed that the cost of the site was $115,000.


Howard Charles Green: In addition to the cost of the site the minister was to let me know the rentals which are being paid for the present accommodation and also the number of Canadians who would be housed in this building.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am informed that the present rentals are $47,488 a year; that the number of staff who would be housed in this building at the present time is 228.


Howard Charles Green: This is a proposal that merits some comment. This afternoon the associate minister said that this Canadian joint staff mission building in Washington was to cost $2 million. He now says that the site has cost $115,000 and the rentals being paid for the present accommodation amount to $47,488. This appears to me to be another instance of money being wasted, of Canada trying to live up to the Joneses in the matter of buildings beyond our country's boundaries, and a very unfair burden on the taxpayers of the country. The press dispatch which first announced this building was dated December 29, 1952. I am reading from the Vancouver Province:
Canada has purchased a site here for a new $1 million building to house the Canadian joint staff mission, the Evening Star says.

Supply-National Defence
Hon. members will notice that the cost of that building has now gone from $1 million to $2 million. Then the dispatch goes on:
The property involved now occupied by a fraternity house is in a fashionable area on Massachusetts avenue. It is several blocks from the British and Canadian embassies.
I cannot see the reason for the construction of a $2 million building for a Canadian joint staff mission in a fashionable area in Washington. It is about time the government got back to the old Canadian virtue of thrift. Here we have a situation which will not be permanent. For the time being 228 Canadians will be housed in that building. I presume that they will all be living elsewhere, and living accommodation will have to be provided in addition. It will only be a matter of time until that joint staff mission will be greatly reduced. Surely here is one place where we could get a building for a good deal less than $2 million. I take it that the building has not yet been constructed, and therefore that it is not too late for the department to give some further consideration to its cost.
A similar situation arose in the committee on external affairs with regard to an embassy in Italy. The tentative plans called for an embassy which, with equipment, would cost over $1 million. As a result of the complaints made in the committee the Department of External Affairs is to review the plans in an effort to cut down the expenditure. I would hope that the same plan will be followed by the Department of National Defence with regard to this joint staff mission building in Washington. I do not believe the Canadian people should be saddled with an expense of $2 million for a building of that kind.


Brooke Claxton: The hon. member has made some observations which of necessity were made without knowledge of the facts. Almost without exception, Washington is the most difficult place to get accommodation in that we know of. The joint staff mission is now located in two buildings on Massachusetts avenue, but they are the property of the Australian government. We succeeded in getting the leases to them at a time when space was not quite so tight and because we were a friendly government engaged in the same kind of operation. It was a fair lease, but the buildings are by no means suitable for the purposes for which they are used. Nevertheless we would like to stay there but unfortunately we are being put out in October of this year. I myself have appealed to the Prime Minister of Australia to let us stay on for another year; otherwise we will have


to house this joint staff in temporary accommodation, probably in a hotel or an apartment house at terrible expense.
We searched the city of Washington for any building that could be used for this purpose. We had the leading real estate agents in Washington conduct that search for us. We had representatives of the Department of Public Works and the Department of External Affairs work with us to try to find any type of building. We did not want to build, and we just could not find anything suitable. If the hon. member knows of a better place in Washington we would be glad to take it, but I do not believe there is such a place.
As for the land, we got it at a very favourable price. It is between $2 and $3 a foot which, as the hon. member knows, is a very favourable rate indeed for land in any large city, and particularly a city like Washington where prices are very high.
If it should turn out that we can reduce our joint staff there, then the building is sufficiently close to our embassy to enable it to be used as an annex of the embassy. That is one useful thing about this location. However, our experience is that in the case of relations with countries like the United Kingdom and the United States the extent of governmental business, whether it be defence or otherwise, has tended to increase; thus it appears we will always have the need for this place, either for civilian or service purposes. As I say, the location happens to be convenient to the embassy. But the land at between $2 and $3 a foot is a very good purchase, and at a very low cost. We could not find anything comparable in any suitable area in Washington.
Item stands.
Progress reported.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Robinson):: It
being five o'clock, the house will proceed to the consideration of private and public bills.



CRIMINAL CODE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Friday, February 20, consideration of the motion of Mr. Thatcher for the second reading of Bill No. 108, to amend the Criminal Code (capital punishment).
Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I am inclined to think that when this bill was first introduced exception might have been taken to it, by way of a point of order, that it touched upon a subject matter already covered by another bill

then before the house and which had been forecast in the speech from the throne, namely a bill to consolidate the Criminal Code. In any case, as it happens we are at the present time debating this subject of capital punishment on the bill before us in the name of the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher), and at the same time a House of Commons committee is discussing the identical subject as one of the sections of the Criminal Code bill.
I do think, with all deference-and in this I believe I express views with which those who have taken part in the debate would agree-that the question as to whether or not capital punishment should be retained is one of great importance, complexity and difficulty, and perhaps is deserving of somewhat more profound attention than has been given it in the debates which have taken place almost every year in this chamber.
For example, we have the argument as set out in the Mosaic law: Thou shalt not kill. And in the very next chapter of Exodus, the book of the Bible in which that occurs, we have set out, as related to that statement of a crime, the punishment for that crime, where in the 12th verse it says:
He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.
And in the 15th and 16th verses:
And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
So when we make this quotation, and it is a very common quotation, against capital punishment, as it is set out in the Mosaic law- and I am not adopting it for the purpose of any argument I am advancing-


Stanley Howard Knowles: There is such a thing as the New Testament.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: I quite agree; but it is the Old Testament which is quoted. The injunction "Thou shalt not kill", which is the definition of a crime, is suggested as a reason why capital punishment should not be inflicted, whereas just a few lines farther on in the same chapter, and from the same authority, the suggestion is made that capital punishment is a punishment suitable for the crime so defined. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) has said there is such a thing as the New Testament, and of course I entirely agree with him. I agree also with what I take it he implied, and that is that the New Testament might adopt a different attitude toward capital punishment.
Criminal Code
May I, as having some bearing upon what the hon. member has in mind, refer him to the contribution made by the present Archbishop of Canterbury, as it is set out in the parliamentary debates in England for 1947 and 1948, where he makes this statement:
The statesman-even the Christian statesman- has to deal with society as it is at any given moment; and though he be guided and impelled by Christian doctrine and ethics, he will have to decide constantly how far, in the fulfilment of his trust as the guardian of society, he must rely on preventive and deterrent methods of punishment only and how far he can mitigate them and make them constructive by the operation of the law of love. It is the same question which every citizen and every Christian has to consider, and it has to be decided by each man according to his own judgment, discrimination and experience.
The church, in its corporate capacity, does not pronounce in such a matter. Each Christian has the duty of conscientious private judgment, and Christians very naturally and rightly differ in their estimate of what is practicable.
Then he makes this further observation:
The duty of the state is to protect society against this horrible crime. There is, shall I say, a prima facie case for the law of the state to inflict the death penalty upon one who takes the life of another. It goes to the self-preservation of society. The state must begin by asking, not what is for the good of the murderer-that must come second *-but what is necessary for the good order of society, life and the safety of its citizens.
I think as good a statement as can be found as to the relationship between jurisprudence, or the law at large, and the question of capital punishment, is that contained in the ninth edition of Jurisprudence, by the late Sir John Salmond. This is the classical statement on the subject and it states:
The ends of criminal justice are four in number, and in respect of the purposes so served by it, punishment may be distinguished as, (1) deterrent, (2) preventive, (3) reformative, and (4) retributive. Of these aspects, the first is the essential and allimportant one-*
That is, the deterrent.
-the others being merely accessory. Punishment is before all things deterrent, and the chief end of the law of crime is to make the evildoer an example and' a warning to all that are like-minded with him.
Thus the prime object of criminal law is, in the words of the great English political philosopher, Locke, to make every offence very obviously a bad bargain for the offender. After the deterrent aspect is placed preventive punishment, for we are not concerned merely with deterring offenders but also with preventing them from repeating the offence by such penalties as imprisonment or, in capital cases, death.
Sir John Salmond in that connection makes what seems to me a very profound observation, although it is a short one. He says, "Offences are committed through the

Criminal Code
influence of motives upon character" and thus "may be prevented either by change of motives or by a change of character. Punishment as deterrent acts in the former method; punishment as reformative in the latter". It is clear, he concludes, "that there is a necessary conflict between the deterrent and the reformative theories of punishment". And it is necessary, in view of modern tendencies, "to insist on the primary importance of the deterrent element in criminal justice". He puts it this way:
The reformative element must not be overlooked, but neither must it be allowed to assume undue prominence. To what extent it may be permitted in particular instances to overrule the requirement of a strictly deterrent theory is a question of time, place and circumstances.
In other words, Mr. Speaker, if I were to cite, as I could cite, for example, the records of the six states of the United States of America in which capital punishment has been abolished and which show that their rate of murder, according to the figures I have here, is something of the order of three times as high as it is in Canada, or if I were to cite the fact that during the interval between when New Zealand abolished capital punishment in 1941 and restored it in 1950 their rate of homicide was several times higher than in Canada, I would not suggest for a moment that these statistics necessarily have any great force or relevancy as applied to the problem before us.
I say that because we know that one of the most elementary rules of logic is that if you are going to compare two separate countries statistically in that way you first have to be able to say that the only factors which differ as between the two you are comparing are whether they have capital punishment in one case and no capital punishment in the other, and that all the other factors which might influence the rate of homicide are identical in the two countries.


Edmund Davie Fulton: How do their own rates compare before and after?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: I could not say. I have just compared during the period.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Does the minister know how the rates in these six states compare with those in other states?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: Again I suggest to my hon. friend that there are numerous factors which might account for the difference. Therefore, if we are making a serious attempt at thinking our way to a proper solution of the problem, I do not really believe it serves any purpose for those who favour the retention of capital punishment to cite the case of the six American states or of New Zealand, or 
that it serves any purpose for those who favour the abolition of capital punishment to cite the experience of the Scandinavian states where you have a very high homogeneity of population speaking the same language in each case, largely of the same religion, having the same outlook upon life and with no frontiers in the sense in which we have one on the North American continent.
Therefore if we are going to do any useful thinking in this field we have to get above the matter of basing it upon newspaper clippings and casual statistics of the very sort to which I have just been referring generally myself. That is why I think, if I may be permitted to transgress slightly in view of the fact that we are discussing a matter which I suggest should not be before the house at all, that perhaps the best method of dealing with it is the one that was suggested in the special committee on the Criminal Code the other day, namely that when we have accomplished the really monumental task to which we are now addressing ourselves, the consolidation of no less than 60 odd years of amendments to the code into one entity, we might then either set up a parliamentary committee or a royal commission for the express purpose of considering such matters as capital punishment or the rule of legal insanity, as in the M'Naughton case, and other major problems of that character.
It was suggested that along with the resolution reporting the Criminal Code bill back to the house a recommendation might be made that, while the committee had not considered these major matters and did not think it appropriate to do so in conjunction with another very large and complex task, the government and the house at a later date might either set up a parliamentary committee or a royal commission to consider matters of that sort. I think there will be general agreement not only by those who have taken part in the debate this year and in similar debates of previous years but by every member of the house that in the question of the retention of capital punishment we have a very large, difficult and complex problem, and we are not living up to our responsibilities if we consider it in any other light.
Before we reach any conclusions we have to get beyond newspaper clipping logic and consider the matter carefully over a period of time, hear competent people who are for it and competent people who are against it and then, having gathered a mass of reliable data, reach our conclusions and apply our

own reasoning to that data in order to bring about, if it is thought advisable, a change in the law; or, if it is not thought advisable, to have a much better informed opinion ourselves and a much better informed public opinion upon the subject.
For that reason, if I might be permitted to do so, I should like to suggest to my hon. friend that he might consider withdrawing the bill and leaving the matter to be dealt with by the parliamentary committee which has a bill before it upon this same subject which is in order and which they are considering in the manner in which I have indicated.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I should like to ask the minister a question. He gave us certain statistics and information regarding states and countries which have abolished capital punishment. Has the minister figures showing not a comparison of their rate with Canada's so far as homicide is concerned, but showing their rate of homicide while they had capital punishment and the rate after they abolished it? I think he would then be comparing something under circumstances which are similar.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: No, I have not. The restoration of capital punishment in the case of New Zealand was in 1950, and the time lag with respect to the securing of these statistics is such that I doubt very much if any reliable statistics are available. Then, as I am sure my hon. friend will agree, statistics of this sort, which are not plentiful in any country, are only reliable, it would seem to me, if they are examined over a fair period of time.


Angus MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say a few words on this bill. I am constrained to do so as much by what the minister has proposed as by my support of the bill of the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher).
I am opposed to capital punishment and I am supporting the bill. I think, whether we agree with the purposes of the bill or not, that the member for Moose Jaw should be commended for bringing it before the house. I appreciate that it is a question upon which there is very wide difference of view, but I believe an ever-increasing number of people are coming to realize that capital punishment is not only ineffectual as a deterrent to homicide but it also has other psychological effects that are not beneficial to society. I think the penalty of "a life for a life" which we now carry out with capital punishment was an act of revenge in other and more primitive days. Civilized society everywhere is getting away from the old idea of revenge
Criminal Code
and taking the much broader view, as the minister said, of protecting society.
A little while ago I read somewhere a statement made by a retired officer of the metropolitan police in London. After many years of experience in dealing with crime he gave it as his opinion that the difference between the state of mind that resulted in crime and the normal state of mind was very, very narrow indeed; and that no one could say when he would be himself in an emotional state where a crime of violence would seem to be the natural thing to do. If that is the case, the person who commits murder is not in any normal state of mind; and whether he is insane or knows what he is doing is not a question of great importance. I think we will agree that such a person really has not much control over his actions, and for that reason I think it would be much better to protect society by seeing that he is not allowed to mix with society again than by going through the very brutal proceedings by the infliction of capital punishment. I think the method we use in carrying out capital punishment is the most revolting of any being used at this time.
The suggestion made by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson) is a good one, even though the member for Moose Jaw may not agree. I do not know whether he will agree, though I imagine he will because it is a reasonable suggestion. If the hon. member does not agree the likely result in connection with this bill would be that it would go to a vote and be defeated in the house, and that would be the end of it for this year. However, if the committee on criminal law should bring a recommendation to the house concerning capital punishment, and the other things the Minister of Justice referred to, to the effect that they should be dealt with by a royal commission or a parliamentary committee, then I would think the member for Moose Jaw had made some progress by the introduction of his bill.
I do not think there is anything further I need to say; but if my advice is of any value to the hon. member, I would suggest that withdrawing the bill in view of what has been said by the Minister of Justice would be the proper course at this time.


Mr. J. J. Smith (Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a few comments on this bill which has been presented to the house by the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher). I am not a lawyer and I cannot talk about the legal aspects of the bill, but I do believe the bill has considerable merit in it. I think the abolition of capital punishment is something we might well consider in this day and age. I think, too,

Criminal Code
that we have considered bills in this house which have had much less merit than this present bill.
I am not too greatly concerned about how a criminal is put to death. I do not think it makes a great deal of difference to one who is going to lose his life whether he is to be guillotined, hanged or sent to the electric chair. 1 understand that in France they still use the guillotine. In Great Britain individuals are hanged for the offence of murder, and in this country we follow that same procedure. In the United States the electric chair is generally used.
My concern in regard to capital punishment is for the immediate friends and relatives of those who are to be hanged. It seems to me that hanging is a pretty cruel death; but again I say that I do not think it makes too much difference to the man who is going to be hanged just what happens to him. He has been found guilty in the courtroom and the judge has said that he will be hanged until he is dead. I do not think the method makes too much difference to the criminal, but I do have in mind possibly parents, a brother or sister or close relatives and friends of that criminal, and I think the effect on them is very important.
The minister has suggested that this matter may be referred to the committee on criminal law and I think in this day and age it is time we looked into capital punishment and, if we are going to continue to have it in this country, see if there might not be a better method. I repeat that my concern is for those who are close relatives of the one who is to be hanged. I have a family, and it seems to me that if one of my sons got into trouble and had to pay that penalty under the law of the country, then it would be some consolation to me, if capital punishment could not be abolished, if we had a more humanitarian way of taking the life of that individual. My hon. friend in front of me says I may be hanged myself, but I will take that chance. In the United States they use the electric chair, and I think that is a more humane way for one to be put to death.
That is all I am going to say and I suppose that the hon. member for Moose Jaw will withdraw his bill. However, if it goes to a vote I will support it.


Mr. William Bryce (Selkirk):: 
Mr. J. W. Noseworihy (York South):: Mr. Speaker, I merely want to say that I support the bill, and I congratulate the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher) for having brought this matter to the attention of the house as he has done year after year. I tried to follow the minister's argument to discover whether or not he was in favour of capital punishment. I think everyone reading his remarks will find it rather difficult to conclude which way the minister was arguing. I would gather, however, that the minister is not prepared at this time to support the bill.
If the minister is not prepared to support it, and if he is speaking for the cabinet, then of course the bill has not a chance in the world of passing the house. The only recourse open to the hon. member is to follow

the minister's suggestion, unless he wants to see the bill defeated by an overwhelming majority.
I think there is a growing number of people throughout this country who are opposed to capital punishment. The committee which is revising the Criminal Code has had a number of representations made to it expressing that opinion, and a number have asked that a commission be set up this session in order to study the question of abolishing capital punishment and abolishing whipping. I am pleased to gather from the minister's remarks, whether or not he is in favour of abolishing capital punishment, that he will support a resolution coming from that committee recommending the setting up of a parliamentary committee to study this matter at some length. In the light of that fact I shall support the withdrawal of this bill, if it is withdrawn. If it is not, I shall vote in favour of it.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Mr. Speaker, I want to say quite frankly that I am entirely in disagreement with the principle of the bill. The chief purpose of punishment, as I understand it, is the prevention of crime. If you want to prevent crime, as I view it-and I have talked to much wiser people than I shall ever be-and from what I have read, the only way to prevent a crime of this nature is by humiliation. Hanging not only extinguishes the life of the chief felon, but it also imposes a very severe punishment on the family of the felon.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The government might want to prevent you from doing some of the things you do.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Quite possibly. I do say there may be people with strong ideas on the other side of the fence, but as I view it, I do not agree with them. Again I am speaking in the presence of my important seniors at the law-I was going to say my seniors at the bar, but that might be misunderstood. I am unalterably opposed to the principle of this bill, and I intend to vote against it if it comes to a vote.


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher) speaks now he will close the debate.


Mr. W. Ross Thatcher (Moose Jaw):: It is
obvious that this bill is fairly contentious. It is also fairly obvious that if it does go to a vote the bill will be defeated. I may say that when I first introduced this bill to the house it received very little support. I have been pleased that there have been quite a number of members on this occasion who have spoken in favour of it. I believe the speech which the Minister of Justice
Criminal Code
(Mr. Garson) made this afternoon was most reasonable. He has suggested that if his colleagues on the committee consolidating the Criminal Code will go along with him, at the next session there will be a committee of some sort or a royal commission which will go into the matter in the proper way.
Since the matter is so contentious, I do think it needs a good deal of study. I should like to accept the suggestion which the minister has made and withdraw the bill at this time. In doing so, may I say that I hope in the intervening period the cabinet will exercise its prerogative of clemency in capital cases wherever possible. I have noticed that in recent months the cabinet seems to have been doing that on quite frequent occasions. I hope the Criminal Code committee will accept the suggestion which the minister has made today, and that parliament will accept that recommendation when it comes. I would ask then, Mr. Speaker, for permission to withdraw this bill.


Mr. Speaker:: Has the hon. member leave to withdraw the bill?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Order discharged and bill withdrawn.



CANADA ELECTIONS ACT


[Stage Direction]
On the order:
Resuming the adjourned debate on the motion of Mr. Adamson for the second reading of Bill No. 224, an act to amend the Canada Elections Act.
Agar Rodney Adamson: I do not
want to hold up the house, Mr. Speaker, since the officers of the Department of National Defence are here and the minister is going to leave shortly. But I would ask that this bill receive some consideration at the next hour given to public and private bills. I feel that the bill-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Probably the bill should stand today.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes.


Mr. Speaker:: Stand. The business on the order paper for private and public bills having been disposed of, the house will resume its business which was interrupted at five o'clock.



SUGGESTION THAT PAGE BOYS BE EXCUSED FROM ATTENDANCE THIS EVENING

Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Before you leave the chair, Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege because it is a matter which is of some concern to several
4050	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence members of the house. We have had a long and heavy week, and so far we have sat every evening. The page boys have been kept extremely busy. I was wondering, Your Honour, whether you would give consideration to allowing the page boys to go home after the dinner hour this evening in order that they may get some rest. We shall have another heavy week ahead of us next week.


Mr. Speaker:: That is a good suggestion. If the members of the house can look after their own wants themselves, I will direct the chief page to allow the boys to go home after six o'clock.

The house resumed in committee of supply, Mr. Robinson in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE

William Alfred Robinson: Do I understand that we have disposed of the subheading "Army"?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, while the house was considering private bills I had an opportunity to check up on the reports of the earlier discussion. The associate minister was to get me further information with regard to this army benevolent fund. In his earlier remarks he did not make it clear whether the Korean army veteran will now be able to get loans and have all the privileges which are enjoyed by a Korean navy veteran and a Korean air force veteran. As the associate minister will remember, he was uncertain of the situation at that time. I would ask for a further explanation now.


Ralph Osborne Campney: To reply to the hon. member's further question, it is my understanding that under the new fund to which I referred and which will be applicable to the Korean veterans of the army, called the Canadian army welfare fund, they will be permitted to obtain loans and generally speaking-I cannot say in every specific detail-the purview of this new fund will be similar to that of the navy benevolent fund and the air force benevolent fund. These are private funds, as the hon. member will understand; they are not government funds. They are administered in trust. I am told that the general field covered by the new Canadian army welfare fund, together with the benevolent fund, will be parallel to the other two.


Howard Charles Green: Will the funds be administered by the same board which administers the army funds from the second great war?


Ralph Osborne Campney: Yes. I understand that
the administration will be carried on by the same agency that administers the army benevolent fund.


Howard Charles Green: Then the veteran of the
second world war will not have the same rights as the veteran of the Korean war? Will that be the position? In other words, this army board will be administering two different funds in different ways. There will be more privileges pertaining to the fund which is now being set up for the Korean army veteran.


Ralph Osborne Campney: The hon. member is correct. Unless and until the army benevolent fund is changed, it has a limitation which does not obtain in respect of either the naval benevolent fund or the air force benevolent fund or the new Canadian army welfare fund which will be available to the veterans from Korea.


Howard Charles Green: When will that fund be
set up?


Ralph Osborne Campney: It is in the process of being set up now. I think the organization part is practically completed.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the subheading carry?


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


William Alfred Robinson: We shall then
proceed to the subheading "Royal Canadian Air Force-Regular and General", found at page 311 of the blue book.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: On the subject of the air
force there are several questions I should like to raise, and I think I will present the whole group of questions while I am on my feet, if I may. During the minister's remarks on April 14 he had this to say as reported at page 3811 of Hansard:
During 1952-53 there were 19 regular airfields, stations and schools opened bringing the total number used by the air force up to 108. Another 13 regular and 7 auxiliary schools and stations will be opened during 1953-54.
That statement indicates that an expansion of air force training facilities is contemplated for the current fiscal year. I should like to ask the associate minister whether he could give further details as to the expansion contemplated. For example, would it be possible to indicate where and when these 13 regular and 7 auxiliary schools are going to be located?
Continuing along that same line dealing with the expansion of auxiliary schools, I do not know whether that refers to reserve training or not, but in the estimates I notice that the expenditure for auxiliary operations is decreasing from $5,718,162 to a figure of $5,286,200 for the forthcoming fiscal year. I should like to discover the reason for the decrease. That would tend to indicate that

no further expansion in the auxiliary operations is contemplated, something which seems to be contrary to the statement I have read from page 3811 of Hansard.
If the auxiliary operations are to be extended, if there is to be an expansion of the number of auxiliary squadrons, I should like to remind the associate minister that for some two or three years now the air force association in the city of Brandon has been very interested in participating in this form of reserve activity. They are a very keen group; at the present time they are not tied to any active program of reserve training. They have won a pennant award for their participation in association activities this year, and they would be interested in any expansion of reserve activities of this nature that might be undertaken.
That brings me to the mobilization assignment training program. I am getting all sorts of information these days about defence matters in general and air force matters in particular. This morning in my mail a circular letter reached my desk. It is the first issue of what is called the M.A.T.P. officers' training school. I believe they are going to circulate a monthly information sheet of this kind. As I read this circular it would seem to me it is expected that there will be some expansion in this form of reserve training. On page 2 of the circular it is indicated that the first course for mobilization air training personnel is to get under way in September of this year, a course in flying control activities. It is hoped that circumstances will soon permit additional courses for personnel engaged in other types of employment. That seems to deal with one of the complaints I made the other day to the effect that reserve people having a special background of training are not being fitted into the area of service for which they are most suitably prepared.
I should like to commend the department for its activity in this regard. A list of the personnel already participating in the M.A.T.P. is attached, and the implication I get from this list is to the effect that more and more reserve people are to be absorbed in this type of training program. I think it is a very worthy activity. If the minister has anything further to say on this matter I would appreciate having it.
Finally, coming back to the association problems again, I am wondering just what form of assistance is available to air force association wings across the country. It is a veterans' group that is officially recognized by the R.C.A.F. and the Department of National Defence. Up to the present time most of its activities have been of a social
Supply-National Defence nature, but they are trying to contribute in some more concrete way. I know that our own wing, the 502 wing, has recently established a club and they are interested in knowing whether any assistance is available in the form of furnishings and that sort of thing that could be used in equipping a mess. At the present time we have not been able to get any concrete information in that regard. That covers most of the questions I had in mind.


Ralph Osborne Campney: With reference to the first question asked by the hon. member for Brandon, I have not a list of the 13 regular and 7 auxiliary schools and stations that are referred to on page 3811 of Hansard, but I would observe first that these figures include major Royal Canadian Air Force formations and units, including wing headquarters, ground and operational units, supply depots and radar units as well as actual flying units.
With respect to the auxiliary units, I can give the hon. member the location of the 7: Saskatoon, 2; Calgary, 2; Saint John, New Brunswick; Windsor, Ontario; London.
On the second point as to the apparent decrease in the air force estimates, I am told that the discrepancy to which the hon. member referred was owing to the fact that there was an overprovision in the estimates of last year. It is not owing to an actual decrease in the activity.
With regard to the air force association, it is my understanding that a grant of $15,000 a year is given to the association and the members are given a free subscription to the Roundel; but no other assistance.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I take it that no movement is under way to increase the number of auxiliary squadrons in operation in Canada?


Ralph Osborne Campney: Not flying.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Not flying squadrons?


Ralph Osborne Campney: No.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the subheading carry?


George Randolph Pearkes: It is six o'clock.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Louis-René Beaudoin: We shall continue consideration of item 241.


Mr. MacLean (Queens):: I see an item here for 28 air traffic control assistants, listed in the civil staff. Does that mean that civilians

Supply-National Defence have replaced service personnel in this employment, or does this represent a new category of employment?


Brooke Claxton: The Royal Canadian Air Force took over from the Department of Transport a number of air stations. At the present time there are 28 air traffic control assistants located at seven air traffic control centres across Canada, namely at Saint John, New Brunswick, Moncton, Dorval, Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Vancouver. Their job is to pass on flight plan information concerning all aircraft in their area to the air defence control centre, so that particular flights may be identified. This is part of the air defence of North America.


John Angus MacLean: I see that under the civil staff there appears to be an appreciable increase in the number of clerks and stenographers, as well as diesel power plant operators. Are these additional employees, or are they civilian personnel who are replacing service personnel in certain categories of employment?


Brooke Claxton: The diesel engine operators are stationary engineers at radar stations where power plants are located, and the others mentioned by the hon. member represent an endeavour to use civilian rather than service personnel wherever possible.


John Angus MacLean: I have mentioned a considerable increase in the number of clerks and stenographers in the civil staff. It seems to me there has been a considerable increase in the number of service stenographers employed by the air force in the last year, due to the fact that women are again being recruited in that force. Would the minister give us some indication of the over-all increase in the number of stenographic employees?


Brooke Claxton: The increase in stenographic employees is related to the increase in the activities of the R.C.A.F. generally. The number of man-years is one way of measuring it. In the year 1952-53 the number of man-years in the R.C.A.F., as related to this point, was 37,073, while in 1953-54 it is estimated the number will be 44,309. The civilian increase is related to that.


John Angus MacLean: Last year an item appeared in the estimates for the employment of chauffeurs in Brussels and Moscow. No doubt this was in connection with air attaches. This year the item does not appear.
I presume these chauffeurs are now service personnel; is that the explanation?


Brooke Claxton: The service personnel in Brussels have been -Changed so there is no longer an air attache there. In Moscow it has to be a serviceman.
(Mr. MacLean (Queens).]


John Angus MacLean: Then under the heading of major procurement of equipment I find an item for aircraft and engines, which has been increased from $223,545,000 to $420,232,600. What does that increase represent? Then I see a separate item for armament equipment, and another item for signal and wireless equipment. Does this include airborne equipment, or is the cost of airborne armament included with aircraft and engines? Does the sub-item of armament equipment include airborne as well as ground equipment?


Brooke Claxton: The first item of $420,232,600 covers aircraft of all types, and everything that goes into aircraft. The major components are, for the Sabre, $65 million; for the CF-100, $77 million; for the C-119 Packets, $3 million; for the de Havilland Comet, $700,000; for the Otter, $660,000. Then there is an item for customs, excise, sales tax, etc. of $9,810,000 and an item for the Lockheed trainer, which is the T-33, of $1,703,000. The figures I have given relate to the total program, and the amount of that total program of $1,146,640,000 which we expect to spend in 1953-54 is $420,232,600.
The second item to which the hon. member referred is armament. The estimate for cash required is $4,515,000. That includes ground armament, airborne gun and rocketfiring and sighting equipment, guided missile equipment, test and handling equipment, passive defence equipment, freight, express, customs and excise.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I was a little surprised to have the minister give a breakdown of the $420 million as between the amount for Sabres, the amount for CF-lOO's and so forth in view of the fact that when I tried to get that information last year in the defence expenditure committee with respect to the item of $687 million which had been spent on aircraft up to that time I was refused the information on the grounds of security. But as the minister has now given a breakdown as far as the $420 million is concerned, I wonder if he would be prepared to give one with respect to the item of $687 million which we had up to this year.


Brooke Claxton: I did not give a breakdown of the expenditures involved in the $420,232,600. I gave the division with respect to the total program, which I do not think would have any security attached to it.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I understood the minister was giving a breakdown of the $420 million. He gave so much for Sabres, so much for CF-lOO's, so much for T-33's and so on. What does that refer to if it does not refer to the $420 million?


Brooke Claxton: The balance of the authorized program totalling $1,146,640,000.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am not quite clear as to what the breakdown the minister gave referred to unless it had reference to the $420 million. Is that what it referred to?


Brooke Claxton: I am afraid not. I gave the figures with regard to the total program, but not the amount of cash that would be spent this year.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I certainly do not think the figures the minister gave referred to the total program which includes this $420 million up to January 1 of last year, I think it was. There is over a billion there alone, and the figures he gave certainly do not add up to anything like that. I did not put them down, but having kept rough track of them I would say that they do not even add up to $420 million.


Brooke Claxton: The figures are made up of a carryover from the program of $981,022,000, that has already been entered upon and committed, and the new program of $165,618,000, or a total of $1,146,640,000, of which $726,407,400 is to be liquidated in future years.


Douglas Scott Harkness: We seem to be talking at cross purposes. What exactly was the breakdown that the minister gave? He mentioned $65 million for Sabres and $3 million for C-119's. I have forgotten what the other figures were.


Brooke Claxton: The items I mentioned plus some others that are similar total $165,618,000, which is the new program in addition to that already put before parliament and in respect of which we have commitment authority.


Douglas Scott Harkness: What relation do these figures have to the $420 million? Are they included in it or are they in addition to it?


Brooke Claxton: The $420 million that I mentioned will be used to finance the carryover, plus new program, less commitments to be liquidated in future years which total $726,407,400. The details I gave, including the $65 million odd for Sabres and $77 million for Canucks, are the new program.


Douglas Scott Harkness: If I understand this properly, the $165 million is all of the new program which is included in the $420 million. The $420 million is the previous commitments from last year and the year before but which is going to be spent this year, less the amount that the minister indicated.


Brooke Claxton: Less the amount that will be spent in future years; that is right.
Supply-National Defence


Douglas Scott Harkness: Less the amount to be spent in future years. In other words, this consists of money commitments which were made in past years, plus the $165 million which is a new commitment to be spent this year, plus commitments for future years.


Brooke Claxton: Less commitments for future
years.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The $420 million includes commitments for future years too, does it not?


Ralph Osborne Campney: That is the cash element to be spent for this present fiscal year.


Douglas Scott Harkness: If that is the cash element, then the $420 million minus the $165 million, which would be approximately $260 million, represents cash expenditures on commitments from past years.


Brooke Claxton: That is right-to be made this year.


Douglas Scott Harkness: There are no commitments for future years included in this at all?


Brooke Claxton: No.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Not in the whole $420 million.


Brooke Claxton: No.


Douglas Scott Harkness: We have a breakdown of $165 million out of the $420 million. Can we get a similar breakdown for the remaining $260 million odd?


Brooke Claxton: We have not got a breakdown of that. The way in which I put the figures was that we have a commitment authority carryover of $981,022,000 and a new program of $165,618,000, or a total of $1,146,640,000, from which $726,407,400 is to be subtracted because it is to be liquidated in future years. The difference is the cash required for this year of $420,232,600, of which $165,618,000 is covered by the details I gave.


Douglas Scott Harkness: As I understand the picture now, there is a carry-over of $981 million included in which is $260 million odd which is included in this item, for which cash is going to be put out this year, and of which we have not had a breakdown.


Brooke Claxton: That is right.


Douglas Scott Harkness: And the remainder, which would be about $720 million, has still not been committed. Is that correct?


Brooke Claxton: It is committed but it will not have to be met in 1953-54.


Douglas Scott Harkness: May I put it this way. Of this $981 million there is a further amount of approximately $720 million which will not be spent this year and which has not been spent up to date.


Brooke Claxton: That is right.
4054	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence


Douglas Scott Harkness: But it has all been committed?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Douglas Scott Harkness: For this total amount which has been committed but not spent can the minister give us any breakdown-although I am not insisting-of how it is to be spent?


Brooke Claxton: I think the same reasoning would apply here as applied in the defence expenditure committee.


Douglas Scott Harkness: In view of the fact that we have had a breakdown of part of this $420 million which is actually to be spent this year, it would seem to me that we should be able to have a breakdown of the whole thing. I would think that as far as security is concerned the rule which applies in one place should apply in the other.


Brooke Claxton: A partial breakdown does not give you or anyone else anything, except as related to the amount we are seeking here in the total breakdown.


Edmund Davie Fulton: It does if you give it year by year. The minister has given it this year and he will presumably give it in future years.


Brooke Claxton: Is it desirable to give it?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I cannot see why not unless the minister is going to say in some future year that he will not give the breakdown for that year. If he is going to give the breakdown year by year, as he has for this year's operation, when the whole program is completed we will have the whole picture. Is there any difference between giving it for the whole program and giving it year by year until the whole program is completed? If there is some valid security reason perhaps we would be able to understand, but I cannot see it.


Brooke Claxton: Perhaps I was wrong in giving it a moment ago, but that does not justify us giving the whole thing which would enable one, by a simple process of division, to arrive at the total production of fighter aircraft, something that is not we believe in the public interest to give.


Douglas Scott Harkness: May I ask the minister how much cash has actually been expended since the three-year program started? It is very difficult to keep track of these things, with these commitments, hold-overs and so on. As far as I can make out, $165 million of new expenditure is to be made this year and there is a $981 million carryover from money which was authorized by parliament in past years. In addition to the $981 million authorization or commitment or whatever you


wish to call it, how much has actually been expended as far as the three-year program is concerned?


Brooke Claxton: The total amount expended for each service-


Douglas Scott Harkness: I mean just for the air force.


Brooke Claxton: -on that major division is given in the white paper at pages 36 and 37.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Where on pages 36 and 37 would we relate this $981 million to the total amount voted and the total amount expended? That is the thing I do not see.


Brooke Claxton: What the hon. gentleman was asking a moment ago was the amount that had been spent during the past three years?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Yes.


Brooke Claxton: Well, that is included in the item on page 37: procurement of equipment.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Not for aircraft.


Brooke Claxton: No.


Douglas Scott Harkness: It was aircraft I was asking about because I was trying to relate it to the total $981 million carryover and also to the total amount that had been voted.


Brooke Claxton: I would be glad indeed to get for the hon. member the total expenditure on aircraft provided that we do not have to break it down into types. I will get it for the hon. member.


George Randolph Pearkes: May I ask a question? Have the CF-lOO's which are now being organized into squadrons at North Bay been equipped yet with electronic gun sights?


Brooke Claxton: They are being equipped with radar sights, yes.


George Randolph Pearkes: I know they are to be equipped but they are not so equipped at the present time.


Brooke Claxton: Well, they are.


George Randolph Pearkes: They are or they are not equipped?


Brooke Claxton: They are equipped.


George Randolph Pearkes: They are equipped with electronic gun sights now?


Brooke Claxton: Yes. While this is a field which is pretty technical for me, as I understand it they are equipped now; and there are developments occurring which are resulting in their being equipped as they pome off the line with a subsequent development, the very latest thing.


George Randolph Pearkes: There is one other observation which I am forced to make. On April 14, at page 3811 of Hansard, the minister said

that the radar system would be largely completed in 1953. I know this is highly bound up by security, but that estimate is so far from the estimates that I have been given by other sources that I just wanted to ask the minister whether by any chance a mistake had been made in his estimates.


Brooke Claxton: No, that is correct. As regards the Canadian part of the radar chain, as it is presently planned, we expect that it will be largely operational in 1953. A good number of the permanent stations are operational now.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Last year there was $223 million spent for aircraft and engines. Of that amount more than one-third was spent outside of Canada. From the returns I have here this year we plan to spend $420 million on the same item. How much of that will be spent outside of Canada?


Brooke Claxton: That is a matter for the Department of Defence Production. From the figures I have seen it will be very much less in proportion because for one thing we are producing the Orenda engine in quantity. It will go into the F-86E Sabre-it is going in now-and that will mean a very large additional element of each aircraft of that type will be produced in Canada.


Gordon Francis Higgins: You expect the same ratio of purchases as last year would follow?


Brooke Claxton: No, I think it would be very much less.


Gordon Francis Higgins: You have no idea how much less?


Brooke Claxton: No.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: In that connection, I want to ask how much of our defence money has been spent in Britain up to date?


Brooke Claxton: That is in the white paper, in so far as it can be sorted out into the main end items, and it appears at page 34. During 1951-52 we have spent $9,962,000; in 1952-53, for ten months, $15,732,000, and that is largely for Centurion tanks. In addition to that we have spent considerable sums on components that have gone into these new ships.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I was given a figure of $100 million from the department up to the end of 1952. It seems to me it is a matter of very great importance having regard to the balance of payments between Britain and ourselves. I am wondering if the minister can hold out any hope that more can be done. I was told at one time that deliveries were slow, but later I was told that the
Supply-National Defence difficulty was clearing up. I wonder if the minister can say something about it, as I think it is a matter of great importance.


Brooke Claxton: My colleagues the Minister of Defence Production and the Minister of Finance are continuously directing their attention to this subject. We have had also, of course, a number of conversations with representatives of the British government and their department of defence, to see in what ways we could enlarge these expenditures. There are considerable difficulties in the way of getting delivery and also of having equipment of the types that we want. We are getting all the Centurions we can from Britain, but in the case of F-86E Sabres the flow is the other way.
We are exploring, for example, the possibility of acquiring or getting the right to make a new type of long-range aircraft for production about 1956-57.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I do not want to labour the point, but when we are having difficulty selling things from this country, such as cheese and things of that sort, I am wondering if the minister can assure us that it is a matter of constant effort on the part of those who are responsible for purchasing to have it in mind that, all other things being equal or nearly equal, we should purchase in Britain. We are trying all kinds of ways of adjusting the balance, and it seems to me that here is a way because we are here spending many hundreds of millions of dollars.
I would not disagree that there are difficulties; I know they exist. There is an old music hall maxim, however, which says "where there is a will there are three ways." If everyone has it in mind, it seems to me that a great deal could be done.


Brooke Claxton: That is right. This is the business of my colleague the Minister of Defence Production. I assure the hon. member he has this problem very much in the forefront of his mind, just as his officers have. They are doing everything possible in that direction.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Following the hon. member's remarks just now, I notice that according to a return I have here it would appear that we purchased last year aircraft engines and planes from Britain to the value of $22-5 million and from the United States to the value of $54 million. Is that correct?


Louis-René Beaudoin: The minister has said twice that the Minister of Defence Production is the minister dealing with that problem, together with the Minister of Finance; therefore I think we ought-
4056	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Defence Mr. Higgins: It is in the minister's estimates.


Louis-René Beaudoin: That is the amount to be spent, and if you want to ask for any information concerning the purposes for which the money was spent, that is quite relevant. Information concerning where the contracts are being let is a matter, according to the minister's statement, that is left to the Minister of Defence Production.


Gordon Francis Higgins: With deference, Mr. Chairman, this was a return of the house which is in Hansard of March 30, 1953 at page 3397. It shows the sum of $54 million having been spent for aircraft and engines in the United States, while $22-5 million was spent in Britain.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Was the return filed by the Minister of National Defence or the Minister of Defence Production?


Gordon Francis Higgins: Is it material who files it?


Louis-René Beaudoin: It is when we are studying the estimates. The estimates of the Minister of Defence Production will come later, and questions relating to his department should be asked at that time. It will be quite proper for the hon. member to ask the question then. I do not want to get involved in a long discussion on procedure.


Gordon Francis Higgins: There is an item here, "aircraft engines". What other item would enable a member to ask a question except this item "aircraft engines" in the minister's estimates?


Louis-René Beaudoin: It seems to me that if the Minister of National Defence requisitioned the Minister of Defence Production to purchase aircraft engines, it would be for the Minister of Defence Production to inform the house as to where he let his contracts, whether it is in Britain or the United States. That is my view.


Douglas Scott Harkness: May I point out that the Minister of National Defence asks the Minister of Defence Production to purchase aircraft, and he specifies the kind of aircraft or engines he wants. In other words he specifies whether it is a British engine or a United States engine. I think, therefore, it is proper to ask questions of this sort because the minister is the one who specifies the type of engine to be secured.


Mr. Mcllraiih:: With respect to the reference by the hon. member for St. John's East to the question and answer appearing on page 3397 of Hansard for March 30, 1953, about which he is now seeking to question the Minister of National Defence, I may say that the information does not relate to the procurement of aircraft engines for defence at all. [The Chairman.]

It is a statistical figure showing the number of airplanes and engines imported into Canada, and includes all sorts of commercial aircraft, engines and that sort of thing. It has no bearing upon defence expenditures in any way.


Howard Charles Green: May I point out that the Minister of National Defence, in his own white paper, sets out how much money has been spent in the United Kingdom and how much has been spent in the United States. Surely the hon. member for St. John's East is entitled to ask a question along that line. As I understood it, that was what he was doing.


Louis-René Beaudoin: My remarks were made in the light of the reply which the minister gave. In any event the minister wants to take the floor.


Brooke Claxton: There is no doubt about the right of the hon. member for St. John's East to ask the question, but the question is whether I can answer it. None of the figures I have here will answer it. The Department of Defence Production have the figures and can give the answer. I suggest, as the chairman did, that is the department to which the hon. member should put his question.
I may say, in a general way, that during the year we bought some Bristol freighters, some Merlin engines and at the end of the year we bought two Comet aircraft. Apart from that I do not recall that we made any purchases of aircraft or their parts from Britain during the year.


Gordon Francis Higgins: It is correct to say that the Minister of National Defence does not actually keep a tabulation of the orders that he places?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Well, why should he?


Brooke Claxton: I ask the Minister of Defence Production to procure some equipment. He is the person who selects where the equipment is to be procured and keeps the figures on the contracts and so forth. We provide him in the end with the money.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Would it be fair to ask him to answer the question?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No.


Edmund Davie Fulton: May I point out to you, Mr. Chairman, that as I see it, unless we were to do it under the first item of the defence production estimates, there is no item under which this question concerning the money spent for aircraft engines could be asked. If you look at the defence production estimates on page 12 you will find there is no particular item to which that particular question is relevant. I would imagine that even with a generous chairman such as you have been, if I may say so, you would be bound to rule the hon. gentleman out of order because

there would be no item in these estimates on which he could ask his question. It seems to me the sensible thing to do is have both ministers here, and if one cannot answer the question then the other should.


Stanley Howard Knowles: One cannot answer and the other will not.


Clarence Decatur Howe: As the minister charged with responsibility, I shall be pleased to bring in that information when my estimates come down, if they come down. I suppose that will depend on the length of the session.


An hon. Member:: I thought the minister was always an optimist.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Order.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I note that the item for clothing and personal equipment is reduced from $31 million last year to $15 million this year. Will the minister comment on that matter?


Brooke Claxton: Yes; I should be glad to. That is owing to the fact that in 1951, as I announced on February 5, we entered a period of stockpiling equipment for the purposes of mobilization. We also had to replace stocks that were used to equip the forces as they were rapidly built up. Therefore during 1952-53 we spent much larger sums on clothing than were necessary for a normal year. Having replenished our stocks that were necessary to equip the forces and provide something for stockpiling, it is now possible to reduce the amount sought for clothing.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Have any changes been introduced in the style of uniforms for the air force within the last couple of years? For instance, I have been told that last year before one issue was completed the style had been changed and a new style of uniform was introduced.


Brooke Claxton: No, that is not so.


Joseph William Noseworthy: How many changes of style have been introduced within the last year or two?


Brooke Claxton: The only change of any significance at all that occurs to me as having been made during the last three years is that there is a new working dress for air crew and ground crew along the lines of battle dress.


John Angus MacLean: To revert again to civil staff, there are a couple of questions I should like to ask. I notice that the department apparently employs one meteorologist. Since ordinarily these men are employed by the Department of Transport, perhaps the minister would explain this one exception and tell us how it comes about that he is employed by the Department of National
Supply-National Defence Defence. Then as a second question I would ask this. I notice that the estimate for payment of the corps of commissionaires has increased considerably, namely by about $150,000. Does this mean that there is an increasing program in effect for replacing service guards by commissionaires for guard duties? Is that the explanation of the increase?


Brooke Claxton: On the first point, may I say that I am informed that we have one meteorologist attached to air force headquarters, on loan or seconded from the Department of Transport. He is there as an adviser to co-ordinate civilian and air force meteorological activities, and we pay his salary. On the second point, my answer is that the general policy is to reduce the number of service guards to the minimum and to have the corps of commissionaires wherever we can. I might also say that there are 19 new units this year.


John Angus MacLean: Further on there is an item for the purchase of real properties, land and buildings. There is an increase there of about $5 million. Can the minister explain that increase?


Brooke Claxton: Yes. This is largely for the purpose of a new air weapons range at Cold Lake, Alberta. That accounts for a great proportion of the increase.


John Angus MacLean: In connection with the purchase of land at Cold Lake, can the minister tell the committee how the value of this land was arrived at? Was it bought by tender, by some independent arbitration to set the value, or from whom was it bought?


Brooke Claxton: I am informed that this matter was gone into in great detail in the defence expenditure committee where actual unit costs, the procedures and so on were explained.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall we pass on to defence research and development?


Douglas Scott Harkness: No, Mr. Chairman. There is an item here which I was rather surprised to see, namely "gasoline, fuel oil and lubricants for aircraft and mechanical equipment". Last year the amount was $17 million; this year it is about $13,700,000. There is a considerable decrease in spite of what the minister has told us about the increasing activities of the R.C.A.F. and the increasing numbers of aircraft. I found it difficult to understand why the cost of gasoline and lubricants for these aircraft had come down so much.

Supply-National Defence


Brooke Claxton: The entire reason is, I am told, that the estimate that was made last year was higher than it proved to be necessary.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Can the minister tell us how much actually was expended last year on this particular item?


Brooke Claxton: Of course the figures for the year are not complete yet, but I am informed that the figure of expenditure will be approximately $13 million.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The estimate for this year is being made the same as the amount actually expended last year?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I suppose the minister
actually expects there will be considerably more flying this year than there was last year?


Brooke Claxton: About the same.


Douglas Scott Harkness: About the same?


Brooke Claxton: Yes. There will be some increase because we will have two more training stations in operation.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I would think there would be bound to be more flying this year.


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Douglas Scott Harkness: There is an item for ammunition and bombs which is about half a million dollars more this year than it was last year, being $10,900,000 as against $11,500,000. That is quite a different situation than we had in the navy and in the army, particularly in the army where there was a large increase with regard to ammunition and bombs. So far as the air force goes, can the minister explain why the estimate is approximately the same? The air force is supposedly our chief defensive arm, or the arm upon which we are placing the most emphasis. Why is the estimate approximately the same as last year, and why is it a much smaller amount than is shown in the case of the army and the navy?


Brooke Claxton: It is owing to the fact that the air force operation does not involve the use of highly expensive rounds as does that of the army and the navy. As to the air force, it is largely small calibre ammunition used in practice. It is only toward the end of the year that we shall be coming into the rocket field in any considerable way.


Douglas Scott Harkness: What this means particularly, I presume, is that the air force used a comparatively small amount of ammunition last year and it is anticipated that they will


use a small amount this year in comparison with the other two services.


Brooke Claxton: They will use a great number of rounds but each round costs much less, on the average, than a round in the navy or the army.


Howard Charles Green: A few moments ago the minister referred to two Comets. Are these the de Havilland jet air liners which we were to obtain in the United Kingdom?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: Are they now in the possession of the R.C.A.F.?


Brooke Claxton: Yes. They have been handed over in the United Kingdom and are now engaged in familiarization flights over routes that have been flown previously with Comets so that the experience can be passed on to our pilots who are being trained to use them, and also so that the aircraft can be tested out over the same flights and results arrived at concerning fuel consiimption, load-carrying capacity and so on.


Howard Charles Green: How much do these air liners cost apiece?


Brooke Claxton: They cost something more than $1J million each.


Howard Charles Green: I suppose the idea is to bring them to Canada once they have been tested.


Brooke Claxton: That is right.


Howard Charles Green: To what use will they be put here?


Brooke Claxton: Very largely for the purpose of training the fighter defence and the radar coverage, so the fighter defence and the radar stations can be trained on high speed, high altitude aircraft of the most modern type known.


George Randolph Pearkes: The cabinet are not going to the coronation in them?


Brooke Claxton: No.


Howard Charles Green: Are they to be used for transport purposes as well?


Brooke Claxton: Not so far as I know.


Howard Charles Green: Were they bought by the Minister of Defence Production?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall we pass on to the next heading?


Mr. Hansell:: Before we pass from the air force estimates may I ask the minister whether it is expected that the air force will be so extended that further training schools will be needed? If so, where is it expected

that these air training schools will be built or reopened? The minister knows that in the past there have been quite a number of air training schools in southern Alberta. Just as soon as some little activity takes place in some of these localities people come to me and ask whether this or that school is to be reopened. Rumours get around.
I think I asked the minister a similar question a little while ago. I have particular reference to the air training school at Vulcan, Alberta and the one at Macleod, two schools that were quite active during the war. They are now almost closed and partially dismantled, but the one at Claresholm has been opened and is, I understand, doing very good work. Is it expected that the air force will be expanded to such an extent that it will require the reopening of any of these other schools?


Brooke Claxton: We do not expect to be opening any additional schools. The one at Moose Jaw and the one at Penhold will be opened next month, I understand, and that will complete the requirement to meet our estimated need.


John Angus MacLean: I have a couple of questions that are somewhat related to the last one. The first is this. Are some of the schools that have been functioning at full capacity being closed down in the near future? I have in mind especially two air navigation schools. Will both of these continue to function, as well as the central navigation school?
My second question relates to buildings on stations which are now open. From time to time new buildings are erected on certain stations, of necessity, and I was wondering whether there are some stations where buildings of a permanent nature are erected that were opened during the war, and are there other stations where only temporary buildings are erected with the idea that these second-class stations are on a temporary basis and might be closed down at any time? Is there any division along that line as to possible permanency of stations which are now functioning, and which were built during the war as temporary establishment stations?


Brooke Claxton: The only change which I think the hon. member's question refers to is the transfer of the navigation school from Sum-merside to Winnipeg. That is being done for the purpose of bringing together two schools, because we can meet the needs of both at Winnipeg. The need for training navigators is being met progressively, and we can handle the job both for ourselves and for the NATO countries at Winnipeg. However, the air station at Summerside will continue to be operated on at least its present level through the transfer of the operational training unit
Supply-National Defence for maritime reconnaissance from Greenwood to Summerside, so the facilities at Summer-side will be fully used.
With regard to the second question, wherever it is possible we renovate old buildings, where that is profitable. Where it is not profitable, then if we need a building we replace it with either a class I or II or a class III building.


John Angus MacLean: With regard to the reconnaissance maritime squadron, a coastal type of squadron, what action is being taken, if any, that the minister might explain to the committee with regard to replacing their present Lancaster aircraft?


Brooke Claxton: I did mention that the other night. These Lancasters are converted for this purpose because there was no aircraft particularly suited for this purpose in this or any other country. To meet our needs the Lancaster as converted was the most suitable aircraft. Of course they will be gradually used up and worn out, and we are looking around for a new type of aircraft to replace the Lancaster. So far we have made no decision about it. That replacement will begin about 1956 or 1957.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall we pass on to defence research and development?


Mr. Nickle:: I should like to ask the minister some questions concerning the northwest staging operations. When we compare the estimates for the current year with the estimates of last year there seems to be a changeover in the nature of the work, or a change in the emphasis on the nature of the operations on the northwest staging route. There appear to be a number of reductions in some items which are not in keeping with the increases in other items for the northwest staging route.
For example, in pay and allowances for military personnel there has been a reduction of approximately 20 per cent when compared with last year. There also appears to be a substantial reduction in the number of civilian personnel engaged in that operation. There is an increase of about 75 per cent in the appropriation for gasoline, fuel oil and lubricants, which would appear to indicate some substantial increase in the operation of aircraft, on the northwest staging route. At the same time there is a reduction in the item under fuel for heating, cooking and power generating units. There is an increase of 375 per cent in the item for the acquisition and construction of buildings and works.
Then getting down to the smaller items I see that three for which there was provision last year are eliminated from the list this

Supply-National Defence year. There is another small item of postage with whioh, presumably, typists and stenographers would have some connection. I notice that the item for postage is increased to the extent of 150 per cent.
Would the minister give us some explanation of the nature of the operation of the northwest staging route this year as compared with last year, as to why in some instances there are increases and in others decreases, which do not appear quite consistent.


Brooke Claxton: The hon. member is correct in his assumption that there has been a considerable change in the functioning of the northwest staging route. Owing to the increase in the range of the aircraft flying from Edmonton to Alaska, the operations of the various stations on the route have been substantially reduced. There is a consequential reduction in staff and activities. They are being maintained at the lowest possible figure to keep the route open. Then the amount for postage was increased because the amount set aside last year was quite inadequate. As I have said, the other operations have been reduced.


Carl Olof Nickle: Would the minister explain the item of $705,000 for the acquisition and construction of buildings and works. This, as I have said, represents an increase of about 375 per cent over last year.


Brooke Claxton: This is entirely accounted for by an addition at Whitehorse, valued at $565,000, for the mechanical engineering section, including a drill hall, renovation of and putting cubicles in the barracks block, some work carried over in connection with the storage building and barracks block, and some other items.


Carl Olof Nickle: I see here an item of $1,090,000 for fuel for heating, cooking and power generating units. This represents about a sixth of the total amount to be voted for the northwest staging route. In view of the high percentage to be voted for fuel, would the minister give us some indication of how fuel costs, which of course would be high in the remote northwest, compare with fuel costs for heating and cooking in other parts of Canada.


Brooke Claxton: This represents a reduction from last year, when the figure stood at $1,443,520. The reduction this year is due to the reduction to which I referred in my remarks a moment ago. As the hon. member knows, the cost of fuel in that area is very much higher than it is in other parts of Canada. It is very cold there, and a large amount of fuel is used for heating and cooking.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Before passing the item for search and rescue I should like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the unit stationed at Torbay, St. John's, Newfoundland. The men of the unit have done and are doing wonderful work not only in mercy flights but in various other activities. This has gone on for some years. The first name that comes to my mind in connection with the original unit is that of Flight Lieutenant Mike Pearson. The present pilot, I believe, is Flight Lieutenant Carl Ensom. Under great difficulties they have evacuated many sick people from various isolated settlements and under trying conditions, at risk of their lives. The last item about which I remember reading was in connection with the recent ice blockade of St. John's harbour, upon which occasion a number of ships were caught in the ice. The search and rescue unit, headed by Flight Lieutenant Carl Ensom, dropped food and other items to the trapped ships.
This gets me down to a further point. They have been greatly assisted in their work by the coastguard service of the United States, stationed at Argentia>. The other evening the hon. member for Comox-Alberni asked the minister about the situation in connection with the setting up of a coastguard service. I do feel that something definite should be done. My recollection is that about a year and a half ago an interdepartmental committee was set up to study the situation and make a report. Whether that report has been made, I cannot say. I was absent from the house for a period of time, and the report may have been made while I was away. However, I do not seem to recollect any decision in the matter.
As the work of search and rescue is being done under this department, I feel it is only proper to urge upon the minister that some decision should be made in connection with the establishment of a coastguard service.


Brooke Claxton: I appreciate the hon. member's remarks about the search and rescue operations, which, I agree, have been admirable. I might point out that the coastguard service concerns a number of government departments. I said a word about it the other evening.
Replying to a question by the hon. member for Calgary East, I would say that the amount spent in the last three years on aircraft and engines has been $682,500,000.


Douglas Scott Harkness: That figure does not include the $165 million the minister mentioned before?


Brooke Claxton: That is right.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Can the minister give a breakdown of the $682,500,000?


Brooke Claxton: I have not that information; no.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Before we leave these
defence items, I believe there are two other questions outstanding which the associate minister was going to answer. One was with reference to the number of deserters, and the other concerned the contract for the removal of ashes at Petawawa.


Ralph Osborne Campney: I have no further information on either point, but the search is still continuing. I will see that the hon. member receives an answer.


Douglas Scott Harkness: When am I going to get it? If we close out the defence estimates now I am sure I will not have an opportunity to get these answers.


Mr. Fournier (Hull):: Oh, yes.


Louis-René Beaudoin: We still have several items.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The items remaining will go through rapidly, because they concern smaller matters.


An hon. Member:: I hope you are right.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The minister says he will produce the information, but if we pass all the national defence items I will have no opportunity to say anything more.


Ralph Osborne Campney: It would take some time to check the figures on deserters; and so far as the other matter is concerned, I have not been able to figure out the cubic footage of the pile of ashes to which my hon. friend referred.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: How about my photographs?


Douglas Scott Harkness: I know the minister will need some time with his foot rule to get the figure for the pile of ashes.


Brooke Claxton: We will give you the figures.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I would suggest that we leave the last of the defence items-


Brooke Claxton: No.


Douglas Scott Harkness: -so the minister can answer these questions when he gets the answers. There are also certain other questions which have not been answered.
Mutual aid-


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to ask the minister a question under this general group headed "mutual aid". My question may involve two or three of the headings that we have just passed, but at any rate they all go together. Can the minister tell the house 68108-257
Supply-National Defence the form in which we extend mutual aid? I note from the item before us that we are asked to appropriate $324 million for mutual aid but it is broken down into the usual items of civil salaries and wages, pay and allowances, pensions, other expenditures and so on. Perhaps the minister knows what I am driving at. In what form do we render mutual aid?
When he is answering that question, will he relate what we spend on mutual aid to the last two headings, namely contributions toward the military costs of NATO and defence expenditures by other government departments? Can he give us this picture in an intelligible form?


Brooke Claxton: I think it is in the white paper at page 33. The figures are given there. When the hon. member refers to items like civil salaries and wages, those are largely in connection with the air training plan where we charge the direct costs to mutual aid. The mutual aid program includes NATO air training plan, radar No. 4 sets, walkie-talkies and so on. These are the heads under which expenditures are made on mutual aid.
With respect to the second part of the hon. member's question, the form of mutual aid is summarized on page 33. It includes transfers of stock of existing equipment and some equipment of world war II that has subsequently been taken into our own stores. Then there are transfers from new production under which are aircraft and engines, radar sets and ammunition. Then there is NATO air crew training, and the total is set forth there. I think I have given the actual items before. They largely consist of world war II equipment for three divisions plus what we have transferred to the Netherlands, Italy and other countries. With respect to new equipment, it includes radar, walkie-talkies, howitzers, ammunition, explosives, Wasp engines, communications materials, propellants and so on. The program for 1953-54 will in addition include some ships.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Then am I correct in my understanding that what we spend on mutual aid is spent either here in Canada or by procurements made by Canada in the usual way? We spend it on hiring technical aid, buying equipment and so on and then we either turn that equipment over to our partners or we make it available to the common pool. Is that a correct statement?


Brooke Claxton: The procedure under which we do it is that we arrive at a figure which we propose to give by way of mutual aid and we ask parliament to vote it. Parliament votes it. Before that is done we have made

Supply-National Defence up a catalogue of things that we think the other countries need and that we can provide. As soon as parliament authorizes the vote we offer specific items of equipment to the standing group at Washington. The standing group notifies the North Atlantic treaty nations about them. They bid for them; they ask for them if they want them. The standing group arrives at an appraisal, judgment or recommendation as to which country should get the equipment. It makes that recommendation to us. We usually act on it. Then the cabinet approves the allocation of the equipment and it is shipped at once.
In the case of some equipment which countries like Britain, for example, happen to need particularly, they may make a direct approach to us but we still go through the form of telling the standing group about it and getting their approval in each case. That occurred in the case of aircraft, some propellants and other things. The only item of dollars that has so far entered into this has been that where we agree to pay towards infrastructure a larger proportion than that arrived at on the basis of capacity to pay as judged by national income, we then charge the excess over what we think is the right proportion on the capacity to pay basis to mutual aid. That accounts for probably two or three million dollars.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I gather from what the minister has been saying that he has been describing the procedure with respect to the item we are on, namely mutual aid. What is the procedure with regard to the last two items which we passed over? I deliberately let them go because it seemed to me they were related to this one. I refer to contributions toward the military costs of NATO and defence expenditures by other government departments.


Brooke Claxton: Contributions to the military costs of NATO are set out at page 34 of the white paper. They include contributions to the military budget of SHAPE of $1,750,000, infrastructure $15,150,000, and accommodation, etc. $3,700,000, a total of $20,600,000 for the year 1953-54 compared with $27,500,000 for 1952-53.


Stanley Howard Knowles: None of this can be regarded as coming under the heading of economic aid? This is only what is known as mutual aid?


Brooke Claxton: Perhaps the supply of some explosives and other materials which are not end items could be called economic aid, but they are quite minor.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Why are pay
and allowances for distribution of the same
[Mr. Claxton.!

amount of money almost twice as much as last year?


Brooke Claxton: Because the air training plan will be working at full peak.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
246. Government's contribution to the permanent services pension account, $35,252,291.
Douglas Scott Harkness: I have no question on 246 but I suggest, as I did earlier, that it stand so we might get the answers to the questions which have not been answered and to which the minister has agreed to produce answers.


Louis-René Beaudoin: The hon. member will realize that unless there is unanimous consent the item cannot stand.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I wish to make exactly the same point. I had some questions this afternoon which were held over and to which I expect to get answers. The hon. member for Calgary East is right when he says that if these are allowed to go through then our rights are all gone. I think it is a reasonable concession; otherwise the only alternative we have is to go ahead.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I would point out that the ordinary procedure in the years since I have been a member of the house is that when the minister concerned, no matter for what department, did not have the answer the item was allowed to stand until he did produce an answer. That is the ordinary procedure we have followed.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Not necessarily. Sometimes a minister has given members an undertaking. It is up to the minister to devise the procedure, but as far as the rules are concerned I could quote Beauchesne's third edition and the citation which says that when the committee of supply has a resolution before it, it has either to vote for it or vote against it, and if it is allowed to stand that is by consent. I imagine that the matter can be settled amicably.


George Randolph Pearkes: Might I ask the chairman if there are any supplementary estimates for this department? If so, perhaps we can get the answers when we are dealing with them.


Brooke Claxton: Yes, we will have supple-mentaries.


Douglas Scott Harkness: On the understanding that we will get the answers to the questions on the supplementary estimates I am quite agreeable to let this go through.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Brooke Claxton: I appreciate that. I think there are only three questions, and we will try to get the answers long before the sup-plementaries come on.

Before we close I would like to make two brief announcements with the permission of the committee, if I may, because I feel certain that members would rather have them here than learn about them later; and they are rather important.
The first relates to the provision of transportation for the dependents of service personnel in England and Europe. We had hoped that by the principle of rotation it might be possible to rotate married personnel so they would only be separated from their wives and children for a year. Despite that, however, a number have taken their wives and children overseas without government assistance, and it is now proposed that regulations shall be introduced under which the ordinary rules regarding postings shall be applied if the commanding officer of the unit is satisfied that a service officer or man has secured proper accommodation for his wife and family. Transportation will be paid and they will be treated as married persons abroad on the condition that the posting is for a minimum of two years. This will be of major importance to the welfare of our troops abroad.
The second change which was just authorized by the cabinet yesterday is a change in the arrangements regarding subsistence under which the amount payable for subsistence to married personnel in the armed forces is increased substantially. This was done also to meet the condition that has arisen in consequence of having these large peacetime forces with frequent postings, some of them abroad, and the fact that we have not yet been able to provide everyone who wants them with married quarters. The details of these changes are worked out in a schedule that will be made public at once. Both of them are very much to the advantage of the service personnel.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Could that schedule be placed on Hansard?


Brooke Claxton: I hardly think that desirable. It is being made available at once. We do not usually place schedules of that kind on Hansard, but I will include it in the revision of the white paper.
I might say in conclusion that the associate minister and I have appreciated the co-operative spirit of the committee.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.
DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND COMMERCE General administration-
426. Departmental administration, $588,333.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Chairman, in previous
68108-257i
17, 1953	4063
Supply-Trade and Commerce years I have used this opportunity to make a statement about economic conditions in Canada and about the efforts being made by the Department of Trade and Commerce to maintain and expand Canada's trade with the outside world. To some extent both have already been covered by my colleague the. Minister of Finance, in his budget speech; and during the budget debate I gave an account of my trip to Latin America.
It seems to me that hon. members should have before them when they consider the estimates of my department a brief account of what has been happening under the economic and trade policies followed by the government. The simplest way I can describe the present economic situation in Canada is to say that at no time in the past have Canadians been more prosperous. In spite of the predictions of recessions and depressions that were made from time to time the fact is that the pace of Canadian production has rarely faltered since the end of the war. Our country has attracted the attention of the world because of its economic stability and rapid development.
Of course it has not all been smooth sailing. There have been times when shortage of key materials interfered with the attainment of maximum output. There have been times when loss of external markets caused distress to some producers. But in the end most of these difficulties proved to be limited in their scope or of relatively short duration. New records of national output were attained from year to year.
At the beginning of 1952, for example, there were many uncertainties. On the one hand, some industries were handicapped by lack of materials arising out of the demands of the defence program. At the same time other industries, particularly those producing consumer goods, were operating well below capacity. The outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease cut off exports of our livestock and meat to the United States.
During the course of 1952 the Canadian economy adjusted itself to the defence effort and achieved balance at a high level of activity. The establishment of new capacity in raw material producing industries helped to eliminate shortages of key materials such as steel and cement. Internationally, the supply situation improved to the point where it became possible to get along without international allocation of most essential materials. Just a few scarce materials remain under international allocation.
Here in Canada consumer buying gradually increased during the year and gave a substantial boost to employment in the industries producing both hard and soft goods. In the

Supply-Trade and Commerce final quarter of 1952, for example, about 14 per cent more goods passed over retail counters than in the same quarter of 1951.
To show the extent of the improvement let me particularize for a moment. Comparing the latter part of 1952 with the same period of 1951, production levels were running about 20 per cent higher in the case of motor vehicles; 67 per cent higher in the case of refrigerators; 92 per cent in the case of washing machines; and 135 per cent in the case of electric stoves. And now we have a new television industry which sold about
75,000	units from the factories in the fourth quarter of 1952.
The suspension of consumer credit regulations and the removal of special excise taxes in the budget of 1952 helped to stimulate consumer buying. Those restrictions had been essential at an earlier period, and they were taken off as soon as they were no longer needed. But the more important reason for the upturn in consumption was the steady increase in personal incomes and the levelling off and decline in consumer prices. The statisticians tell me that during 1952 the per capita average real income of wage and salary earners increased by about 9 per cent, a 7 per cent increase in money incomes and a 2 per cent drop in consumer prices. There was also some reduction in the rate of personal saving, that is a higher proportion of incomes was spent rather than saved in 1952 compared with 1951, which added still further to consumer buying.
By the end of 1952 most of the soft spots previously in evidence had disappeared, although a few others developed during the year. A reduced demand for wood pulp brought about a reduced pulpwood cut this season. The winter shutdown affected a large amount of construction work under way in outlying areas. On the whole, however, market forces are in good balance and, with few exceptions Canadian industries are working at close to capacity.
As a result total output, the gross national production, reached $23 billion, compared with $21-4 billion in 1951. The physical change, after eliminating the effect of prices, was about a 6 per cent increase. Even after excluding the effects of the phenomenal crops harvested on the prairies, the increase compared favourably with that achieved in any previous post-war years. It was a year of notable progress in standards of living for the Canadian people. But it was also a year devoted to the development of our resources and to the building up of capacity to make possible an even higher standard of living in the future. Capital investment absorbed no less than 22 per cent of our national output.

So great indeed has been the rate of capital investment in post-war years that many people have wondered how long it could continue. Yet each year when we survey the intentions of businessmen and public bodies we find that they are planning to spend more on capital account than they did the year before. This year is no exception. There is every reason to believe that investment outlays will show a further significant increase in 1953.
During the past two years an increased proportion of capital outlays has been directed toward expansion in industries of particular importance to Canada's over-all preparedness such as mineral and hydro developments, strategic raw material processing and new plants for the production of defence and other heavy equipment. While this expansion of basic industry is still proceeding, some of the major programs undertaken within the last two or three years are well on their way to completion. For example, expenditures for new capacity in the steel and chemical industries is expected to be lower in 1953 than in the preceding year.
The substantial development taking place is certain to involve extensive supplementary investment in services and other related fields. In view of the limited resources available in 1951 and 1952 much of this secondary expansion has been delayed. This postponement was encouraged by government measures specifically designed to make way for more urgent projects. Meanwhile, productive capacity in building materials industries has been increasing and in addition supplies from abroad have become more readily available. The deferred depreciation measure, restrictions on the use of steel for construction, and other measures designed to discourage less essential investment have therefore been removed. There are now indications that outlays for housing, trade establishments and so forth will be considerably increased in 1953.
In total it is now estimated that the 1953 capital expenditure program will involve outlays of $5-4 billion compared with $5 [DOT] 1 billion expended last year. This estimate is based for the most part on a recent survey of the investment intentions of business, institutions and governments. Some weeks ago I tabled two reports which give details of these forecasts.
If investment plans for 1953 are realized, this will be the sixth consecutive year in which capital outlays have reached more than 20 per cent of total national production. Some upturn in capital expenditure following the establishment of the new rearmament

objectives was to have been expected. However, as I have previously indicated, we have now made a good deal of progress in adjusting to these new goals. For capital outlays still to be increasing substantiates the view that Canada's present expansion is not based on temporary boom conditions. It is not a flash in the pan. Instead, it reflects the growing diversity and adaptability of Canada's industry and the capacity to produce economically an increasing proportion of the world's requirements.
It is important to note that whereas much of the investment spending made in the immediate post-war years was for replacement needs, a much larger proportion of today's investment represents new additions to capacity, based on the expectation of adequate markets for many years to come. Future markets can never, of course, be fully assured. Canadian industries remain vulnerable to dislocating influences, particularly from abroad, and future growth will depend to a very large extent upon continued progress toward sound and vigorous world trade.
Now let me turn to the record of Canada's external trade. Exports continued to advance last year. They amounted in total in 1952 to $4-4 billion, an increase of $400 million over 1951, the previous highest year. The total value of imports in 1952 remained at about the same level as the year before.
Each time in recent years that I have reported further advances in our exports, I have been asked whether we are really selling larger quantities of goods or whether the increased values may not simply reflect higher prices. In 1952 the volume of exports increased by even more than their total value. Export prices actually declined during the year, although not by any more than 1 or 2 per cent on the average. Since 1950 the total value of our exports has risen by about 39 per cent and the physical volume by 23 per cent, a remarkable and sustained record. Of course not all exports have fared equally well during this period. There have been some real difficulties in the export of manufactured goods, although this has been more than made up by strong demand in the domestic market.
As I have said, livestock producers experienced a major setback in 1952 owing to the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. The ban on exports to the United States has now been lifted and normal trade is being resumed. In the meantime, many adverse effects of the meat surplus situation have been avoided by the use of price supports and by special arrangements made to deal with surplus stocks.
17, 1953
Supply-Trade and Commerce
On the other hand, grain producers have benefited from a record crop accompanied by a strong world market for their product. In the present crop year we expect to export all the wheat that can be handled by our transportation and storage facilities. The continuing world-wide demand for our major export products and the relative stability of our export prices provide evidence of the basic strength of Canada's position in world trade. This strength has been created in large part by sound policies, and it has buoyed us up during a period when many other countries have suffered setbacks. By wise though sometimes unpopular measures we have succeeded in avoiding most of the damage that inflation has inflicted upon the trade of many other countries, which is one reason our dollar is so strong.
During 1952 major downward adjustments occurred in the prices of many of the basic commodities and foodstuffs which move in world trade. Price declines of as much as one-third or one-half were quite common in 1952. As examples of commodities thus affected I might mention rubber, tin, cotton and wool. Canadian importers and consumers have benefited from these reduced prices. On the average, the prices of imports fell by 12 per cent during 1952. Our exports, with a few notable exceptions such as lead, zinc and lumber, have been relatively exempt from drastic price adjustments, which is evidence in itself of the demand which exists for our goods.
Two or three years ago there began to be a good deal of concern expressed that too large a proportion of our exports were being marketed in the United States. The totals were satisfactory but perhaps we were getting too many of our export eggs in one basket. As Minister of Trade and Commerce I stated on a number of occasions that this situation was mainly a reflection of the financial difficulties through which the sterling area countries and western European countries were passing. There has at no time been any lack of desire in overseas countries to obtain Canadian goods.
In my view we have been fortunate in Canada, during this period, to have the great markets of the United States open and receptive to our goods. We have certainly taken advantage of our opportunities in that direction, and Canadian exports to the United States have risen to a level of $2-3 billion.
During these years the government has done everything possible to encourage and assist the recovery of our exports to those countries overseas which are our traditional customers. I am pleased to say that almost all of the $400 million increase which took place

Supply-Trade and Commerce in our exports in 1952 went to countries overseas. Very little of the increase took place in exports to the United States, where we just about maintained our position last year and even improved it a little bit. Consequently the percentage of our exports going to the United States has declined steadily, which I am sure all hon. members will agree is a healthy sign. In 1950, 65 per cent of our total exports went to the United States; in
1951	the figure was down to 59 per cent and in 1952 it was down to 54 per cent. Our efforts to diversify our exports have been paying off.
It has been encouraging to see the way in which the trade and financial position of th6 United Kingdom has improved in recent months. Such improvement is a good thing for Canada from every point of view. Canada participated fully in the recent commonwealth economic conference, as hon. members are aware. We may be greatly encouraged also by the increasing amount of international agreement about what needs to be done to solve the trade and financial problems of the sterling area and western Europe. Many of the countries concerned are showing signs of moving in the right direction.
In our attempts to overcome barriers to trade we have not by any means as yet had all the success we would wish for, particularly in regard to the British countries. Many of our manufactured goods are still excluded from overseas markets because of import restrictions. Nevertheless, in 1952 the value, quantity and proportion of our exports to British countries did increase and for the first time their value amounted to over $1 billion. Greater shipments of wheat and metals to the United Kingdom account for most of this increase.
Canadian imports from the United Kingdom were relatively low in the first few months of
1952	but have been increasing lately with the upsurge in consumer buying in this country. I am glad to see that the United Kingdom have been able to increase their sales to us of many types of machinery and that their sales to the United States are increasing. It has been said before, but it bears repeating, that there is a large and continuing market in this country for many goods which the United Kingdom can supply in greater quantities.
We have substantially improved our sales to Europe, Latin America and other foreign countries overseas. The total of these exports increased by $240 million to just short of $1 billion. Germany has increased its Canadian purchases substantially so that it is now the second largest European market for our

products. Here again wheat accounted for much of the increase. Most other European countries are now buying more Canadian goods, including Belgium, our largest European market.
In Asia the most notable increases took place in our exports to Japan. Sales to Japan rose to the point where they were in excess of $100 million in 1952. From the Canadian point of view the increasing importance of the Japanese market has become more and more apparent in each recent year.
In Latin America also we have expanded our sales. Whereas in Europe we are largely selling raw materials, in Latin America manufactured goods constitute a much greater proportion of the total. Exports of such essential manufactures as trucks, machinery and electrical equipment to Latin America have all increased. As I have already reported to the house, there is no doubt that there are great possibilities for further sales in Latin America of manufactured goods of all kinds. To make the most of these opportunities it is necessary for Canadian businessmen to make personal contacts. There is lots of competition, but the opportunities are very real.
Canada and the United States continue to be each other's best customers. This extensive trade is both a cause and a result of the cordial commercial relations which have been developed over the years. Both countries have fostered the development of trade, across our joint borders and with the world at large. Both Canada and the United States have attempted as much as possible to solve numerous trade problems, not by restrictive measures but by reducing trade barriers and expanding the opportunities to trade. With the recent change of administration in the United States government, I feel confident and hopeful that problems of commercial relations between Canada and the United States can continue to be dealt with along these lines.
This is not to say that there have been no problems or differences between Canada and the United States. At every appropriate opportunity the government has made clear to the government of the United States that basic principles are being infringed by the imposition of import controls upon dairy products in the United States. We have made clear, furthermore, the importance we attach to the passage of customs simplification legislation in the United States, to facilitate trade and to fulfil the agreements which were entered into at Geneva in 1947.
Negotiations of profound importance for the future of trade and commercial policy will have to be conducted during 1953. Consideration will have to be given by the major

trading countries to the future of the international program which has been established under the general agreement on tariffs and trade. Canada and the United States have helped themselves and the world as a whole through the negotiation of extensive trade agreements, before the war in 1935 and 1938, and since the war under GATT at Geneva in 1947 and at Torquay in 1951.. The unprecedented flow of trade between Canada and the United States today is conducted in accordance with the general agreement on tariffs and trade.
Since the tariff undertakings of the general agreement on tariffs and trade are firmly bound only until the end of 1953, decisions will have to be made amongst the countries concerned as to what further steps to take to safeguard the future of international trade. There may be a further opportunity to take steps forward in the reduction of tariffs and the elimination of trade restrictions, as an alternative to moving in the other direction. The interest of Canada in this matter is perfectly clear, because we require other markets to be open to our goods on an expanding scale.
The role of the United States will be a crucial one and, as always in such circumstances, I am sure that constructive American leadership will not be lacking when it is needed.
Over the years Canada has become one of the world's most important trading nations, and our standing in that respect has never been higher than it is today. That this is so is due primarily to the capacity and enterprise of the Canadian people and to the extent and variety of the resources which they have at their command. Government policies, too, have played an important role, and I wish to refer briefly to some of the trade promotional activities of the Department of Trade and Commerce, particularly to the work of the trade commissioner service which is well known to many of you in a general way.
This is both an old and a new service. Its origins go back to the very early days of the department, but it was not until the period immediately following world war I that it was built up and organized on such a scale as to give Canada a really competent trade service in most of the world's principal commercial centres. During the ten or twelve years following world war I the extension of this service was carried out in a vigorous way. In fact Canada, by reason of circumstances which were peculiar to our national development, reversed the usual order of events. We were more or less compelled to equip ourselves with strong and world-wide
17, 1953
Supply*-Trade and Commerce trade representation before we had made more than a modest start on the establishment of our political or diplomatic foreign service. It was Canada's rapid commercial growth that accounted for this marked departure from the ordinary sequence of events.
Our first venture into foreign representation on a large scale having been dictated chiefly by our urgent commercial needs, it was natural that special attention should be given, and was given, to developing a service that would be as efficient as we could make it from the trade promotion standpoint. The recruits to this service were selected and trained entirely with that object in view.
The young men who came into the trade commissioner service did so with a commercial career in mind. Emphasis was1 laid upon their having some business experience to start with, on top of which they were put through a thorough course of training before being posted abroad. Great importance was attached to having them gain a firsthand knowledge of Canada's major export industries by actual visits to plants in all parts of the country and by becoming personally acquainted with the export managers and other business executives through whom their subsequent work abroad could be made most effective. That close contact between the trade commissioners and businessmen throughout Canada has been responsible, more than any other factor, for building up the reputation of our trade commissioner service and the good will which it has enjoyed in business circles for many years past.
That reputation is not just local, for I believe it is widely recognized that Canada's commercial representation abroad is not excelled by that of any other country. We intend to keep it that way, and it is a matter for congratulation that whatever administration has been in office in Canada at any time during the past 30 or 40 years, there has never been any difference of policy, or of practice either, in regard to the importance of seeing to it that we support and maintain this service on a most efficient basis.
It is, as I have said, both an old and a new service-new in the sense that at the close of world war II we had a pressing problem to deal with in reopening offices abroad that had been closed and in finding personnel to man these as well as a number of new offices which have had to be established during the past seven or eight years. In fact we have virtually had to re-create the trade commissioner service, but we have now reached the stage where we can truthfully

Supply-Trade and Commerce say that it is not only back on its feet but in better shape than ever.
Three new offices were opened during 1952 at New Orleans, Ciudad Trujillo and Beirut. These offices will serve territories which we have reason to believe will afford good opportunities for the expansion of Canada's exports. We now have 51 offices in 40 countries, manned by 102 trade commissioners and assistant trade commissioners. I take particular satisfaction in pointing out that during the course of rebuilding this service we have paid great attention to the need for men whose training has been specialized along the lines of promoting the exports of agricultural and fisheries products.
Coupled with this greater degree of specialization, we now have the advantage of a foreign commercial service in which there is a much improved balance as between the older and more experienced personnel and the younger group who, in another few years, will be stepping up into the senior positions.
Apart from the trade commissioner service there are, of course, other divisions of the department, centred here at Ottawa, that are responsible for carrying on important trade promotional activities, notably the international trade relations division, which is concerned especially with trade agreements and trade negotiations with other countries, and the commodities division, whose officers provide an essential link between the business community at home and the trade commissioners abroad.
May I close with a word regarding the Canadian international trade fair. This fair has been held annually since its inception in 1948. The 1952 fair was, we believe, the most successful that has been held to date, although in point of size it still fell somewhat short of the opening fair in 1948. We are now well advanced in the preparations for the 1953 fair, to be held this coming June, and I am glad to be able to state that this will be, without exception, much the largest fair that we have had yet. Moreover it will have, on the exhibit side, a good division between the amounts of exhibit space taken respectively by Canadian firms and by firms from other countries. Exhibit space for the 1953 fair is now at a premium. We have reached the stage at which, from the standpoint of improving the fair as a business undertaking, we are having to give at least as much attention to building up the attendance of bona fide business visitors as to the attracting of either Canadian or foreign exhibitors. This Canadian trade fair has already won wide recognition abroad, and I think we can safely say that its success represents one of the outstanding advances made by Canada

in many years in the field of international trade promotion.
Item stands.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Alphonse Fournier: On Monday we shall consider legislation. Most of the bills on the order paper are amending bills, and many of the amendments are of a minor nature.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Alphonse Fournier: That is true. As far as possible we shall proceed in the following order: Bill No. 191, to amend the Canada Shipping Act, 1934; Bill No. 37, to amend the Indian Act; Bill No. 337, to amend the Radio Act; Bill No. 190, to amend the Canadian Citizenship Act; Bill No. 335, to amend the Veterans Benefit Act, 1951; Bill No. 336, to provide assistance for the higher education of children of certain deceased members of the armed forces and other persons; Bill No. 332, respecting the Canadian forces; Bill No. 48, respecting food, drugs, cosmetics and therapeutic devices; Bill No. 316, relating to trade marks and unfair competition. I understand this bill will be referred to the committee on banking and commerce. Should we be fortunate enough to pass these bills, we shall move to go into supply.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What departments would you call if you got in?


Alphonse Fournier: Finance and legislation.


[Stage Direction]
At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
The following items were passed in committee of supply:
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE Defence services-
241.	To provide for the Canadian forces, the defence research board and other expenditures relating to defence, including contributions toward the military costs of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; to authorize expenditures in the current year out of the amount hereby provided, not exceeding $324,000,000, under the provisions of section 3 of the Defence Appropriation Act, 1950, and to provide that, notwithstanding subsection 3 of that section, where equipment or supplies acquired by the Canadian forces after March 31, 1950, are transferred, the estimated present value thereof shall, if the governor in council so directs, be credited to this vote instead of being paid into the special account mentioned in the said subsection 3, and when so credited may be expended for the purposes of the Canadian forces; and notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act to authorize total commitments for the foregoing purposes of $3,994,895,578 regardless of the year in which such commitments will come in course of payment (of which it is estimated that $1,971,926,275 will come due for payment in future years), $1,960,159,633.

General services-
242.	Grants to military associations, institutes and others, as detailed in the estimates, $227,325.
243.	War museum, $22,878.
Pensions and other benefits-
244.	Civil pensions, as detailed in the estimates, $2,977.
245.	To authorize in respect of members of the Royal Canadian Air Force on leave without pay and serving as instructors with civilian training organizations operating under the British commonwealth air training plan who were killed, pay-
Supply-National Defence ment to their dependents of amounts equal to the amounts such dependents would have received under the Pension Act, as amended, had such service as instructors been military service in the armed forces of Canada, less the value of any benefits received by such dependents under insurance contracts which were effected on the lives of such members of the Royal Canadian Air Force by or at the expense of the civilian organizations, $3,396.
Defence Services Pension Act-
246.	Government's contribution to the permanent services pension account, $35,252,291.
4070
[Stage Direction]
Appendix

[Stage Direction]
Letter to Secretary, National Council of Canada Prisoners of War
Ottawa, March 10, 1953
Major G. T. Prefontaine,
Secretary, National Council of Canada
Prisoners of War,
3721 Henri Julien Street,
Montreal, P.Q.
Dear Major Prefontaine:
Following on the meeting of your group with the Hon. Mr. Lapointe, representing the Prime Minister, your representations regarding compensation to prisoners of war on account of maltreatment were examined by the government, and I now have to inform you of their conclusions.
While your proposals were considered as sympathetically as possible, it is not felt that you have adduced any arguments which require the government to modify its previously announced decision, that is, to put into effect the recommendations made by the Right Hon. J. L. Ilsley, the commissioner on war claims.
The proposition which your group advanced is that, as the prisoners of war who were interned in Japanese camps in the Far East have been paid compensation at a per diem rate, similar payments should also be made to those who were prisoners of war in German and Italian camps, as it is your contention that all of the latter group suffered maltreatment.
It is the view of the commissioner, in which the government concurs, that there was a substantial difference in the treatment of prisoners of war by the Japanese on the one hand and by the Germans and Italians on the other hand. However, the relatively few prisoners who were held in custody by the gestapo and other organizations declared illegal at Nuremberg are to be treated the same as those in Japanese operated camps.
The commissioner's reasons for arriving at this conclusion in regard to Japanese controlled camps are set forth in detail on pages 41 and 49 of his report, and seem to the government to be valid. On page 50 of the report he gives evidence from the "British Hand Book" to the effect that conditions in the German and Italian camps were not such as to support any presumption of general maltreatment.
The British government, by paying a small lump sum grant to those who were interned by the Japanese, and by not doing so to those who were interned by the Germans and Italians, has acted in conformity with the finding that conditions in the two theatres were vastly different. This finding is confirmed by the following facts which are on record as a result of the post-war experience of the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Canadian pension commission with prisoners of war from both theatres.
As for the Far Eastern prisoners of war, their food was so limited that nearly all who survived showed clinical evidence of avitaminosis while in camp. A high percentage had also clinical evidence of dysentery, etc. Roughly 20 per cent of all Far Eastern prisoners of war suffered permanent damage as the result of avitaminosis. Autopsies on a number of deceased Far Eastern prisoners of war who had certain symptoms but no physical signs of disability proved that they suffered from avitaminosis. Records of the rehabilitation and welfare services branches of the D.V.A. show that a high percentage of survivors have had occupational difficulties and impaired general health.
On the other hand, as regards European prisoners of war, there is no record of any avitaminosis occurring while in camp, or discovered subsequent to liberation. While there is evidence of intestinal infestation (dysentery, etc.) it is much lower than among the Far Eastern prisoners of war. In the summer of 1946 instructions were issued that all prisoners of war were to have a complete physical examination including an X-ray of their chest and any other indicated special examinations. There have been no indications as a result of these examinations or subsequent surveys that any considerable number of prisoners of war in the European theatre suffered impairment.
Canadian army statistics of death from nonbattle causes, while prisoners of war in the two theatres, are, however, probably more decisive than any other evidence. In the campaigns in Italy, Sicily, and North West Europe and in the Dieppe operations some 4,005 unwounded prisoners of war were taken, and of these only 37 died from non-battle casualties while prisoners of war-a death rate of less than one in a hundred.

In Hong Kong, however, 1,289 unwounded prisoners of war were taken; of these 264 died of non-battle causes or a death rate of approximately one in five. These figures speak for themselves, indicating the difference in conditions in prisoner of war camps in the Far East and in Europe.
Your group advanced arguments that all prisoners of war in German and Italian camps suffered more or less from poor shelter, interruption of mail, the fear of death and various indignities. It is not felt that any concrete evidence has been offered to offset the conclusions of the commissioner, and that in any case hardships of that kind cannot be said to entitle those who have suffered them to receive a payment which would be denied to the front-line soldier who is in greater danger of death and at the same time frequently suffers equal or greater hardships.
It was represented that individual prisoners of war would have considerable difficulty in proving maltreatment through lack of evidence, and lack of facility in expression. In order to eliminate any unfairness on this score, the government decided to make the
Appendix
services of the pensions advocates of the Department of Veterans Affairs available to any prisoner of war who may wish to make a claim in respect of maltreatment. These officials will be well able to obtain the available evidence and advocate the claims effectively. A considerable number of former prisoners of war have already taken advantage of these facilities, and it is hoped that all who feel that they have a claim for compensation for maltreatment will do so.
In conclusion I am instructed to say, that after most careful and sympathetic consideration, the government feels that the proposals for settling the claims to compensation of prisoners of war laid down by the commissioner and set forth in the report dated 25th February 1952, are essentially sound and equitable, and that any prisoner of war, having a valid claim for maltreatment, will be able to obtain the compensation to which he is entitled.
Yours sincerely,

[Stage Direction]
Secretary of State.
08108 258.1
[Stage Direction]
Monday, April 20, 1953