OFFICIAL REPORT


[Stage Direction]
House of Commons ©efiates
[Stage Direction]
Wednesday, May 6, 1942

Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege and to keep the record straight. Doctor Franz Klein gave a statement to the press last night in which he said this-I am reading from the Ottawa Journal:
He claimed that any note of dissension in his writings was in relationship only to a difference between his views and those of another Austrian expatriate now in Toronto.
"Mr. Coldwell may regard him as an Austrian leader, since he boasts having been Schuschnigg's press chief. He was one of the junior officials in Colonel Adams', the press chief's bureau. Adams' whole staff was imprisoned by the German invader. Most of them are still in concentration camps. Mr. Coldwell's witness is the only one who owing to his friendship with Schuschnigg's Foreign Secretary Guido Schmidt, was released after a few weeks and allowed to leave Austria."
I wish to say that I do not know the gentleman to whom Doctor Klein refers. I have had no communication with anyone connected with the Austrian or Czech organizations in this city or in the dominion. The information I gave the other afternoon was obtained when I was in England, from the Free Austrian Committee there.



REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

[Stage Direction]
Second report of standing committee on railways and shipping.-Mr. Howden.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. J. J. McCANN (Renfrew South) presented the first report of the special committee on radio broadcasting, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING
(Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of Mr. Ilsley I beg to move:
That estimate items Nos. 400, 401, 410 and 411, approved and reported upon by the standing committee on railways and shipping, owned, operated and controlled by the government, be referred to the committee of supply.
Hon. R. B. HANSON (Leader of the Opposition):: The report of the committee
has not yet been concurred in. I know this is a pro forma motion, but it seems to me to be a little premature.


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: It can stand.


Mr. SPEAKER:: The motion refers to
items that were taken out of the estimates and referred to the standing committee on railways and shipping, the standing committee has approved the items, and they are now reported back to the house. The usual procedure is then to refer these items to the committee of supply to be dealt with in the usual manner.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

William Lyon Mackenzie King: That the name of Mr. Hansell be substituted for that of Mr. Kuhl on the select committee on radio broadcasting.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

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

Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	How many houses were completed by Wartime Housing Limited by April 1, 1942?
2.	What was the average cost, including services, per unit?

Questions

3.	How many completed houses were occupied at April 1, 1942?
4.	What were the different rates of rentals charged by Wartime Housing Limited?
5.	How many houses have been rented in each of these categories?


Mr. MICHAUD (for Mr. Howe):: 1.	3.918 completed, as of April 10, 1942.
2.	$3,197 (estimated)-Includes services and cost of land.
3.	3,796 houses as of April 10, 1942.
4.	Type HI and H2. Amherst, Halifax and Prince Rupert, $25.00 per month; St. Cath-arines-Victoria Park and North Vancouver, $20.00 per month; all others, $22.00 per month. Type Hll and H12. Amherst, $32.50 per month; Hull, $30.20 per month; Halifax, Prince Rupert, $32.00 per month; St. Cathar-ines-Victoria Park, $28.00 per month; North Vancouver, $27.00 per month; all others, $30.00 per month. Type H22. Halifax, Prince Rupert, $27.50 per month; St. Catharines-Victoria Park, $23.00 per month; North Vancouver, $22.00 per month; all others, $25.00 per month.
5.	As of April 10, Type HI and H2, 2,226 houses; Type Hll and H12,1,117 houses; Type H21 and H22, 453 houses.
w. V. WRIGHT


Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	Is W. V. Wright, former sheriff in the Shaunavon district, employed by the Department of Agriculture in any capacity?
2.	If so, what remuneration was paid him during the past fiscal year for (a) salary, (b) expenses?


Mr. WRIGHT:: I wish to have this question dropped.
Question dropped.


CANADIAN CHARGE D'AFFAIRES FOR FRANCE- VICHY CONSULATES IN QUEBEC
[Stage Direction]
Mr. BRUCE;
1.	Is M. Pierre Dupuy, the Canadian charge d'affaires for France, Belgium and The Netherlands, living in Vicliy?
2.	If not, where does he live and what are his opportunities for direct contact with Marshal Petain?
3.	When did he last visit Vichy?
4.	Has he had a conference with M. Pierre Laval since the latter's accession to power in France ?
5.	If not, what advantage will the Prime Minister derive from a conference with M. Dupuy?
6.	Have complaints been made to the Vichy minister-M. Ristelhueber-that the Vichy consulate in Quebec was distributing anti-British pamphlets?
7.	If so, what action did M. Ristelhueber take?

8.	How many Vichy consulates are there in the province of Quebec?
9.	Are broadcasts being sent to this continent, in French, from nazi-controlled Paris?
10.	Are broadcasts being sent to this continent, in French, from Vichy?
11.	Has any action been taken in respect thereto ?
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	No.
2.	Mr. Dupuy resides in London. He has had opportunities for direct contact with Marshal Petain on his visits to Vichy.
3.	It is not considered in the public interest to give details concerning Mr. Dupuy's visits to Vichy.
4.	No.
5.	The advantage afforded by conference with one who possesses special knowledge and is widely informed on matters at issue.
6.	It is not customary to disclose particulars of confidential conversations between foreign diplomatic representatives and the governments to which they are accredited.
7.	Answered by 6.
8.	Two, one in the city of Montreal and one in the city of Quebec. The latter consulate is now vacant and is being administered by the Consul General in Montreal.
9.	Yes.
10.	Yes.
11.	Yes.


AIRCRAFT AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES-MORALE BUILDING CAMPAIGN
[Stage Direction]
Mr. D1EFBNBAKER:
1.	Has E. G. Hirst of Toronto been appointed to organize and conduct a morale building campaign in aircraft and allied industries?
2.	If so, when was he appointed?
3.	By whom was he appointed?
4.	In what business was he previously engaged ?
5.	Is he still conducting such business?
6.	What salary, honorarium, allowance, or other remuneration, is paid to him by the government ?
7.	If no remuneration is paid to him by the government, by what means is he being compensated for his services?
Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Yes, in the aircraft industry.
2.	December 20, 1941.
3.	Director-General, Aircraft Production Branch, Department of Munitions and Supply.
4.	Might Directories Limited.
5.	He is still Vice-President of Might Directories Limited.
6.	None.
7.	He is receiving no compensation for his services.

Questions


WARTIME HOUSING LIMITED-GREATER MONTREAL
Mr. FAUTEUX:: 1.	How many dwellings have been erected by Wartime Housing Limited within the area of greater Montreal?
2.	What classes of dwellings have been constructed and how many of each kind?
3.	What has been the cost, by groups, of each class of dwelling?
4.	How many of each kind are actually occupied ?
5.	What rental is charged for each class of dwelling?
6.	Are any restrictions imposed on the different classes of tenants?
7.	Do all tenants come within the scope of these regulations?
8.	Has the company received from the city of Montreal, or from any of the municipalities constituting greater Montreal, any requests for the utilization of all other dwellings within the limits of the city?
9.	What arrangements have been made, if any, with the city of Montreal and the different municipalities constituting greater Montreal, for the leasing of any of these dwellings?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	None.
2,	3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Answered by 1.
8.	No.
9.	None.
The above questions are answered on the assumption that "greater Montreal" refers to the island.


SALVAGE-WILLIAM KNIGHTLEY
Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	What has been paid to William Knightley, salvage division, national war services, as (a) salary, (b) expenses?
2.	What salary and expenses will be paid to him as associate director?
3.	What will be paid to C. Laferle, newly appointed director of salvage, as (a) salary, [DOT](b) expenses?


Mr. THORSON:: 1.	(a) S3,720 per annum.
(b) $947.11 from March, 1941, to date.
2.	(a) $3,720 per annum.
(b) Actual out of pocket travelling expenses when on departmental business.
3.	(a) $5,000 per annum.
(b) Actual out of pocket travelling expenses when on departmental business.


MILITARY SERVICE-APPLICATIONS FOR POSTPONEMENT OF TRAINING
Mr. FATR:: 1.	How many men have been called up for training under the National Resources Mobilization Act in each of the provinces?
2.	How many applications for postponement of training have been made in each province?
3.	How many applications have been granted in each province?


Mr. THORSON:: 2
Provinces
Number of men called up for military training under the National Resources Mobilization Act in each of the provinces, and accepted at National Defence (Army) basic training centres, since October 9, 1940, up to March 12, 1942
Number of applications for postponement of military training that have heen made in each province, since October 9,	1940, up to
March 12, 1942
Number of applications for postponement of military training that have been granted in each province, since October 9, 1940, up to March 12, 1942
P.E.I	1,013	549	463Nova Scotia	4,718	3,010	2,019New Brunswick...	4,567	2,315	1,802Quebec	38,433	37,163	22,174Ontario	37,252	19,800	15,953Manitoba	8,331	3,231	2,442Saskatchewan. . . .	9,424	2,874	1,803Alberta	9,024	2,534	2,334British Columbia.	7,543	4,443	4,056Totals	120,305	75,919	53,046
2180
Questions


HOSPITALIZATION OF SERVICE MEN OVERSEAS
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What agency is in charge of the hospitalization of service men overseas in Britain?
2.	What private organization or auxiliary services are in charge of amusements and sports for soldiers overseas in the various camps?


Mr. RALSTON:: 1.	The Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps is in charge of the hospitalization of all personnel of the army overseas in Britain.
There is a director of medical services on the staff of the senior officer commanding overseas. This director of medical services administers the hospitalization and Medical Corps in England.
2.	Amusements and sports furnished to the soldiers in camps overseas are provided under the direction of the auxiliary services officers by the four national voluntary organizations, namely: the Canadian Legion War Services, Inc.; the Knights of Columbus; the Salvation Army; the National Council Y.M.C.A.


RECOGNITION OF FRENCH NATIONAL COMMITTEE
Mr. CHURCH:: Will the government now recognize officially the provisional government of General de Gaulle of France?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The Free
French National Committee, to which this question refers, is not a provisional government, and the question of its recognition has not arisen.


EXPORTS OF METALS AND MINERALS TO AXIS POWERS
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What was the tonnage of copper, aluminum, nickel, scrap iron, pig iron and coal exported from Canada to Japan, Germany and Italy for tile five years before the war?
2.	What amount has been exported to Japan and Italy since the war began?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1.	Exports to Japan, Germany and Italy,
Year	Item	Unit1935	Copper	
Cwt.Aluminum	
Cwt.Nickel	
Cwt.Scrap iron	
TonPig iron	
TonCoal	
Ton1936	Copper	
Cwt.Aluminum	
Cwt.Nickel	
Cwt.Scrap iron	
TonPig iron	
TonCoal	
Ton1937	Copper	
Cwt.Aluminum	
Cwt.Nickel	
Cwt.Scrap iron	
TonPig iron	
TonCoal	
Ton1938	Copper	
Cwt.Aluminum	
Cwt.Nickel	
Cwt.Scrap iron	
TonPig iron	
TonCoal	
Ton1939	Copper	
Cwt.Aluminum	
Cwt.Nickel	
Cwt.Scrap iron	
TonPig iron	
TonCoal	
Ton
calendar years 1935 to 1939.
Japan	Germany	Italy3,526	* 188,325	66,870126,483	79	4,41117,456	384	31,53239,186	982	2,8008.348	261,842	38,90388,872	3,374	28,821	10,136	24,65468,011	1,935	1,038	1,50469,175	223,408	11,899178,405	7,870	9,921101,342	23,151	17,92146,948	34	311,875	554,897	37,486312,250	123,937	153,992	20,233	41,033	378,396	58,289	99,644421,173	57,964	233,107	46,866	821	2.	Information by countries not available during war period.
{Mr. Thorson.]

Questions as Orders jor Returns


SCARCITY OF BEEF
Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	Is there a scarcity of beef in Montreal and other Canadian cities? If so, why?
2.	Has the government undertaken, or does it propose to undertake a careful inquiry to fix responsibility for such scarcity?
3.	What steps does the government propose to take to deal with this situation?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	Some shortage in beef supplies has occurred since April first in some of the larger consuming centres in eastern Canada due to higher prices for certain classes of cattle in the export market than those offered in the Canadian market.
2.	No investigation is considered necessary.
3.	Proposals have been under consideration but decision has been deferred pending further market developments.


EXPORTS OF BEEF
Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	Has Canada exported any beef to the United States since January 1, 1942?
2.	If so, what was the quantity for the months of January, February, March and April, 1942, respectively ?
3.	What quantities of Canadian beef were exported to the United States during the corresponding months in the years 1941, 1940 and 1939?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1,	2 and 3.
Exports of fresh beef to the United States:
1939	1940	1941	1942Month 1001b.	1001b. 1001b.	1001b.January	1,100	361	304	15.89SFebruary ....	1,082	226	121	12,204March	
1,803	247	98	13,050April	352	169	55	951


EMPLOYMENT OF CANADIAN NATIONALS IN UNITED STATES DEFENCE INDUSTRIES
Mr. CARDIFF:: 1.	Has the attention of the Department of External Affairs been directed to a situation said to obtain in the United States where Canadian nationals in the United States are and have been refused employment by companies in the United States engaged in defence orders?
2.	If so, what representations have been made by the department to the government of the United States?
3.	What results, if any, have accrued as a result of such representations?
4.	If the answer to No. 1 is in the affirmative, is the practice continuing, and if so, what further action does the department propose to take in the premises?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	Yes. Complaints have been received from various sources.
2.	The Canadian Legation in Washington has discussed these complaints with the competent authorities of the government of the United States and the matter has also been discussed at a recent meeting of the Joint Economic Committees of Canada and the United States.
3.	The government of the United States is endeavouring to eliminate discriminations against citizens of the united nations and the President, the Attorney-General, the Federal Security Administrator and other officials of the United States government have appealed to employers to stop these discriminations.
4.	It is impossible to say how far these measures have been effective. The question is receiving continued attention and is being considered by the Joint Economic Committees as part of the wider question of the most effective use of manpower.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. JEAN:: 1.	According to the latest statistics what is the number, in each province, of (a) young men of 18, 19 and 20 years of age; (b) young men of 21, 22, 23 and 24 years; (c) young men of 25, 2G, 27, 28, 29 and 30 years?
2.	What is the number in each province of those actually mobilized or in active service in each category?
3.	What is the number, by provinces, of those who have been declared incapable of military service ?
4.	What is the number, by provinces of young men between 18 and 30 years of age who are exempt from military service under the law or by reason of their beliefs?


Joseph Thorarinn Thorson: Return tabled.


PARCELS TO PRISONERS OF WAR
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	How many ships are now engaged in carrying parcels to Canadian prisoners of war in enemy and enemy controlled countries?
2.	Who charters such ships and have any of them been sunk?
3.	Has any ^ official statement yet been pub-fished or received by the government from the Red Cross regarding the delivery of parcels to Canadians in all enemy countries?
4.	How many parcels per month or week have been delivered to Canadian prisoners?
5.	Is the government aware that friends in C anada of our war prisoners have become alarmed by statements in the British press and
Motions for Papers

criticisms in the House of Commons in Great Britain, regarding non-delivery of parcels to prisoners of war?
6.	Is it not a government responsibility to look after our prisoners of war?
7.	Docs the government accept responsibility for the services provided by voluntary organizations in this respect?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. NICHOLSON:: For a copy of memorandum of the Secretary of State recommending P.C. 134>
of February 20, 1942, to the privy council.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I ask that this be
dropped.
Motion dropped.



MONTREAL BRIDGE TOLLS

Mr. CARDIFF:: For a copy of all letters, telegrams or other communications, passing between any official of the government of the province of Quebec and any official of the government of Canada with reference to the abolition of tolls on the Victoria and harbour bridges in the city of Montreal.



CONSCRIPTIVE POWERS OF GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL UNDER WAR MEASURES ACT

Lewis Elston Cardiff: For a copy of all opinions rendered by the Department of Justice with reference to the power of the governor in council under the War Measures Act to conscript men for service in any theatre of war.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I ask that this be allowed to stand so that I can have the question considered whether or not this can be complied with without violating the privileges which still exist as to certain communications between the Department of Justice and other departments of the government.
Motion stands.



THE PLEBISCITE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Richard Burpee Hanson: I desire to ask the Prime
Minister when he will make a statement to the house with respect to what the government intends to do, having regard to the final and official vote on the plebiscite and the statement of the Prime Minister on Tuesday of last week that in due course the government will make known to the house what action it proposes to take in the light

of the plebiscite vote, and the prior statement of the Prime Minister, in his plebiscite address of April 7, that the only place it can satisfactorily be decided whether a particular step is necessary or a particular measure needed is in parliament-that in parliament the government can state its case and provide the information on which a wise decision alone can be made.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: First of all, perhaps I should correct my hon. friend the leader of the opposition (Mr. Hanson) in his statement that the "final and official vote" has been given to the house or is available. However, I do not wish to make any point of that except to be strictly^ accurate. I would say to my hon. friend that I expect to make a statement to the house in the course of a few days with reference to the matter to which he has referred. In the meantime the government will continue, as it has in the past, to endeavour to anticipate and to meet every situation that arises, in the light of existing circumstances.



VICHY REPRESENTATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Richard Burpee Hanson: Mr. Speaker, I desire to ask the Prime Minister another question. On Tuesday, April 28, the Prime Minister told the house that he had asked Mr. Pierre Dupuy to return to Canada and indicated that "unless some occasion should arise to make it necessary to take action before he returns" he would not make a statement on our diplomatic relations with Vichy until he had had the opportunity of conferring with Mr. Dupuy. I should now like to ask the Prime Minister if the situation at Madagascar is such an occasion as he referred to in his statement, and if so, whether any further action has been taken by the government. Further, I should like to ask the Prime Minister when he anticipates that Mr. Dupuy will be available for conference on this question.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am unable to say whether Mr. Dupuy is in the city at present or not. I expect that he will he here this week if he is not already here. I have not had a chance this morning to ascertain. Until I have had an opportunity of an interview with Mr. Dupuy I prefer making no further statement on the matter.

The Senate



THE SENATE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr.  D. G. BOSS@St. Paul's: Mr. Speaker, in view of the urgency of the situation and the desirability of strengthening in every possible way our parliamentary institutions by recruiting thereto men and women of outstanding ability, will the Prime Minister tell the house when he will be in a position to announce the appointment of men and women of ability to the Senate of Canada to fill the many vacancies at present existing?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I shall be glad to take
note of my hon. friend's desire to be considered in that connection.



HIS MAJESTY THE KING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. JEAN-FRANG'OIS POULIOT (Temis-couata):	May I ask the government if it is
not possible to have a fine picture of His Majesty the King, the commander of the army, in each recruiting office?
Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):: I will deal with that when my
estimates are under consideration.



TORONTO HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. H. HARRIS (Danforth):: In the absence of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Cardin) may I ask the government to be kind enough to expedite the introduction of the bill standing in the name of that minister having to do with the Toronto harbour commissioners. The urgency lies in the fact that the summer vacation of the city council may preclude the possibility of taking advantage of a $5,000,000 debenture issue which is coming due on September 1.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I can promise my hon. friend that the matter will be taken up to-morrow.



INTERNMENTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. K. FRASER (Peterborough West):: I should like to address a question to the
Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent). Owing to the escape of two more German prisoners from the internment camp at Bowmanville, as reported over the radio this morning, will the minister tell the house whether these frequent escapes are being investigated by his department and whether provision is being made to stop such escapes?


James Layton Ralston: That comes under my department. The guards at internment camps are under the Department of National Defence, and I have constituted a board, composed of Colonel G. S. Stairs, M.C., V.D., of Montreal, Colonel K. R. Marshall, C.M.G., D.S.O., V.D., of Toronto, and Colonel C. M. Edwards,
D.S.O., V.D., of Ottawa, who will make a special investigation with regard to the escape of these two prisoners, and any other matters that may be referred to them in connection with the administration of the camp. There have been four different commanding officers there and the escapes which have occurred have occurred under all of them, so that it seems to be a question as to where the responsibility lies. However, the matter is being thoroughly investigated by the officers whom I have named. As a matter of fact I ordered that the district officer commanding should himself proceed to Bowmanville this morning. I did so the moment the report came in and 'he is on the ground now. The court of inquiry will be constituted at once.



THE &quot;NEW CANADIAN&quot;


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. N. A. McLARTY (Secretary of State):: On Monday the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) asked a question with regard to a paper which is being published in Vancouver under the name of the New Canadian. It is published in Japanese and in English, and the hon. member inquired whether any steps are being taken to check up on it. I have now secured the necessaiy information and would advise that the New Canadian is still being published in English and in Japanese at 396 Powell street, Vancouver. It generally appears three times a week. Its Japanese section occupies approximately one-quarter of its space and consists entirely of translations of official announcements and notices affecting the Japanese-Canadian population. In regard to the second portion of the question, I would point out that in the early days of the war the New Canadian was handled exactly like all other Canadian publications; it was subject to post-publication censorship. However,
War Appropriation

the press censors advise me that it is now subject to pre-publication censorship and all copy must be presented to the censor in Vancouver prior to the publication of the paper.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, May 5, consideration in committee of a resolution to provide sums not exceeding $2,000,000,000 for the year ending March 31, 1943, for granting
to his majesty aid for national defence and security-Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Vien in the chair.
Joseph Henry Harris: On several
occasions we have been trying to find out what progress has been made with regard to certain recommendations which have been put on the record during the last ten or eleven months. The minister was kind enough to indicate that he would give the committee a fairly comprehensive statement, the idea being that this would avoid the necessity of cross-examination across the floor of the house. Altogether there are close to forty recommendations not enumerated or numbered as such but appearing in the context of evidence which the minister's department and other war departments have had before them. I should be glad to have a statement from the minister.


James Layton Ralston: I will endeavour as briefly as I can to summarize the action taken, or the comments of the department with regard to some of the more important recommendations. I am sure my hon. friend does not expect me to go into the whole matter, because I presume all the recommendations will come before the war expenditures committee when it meets.
One recommendation has to do with the appointment of a financial superintendent under the jurisdiction of the deputy minister. That recommendation, in the case of the Department of National Defence (Army) had already been carried out. As a matter of fact, there had been a financial superintendent for some years.
With respect to a war establishments committee, that also was recommended, and that recommendation, if it was intended to apply to the Department of National Defence, (Army), is met by the fact that we have had and have a war establishments committee which is functioning, I think, satisfactorily. The director of staff duties is chairman; the director of military operations and intelligence and the director of mobilization and recruiting are members.
The committee recommended that someone from the deputy minister's branch should

become a member of the war establishments committee, and the financial superintendent himself became a member of it, although he had been functioning from June 30, 1941. Later, on March 7 of this year, the director of military training was appointed a member. Hon. members will understand that frequently these establishments are related to training centres or to some unit, the training of which needs particular attention and in respect of which, therefore, the knowledge of the director of military training is needed as to establishment requirements.
A recommendation was made suggesting that a staff of highly trained civil servants, with expert background, should assist the financial superintendent in carrying out his duties. Under that, there were to be appointed 21 grade 4 civil clerks, who had had a university course in economics and commerce. That was authorized at a meeting of the committee some time before, for the purpose of assisting the financial superintendent. Of these, ten were appointed in the army service and six were assigned to work on estimates and finance under the financial superintendent.
A recommendation was made with regard to the long and complicated procedure concerning war establishments, suggesting that that be simplified without weakening the financial and constitutional controls of the civil power. I could dilate at some length on that particular recommendation, but perhaps it will suffice to say that we have adopted a plan whereby there will be simpler procedure in certain increases in establishments. I think it is that increases up to 5 per cent, not more than 5 per cent of personnel, are made on the authorization of the minister, and do not go to the privy council at all. The same applies to increases in establishments in England; up to 5 per cent are made on the authority of the army commander without reference to the authorities here. Up to 10 per cent may be made in connection with establishments, if that is done for the purpose of bringing them up to correspond with British establishments. Further than that, a sweeping and thorough examination has been made of departmental procedure in order to shorten the time, if we possibly can, for a file to pass from one branch to another with respect to establishments.
I will not go into details here. I myself have discussed the matter thoroughly with the director of staff duties and with the financial superintendent, and I can assure the committee that a substantial saving of time will be effected in that respect as well. I must say it is pretty difficult to do it and at the same time to preserve the reservation made in the recommendation, that is that we must not

War Appropriation
weaken the financial or constitutional control. Obviously, if you stop the recommendation bn its way to the minister's office or the deputy minister's office, you leave the recommendation largely in the hands of more junior officials. But I do feel, and have so expressed myself, that for the purpose of getting on with the war we must do that; we must place responsibility on the senior officials in these branches and in the financial superintendent's office to approve the establishments; and if privy council authority is necessary, I have proposed-and I think it will be adopted-that we should get confirmation of those establishments simply by a schedule attached to one order in council, say once a month. That may not be approved by the hon. member for Danforth or by the committee, but there is no way of shortening the establishment procedure unless you cut out some of the officials, and it is very difficult to cut out the service officials, because every one of them in the branches has something to do with the establishment. That is, where a particular individual or a particular number of personnel is necessary, or whether so many trucks or so much motor transport may be necessary or where other equipment is necessary, all has to be passed on by the branches concerned. You cannot shorten that. The only way to shorten it is to have the approval further down the line.


Joseph Henry Harris: Or split it up.


James Layton Ralston: Yes, in the case of minor or small establishments, and that is being done. A suggestion was made that each defence deputy minister should be assisted by a civilian director of personnel; that is in force in the Department of National Defence, Lieutenant-Colonel Harris being in charge.
A suggestion was made that consideration be given to the after-war use and disposal of all property, real and personal, acquired by the crown for war purposes. In so far as the Department of National Defence is concerned, at the moment naturally we are acquiring property for war purposes. The real estate adviser does, I know, in selecting property, endeavour if he can to have an eye to postwar conditions, but he has first to comply with the requisitions and requirements of the service people. If he can do that and at the same time pay attention to the comparative post-war value of alternative sites, he does so.
With regard to the matter of salvage generally the Department of National Defence, particularly in the master-general of the ordnance branch, has had authorized by order in council a salvage board. That board has to do particularly with army equipment, not general salvage but army equipment, and the
officer in charge is Colonel Bailey who had an extended and detailed experience in the last war in connection with the same sort of thing. That board operates under the master-general of the ordnance. Certain sales require approval of the minister or the deputy minister as the case may be, and we have found it operates successfully with regard to the disposal of this army equipment, compared with the ordinary salvage which is disposed of under a salvage officer.


Joseph Henry Harris: Does that board include officials of the Department of National Defence for Air?


James Layton Ralston: I do not think so.


Joseph Henry Harris: We still have five sets of people doing the same class of work.


James Layton Ralston: Well, my hon. friend will not expect me to make any apology for the service which has to do with army equipment.


Joseph Henry Harris: Have the othei war departments a representative on this board?


James Layton Ralston: I do not know whether they have in regard to that type of salvage. As a matter of fact, I would not expect that the air branch would have a great deal of salvage, except destroyed planes, new equipment which has been damaged.


Joseph Henry Harris: They have
clothing, worn-out guns, the same class of material. There should be some coordination.


James Layton Ralston: They started out with things such as horse transport, of which there was a large quantity in the department. It may be that we shall need some of that before we get through this war.
There was a recommendation with regard to the division of freight between the two railways. That matter has already been the subject of considerable discussion in another committee and I made my statement there. It really has to do with the three services and also munitions and supply.
The system of stock control in operation in naval stores was suggested as being possibly useful in the army and the. air branch. I can say that our officers have examined it, and we find it is difficult to apply to the army in view of the continuous turnover of the supply stock.
That is with regard, I think, to subcommittee No. 3. Then there was subcommittee No. 2 which dealt more with medical matters. In reference to the dental services the subcommittee mentioned the efficiency with

War Appropriation

which the organization had been set up and, of course, having received that commendation, no one is going to deny jt. With regard to medical and hospital services, the importance of cooperation and coordination was stressed, and the principle was laid down that the necessity for care of men above category E should be under the Department of National Defence, that is, until they are placed in a lower category. The Department of National Defence accepts that responsibility, but it has at the same time used, as suggested by the committee, existing hospital accommodation of the Department of Pensions and National Health or civil hospitals. The return of March, 1942, showed the distribution of military patients as being 72*59 per cent in national defence hospitals, 12*04 per cent in pensions and national health hospitals, and 15-37 per cent in civil hospitals.
Then the committee really reiterated that recommendation, that the principle be recognized that the medical services of national defence should be responsible for medical and hospital care of all men in the forces until they are placed in category E.
There was a recommendation that the subject of medical care and hospitalization of men above category E be referred to the interdepartmental committee for further study and report. The report is that the interdepartmental committee has met on several occasions where the different services, including pensions and national health, have hospital facilities and when increased accommodation has been necessary, to study these situations. Just to dilate a little on that matter of the interdepartmental committee on medical services, the report I have is that subsequently to the presentation of the report the interdepartmental committee has been meeting more frequently than in the past. They have held twelve meetings from November 30 to April 22. Although the committee was first appointed for a specific task, it is now in fact becoming to all intents and purposes a permanent committee, and all questions of an interdepartmental nature are referred to the committee at the instance of any director or senior officer of any one of the services. If there are any questions in which civilian interests are involved, representative civilian authorities are called in and consulted. Generally speaking, however, the matter brought before the committee is of a technical and administrative nature involving the three services only.
The committee has had under its constant consideration a review of the system of medical and hospital care in the services. Inspecting officers are continually travelling

over the country in order to see that the men of the forces are receiving proper medical care in the services hospitals and that the hospitals themselves are efficiently administered.
The redistribution of existing hospital facilities between the Department of Pensions and National Health and the departments of national defence has not yet been fully worked out, but certain steps in that direction have already been taken. For instance, the army has taken over 200 beds from the Department of Pensions and National Health in Toronto, to operate as a convalescent hospital, and the naval service has taken over from that department the Rockhead hospital at Halifax. Before any hospital project is undertaken by the services, consideration is always given by the committee to existing hospital facilities. The situation is carefully studied, and none of the services proceeds with any such project unless it is found necessary to do so.
I want to add that special attention is given to this matter of hospitalization and medical services generally. A month or two ago the adjutant-general adopted the policy of having liaison officers in his own department representing the various branches of the service. One of those officers, in the person of Lieutenant-Colonel Lebbetter of Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, was appointed special assistant in connection with the matter of medical services. Lieutenant-Colonel Lebbetter works in close cooperation with the director-general of medical services, but if anything comes up in the adjutant-general's office with respect to medical services Colonel Lebbetter, or it may be the artillery officer, or the signals officer, or the infantry officer, is there to act immediately as liaison officer between the adjutant-general and the director-general of medical services, or the chief of the particular branch concerned.


Joseph Henry Harris: Would the
minister feel disposed to direct that minutes of the meetings of this interdepartmental committee be kept as a matter of record? Up to the present that has not been done; there are no minutes of what has occurred.


James Layton Ralston: I am surprised to hear my hon. friend make that statement, and certainly I see no reason at all why minutes should not be kept.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Before the minister leaves this question of hospitalization, I should like to ask him what is the ratio of hospital beds required, we will say in Canada, to the number of men on active service. I was surprised to learn recently that it is considered necessary to have beds

War Appropriation
for five per cent of the total number of men. I should have thought that was a very large proportion. When in a given community the number of troops is increased, of course the question of hospitalization arises. I am interested, for personal reasons, in the situation in Fredericton. It now develops that the number of troops in that community has more than doubled. The military hospital accommodation was up to a maximum of eighty beds, which under the original arrangement was considered quite ample; that would take care of some 1,500 troops. There are now about 3,400 troops there, and the present accommodation is not considered sufficient. I would be inclined to agree with that. Then comes the question of new hospital facilities. Apparently the present facilities cannot be increased, and a new building will have to be erected.
That brings me to this point. Would the department of medical services give consideration to increasing the existing facilities of the civil hospital at that point? We have what is to all intents and purposes a brand new hospital, built at a substantial expense, offering accommodation, I think, to the extent of 140 beds, which, of course, is only sufficient for the civilian population. If the department and the hospital authorities could get together and provide increased accommodation of a permanent nature at the Victoria public hospital, it would serve a useful purpose post-war. Instead of that I understand it is considered necessary to construct a brand new hospital for military use only, and abandon the present facilities which have been built and equipped at great expense. I only suggest to the minister that he pass along this observation to the medical authorities, that the present civil hospital facilities at Fredericton be increased to serve both purposes. That is a brand new hospital, classified A-l in the United States category, one of the best hospitals in the maritime provinces for its size. The accommodation there could be doubled with very little expense, because the central services are all there; all the equipment is there for X-ray work, surgery, and all that sort of thing. What is needed is additional beds; I think that is about all. There are elevator services, dietitian services and everything else for a hospital twice the size of the present one. If this suggestion could be adopted it would remove the necessity of spending a large amount of money on a new military hospital, which would be useless in the post-war period, and a very useful purpose would be served for the whole community of central New Brunswick, where there is a population of, we will say, a hundred thousand people who are
more or less dependent upon this one institution for hospitalization.
I commend this suggestion to the minister; I hope his officers will give consideration to it, instead of spending a large sum of money on a new hospital and new equipment which would be scrapped after the war. I think this question of building separate hospitals ought to be considered in the long view. I am not complaining, but I think this is a point which ought to be put forward.


James Layton Ralston: The general principle which my hon. friend lays down has been pretty well considered, and the hon. member for Danforth will remember that in its recommendations the committee itself felt that it could not lay down any general principle but that each case would have to be considered on its merits,-having regard to local conditions. One of those conditions, naturally, is the question of capital expenditure. You build an addition to a permanent hospital, and I think the cost per bed is, in most instances, double what it would be if you built what I might call a hut hospital. There is, of course, the advantage which my hon. friend mentions, if the equipment is sufficient and you do not have to duplicate equipment which is sometimes very expensive. The director-general of medical services tells me that it is the policy of his department to cooperate as far as possible with civilian institutions. I know that in Gaspe they have taken over one floor of the Gaspe hospital. The military doctors are in there, with the orderlies and all the military personnel, just as though it were a separate hospital, but they have the use of the operating room and the other equipment, which I understand is very good.
There is also the other policy of building an addition to an existing hospital. It is very seldom that we build on to a hospital, but where they do not do that they sometimes build near a hospital if they can, making it a sort of annex or wing which may be used by the hospital after the war is over.


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbuiy):: The situation at Fredericton is such that an addition could be built. The building was designed by a good hospital architect with the idea that it might be added to, and I am told that all the central services now exist for a hospital of 400 beds, though, of course, that may be something of an exaggeration.


James Layton Ralston: The district officer commanding, Brigadier Anglin, spoke to me about the Fredericton situation when I was there two weeks ago. Of course he was pressing for more hospital accommodation.
If I may add a further word, the hon. member for Danforth asked as to the minutes of
War Appropriation

the interdepartmental committee, and I was surprised to hear him indicate that such minutes had not been kept. My information is that minutes are kept of the meetings of the interdepartmental committee.


Joseph Henry Harris: I am glad to hear that. Are these regular meetings?


James Layton Ralston: No; they are not held at regular intervals. Some of the dates were: November 30, December 18, January 2, January 22, February 25, March 9, March 14, April 3, April 27. I think they meet whenever there is business to be done, and they meet to deal with special cases as they come up, rather than with routine matters. However, it might be well to consider having them meet more regularly.


Joseph Henry Harris: It is gratifying
to learn that the committee has had thirteen meetings since those recommendations were made.
To get back to hospital matters for a moment, the condition which obtains in the maritimes, and which was so well put forward by the leader of the opposition, also obtains in other parts of Canada. I should not like the impression to go abroad that the cost of construction of civilian institutions is double the cost of construction in the case of hospitals under the Department of National Defence. As you, Mr. Chairman, very well know, the difference arises because of the fact that the cost of heat, light, power, land, depreciation charges and all the other elements which go into the cost of a self-contained civilian hospital, even down to the personnel, do not go into the cost of a national defence institution. Personnel is paid for out of the general vote, whereas with the civilian institution personnel has to be paid for by that civilian institution. I should not like the impression to go abroad that the cost is double; I think the minister will agree with that.


James Layton Ralston: I had just two figures
in mind. I shall not mention them for fear they are not accurate. The figure was at so much per bed, and it was about double. But that was capital expenditure, not maintenance.
Last night the hon. member for Renfrew South (Mr. McCann) spoke about Wasser-mann tests, and I shall not deal with that matter again.
Then there was a recommendation with regard to the building up in Canada of a blood bank. The subcommittee recommended that the suggestion be given careful consideration; the comment is that dried human serum is now being recommended in lieu of whole blood, in the form of a blood bank, for

the treatment of war casualties, and the production of suitable quantities of this product is now well in hand and is being supplied to all military districts in Canada and overseas. In addition, a certain number of personnel have been typed and are available for transfusions, if found necessary.
The subcommittee also made a report and recommendations in the matter of medical stores and supplies. The action taken in that regard is this. A survey of the medical stores branch is now being conducted, and steps have also been taken by the Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps to provide added staff where necessary, and to investigate further possible improvements. I believe there is decided activity in that direction, and I believe the hon. member took a particular interest in it.


Joseph Henry Harris: There is great
room for it, too.


James Layton Ralston: Then there was a recommendation with regard to meat supplies. The subcommittee recommended that consideration be given to a proposal submitted by the packers for the saving of fat from beef carcasses by having such fat trimmed from the carcass at the packing plant and the purchase of pork in trimmed cuts, leaving with the packer such parts as spareribs, tail, fat, skin, hocks, bones, scrap and belly.
The action taken was that after careful study of this proposal it was decided that to. provide the greatest possible variety of meat dishes it would be more advantageous to continue the purchase of beef and fresh pork in sides and carcases. So that there is no waste, steps are taken to ensure the use of all the residue parts of the beef and hog carcases; mincing machines with sausage attachments are provided, together with authority for the purchase of sausage casings, seasonings, et cetera. I remember in that connection meeting with a cook on the Pacific coast who wanted a sausage machine. I promised to get him one, and it has gone to him. The machine is very useful, in fact, from the point of view of dietetics, and also from that of saving.
Recipes have been circulated to all units, giving complete instructions for the making of beef and pork sausage, headcheese, pickled pork and corned beef. The issue of three ounces of lard per man per day has been discontinued, so that cooks are now compelled to obtain this supply from the dripping and rendering of fats of meats to which reference has been made. All other residue of meats from kitchens, such as bones, rough fat, and

War Appropriation
21S9
kitchen grease is disposed of by sale under arrangements approved by the chief salvage officer.
The next recommendation was that some system should be devised whereby the quality of meat furnished could be passed on by government inspectors prior to the carcase being cut up. .
The action taken was this. The question of the inspection of beef at packing houses by Department of Agriculture inspectors to ascertain whether it conformed with the specifications of contract prior to its distribution to the supply depots was under consideration at the time the subcommittee considered this matter of meat inspection. In the spring and early summer of 1941 a system was adopted whereby all beef, destined for the army supply depots inspected at point of origin and found in accordance with departmental specifications was stamped with a Department of National Defence prick stamp which designated that, at the time of inspection, the beef was in accordance with government specifications. This inspection, however, does not in any way relieve the officers of any of their responsibility; they make their own inspection when the beef arrives at their supply depots and, if judged by them to be below contract specifications, their duty is immediately to reject such beef' regardless of the fact that it may carry the stamp of the agriculture inspector referred to above.


Mr. TUSTIN:: How many times has beef been rejected?


James Layton Ralston: I am sorry I cannot say. Does the hon. member mean in a month?


George James Tustin: Yes, and in Canada.


James Layton Ralston: The subcommittee recommended that consideration be given to possible changes in the ration to meet the needs of flying personnel in the air force.
I can say that there is a standing committee on nutrition, which was mentioned the other night. That committee is headed by Doctor Hunter of Toronto and has been meeting.
I know that lately a new diet scale has been issued and approved. The first meeting was held in Ottawa on January 26, and I know several meetings have been held since. As a matter of fact, the recommendations of the committee have been approved.
Then there was a recommendation from the subcommittee that each branch of the service appoint one officer or board of officers to be responsible for salvage, and that all personnel of the armed forces be made salvage-conscious, particularly quartermasters and supply officers.
Periodic inspections were recommended to be made of all stores, and such as are no longer serviceable in any branch of the services are to be turned over to the civilian board for disposal.
The action taken has been that an army salvage and disposal board has been created, with district representatives. All salvageable material including packing boxes, jute sacks, crates, cartons, bags of various kinds, waste-paper, et cetera are collected and disposed of on instructions of this board. Records of sales, such as recoverable invoices, et cetera, are maintained by the district supply and -transport officer, or the camp supply and transport officer, as the case may be, who submits to the army salvage and disposal board such reports as are required from time to time by that board.
The subcommittee recommended that arrangements be completed for the transfer of waste oils from the air force to the army for reclaiming.
I may say that that was the subject of a return made to the house the other day. The hon. member asked whether any steps had been taken toward the reclamation of oil used in -the army. The answer for the army was that oil reclaimers have been installed at Debert, Sussex, Ottawa, Camp Borden and London, Ontario. So far the operational output has been able to handle only waste oils from army supplies. It has not handled -transmission greases and heavier lubricants. The oiganization of these reclaiming plants is now being carried -out to increase their capacity to handle larger quantities of waste oil and, therefore, to be in a position to reclaim air force oils for army requirements up to the quantities -the army can use, wherever freight, transport and other charges make it economical to do so.
I may say that I know personally that steps have been taken in connection with that matter. The master-general of the ordnance has had it under consideration. I am not so sure that those reclaiming stations or mechanical installations will be increased. We have under consideration another plan upon which I shall not now enlarge. It is a commercial plan which, it seems to me, will perhaps be more useful, in that it does not call for the expert personnel which are required in these reclaiming installations. That is to say, in the present instance the army has to turn aside from its regular job of training men for the army, and train them in the collection and careful preservation and segregation of the various oils used. I was amazed by the reclamation apparatus installed in these stations. From conversation with those who ought to know I have found that labora-
War Appropriation

tory tests are required, when the oil comes a from the garage, or from wherever it may oe obtained, to ascertain whether or not it contains Prestone, or anything of that kind, or transmission grease; and it also requires laboratory tests when it goes out to ascertain that it contains no foreign matter which would interfere with its lubricating value. By another system it may be possible that we could have this oil actually cracked so that, regardless of the fact that it may have waste substance in it, it will be clear and good for lubricating uses. This matter is under study by the master-general of the ordnance, along with representatives of the research council; and I expect the extension of that service will be in accordance with whatever recommendation is made. I believe the study will be completed shortty.
The subcommittee recommended that consideration be given to possible savings by more extensive use of the government owned and controlled railway system for transportation, freight, express and telegraph service. That also is a matter up for consideration by a standing committee of the house.
There was the further recommendation that periodic and regular inspection of all stores should be made by the responsible officer of each service to determine if any stores are obsolete or no longer of use. Should this be the case, prompt action should be taken to salvage or dispose of these stores.
The action taken was that left-over materials from construction works are utilized on maintenance services. Data has been compiled on stocks that have accumulated for various reasons, and they have and are being diverted to other construction projects or districts. Condemned materials are submitted to the salvage board for disposal.
Those are the principal recommendations of which I have note.


Joseph Henry Harris: I desire to
record my appreciation of the information which the minister has just given. I have one observation to make. Could there not be more coordination between the different departments of defence-army, navy and air? It is unfortunate that in some respects there are similar organizations in all three departments. The barriers should be broken down that make it difficult for the man in khaki to become intimate with the man in blue. The statement has been made that that difficulty does exist, and it is an unfortunate situation. We are all anxious to have a unified war effort, and I would like to see as much coordination as possible between all three branches of the defence department.

My last observation is this: Let us get on with this war. I could make extended remarks on every item and easily consume three hours in doing so, but this is not the time. Let us get on with the war as fast as we possibly can.


Mr. KINLEY:: I desire to bring before
the minister and the committee one or two things which I think are important. I was home during the Easter recess and during the plebiscite campaign and I discussed with many alert people in my riding questions of interest in my riding. I found that the farmers of my riding got the impression from radio addresses and from what appeared in the press that they were exempt from military training and therefore from military service, and that this exemption applied also to those engaged in the primary industries who had a background of farming. But I find that it is not so simple as that. The mechanics of it are a little involved. I am glad to say, however, that a press release went out from the Department of National War Services not long ago which I think should be widely distributed and appear in the press to a greater extent. It can readily be understood, after what has been said and broadcast about military service, that when a farmer's son gets a notice to report for medical examination he immediately runs to someone in authority and says, "I thought I was exempt". The actual conditions are very well explained in the press release issued by the Department of National War Services, which states that the farmer's son will be called up for medical examination but that he has eigjht days within which to put in a claim for exemption as a farmer's son or as a farmer, and that if on the 23rd day of March he was actively and efficiently engaged in agriculture that is all the reason he needs to advance to be granted an exemption. The board has no discretion in that case but must grant him a six months' exemption.


James Layton Ralston: If he has a prima facie case.
Mr. KINLEY; Yes. But the farmers will not understand that so readily, and the actual conditions should be made plain to them. In my riding we had a splendid "yes" vote on the plebiscite. I think the town of Lunenburg voted "yes" eight to one, but in some outlying fishing districts all along the shore of Nova Scotia there was a considerable "no" vote. Naturally we asked ourselves why they voted no. The people in these districts are fishermen and sailors. A sailor ashore is rather out of his element. These people do not take

War Appropriation
readily to the army, but they prefer to go into the navy. When they had to vote on the question whether they should go into the army, naturally there was an inclination on their part to vote no. Some consideration should be given to men who have been trained practically a lifetime as sailors and fishermen, so that they may be allowed to select the navy in which to serve rather than the army. There is all the more reason for that in the fact that they are admirably equipped for service at sea. They are sailors ready-made and are considered perhaps as good as any in the world.
I wish to say a few words also on nationals in exile, because I have had some personal experience with this question. When Germany overran the small countries of Europe, some of which had a splendid mercantile marine and many of whose people had spent their lives on the sea, many of them going fishing in the south seas, I am informed that many of the ships of these countries were directed by the British government to Nova Scotia. They obviously could not return to their own county in Europe, and they came to Nova Scotia ports-a very natural thing for them to do. But when they came here the crews became wards of Canada-not in the financial sense, because fortunately their governments were well supplied with revenue from their maritime activities and could look after these people. Wo all know that governments in exile have been doing splendid work in training their men for the armed services. I have had personal experience with that, and I know they are doing a splendid job. Their officers and men have received superior training. These governments in exile asked for volunteers from their nationals who are now wards of Canada. Many of these men who came here were good machinists or good engineers. W'hen they were brought to Nova Scotia there was no work for them at the time, but those amongst them who were technically trained men were soon working in the war industries of Nova Scotia, at Lunenburg, Liverpool, Halifax and Pictou, and they are doing a good job. They are good men, well trained in mechanics. For some time the voluntary system prevailed, but recently a call was sent out to these men who were working in the war industries of Nova Scotia to come and register and be medically examined.
I have personal knowledge that one of the governments in exile called up men up to thirty-seven years of age. Some of them were married in their own countries; others married after they came to Canada. As I understand the Canadian law, we call up single men or widowers without children up to thirty
years of age, and I think I am correct in assuming, from the statements that have been made in the house and from letters I have received in communication with the authorities, that these wards of Canada are subject to Canadian law and must be treated the same as Canadian citizens, and that therefore thirty years should be the age limit in calling up these men, so long as the Canadian law provides that age limit. Some hon. gentlemen may say: Why don't these men tell their authorities that they prefer to remain in industry, being over the Canadian age call and working on naval repairs.
One can well understand that a man who is a national of one of our allies and has a wife and, perhaps, children in a foreign country might get a black mark from his own nationals if he assumed the privilege of invoking Canadian law in his behalf. The minister said the other day that the matter was still under advisement and an agreement would be made with these nationals. I am aware of that; I have considerable correspondence upon the subject which I will make available to the minister. I believe the agreement should be so drawn that the man who is a foreign national will not have to assert himself, that the Canadian authorities will state what the law is and that we expect these men to be bound by it as so stated, so that the man who is a national of that foreign country need not fear that when the war is over he will be prejudiced because he invoked the law of this country in respect to privileges which are available to our own citizens.
I have only praise for the nationals of our allies in eastern Canada. I want to compliment them; they are doing a splendid job and doing it actively. But I repeat that this is a situation which should be cleared up, that these men who are working in wartime industry throughout Nova Scotia as engineers and machinists and who are over thirty years of age should be definitely told what their obligations and duties are. In this way everything would be aboveboard, and they would feel that they were doing their duty as expected of them.
There is one other matter about which I wish to speak. I was absent in Nova Scotia when the observation was made by the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Green), although I think he later withdrew it, that Nova Scotia members did not have the gumption to speak up for the defence of that province. I want to say here, and I say it advisedly, as a member of this house, that I regard the rights and the benefits of the people I represent as my first duty here, and I would not hesitate to assert them if I believed that they were impaired. The hon.
JFflj- Appropriation

member for Vancouver South, as a critic on behalf of the opposition, is doing a fairly good job, but he has a different role from that of hon. members who are supporters of the government, and I believe that he could do it effectively without casting any aspersion on our efforts. I am constantly bringing to the attention of the proper authorities the importance of the defence of Nova Scotia.
I realize that for this purpose and for other phases of our war effort we must have stability of government, and thank God, we have it better than in any other country I know of; also we must have coordination of effort and planning. If everyone who comes to this house were to put forward and emphasize his ideas as those which should be adopted for defence and for the conduct of this war, we should merely have confusion. So far as the defences of Nova Scotia are concerned, I, living on the coast, am naturally interested. I believe there must be a very comprehensive effort. While some places are defended, there is always a back door, and the back door is the door which has been left open in most cases during this war. So far as Nova Scotia is concerned, the strong places are only as strong as the weakest places, and our defences must be considered from the viewpoint of that part of this country which juts out into the Atlantic, but we must plan with a degree of secrecy. It would be terrible if we had an invasion of our Atlantic coast and you in Ottawa had to send bombers to bomb us who were for a time in the control of a foreign power. We think that, notwithstanding the world-wide effort which we should do everything to support, the defence of the eastern coast of this country is a first duty of our army and our navy.
Few know Nova Scotia better than the minister. During the Easter recess he went to the Pacific coast and flew to the Atlantic coast. I am sure that he has this situation in hand in a way which will bring confidence to the people of our province. So far as the navy is concerned, I have had conferences with my fishermen, and with the admiral in Nova Scotia, himself a Nova Scotian and a fine sailor, and I know that many things are being done, and others being changed, in the interests of coordination and efficiency. The defence effort is growing and will get better as time goes on. The air force, too, is doing a splendid job. If you get up quite early in the morning you will hear them in the air, and if you stay up late at night you will hear them still flying overhead. So that, while the hon. member for Vancouver South, representing the opposition, will naturally 'ook for vulnerable parts of our defence, we
(Mr. Kinley.3
who are working in conjunction with the minister and come to him with our problems and tell him what we need and what we expect, cannot stand for anybody saying that we have not the gumption to bring before the government matters which we believe are in the interest of the province.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Why do yoy not come out in the open and say it?


Thomas Langton Church: I always enjoy reading in Hansard the remarks of the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg who has just spoken.
Three ministers have stated here this session that the question of farmers' exemptions is for another department, that boards have been set up, and that it is somewhat a matter of policy and of construction of the law passed. With all due respect may I remind the committee that the enemy is near our doors, and it is necessary to get men into the reserve army and into the army overseas. Yet count up all the exemptions and postponements which now exist under the law.


Mr. FLEMING:: There are no exemptions.


Thomas Langton Church: When you allow for the farms, the munition plants, and the reserve army, you have very few of the population left, because there are exemptions yet, for the active army formations and for reinforcements overseas.
Before the resolution is adopted, there are one or two matters I should like to mention. If the minister is not able to clarify them to-day he may be able to do so to-morrow or in a day or two.
First, we have had a great many statements made by the chairmen of the defence board, both in Canada and in the United States, and speeches at banquets and over the radio. I will not dwell on this matter for more than a couple of minutes, for I think the minister has been very patient and has given a great deal of information, which the country will appreciate. But let me ask what is the joint policy on the north American continent in the case of Canada in the event of a surprise invasion? Here we have a joint defence board. The chairmen of both sections have, for over a year, been making a great many speeches-far too many speeches for the good of defence. Their work has been largely board and not much defence in sight yet. The two cardinal principles of this country's military policy and of this resolution are home defence and to protect Canada's neutrality in case our ally next-door is attacked by a foreign power, namely Japan. Could the minister clarify

War Appropriation
the statements which have been made, because so far as I can learn, since the start of the session we have yet to have a considered statement as to what will happen in the event of a surprise attack which may or may not come to this country, but is still a possibility. After throwing away our defences and our friends, we cannot expect to get any in a day anywhere in Canada, since we chose to be an unmilitary power.
We have yet to have a considered statement on our side of the border as to what, in the event of a surprise attack, which may or may not come, our allies to the south will do for Canada. Announcements have already been made with regard to advance bases on the Pacific and the Atlantic for joint protection, with regard to the Alaska highway, and with regard to other matters which have been covered separately; but as far as I can see, apart from the minister's statement, we have not been given anything definite by the government as to our real position. I do not ask the minister to go into the matter to-day, but he has two colleagues in the other branches of the service, the navy and the air force, and I submit that some statement should be given to the committee later as to our strategy since we are, like the United States, a nonmilitary power as yet in the making. I should like the minister to make a short radio address or statement later on this subject, telling the people what will be done along this line.
There is one other matter, a most important one, which I wish to bring to the attention of the committee and of the department at this time. I refer to shipment of parcels to prisoners of war in Italy, Germany and the far east. As we all know, in the last war the Red Cross did wonderful work, but their activities at the present time are naturally restricted, in the very nature of things, and in view of the changes in the war made every week. We are on the defensive yet. Yesterday, in Toronto, a representative of the Y.M.C.A.-he states that he is international secretary-contended that parcels were being given out by that organization and delayed. Has the government knowledge of it? At least, that is what I gather from his remarks as I read them in the press. What is the status in enemy countries? It seems to me that the first duty or function of the government is to its prisoners of war, itself, to see that this is done, no matter where they may be and not to leave it to any private organization entirely, although they have done so well. The situation is changing every day, with Laval in control. I have twenty-six questions which I have gleaned from the British newspapers
in less than the last six months and from the British Hansard as well,, and I may say that in the last three months about thirteen or fourteen questions have been raised by government supporters in the British House of Commons all to the effect that parcels are not arriving and demanding government action, regulation and check up. Ships have been sunk at Lisbon and the way to Marseilles may be blocked. Taking these facts into account, and with the entry of Laval into affairs over there the mechanization and destruction in the air and at sea, and many other matters that tend to dislocation, numerous British members of parliament say that parcels are not reaching our soldiers who are prisoners. A list of camps has been given in the British house to the government there, and the camps are identified.
The whole situation as to Canadian prisoners in enemy and enemy-controlled countries, should be clarified, because a great many families are sending parcels, and it is of the utmost importance that they should reach our men, especially when we know that there is lack of medical attention, food, health regulations and other proper care in the theatres of war overseas and abuse of prisoners by a savage, barbarous foe. It is most difficult for any private organization to meet this situation with any status or right. Everyone in Canada appreciates the work that these private organizations are doing and have done. No criticism is ever intended. We all know what splendid work they did in the last war and in our camps in peace and war, but they cannot go as far in this war because conditions now are different from those in the last war. As I say, the situation is changing every day in Europe, Libya, the far east and elsewhere. The other day in the British House of Commons, the food administrator made an announcement, which I read in the London newspapers and Hansard in March. His remarks were reported in the British Hansard. He was proposing a policy with regard to parcels, and he stated that he was considering the restriction of parcels to the old country, first, for civilians, and second, in some instances, for the purpose of regulating supplies to soldiers on the continent and Britain. The reason given is the shortage of shipping and the extremely grave situation on the Atlantic having regard to the possibilities of a spring offensive of the axis powers and other matters of that sort. I do not ask the minister to go into this question to-day, because I want to see the resolution adopted if that is possible, but I hope he will be in a position in a few days to make a radio address or statement-I will give
War Appropriation

him the pages of fifteen Hansards-so that the people may know exactly what to expect and get the real facts. Our first duty is to our prisoners of war and action must be taken. We have had little information that would help to clear the situation up or get the real picture. I should like him to make a statement also telling us what is going to be done if we should have a surprise invasion of Canada, what help is expected, if any, and what help may we expect from our good friends to the south.


Mr. ESLING:: Would the minister give
his views on a specific case to which reference has previously been made, and some details of which have been handed to him? It is merely for the purpose of determining responsibility in the matter. A young man enlisted in October, 1939, left the base of enlistment at Nelson, British Columbia, and went with his company to Edmonton. He went to hospital, and was discharged from hospital and discharged from the army. From that time on he was five additional months having treatment. The fact is that the man was a diabetic, but he contends that his condition was aggravated by the change of temperature, from the mildness of Kootenay to the extremely cold temperature of Edmonton. His physician certifies to the fact that his parents have paid to one hospital in excess of $400 for his treatment. He is denied treatment at the military hospital in Vancouver. He is denied employment for the reason that he was not physically fit for the army. The government denies responsibility for his case. My contention is that the man having been examined by a departmental physician paid by the government, the responsibility should be placed on someone. Perhaps somebody was responsible for not having made a diabetic test-or was it up to that man to tell the medical adviser that he was a diabetic? He certainly offered his services to the government in good faith because, in order to enlist, he sold his business. He had money in his pocket and in the bank. My question, presented directly to the minister, is this: Does the responsibility rest with the government? Does the responsibility rest with the Department of National Defence, or with the Department of Pensions, or does it rest with the man for not having stated his condition? Will the minister give his views so that we may know what course to pursue. Everyone denies responsibility.


James Layton Ralston: I dislike more than I
can say to attempt to give views with respect to something in another department and with respect to a matter over which only the 
pension commissioners have jurisdiction. But I should like to give any views that would be of assistance to my hon. friend, although I am afraid I am not going to be very helpful. With regard to the examination, that is army, and I shall certainly find out about that. Did my hon. friend say that he had referred the case to me?


William Kemble Esling: No; I said I had sent a
few details to the minister.


James Layton Ralston: The hon. member did
refer the case to me?


William Kemble Esling: Just some details. The
minister sent for the details himself.


James Layton Ralston: What I am interested in
is what my hon. friend said at first with regard to the army. The nature of the medical examination that was made is what I am interested in, as to whether a diabetic condition should have been detected on examination.


William Kemble Esling: That seems to be the point. Who is responsible?


James Layton Ralston: I will look up the file.
It seems to me that when a man is being examined, one of the most elementary questions would be whether he had ever been the victim of a diabetic condition. I want to see how that question was answered.


William Kemble Esling: That is the very point.
Was not somebody lax? Was not the departmental physician lax in not making a proper examination? Even though the man had not told him he was a diabetic, a proper examination would have revealed that he was; the man would not have been accepted and his condition would not hsve been subsequently aggravated.


James Layton Ralston: This is a little harsh, but one must realize that in the case, for instance, of a life insurance examination if a man stated that he was not suffering from a diabetic condition, when he was, and knew it, the insurance would not be collectible. The same rule must apply in connection with pensions-I shall ascertain that. But one would think it was the man's fault. It is pretty harsh to put that fault on him after he has been accepted, but the pension board must have some rule like that. As my hon. friend knows, there is treatment. As I understand it, under the pension commission or the Department of Pensions and National Health, even though they award no pension, if a man's reestablishment in civil life would be helped by further treatment, the treatment may be given. Do I understand that the man's condition is so bad that rehabilitation is not practicable?

War Appropriation


William Kemble Esling: The unfortunate part is
that the man was denied treatment at Shaugh-nessy. What is such a man to do? He has offered his services to his country; the military hospital denies him treatment, and he cannot get employment.


James Layton Ralston: The military hospital
would discharge him to pensions and national health. When he was discharged and boarded category E he would be taken over by pensions and national health. Some question was asked when this vote was first up as to what was done to promote liaison between the army and pensions and national health. I have ascertained that a slip goes immediately . to pensions and national health. The man is given a note; if necessary he is taken there or guided there, so that he immediately reports to a pensions and national health hospital for examination and treatment until his condition is acertained. If he was not pensionable but still his disability was such that treatment would help him to be reestablished in civil life, they would give him further treatment. My hon. friend says he was not given treatment?


William Kemble Esling: He is denied it.


James Layton Ralston: So I can only assume that rehabilitation is not feasible. I will, however, look into the file myself. I shall have to get it from pensions and national health.


William Kemble Esling: I can give it to the minister.


Mr. MacINNIS:: I should like to crave the indulgence of the committee for a few minutes to go into another phase of a question which has been discussed at considerable length during the time the minister's department has been under review. The question I wish to raise concerns a mother who has two sons in the Royal Canadian Air Force, one in England and the other still in Canada. She says that after investigation she was given a dependent's allowance of $20; that is $10 for each son. She has an invalid daughter. She said that she had done practical nursing to help meet the family's economic needs. In this way she earned about $50 a month. Her case was then investigated and the allowance on behalf of her sons was discontinued. I received this letter only this morning. I am not sure whether this woman is a widow, but I presume she is because no mention is made of a husband. I should like to read how this mother feels about the position in which she finds herself. She says:
For the life of me I cannot see what this has to do with the government's $20. A wife gets $35 for herself and she is allowed to work. Why not a mother? It costs as much for one to live as the other. What I would like to see
is a move made whereby all mothers would be given the same as a wife. These mothers must be dependent on their sons or they would not be receiving their allowance. The government forgets it would have no army if the mothers had not produced the sons.
I realize that there must be some fairly definite regulations covering the matter of dependents' allowance, but it seems to me that the regulations should be such as to cover cases like this. Here evidently is a woman who would be better off if her sons were not in the service of the country; they could give more toward her support. I should like the minister to have this case investigated. I am writing to the dependents' allowance board about it, but I thought I should bring it to the attention of the committee in order to give the minister an opportunity to make some statement as to the attitude of the government or the department on dependents' allowances for mothers who are deprived of their sons.


James Layton Ralston: The same point was raised by the hon. member for Comox-Alberni the other day; and, as I told him, I had dealt with it when pensions were up some time ago. Briefly the situation is that payment to the wife is what I have described in this house as of right. I find I am wrong in that. Legally it is not as of right, but I have indicated that I believe the payment to the wife should be paid regardless of what income she may have. That principle has been carried out in connection with dependents' allowances and also in connection with pensions. The payment to a wife is, to use the expression I used before, treated as inviolable.
The payment to the mother is in a different category. The mother is not in the same position as the wife as far as dependency is concerned, and the intention of the provision for dependents' allowances, as well as the provision in the Pension Act, is to endeavour to make up to the mother the loss in dollars-not, of course, the loss in companionship or the social loss-which she has suffered by reason of her son having joined the army. If she is receiving other income, that is taken into consideration.
All I can say is that that is the rule and the principle upon which mothers' allowances are paid. It was the principle in the last war; it has been the principle in the Pension Act from 1914 to date, and it is the principle followed by the dependents' allowance board regulations which are in force at the present time. Only a short time ago that $20 minimum was raised; at least the dependents' allowance board were given another $5 margin, so that the maximum is now $25. Whether my hon. friend agrees with the principle or not,
War Appropriation

I think it is sound; otherwise you would have dependents of various degrees of consanguinity all receiving pensions on a maximum or fixed basis. I only want to say to my hon. friend that these are paid R.C.A.F. and not army pensions, but at the same time they come under the dependents' allowance board, on which there are two members of the air force, in order to see to it that air force men are looked after.


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: There is one
question that as yet has not been answered, and I revert to it at this time in order to get the assurance of the minister that the information will be furnished; that is, the age classes of the 29,000 men who enlisted between January 1 and April 1. When this matter was brought up over ten days ago the answer given was that the information was not then available. When I brought it up again on April 28 the same answer was given. It seems to me that while practically every other phase of the army has been dealt with, one matter of primary importance to-day to the people of Canada as to whether or not sufficient men are being secured under the voluntary system has been neglected. As I said before, it is only by having that information that we can secure a proper perspective of the position of affairs to-day. It is not going to be difficult to get that information, and I repeat that only by having that information can any of us be in a position to determine whether or not sufficient recruits are being secured. Under the regulations now in existence young men seventeen years of age and up, unless they secure the permit provided for in the case of those attending educational institutions, are forced to enlist, by reason of the regulations which do not permit them to be employed if they are over that age provided they are in the restricted occupations.


James Layton Ralston: Unless they go into other occupations.


John George Diefenbaker: Unless they go into other than restricted occupations. How many of those 29,000 men were seventeen, eighteen or nineteen years of age? How many were from twenty to twenty-four years of age? The answer given by the minister the other night was but a half answer; he said only some 5,000 had enlisted from the camps after having received their call. But what about the men who enlisted just prior to receiving the call, in order to escape being called up under the draft? There seems to be cooperation between the Department of National War Services and the various militia units; for in some parts of Canada to-day men nineteen years of age [DOT]

are receiving notice from units advising them that in a short time they are going to be drafted and pointing out the advantages of voluntary enlistment. I have here a notice sent to a young man in Prescott from a regiment in Cornwall, which reads in part as follow's:
Information has been received at this office to the effect that you will be called for military service in the very near future. It is thought that probably you would prefer to volunteer for service with Canada's active army before you receive this call.
Then it goes on to point out the advantages of doing this. When that man joins up he does so partly because he does not wish to be drafted, the advantage of which is pointed, out to him in the letter. So that before we can say whether or not the voluntary system is in fact a success we should know the number of men seventeen, eighteen and nineteen years of age who are joining up. We should know also those twenty, twenty-one, twenty-two; twenty-three and twenty-four, within the age limit subject to call, who joined before they received any notice, or before they were sent to training units. There would be no difficulty in getting that information, surely.


James Layton Ralston: Is that not what my hon. friend -wants to know?


John George Diefenbaker: I want the complete information on this situation.


James Layton Ralston: Let us see just what it is my hon, friend wants. Does he not want to know how many of the 29,000 he mentioned-
I think it is nearly 38,000 now-had received a call for service before they enlisted?


John George Diefenbaker: No. That was the answer the minister endeavoured to give me. That is a part answer, but I want the information as to the number in each age group from seventeen to twenty-four inclusive.


James Layton Ralston: So what, after that?


John George Diefenbaker: I am entitled to information regardless of what result may flow therefrom. I do not have to state the conclusion to be based thereon. I. want the facts. None of us can arrive at a conclusion until we have those facts.


James Layton Ralston: I thought perhaps I might get what my hon. friend wants in order to prove or disprove whatever he has in mind, without going into all the age groups up to twenty-four, because as I understand it the proclamation now goes up to the age of thirty, and if we stopped at twenty-four my hon. friend would not have all the information he

War Appropriation
wanted. I thought what he really wanted to khow was how many of these men had joined ffom training centres or after being called.


John George Diefenbaker: The questions I asked the other day do not permit of the interpretation which the minister has placed upon them. They were direct.


James Layton Ralston: What were direct?


John George Diefenbaker: The questions I asked, as to the information I wanted; and I intend to insist that this information be given, without being required to let the minister know the conclusions that may be reached from a study of same.


James Layton Ralston: All right; be as mysterious as you like.


John George Diefenbaker: Yes, and I will go further and say to the minister that the other night, because I dared make the suggestion that men were ill-treated in training centres, the minister took it upon himself to read me a lecture on the harm I was doing to enlistment by referring to certain cases of coercion. At that time the minister made the statement that there was only one case in Canada that had been investigated.


James Layton Ralston: I beg pardon; I said only one case was brought to my attention.


John George Diefenbaker: I shall read what
the minister did say, at page 1966 of Hansard for April 28:
I have stated to the committee on previous occasions that when reports have come to me from time to'time or statements been made such as my hon. friend made to-night, I have investigated them and have found no grounds for any statement that there was undue or improper pressure except on one occasion. . . .


James Layton Ralston: That is right.


John George Diefenbaker: So that the minister investigated a number of these complaints but found only one occasion in which they were justified. I should like him to tell the committee the occasion to which he refers and the information he obtained on that occasion, because within the last several days I have received further complaints along the same line. I am not going to give the names of the informants, because they say they have been warned that if they tell the story they are going to be denied leave. The complaints I received cannot be false, where men say that they have been placed in a position which scarcely fits in with what the minister calls a kind of evangelistic meeting. These men say they have been intimidated. The minister says there was only one case where complaints were justified, and I think we should have information as to that case.
In order to decide or to arrive at a conclusion as to whether or not we are getting enough men, I submit that as a member of the house I have the right and the country has the right to have this information, so that public opinion will know the position, as far as recruitment to-day is concerned.
I now go on to one other phase. I should like to have information as to how many men who received four months training and were then permitted to go home have since been recalled? [DOT]


James Layton Ralston: Is the hon. member referring to four months training?


John George Diefenbaker: Yes. How many of those men, after receiving four months training, and returning home, have since been recalled?


James Layton Ralston: What does the hon. member mean by "returned home?" Has the hon. member a special case in mind?


Richard Burpee Hanson: In the early stages, after four months training the men were allocated to reserve units, and went home.


James Layton Ralston: I had in mind that the order to report for duty was made within the first four months period, and that they did not return home after the four months period.


John George Diefenbaker: I know of at least one instance where a man completed his four months training and is now at his home. Those around him who are being called up are asking why this is so.


James Layton Ralston: I shall be glad to inquire into the matter, because I thought the order applied to all those who were in four months training.


John George Diefenbaker: I ask whether or not all of those men who received four months training are put in the forces, either active or reserve?


James Layton Ralston: They would all be active.


John George Diefenbaker: Then, what cooperation is there between the defence departments and the Department of National War Services? I ask that, because in the past few days a large number of calls have gone out by mail and, to my information, letters have been forwarded to men calling them into service who in several cases have been overseas for a period of over one year. In one instance the man has already returned from overseas service. So far as Saskatchewan is concerned, after these letters are sent out and are returned uncalled for, the mounted police investigate. I suggest that if there were
War Appropriation

greater cooperation between these departments, this type of thing would not happen. Here we have a lack of that cooperation which is to be expected. If there is loose organization, then what is to prevent a man called up for service from failing to report for that service?
I should like the minister to give information as to how many men who have been called up for service under the provisions of the National Resources Mobilization Act have failed to answer the call? *


James Layton Ralston: Was there not a return on that point?


John George Diefenbaker: Yes. How many have failed to report; and of those who have failed how many have had prosecutions lodged against them?


James Layton Ralston: Did my hon. friend see the return which was filed?


John George Diefenbaker: Yes, but it did not show' the prosecutions.


James Layton Ralston: I have not seen the return; I intended to look at it.


John George Diefenbaker: The information I wish is first, in regard to the age classes of the men who have volunteered and joined the army since January 1; second, information in regard to those called up for the four months period and, finally, what is being done to assure of greater cooperation between the Department of National War Services and the several defence departments.


James Layton Ralston: And, fourth, how many prosecutions?


John George Diefenbaker: Yes.


James Layton Ralston: First, with regard to the age groups of the men enlisted, the committee will see the situation. I have just asked the adjutant-general whether these attestation papers upon reaching headquarters are filed from month to month. If they are, I imagine one could have some clerk go through those papers, and look into the ages appearing on them. If they are filed alphabetically, with other papers, we would have to go over a great number of papers. I will find out, however, and see how long it would take to look into the attestation papers. I intended to point out that they are not kept in age groups; I have inquired on that point.
With regard to the number of men allowed to go home after four months training, may I say that, as I said before, I did not know there had been any cases. The call-up was made while the first four months period was on. However, I shall find out about that.

With regard to cooperation between the defence departments and the Department of National War Services, that is a matter of procedure. I have not the faintest idea how the registrars of the Department of National War Services are notified when a man who would otherwise be called up enlists in his district. However, I shall look into that matter.


John George Diefenbaker: Are they notified?


James Layton Ralston: The adjutant-general
thinks they are.
Then, the matter of prosecutions is really one for the Department of National War Services, except to the extent to which it applies to men called up under the thirty-day provision. They may be dealt with under the Department of National Defence. I do not wish to put that responsibility on my colleague. The committee will understand that I cannot give information on that point to-day. However, I shall see that it is prepared. I should like really to confer with my hon. friend with respect to his first point. We will get the information concerning the others. I should like, however, to remind him and the committee how long it would take.


John George Diefenbaker: One other matter which has not yet been dealt with is the opportunity given to young men who have taken Canadian officers training corps instructions in the universities, and -in particular young men of eighteen, nineteen, twenty and twenty-one years of age who are attempting to qualify for commissions. What is the system at present in effect in the universities? What advantage is there for those who take the course throughout their scholastic years, and w'hat opportunity is given them to secure commissions?


James Layton Ralston: I have not the regulations before me, and I am speaking only from memory. But without looking up the regulations I believe the rule is that the young man who is training in the officers training corps at a university trains for three years. He may then be recommended to Brockville as a cadet. The training in the officers training corps entitles him to one month off the four months course at Brockville, in order to qualify for his commission. May I ask the hon. member for Lake Centre whether there was any privacy or secrecy about that notice to the young man indicating that he would be drafted?

War Appropriation


John George Diefenbaker: No; the letter in question is dated Cornwall, March 27, 1942, and it is from the second battalion of the Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry Highlanders.
It says:
When you decide to go "active" or if you have already decided to do so, please advise, and transportation will be arranged to bring you in and have your medical examination completed.
Please give this matter your earnest consideration. Your early reply will be appreciated.
That letter is signed by the area recruiting officer.
Now that the matter has been mentioned, I would ask the minister if a list of those who are about to reach an age when they are subject to be drafted is given to officers of battalions throughout Canada?


James Layton Ralston: I am quite satisfied that this is not the practice, but I shall be glad to look into it. They do not need to have a list to guess at the ages of the young men in their own district.


Mr. FAIR:: The animals in the buffalo park at Wainwright were slaughtered or otherwise disposed of and the park turned over to the Department of National Defence with a view, I understand, to a training camp being established there. Would the minister indicate what progress is being made in that direction?


James Layton Ralston: I am afraid I cannot tell my hon. friend at the present moment. We are not sure which of two projects will be carried on there, but I will tiy to tell my hon. friend as soon as possible. In view of the expansion which was being made, the property was obtained for camp purposes. We got it with a definite object in mind, but I think we shall change the location of' the particular establishment that was going to be there and that we shall use Wainwright for something else.


Mr. GRAYDON:: Following up a question which was asked on the orders of the day about prisoners of war, I should like to say a few words. The minister made it clear that the duty of guarding prisoners of war came within the purview of his department. I had hoped that it would not be necessary to bring to the attention of the committee the situation with respect to escaped prisoners of war, but recent happenings at Bowmanville have again brought the matter forcibly to the attention of the public. I realize that the minister has had a very difficult and rather tortuous road to follow in this matter of escaped prisoners. I appreciate his difficulties; nevertheless the storm of public indignation over the escapes some months ago ran so high that one prominent metropolitan newspaper suggested that the government set up a separate "ministry of escaped prisoners of
war" because the business had reached such great magnitude. Would the minister tell us the number of prisoners of war who have escaped in Canada since the war began? I should also like to have some assurance from him that the board of inquiry which he announced this afternoon will go more fully into the question of escaped prisoners of war than to inquire only into the escape of the prisoners of war at Bowmanville. I feel that the public should have the assurance from the minister that his department is dealing with this matter in a realistic and effective way, because nothing so disturbs the public mind, as I am sure the minister himself appreciates, as the escaping of enemy prisoners. I do not want to criticize unduly the minister or the department, because I realize the difficulties under which they are working, but at the same time I feel that the public should receive an assurance from the minister that every possible means will be taken to prevent these escapes from recurring in the future.


James Layton Ralston: I want to say to my hon. friend and the committee that I am not complacent about the matter at all, but I do want the committee and the public to understand that having regard to the class of prisoners which we have in this country, and who were sent here because they were of that certain class, and the difficulties we have had in finding suitable accommodation and getting it fitted up under difficult temporary conditions, the number of prisoners who have escaped in Canada has been, I really think-and I say this advisedly-remarkably small. I want here and now to pay tribute to the veterans guard of Canada who have had most to do in guarding these prisoners. They have proved themselves extremely reliable and vigilant, and they have had to deal with a class of people who have had nothing to do but sit and plan and scheme to escape, for which there is no serious punishment.
Having said that, I want to say to the hon. member and the committee that the moment this escape was reported this morning, since it looked as though there might be something wrong at Bowmanville camp or with the administration there, I had the matter looked into myself and the adjutant-general gave me a report on it. As I have indicated, it apparently does not seem to be the commandant who has been at fault because there have been four commandants at this camp since September 1, 1941, and there have been escapes within the period of administration of each of those four commandants except the second officer. Immediately this escape was
2200.
War Appropriation

reported, the adjutant-general got in touch with the district officer commanding and had him go to Bowmanville to look into the situation. The camp commandant was up until 4.30 this morning. Instructions were immediately given. The district officer commanding was going to have a district court inquiry, but instructions went from the adjutant-general's office that it was to be a headquarters court of inquiry, composed of officers not associated with the department at all. That was the reason why we asked Colonel Stairs, Colonel Edwards and Colonel Marshall, all experienced officers in the last war, to undertake this inquiry for us. If there is any suggestion that the hon. member of any other member of this committee has to make with regard to escaped prisoners which he would like to have referred to that court of inquiry, and which can within a reasonable time be encompassed, I shall be very glad to have it referred to them. The leader of the opposition and some other hon. members know Colonel Stairs and how thorough he would be in a matter of that kind. Colonel Edwards and Colonel Marshall are respectively known to members from Ottawa and Toronto.
I am sure we are right on this, that everything will be done to see that the greatest possible preventive measures are taken, and if there is anything wrong or any fault to find, or if there has been any neglect, it will be brought to light in this inquiry and be promptly dealt with.


Gordon Graydon: Would the minister mind stating the number of escaped prisoners of war?


James Layton Ralston: There have been eighty altogether in the whole period in which we have had prisoners of war.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is at all camps? How many at Bowmanville?


James Layton Ralston: It is eighty altogether.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Out of
how many?


James Layton Ralston: That figure has never
been given.


Gordon Graydon: Did I understand the
minister to say that all escaped prisoners had been recaptured except these last two?


James Layton Ralston: Yes, except the one who escaped to England and was reported killed overseas.


Mr. GREEN:: What is the system of administering the prisoner of war camps? Do they come entirely under the veterans guard of Canada, or are the various camps under the control of their military districts?


James Layton Ralston: They are part of the
establishment of the particular military district. The veterans guard of Canada, while it is operating in a particular district, comes under that district. I believe my hon. friend has in mind Colonel Alley, who is in command of the veterans guard; but the moment one of his detachments goes to a district, it comes under the district officer commanding.


Howard Charles Green: Might it not improve the
situation if more power were given to the veterans guard? Would not that enable them to adopt the same system in each military district, whereas now there are eleven different district commanders who may have eleven different types of ideas about the subject.


James Layton Ralston: I believe that the officer
administering the veterans guard of Canada, Colonel H. R. Alley, has worked out, together with the director of internment operations, who is under the Secretary of State, a uniform system of guarding, and I am sure that the veterans guard commanding officer is given the fullest scope to see to it that there is a uniform system across Canada in connection with guards. It is, of course, no use putting detachments in districts and then controlling them from headquarters. We feel that the only thing to do is to decentralize and put them under the control of the district officers commanding.


Howard Charles Green: Might it not improve the
situation if the veterans guard were given wider powers?


James Layton Ralston: Does the hon. member
mean, the officer commanding?


Howard Charles Green: Well, the headquarters.


James Layton Ralston: The hon. member means, the officer administering? I do not think so. I believe that it has been very fully thought out. For example, the ordnance corps has a head at Ottawa, but when a detachment is in a district it is under the commander of that district. The same with the Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps or any other corps; they come under the geographical district in which for the time being they happen to be. I understand my hon. friend's point, but I believe the matter has been pretty well gone into. We had a complete revamping of the question of internment camps and the respective jurisdiction of the Secretary of State for External Affairs, the Secretary of State, and the Minister of National Defence, and I think the matter was put on a satisfactory basis by the order in council, which placed on the Department of National Defence the responsibility for guarding-which up to that time had been somewhat divided.

War Appropriation


Gordon Graydon: When the minister mentions Colonel Alley he is mentioning a most efficient and capable officer of our armed
forces. The statements which have been made about the veterans guard will surely meet with the approval of everyone in the committee. I am inclined to think, from conversations I have had with men who seem to know something about this matter, that some consideration might be given to the provision of a larger body of personnel from the veterans guard to look after these prisoners of war. The veterans guard can contribute, I believe, more effective service in this type of operation than almost any other personnel one could possibly appoint. What I have heard of the record of the veterans guard in this connection leaves no room for criticism. But I fancy the department could properly give consideration to increasing the numbers of the men who are guarding these dangerous prisoners.


James Layton Ralston: Some readjustments in connection with establishments, due to some changes in locations, are being made now. I will keep in mind the point mentioned by my hon. friend.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: Have there been any requests from the commanders for increased establishments?


James Layton Ralston: If there have not been, I would be surprised.


George Hugh Castleden: Have there been requests for increased establishments?


James Layton Ralston: I have not any record here. I have just asked the adjutant-general, but he does not recall now. If there is one game which is being played with the Department of National Defence all the time, it is the game of asking for increased establishments, and it is played by everybody.	[DOT]


Harry Raymond Fleming: How many prisoners of
war have escaped?


James Layton Ralston: From this camp?


Harry Raymond Fleming: From all of them.


James Layton Ralston: Eighty.


George Hugh Castleden: WThat is the total establishments of guards for all camps?


James Layton Ralston: Seven or eight thousand.


Mr. BROOKS:: Of the number of prisoners who have escaped, how many have been recaptured?


James Layton Ralston: All were recaptured except one who died overseas of wounds, and three who were killed.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Well, those fellows were captured.


James Layton Ralston: The guards number in the vicinity of seven thousand officers and men.


George Hugh Castleden: Would the minister care to state the number of prisoners in internment camps?


Mr. EDWARDS:: Would the minister tell us who pays for the internment operations of the Canadian government? Is that a direct charge on the Canadian people?


James Layton Ralston: It is a subject of agreement between the British and ourselves. I do not know that there is any objection to revealing that, but I would rather leave it to the Prime Minister as Secretary of State for External Affairs. It is a matter between the Department of External Affairs and the British government.


Richard Burpee Hanson: On this question I should like to say that I think the record has been good. These prisoners are able and dangerous men. Their whole time is taken up with the idea of escape. If eighty out of several thousand have escaped and all have been brought back excepting three who were killed, two who are out now and one man who got away, I would think that the Canadian people ought to be satisfied. At least I am. I do not see any great ground for criticism.


John George Diefenbaker: There is one other matter on which no information. has been given to the committee, in connection with man-power, and that is the notices which are being sent out from time to time by the Netherlands government and by the government of Norway whereby their respective nationals are called to the colours. I ask this question to ascertain whether any arrangements have been made between the Canadian government and the government of either of these countries whereby, upon failure of their respective nationals to report for duty, they are subject to penalties. We know the wonderful work which is being done by these two governments in Canada in mobilizing their respective nationals. The question is so often asked whether or not any penalty follows upon failure to comply with the order.


James Layton Ralston: That question was asked
last evening, and I then said the discussion with regard to it is now going on between the Department of External Affairs and a representative of the two governments. As my hon. friend knows, generally speaking as a matter of international law and comity you do not enforce that sort of law. It is like the
War Appropriation

sumptuary laws of other countries, which are not generally enforced. They have not been enforced in Canada. At the present time the whole matter is up in connection with the general question of the right of Canada to call up nationals of these countries, apart from the United States, and I am afraid I cannot give my hon. friend any more information than that at the moment.


Mr. HAZEN:: Some time ago some criticism was expressed here about the cost of constructing military camps. I believe it was in October or November, 1940, that the minister told us, in the course of a speech, that he had obtained-I am not quoting his exact words-a very competent engineer, and that this engineer, with certain officers from the quartermaster-general's branch, was going to visit practically all the camps for the purpose of making a comparison between the cost of the camps which were put up by contract and the cost of the camps which were put up by the engineering service of the army. Did the minister ever receive a report as a result of that inquiry, and would he be prepared to tell us what the comparison shows as between the cost of camps put up by the army and the cost of camps put up by contract?


James Layton Ralston: I have not looked into
the matter for months, or even for a year or more, but my recollection is that there was a difference of from eight to ten per cent in the cost of camps under contract, on the one hand, and the cost of those put up by day Iabour, on the other. According to the engineer's report the explanation is clear. Day labour jobs were done frequently at that time because of the necessity for speed, and you can go ahead with a day labour job without having your plans all complete. If you want to have the work done by contract and have a tender, you must have all your plans, but under day labour you can proceed and make changes as they become necessary and keep on with the work, thus getting it done sooner. Off the bat, without reference to the report, I should say the difference was between eight and ten per cent.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am glad to hear the minister say that. He will remember that he and I had some discussion, perhaps not as pleasant as it might have been, over the cost of army hutments and the like. That, however, is all past, and as far as I am concerned it is water over the dam. But I notice that in all labour construction that has taken place the department has called for bids, and I congratulate the minister on the change of policy.


James Layton Ralston: We do that if we have
more time.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Does the minister find more satisfactory the work done under contract or the work done through the engineering department of the Department of National Defence? I have had a little experience in that regard, and from what I have seen I should think the work done by the engineering department was more satisfactory than that done by contract.


James Layton Ralston: I know what happened. My hon. friend is in command of a training centre and he can get the engineer to do a day job-


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Which is necessary.


James Layton Ralston: -around the training
centre which he will not get done by the contractor. I have had some experience as a company commander and I know the engineer will do work which the contractor will not do.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The question of extras comes in.


James Layton Ralston: They do not count as extras when the army engineer does the work. There is no doubt that from the point of view of service the army engineer and his crew of day labourers or engineers will do a job which the camp commandant or the district officer commanding would prefer to a job done the other way; but when I answered the hon. member for St. John-Albert I was only speaking of the actual money difference between the two jobs. I know there is a general feeling that you can get the army engineers to do the odd job and make certain improvements which are necessary or desirable, and which conduce to the health, convenience or efficiency of the camp, which you cannot get the contractor to do.
The hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) asked about having a picture of the king and queen in the various messes. He spoke of his majesty as commander in chief. That is an error. His majesty is not commander in chief of the Canadian forces; the commander in chief of the Canadian forces is his excellency. I presume, however, my hon. friend is talking about pictures of their majesties. I will take his suggestion into consideration.


Mr. POULIOT:: I thank the minister for what he has said, and I am sure it will be welcomed by all those who desire to volunteer.
I understand now that His Excellency the Governor General is commander in chief of the Canadian army, and as the Canadian army is only a part of the British army, His Majesty

War Appropriation
the King is commander in chief of the Canadian army. Yesterday the leader of the opposition tried to be fin-fin regarding a matter to which I had referred, to the effect that someone had gone to the army train and asked a question in French and was told by someone on the train not to speak a foreign language, or that he could not understand a foreign language. Then the minister asked for something more than a clipping from a newspaper. Of course, I have another clipping to send him. I have also two names. Yesterday he asked me to give him a name, and I will be more generous than he wanted me to be. I will send him two names to-day, and there are other names besides those. I hope the matter will be investigated and that we shall be told what the decision of the department is in that regard.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am greatly surprised to hear some hon. members say "carried" when we have had no precise information at all since we started to discuss this very large estimate. I have asked the minister for some precise information about the cost of each branch of his department, and the nature and functions of each of these branches. It is like the old tale, "Sister Anne, do you see anyone coming?" He has not come yet. The minister has the wonderful ability to avoid answering questions that are asked him unless he is pressed. I do not- want to press him; that is not my idea at all. But I am greatly surprised that he has not answered this question on account of the lack of information in the general estimates. Of course, this is a matter of two billion dollars. I asked him for details, and he told me that it was already given in seven figures. That is not enough. We want to know exactly how it works. The motive I have now is to see that each soldier, each airman or each sailor is treated with the fairness he deserves from the Department of National Defence. If, therefore, I ask these questions, it is not to embarrass the minister; it is to help him to understand the working of his own department. Moreover, it would be easier for him because now he has no responsibility whatever in connection with the payments that are approved and made by the Department of Finance. This makes a great difference between the management of his department now and what it was during the last war.
There is something else. During the last war everything was done by legislation, whereas now most of what is done in the Department of National Defence is done by order in council. The powers conferred upon the minister are so great that he is empowered
by order in council to extend the period of training for the draftees indefinitely. It was not done exactly that way. When the first draftees were called for training it was done by order in council, and the period was one month. Afterwards the period was extended from one month to four months, again by order in council if I am not mistaken. Then an order in council was passed giving the minister power to extend that training indefinitely.
Hon. members must recollect that at the time the draftees were first called for training an interview was given by the then chief of staff, General Crerar, who is now in command of the Canadian forces in England-


James Layton Ralston: The Canadian corps.


Jean-François Pouliot: I regret I have not always the technical expression, but it does not matter much. I am speaking of a gentleman who is highly respected by all classes, whose son started his military career as a private. This gentleman, General Crerar, gave an interview to the press, or made a statement to the effect that a month's training was enough for the time being.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It was a speech before the Canadian club in Ottawa.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend's statement is absolutely incorrect. General Crerar said he advised thirty days' training, but he did not say it was enough.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am glad the minister says that. Most of the time I speak without notes; I have not time to write my speeches. My information might be wrong in detail, but the foundation is right. Therefore, whether it was in a statement given to the press or during a speech to the Canadian club here, and whether the general said it was enough or that he recommended it, what is the difference? If he recommended that, it was because he found it was enough, and what difference does the choice of words make? Enough. Taking it for granted that a man of the experience of General Crerar, who has spent his life in the Department of National Defence and who has more military experience than many others in the department, with the background of his military experience and career the general said, "I recommend one month's training." Then I wonder, if it was on the advice of the very same gentleman that the training was extended from one month to four, whether he had changed his views.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I thought I recommended it. I got the credit for it anyway.
War Appropriation


Jean-François Pouliot: Although the leader of the opposition has a fine legal experience, he has not the military background of General Crerar. I would rather suggest to the minister that he appoint the leader of the opposition as judge-advocate-general if there is a vacancy in that office at any time.
Having the information from the leader of the opposition that it was on his recommendation that the training period was extended from one month to four, who was the military genius who advised the Minister of National Defence himself to decide, in virtue of the powers granted to him by an order in council of very wide scope, to extend that period of training from four months to an indefinite time? I do not know if it was done according to the rules of astrology, or table-turning, or inspiration, or by the ouija board, but it was done. What surprises me is the complete indifference of the Canadian people in that regard. There is a rule that is known to everyone; it is that a delegate cannot delegate, delegatus non potest delegare. The country has conferred power on the government by legislation, and the government takes advantage of this delegation of power to pass orders in council. But how is it that the government can go so far as to transfer to a single individual powers that were granted to them by parliament, even if that individual is the Minister of National Defence? And the more so because the minister was entitled to decide by a stroke of the pen matters that had previously been decided only by orders in council. It seems strange. But of course the Canadian people do not now have the same interest in constitutional matters that they had at the time of Mercier in Quebec, Mowat in Ontario, and other leaders of earlier days. Then they had information that was much more complete than that of to-day, and they held to the British doctrine and the great British parliamentary tradition.
What is the law? The law is just a sheet of paper. We have no more bound statutes. It takes a long time to secure orders in council of a legislative nature. I think it was my friend the hon. member for Lake Centre who asked for the production of all orders in council of a legislative nature, not of an administrative nature, and he was told that that distinction had not been made and that it would take a tremendous time to secure those orders in council duly classified. Well, sir, I have these rules that have been published in book form, small volumes that are really the law of the land in this country, because the legislation that we are enacting now is only for monetary matters; all the legislation we have which binds Canadian

citizens just the same as Gulliver was tied at Lilliput by the dwarfs, is by order in council. The result is to create among the people of Canada disrespect for legislation, as well as to create embarrassment for all those who have to explain the law to either their clients or their constituents. So I regret very much that such wide powers over individuals who do not come within the jurisdiction of the hon. gentleman should have been given to the Minister of National Defence, because his department proper has no authority over the recruits until they are called to the colours and are actually in the army. Those powers, should have been given to the Minister of National War Services, if the government, had been empowered by us to transfer such powers to a single minister.
If we do not have order now, what will we have in the aftermath, when the war is over? It is a most incredible situation. Either there is order in the Department of National Defence, or there is not. If there is order, it should be very simple for the minister to give the information requested as to the functions and cost of each of these branches. That is a reasonable thing; there is no libel or slander in that. It is the most ordinary thing in the world; and if there is no such order, then a change is necessary. We cannot get away from that. If the minister sees clearly what is going on in his department; if he has a chart showing the various occupations of those under him here in Ottawa, let him supply that chart to all hon. members so that there may be no embarrassment whatever when they have to deal with anyone in the Department of National Defence. This seems very clear and very easy, but we have not obtained that information from the minister. I am quite willing to sit down and listen to the hon. gentleman if he has no objection to placing such a chart upon Hansard, because that will be very informative.
What is the trouble with the Department of National Defence in Ottawa? It suffers from elephantiasis. I need not describe that illness, but when one is afflicted with it some parts of the body grow too large, especially the feet. The feet become bigger than the head, and it is incurable. Of course it is a disease that occurs usually in tropical countries, but since everything under the sun is changed here it is not surprising that it should occur in Canada. We are told at times when we discuss these matters of dollars and cents that we are not patriotic.
I should like those who hold this view to repeat that contention before their constituents when those constituents are called upon to pay taxes. Hon. gentlemen will have

War Appropriation
to have very sweet tongues to have that suggestion accepted by the Canadian people. I have also been told from high quarters that I have shown disrespect to those who have exposed their lives in an actual theatre of war, when I have complained about some people on the general staff. But even if I were cruel to the branch of the judge-advocate-general, I would not do harm to many who had thus exposed their lives in a theatre of war, because such are scarce in that branch, though the branch is large. There is less reason for the existence of that branch now than at any time previously, for obvious reasons. Previously the main duty of this branch was to draft and examine contracts for purchases made by the Department of National Defence. That was in the old days, before the minister had suffered capitis deminutio, a reduction of the head. Like my hon. friend the leader of the opposition, sometimes I feel compelled to use a dead tongue in order to find the proper legal phrase.
During the last war, and until a comparatively short time ago, the Minister of National Defence was responsible for all purchases made by his department. Then the judge-advocate-general's branch was much more important than it is now, and in it were some jurists of considerable legal ability, who were able to draft contracts and give the minister sound legal opinions. Now, however, there are no more contracts of this kind. When a purchase is made it is done by filling out requisition forms, so the Minister of National Defence has no more to do in that regard than any deputy minister or other official who makes out a requisition for what he needs. The purchases are not made by the Department of National Defence. That department must send a requisition to the Department of Munitions and Supply, which obtains whatever is required. Then the bill is paid not by the Department of Munitions and Supply, but by the Department of Finance. Have you ever seen anything like that, Mr. Chairman, in your wide experience as a parliamentarian? Of course this is the way things go, and people are indifferent to it. They say, "Let it go. It is all right. This is war time." Of course it is war time, but we want the government to be as strong in war time as it should be in peace time, and we want order in all departments.
I find that some people are very touchy. It is impossible to say a word of criticism about anyone without having someone say that you not only show bad manners but are also a coward to attack someone who is
not present, as though the minister did not represent all those under him. There is no personal grudge against anyone, but we want all those in the Department of National Defence as well as those in other departments to have respect for parliament. It is my idea to preach respect for parliament and parliamentary institutions to all those in the civil service and all high officials who are in the dominion's pay.
What is our business? It is our business here as members of the House of Commons to act as intermediaries between the government and the taxpayers, so that there may be no abuse. When there is a general meeting of the shareholders of a company, any shareholder is entitled to ask the management for information about any expenditure. We are not hard on the minister; we take good care of him, and we want him to have the least possible difficulty in administering his department. I make these observations in accordance with that reference in the Bible where it is stated that the wounds of those who like are better than the kisses of those who hate.
W'hen I say this I am not referring to the leader of the opposition. I only repeat those words of wisdom which have the sanction of time immemorial. I wonder whether the minister is in a good enough mood to give us a charter of the Department of National Defence, and whether he will explain to us the functions of all branches in his department. This is most essential, because over a year ago I asked him to supply hon. members of parliament with the King's Regulations and Orders, as amended. All hon. members know, of course, that those regulations are printed in the Canada Gazette, but because of the work we have to do, it is quite troublesome for us to cut the issues of the Gazette, and make a scrapbook. That is done in the department, and I therefore ask the minister if possible to supply all hon. members with a copy of the amended regulations. I have asked the same question three times. Finally the minister told me that in spite of the order in council passed years ago, one which is respected by all departments except the Department of National Defence, and is to the effect that upon request any member of parliament may secure not only one but two copies, one in English and one in French, of any matter circulated by the king's printer, it was not the practice of his department to do that. We are not supplied with those important regulations by the Department of National Defence. When the house sits in committee we ask for information, and it is not given to us.
War Appropriation


James Layton Ralston: If my hon. friend would just stop and allow someone to speak, we might get ahead. He has been asking the same thing over and over again. I do not know whether he is trying to talk on this motion until six o'clock.


Jean-François Pouliot: No.


James Layton Ralston: But, so far as I am
concerned the hon. member has asked for two things. First, he has asked for the King's Regulations and Orders, and he has also asked for a statement with regard to the expenditures of each department. He has taken twenty-five minutes to ask for those two things.
I want to say first that the accounts are not made up so that one may have all the expenditures of the adjutant-general's branch under one heading. The adjutant-general has to do with promotions, pay, medical services and auxiliary services. Those are some of the most important things with which he has to deal. You would have to take not only the pay of the officers in all the branches, but all the money paid out by those branches, in order to bring the whole expenditures of the department within the terms of those four heads of branches. The same applies to the chief of the general staff.
The chief of the general staff has to do particularly with training and operations. Under him is the intelligence branch, the operational branch and training, in a very large way. He has the job of coordinating the other three chief branches, namely the adjutant-general, the master-general of the ordnance, and the quartermaster-general.
The quartermaster-general has to do with the provision of accommodation for our forces, the provision of engineering services, the provision of transportation, and the provision of food. The master-general of the ordnance has to do with the provision of equipment of all sorts, whether it be for actual fighting operations, for ordnance, munitions or anything of that kind. The accounts are not kept so that you can take any of those branches and find out how much the master-general of the ordnance spent. You would want to find out how much is paid for pay and allowances, clothing, munitions, and things of that kind. The fact that it happened to be paid out under the branch of the master-general of the ordnance means nothing at all, and would give no information of any use whatever.
I say to my hon. friend with regard to the King's Regulations and Orders that the

French edition was printed, as I understand it, on April 10, and I shall be glad to see that a free copy is sent to the hon. member, and a copy of the English regulations as well.


Jean-François Pouliot: I thank the minister, and
I congratulate him. There is progress.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Jean-François Pouliot: But I do not see why
those payments are not indicated in more detail. We should know how much is spent in each branch, and the amount spent for travelling expenses.


James Layton Ralston: The amount for travelling expenses is $50,396,377.


Jean-François Pouliot: That is all right, but it gives no information about travelling of the staff here in Ottawa.


James Layton Ralston: It does not separate private Jones from anybody else.


Jean-François Pouliot: There is something wrong in that. If we have no public accounts, then what is the use of our meeting here? We are here precisely to check expenditures. That would be done in two ways, first, by having a detailed summary of proposed expenditures and, secondly, by the rendering of accounts. We have not that information. With respect to accounts we have no information for amounts under $35,000. That is an intolerable situation. We should have more information than that, and I say that in the best possible spirit. I do not wish to delay the passing of the resolution, but-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, no!


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: It is six o'clock.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I should like to say, so far as the official opposition is concerned, that we would be glad to proceed with the navy to-morrow.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Richard Burpee Hanson: There is only one resolution. The navy and the air expenditures are to follow.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am not bound by what the leader of the opposition has decided. He has only to look after his own conscience as leader of the opposition.
Progress reported.


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

Questions
Thursday, May 7, 1942