[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):: I have received a telegram from Mr. John
Vershagen, reeve of the municipality of Blaine Lake, Saskatchewan, stating that farmers in that municipality are unable to purchase seed with which to cany on their operations because they have not received their bonus payments. Will the minister endeavour to have these payments expedited?


Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) :: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Of course it
will be necessary for us to have the names of the persons involved. There must be very few who have not received their payments to date, unless a township is in dispute.



HONG KONG COMMISSION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. R. B. HANSON (Leader of the Opposition):: I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether any report has been received with respect to the Hong Kong commission.


Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):: I understand that on
account of the illness of the gentleman who wa3 nominated by my hon. friend, briefs were not filed, and further time has been allowed. A date has been fixed within which the briefs are to be filed, I think within one week from now; and I presume that immediately afterward the matter will be dealt with.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I thank
the minister for the information. Personally I have made no inquiry as to the matter, but I understood that briefs had been filed. I did not know there had been any delay.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Air. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour, through the Secretary of State. I am informed by the Montreal local of the office and professional workers organizing committee that in December last they made application for a hearing before the Quebec regional war labour board on behalf of the employees of the Banque Canadienne Nationale. Their brief was presented on January 13, 1942, but as yet they have received no award, nor have they had a reply. I wonder if the minister could make a statement on the matter.


Hon. N. A. McLARTY (Secretary of State):: My colleague the Minister of. Labour (Mr. Mitchell) is unavoidably absent from the house
Labour Conditions

this afternoon on official business. I regret that the hon. member for Vancouver East did not give notice of this question, and I am afraid I shall have to ask him to allow me to treat it as notice of his intention to ask it. I shall direct the question to the attention of the Minister of Labour immediately upon his return.


Angus MacInnis: I did send notice to the office of the Minister of Labour, though it was rather short notice.


Norman Alexander McLarty: Then I regret that my hon. friend's notice was not brought to my attention. However, I think it is a matter i hat may well be allowed to stand until to-morrow, in view of the general nature of the question.



LOCKOUT AT KITCHENER, ONTARIO-DUMART PACKING PLANT

Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):: I too should like to direct a question to the Department of Labour, through the Secretary of State, based upon a telephone conversation this morning with one of the union representatives from Kitchener, Ontario, where a lockout is in progress at the Dumart packing plant. Is the Department of Labour aware of this situation and, if so, what steps are to be taken to compel the operators to reopen the plant?


Norman Alexander McLarty: The hon. member for Cape Breton South was kind enough to send1 the Minister of Labour notice of his intention to ask this question, which notice was forwarded to me. I am advised that there is to be a meeting between the employers and employees this afternoon at 3.30, at which a representative of the Department of Labour will be present, when it is hoped that the difficulties will be ironed out.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Monday, May 11, 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.

Hon. C. G. POWER (Minister of National Defence for Air):: Mr. Chairman, I do not propose to-day to make any formal statement on the affairs of the Department of

National Defence for Air. I hope, following the custom which we have adopted with respect to this department, to cover in a fairly comprehensive way the principal activities of the department.
I may begin by giving approximately the number of men in the Royal Canadian Air Force. When last I spoke to the house, in November, 1941, the strength of the R.C.A.F. was approximately 90,000 men. At the present time it is over 115,000, inclusive of approximately 3,000 women's division, and exclusive of Australians, New Zealanders, Royal Air Force and civilians.
With respect to the man-power situation as it affects the Royal Canadian Air Force I am glad to say that it is what might be described in commercial language as easy. I believe it was in July 1941 we recruited something over 8,000 men, including ground crew and air crew. The figure gradually decreased as our needs for men decreased. At the present time we average something like 4,000 men per month. For instance, in January 1942 the number was 5,052; in February, 2,556; in March, 3,497 and in April, 3,6S3. As time goes on the necessity for raising recruits, other than air crew, will gradually be lessened. At present we have sufficient staff by way of ground crew and mechanics to man, or pretty nearly man, all our schools. We have also a very fair proportion of the number required to man our squadrons overseas, or in the course of preparation. And unless we take on other responsibilities, either arising out of this conference, or arising out of other demands to be made upon us by our partners in the plan, it is not likely that it will be necessary for us to keep up this rate of recruiting-[DOT] for ground crew at any rate.
Perhaps it might be of interest to the committee to know that a portion of these recruits came from the army R recruits. The number is approximately 4,000, and about a quarter of these were air crew. Perhaps my colleague the Minister of National Defence will pardon my being indiscreet' enough to say that he would prefer that we do not go into the army camps to take men away from him. As the committee knows, the arrangement is that up to the end of two months' training the Royal Canadian Air Force may recruit in army training camps. I do not think there will be any further necessity for our drawing upon the army recruits, so far as ground crew is concerned. With respect to air crew, my colleague the Minister of National Defence and myself will, I think, be able to work out a satisfactory arrangement.

War Appropriation-Air Services
It might be of interest to the committee to know something about the average age of the recruits we take into the air force. It has been fairly difficult to get at the ages of ground crew, but with respect to air crew I can say that in the period from August 1941 to January 1942, out of some 18,589 medical examinations, 24 per cent of those who entered as air crew were under 20 years of age, 53 per cent were between 20 and 24 years, 17 per cent were between 25 and 29 years and 4 per cent were 30 years or over.
With respect to our requirements for air crew, I believe it was over a year ago-in March, 1941-that I stated we had six months' supply ahead of us. At that time I expressed the fear that at some time our supply of men having sufficient physical strength and educational qualifications for air crew would dry up. I had before me statistics to indicate that the total potential matriculated high school graduates amounted to only something like 13,000 per annum in Canada. Those figures I gave to the house at that time in good faith. I also stated that there must be some kind of backlog of young men between 18 and 25 years, the ages I considered most desirable for air crew. Well, whether our recruits come from that 'backlog or not, the fact is that a year after my statement we still have a six-months' supply ahead of us, and the schools have not as yet graduated. If the experience of last year is duplicated, thousands of young men who have matriculated will flock into the air force. So that the time has not as yet come when there is any apparent falling off in our potentials, or even in our applications.
While I do not want to paint too rosy a picture, I must point out that in any case for the moment we have another reasonably good supply of air crew in those young men who early in the war, without knowing very much about the difference between air crew, ground crew, mechanics and pilots, joined the air force, almost willy-nilly. We have some thousands of young lads in the air force as mechanics, and some as standard duty men, who have the educational and I assume the physical qualifications to become air crew. As time goes on we are bringing them up and, if they so desire, remustering them in order to take on air duties. So that that is one reserve on which we can draw.
Secondly, there is the process of preenlistment education under the war emergency training programme, a joint enterprise of the Department of Labour and the provincial governments, wherein large numbers of young men who have not attained the required
44561-148	.
standards of education, that is to say the matriculation standard, can be brought up to our educational requirements. Schools with a capacity of 1,265 have been established across Canada. At present the enrolment in these schools total, upwards of 1,300; and to date 900 have graduated and enlisted in the air force as pilots or observers. We have an arrangement with them under which they are medically examined and interviewed by our people, and if selected they agree to enlist in the air force upon graduation.
We are making use of the Canadian legion educational service for candidates within the service. May I say that the air force is extremely grateful to the legion for the efforts which they have put forth in bringing a very large number of men in the service up to the requisite standard so that they could be remustered. We also have university training corps arrangements, to which I referred last year, whereby an opportunity is given to university students to undergo ground training during the period of their career at college, the ground training to be equivalent to the course -which they would take in our initial training school. At the end of their college career they will have attained sufficient knowledge of navigation and kindred air subjects to be allowed) to enter our elementary flying schools. Squadrons have been formed at McGill university, the university of Toronto, Queen's university, the Ontario agricultural college and the university of Western Ontario. Finally, we have as a very important potential source of air crew the air cadets of Canada. The air cadet movement was organized under the auspices of the air cadet league. We have found it advisable, while leaving certain functions to the league itself, to take over most of the training of these air cadets. At the present time we have something like 130 squadrons, with an enrolment of nearly 600 officers and 15,000 air cadets.
So much for the future of our air crew. I cannot give any assurance to the committee that the supply is everlasting. In a small country like ours it must be inevitable that some day sooner or later the field will be so narrowed that we will run short of air crew. But for the present, and with the means which we hope to take, we can look forward to a considerable time during which we will have little difficulty in obtaining the men which we require to make pilots, observers and gunners.
With respect to the estimates themselves, they are divided as follows:



War Appropriation-Air Services
Joint air training plan	 $344,267,745
Home war	 247,139,903
Overseas war	 33,905,244
Departmental administration.	150,000

This total would be less the cash payments which we expect to obtain and which we are obtaining from Australia and New Zealand to the extent of approximately $40,000,000. This means that we are asking the house at the present moment for $585,462,892. These estimates were prepared to conform to the limitations provided in the War Appropriation Act. I may say that these are cash requirements, and whether more cash will be required in the fiscal year 1942-43 will depend upon the deliveries of armaments, munitions, equipment, planes and certain parts of our home war building programme. If complete deliveries could be obtained in the fiscal year we would require additional cash up to at least $300,000,000. After consultation with the officers of the Department of Finance and considering the record of deliveries in 1941-42, this extra amount has not been included, but if deliveries can be accelerated we will require from the treasury an additional amount.
For the information of the committee and in accordance with the custom which we have inaugurated, I have had a statement prepared indicating the highlights of the estimated cash requirements of this year as compared with the actual expenditures for the fiscal year 194142. With the consent of the committee, I shall just mention some of these and then have the statement placed on Hansard; it is a lengthy document. For instance, the cash requirements this year for construction and improvements for the joint air training plan and the home war establishment are $54,000,000 odd, while the actual cash expenditures last year were $68,000,000. I may say that to that $54,000,000 must be added an estimated expenditure of something like $42,000,000 for the building of defensive aerodromes in Canada in connection with the new policy of the defence of Canada. I hardly expect that that will all be expended this year.
We expended $87,000,000 last year for aircraft engines and spares and this year we expect to spend $171,000,000. Clothing and necessaries, last year $10,000,000, this year $18,000,000. Miscellaneous stores last year $11,000,000, this year $22,000,000. Rations, last year $6,000,000, this yeaT $16,000,000. Arms and ammunition, last year $4,000,000, this year $17,000,000. Gas and oil, last year $9,000,000, this year $20,000,000. Overhaul of engines, last year $9,000,000, this year $34,000,000. The statement follows:



R.C.A.F.

[Stage Direction]
Estimates 1942-1943
Actual cash
Pay and allowances- B.C.A.T.P	
H.W.E	
Overseas 	Estimated cash requirement $106,217,454 25,505,615 26,034,937	expenditure for fiscal year 1941-1942 (not final) $69,222,743 10,861,079 2,050,837Total....	$157,758,006	$82,134,659Construction and improvements-* B.C.A.T.P	
H.W.E	$ 25,966,199 28,877,825	$39,537,408 28,631,324Total....	$ 54,844,024	$68,168,732Aircraft, engines and spares- B.C.A.T.P	
H.W.E	$ 36,785,986 134,969,419	$42,044,147 45,155,671Total....	$171,755,405	$87,199,818Clothing and necessaries- B.C.A.T.P	
H.W.E	
Overseas	$ 15,081,560 3,322,505 6,240	$10,030,689 491,133 545Total	$ 18,410,305	$10,522,367Miscellaneous stores- B.C.A.T.P	
H.W.E	
. Overseas	$ 12,083,550 10,171,669 3,000	$ 9,191,386 2,457,948 371Total	$ 22,258,219	$11,649,705Rations- B.C.A.T.P	
H.W.E	$ 14.008,888 2,782,475	$ 5.251,399 662,946Total....	$ 16,791,363	$ 5,914,345Bombs and ammunition- B.C.A.T.P	
H.W.E	$ 10,843,950 6,363,222	$ 1,962,392 2,165,080Total	$ 17,207,172	$ 4,127,472Aero gas and oil- B.C.A.T.P	
H.W.E	$ 16,721,610 3,918,000	$ 8,200,773 948,649Total	$ 20,639,610	$ 9,149,422Overhaul of aircraft and engines- B.C.A.T.P	$ 27,206,609 HAV.E	
7,645,774	$ 8,975,373 500,449Total....	$ 34,852,383	$ 9,475,822
War Appropriation

Air Services
To revert to the first item in the order in which we have taken up these items, we are asking $247,000,000 for the home war establishment, plus, as I said, $42,000,000 and also plus certain other amounts should we be able to obtain the necessary aircraft. As is well known, the work of the home war establishment consists of guarding the security of Canada. The functions carried out are those of reconnaissance far out to sea to spot the enemy before he approaches our shores, convoy patrol in order to guard our sea lines and the sea lines to the United Kingdom, and anti-submarine patrol. This work has become increasingly difficult and , increasingly important as the enemy comes closer and closer to our shores on the Atlantic coast and is a greater menace on the Pacific. We must see to it so far as we can that we keep enemy ships from possible bombardment of our east and west coasts and keep away from our Pacific and our Atlantic coasts enemy seaborne and airborne forces.
If we had been faced this time last year with the situation with which we are faced to-day we would have been almost helpless. It would have been extremely difficult for us at that time to provide increased submarine sweeps, more bomber reconnaissance off Newfoundland and the Atlantic coast and at the same time provide certain protection on the Pacific coast. Fortunately at the present time we have a large number of trained pilots, more than we had last year since at that time they were beginning to go overseas. We have more aircraft

not sufficient by any means-than we had, and our construction development of defensive aerodromes has progressed to a much greater degree than it had at that time.
I have always, when mentioning the home war establishment, endeavoured to pay my tribute to the pilots and other air crew employed on this most forlorn, most lonely and most unglamorous, if I may use that word, of duties. Day after day they go far out to sea over the Atlantic in all kinds of weather. They go out from Newfoundland, sometimes as far as Greenland. They go out through the fog of the Pacific. There is little glory, little renown and perhaps very little credit given to them, but I think the house and this committee should know that they are carrying on a very important work for the defence of Canada and the empire.
In respect to the joint air training plan, so much has been said about it that I hardly think it is necessary for me to go into the details of it here. The full plan is now in operation. Perhaps I might give a very short summary of the situation.
The parties to the agreement are the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The date of the agreement was December 17, 1939. I cannot give the number of the annual output of pupils, but I can say that the original plan, which provided for a "blank" number, has now been enlarged to a plan which provides for the production of 25 per cent more. The date of full production originally planned was April 27, 1942. The date of full production of the present plan, with the 25 per cent increase, was reached by December 15, 1941.
We commenced aerodrome construction on April 24, 1940. We commenced training on April 29, 1940, with an intake of 169 pupils. Our first pupils were graduated in November, 1940. I cannot mention the total number of graduates.
The estimated cost of the original plan was $642,000,000. The present plan is estimated to cost $824,000,000, with a United Kingdom contribution in kind estimated at $193,000,000, leaving a balance of $630,000,000. The agreed proportion which Australia is to pay is $51,000,000, and New Zealand, $36,000,000, a total of $87,000,000, and the present estimated balance which Canada will pay is $542,000,000, or just short by $100,000,000 of what the total plan was to cost originally. The actual expenditure up to the present, including commitments up to March 31, 1942, is $447,000,000.
We are now producing to full capacity. We have our schools built, our aerodromes built, and our establishment built in such a way that the output can be increased if necessary. We have only to add further accommodation. We have sufficient training aeroplanes for our training needs at the present time, and we believe that full provision has been made for future supplies. The technical staff is well trained, and we do not appear to be in any danger of being held up on that score. The Joint Training Plan has now achieved twice its objective, and air crew are being turned out in such numbers that not only are the immediate needs being met but we can absorb a surplus in our home war establishment at the present time. We are now presented with the opportunity of giving additional training in Canada by employing our pilots and wireless operators in a way that, will afford them valuable air operating experience under good weather conditions before sending them overseas. As a result of this experience they will be better fitted to undertake more confidently operational training and active service operations in England.
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation-Air Services
There has been-and I do not think it is any secret-a change in the methods and character of warfare. Originally when we started this plan only three types of student graduates were to come out of our school, namely, pilots, observers and wireless air gunners. Not long ago we added gunners. At the present time we are preparing, so to speak, to change over our plant to some extent, to shift about certain schools and devote them to other specialties. We are now training ten different types of air crews; the single-engine pilot, the twin-engine pilot, the co-pilot, the flight engineer-we are not training any in Canada at the present time -the pilot's mate. All these are new nomenclature in our air training plan. Then there is the air observer-we had him before- navigator, air bomber, wireless operator (air observer), wireless air gunner, air gunner, radio observer. So that there will be considerable of a shift in our training syllabus and in our training schedules, but we hope to be able to meet that situation as we met the situation which confronted us before.
The house will ask me where these men are. Some have been ploughed back into the plan as instructors. Some few in the early days were kept for the home war establishment. But the vast majority have gone overseas. Some are in our own twenty-two squadrons, but thousands more are in the Royal Air Force in every quarter of the globe. They are in every raid, in every sortie; they are in every attack on Germany. Wherever the British forces are attacking, there you will find graduates of our joint air training plan. When this summer's air offensive is carried on, it will be found that there will be hardly a squadron in the entire Royal Air Force which will not have its proportion of men who were trained in and graduated from the Canadian schools.
It may be interesting to the house to know that Canadians in this air war, that is graduates of the joint air training schools, have won fifty-one awards for gallantry. The total number of awards to Canadians for gallantry, including those won by Canadians in the Royal Air Force, is 166.
So far as casualties are concerned, I need hardly mention to this house that not a dhy goes by but there is a list of the dead, or missing, or prisoners of war. Unfortunately there are very few listed simply as wounded. Hardly a day, not one day so far as I know, goes by without a very heavy casualty list of young Canadians serving in the Royal Air Force or in our own squadrons. A casualty list brings distress and tears but it also brings a legitimate pride to the parents

of these Canadian boys. The number of casualties to date, including casualties in Canada and overseas, is 2,035.
I come now to the discussion of a matter of the utmost importance to all Canadians- the united nations air conference to be held in Ottawa next week, beginning on May 18. On April 16 the press of Canada and the United States carried the following announcement:
The Prime Minister of Canada and the President announced to-day that, at the invitation of the Prime Minister, a conference in which all of the united nations with air training programmes under way, either in the United States or Canada, would be invited to participate, would be held in Ottawa early in May.
The purpose of the meeting lies along the lines of further united military efforts. The meeting in Ottawa would extend the air programmes to take in the training of personnel to operate the military aircraft to the end that the most effective use will be made of all resources of personnel.
Great progress has already been made in pooling the aeroplane production of the united nations.
Plans for the conference developed out of the recognition of the desirability of more closely coordinating the British commonwealth (including Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) air training plan with the greatly extended air training programme undertaken by the United States and others of the allied nations. In addition these would include China, Norway, the Netherlands and several others which are already at war with the axis.
The swiftly-moving events of the war- the Coral sea battle, Madagascar, Burma, and our own intense preoccupation with internal affairs-have perhaps served to divert attention from what is an important event in Cana- [DOT] dian history, an event characterized by the Financial Post under the title "Tribute to Canada"-*
Malcolm MacDonald told Britishers last week that the only martial exercise in which Canada is not well trained is in "blowing its own trumpet".
He referred to our magnificently trained troops; the miraculous growth of our navy and the British commonwealth air training plan whose efficiency had doubled the expected
output.
Even if Mr. MacDonald had not graciously paved the way, there are three news events bearing on Canada's war effort which deserve more than a trumnet note at this time. One is:
1. The forthcoming united nations air conference at Ottawa on May 18.
It is well known that the United States wanted greatly to have the air conference held at Washington. But Canada's outstanding job in pioneering the training of airmen, made Ottawa the logical and inevitable choice. Every nation now recognizes (and will do so increasingly after May 18) that Canada has set the pace in this sphere.
There is much more to be done before this war is won. There is little time for selfcongratulation or complacency. Yet proper

War Appropriation-Air Services
recognition of achievements such as these, by Canadians themselves, by fellow members of the united nations, and indeed by our enemies, is far from amiss.
This, to my mind, is the most important conference which has come to Canada since the imperial conference of 1932. It is one of the most important to be held by the United nations since the war started. There will be present representatives on a high level of the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Southern Rhodesia, China, Norway, Poland, Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Jugoslavia, Greece, the Netherlands-
Mr. ROWE:: What about Russia?


Charles Gavan Power: -in fact all the nations now fighting for freedom with the exception of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. They have been invited, but so far I have no news of their acceptance or otherwise of the invitation. The conference meets under the high sponsorship of Roosevelt, Churchill and of our own Prime Minister. It meets here because- and I say it advisedly and without either false modesty or vain boasting-Canada, of all the nations now engaged in fighting this war, has made the greatest progress in training men to conquer the air and to wrest the supremacy of the air from the enemy so as to pave the way to victory.
These delegates come here to observe what has been done, to note the methods followed, to consult with us as to the means to be taken, to endeavour to coordinate our efforts and those of our commonwealth partners into a world-wide united nations programme. This, as the newspaper has said, is indeed a tribute to Canada. And when I say "Canada" I mean, all Canada; for Canada has been the administrator of the greatest undertaking ever instituted within its territory. It has been successfully carried out, may I say in, all frankness and all sincerity, not by the Department of National Defence for Air, not by the government, not even by the Royal Canadian Air Force, but by the people of the whole dominion, every section of which has made its contribution. From the very inception this plan has been non-political and nonsectional, and all parties in this house and the entire press have joined in making it a success. It is unique, I will say, as an instance of a great undertaking which hitherto has escaped political or sectional criticism.
At the very moment when the united nations are meeting here to discuss this great project of our united Canadian nation, we are in the midst of an internal crisis the gravity and seriousness of which I would and should be the last to minimize. When one
has campaigned and marched and bivouacked and fought for twenty-five years with friends, it is a sad wrench indeed to be separated from them, even temporarily. Our own country is apparently torn asunder, not on the question of the war itself but on the methods to be employed by Canada in waging war. There is, I am glad to say, no difference of opinion with respect to the air war, either as to the raising of men or money or the spheres of action. I wonder if, during the time the representatives of all our allies are here, it would be possible to call a truce to our internal dissensions and show by a united front, temporary if you will, our determination to join with them in the defeat of the common enemy.


Mr. GRAY:: We have listened to-day to a report of the progress of the air force under the Minister of National Defence for Air. At the close of his remarks he made an appeal for unity in this country. May I say to him as an old soldier, and speaking I believe for most of us in this chamber, that no matter where we march or where we bivouac we shall find that, under the Minister of National Defence for Air, we shall go forward in the great effort which he is making in furtherance of this project. To-day he has given us concrete evidence of what has been accomplished, beginning as it did in a very small way. To-day, as he has stated, we are on the eve of a conference of the united nations. Under his leadership this enterprise, so soundly based, the British commonwealth air training plan, is certain to develop rapidly and with increasing success.
I have only one or two remarks to add to what has already been said. I wish particularly to refer to the system of air cadet training, which has developed from one of the minister's own policies. Looking at it from the viewpoint of my own province and as I have observed it elsewhere, I feel that, once established by the department, it has been left rather in the position of an orphan. We have been loath to give these organizations the blessing of the department while we have been willing to say to them, "You go out and do it." If we are prepared to accept the air cadets in Canada, as I am sure we are from the minister's remarks and from what has been said; if we are prepared to have them established, then we should establish air cadets as part and parcel of the air scheme of the dominion. We should assist them and give them the support that is necessary and not put them on the basis of some service plan, as has been done. I believe that if the minister will look into the matter he will find that the air cadets proposal, supported by himself and promulgated

War Appropriation-Air Services
by his department, has not been given the support by the government that it should have received. If the air cadets are to be part and parcel of the air force, let us make them so. Do not let us have any half measures whereby we make them cadets for one purpose and not for another. The Minister of National Defence for Air will be the first to admit that they should be made part and parcel of the air force.
The other matter I have to urge is in connection with the air crew, to which the minister has referred. I have watched, as I have no doubt other members have watched, the graduation of air crews from various schools throughout the country. I am told that ninety schools have been established, and day after day we see men walking our streets, pilots, gunners, and observers and other members of the crews to whom the minister has referred. I want to make a plea as a man who served as an ordinary private soldier in the last war, and it is this, that these men who are worthy of wearing wings, whether they be pilots, observers, gunners or whatever they may be, should be commissioned in the air force and should not be put into the ranks as sergeant observers, sergeant pilots, or sergeant gunners, as the case may be. I urge that they be given equal rank and that they be not classed on the basis of 50 per cent of this particular class or that particular class. Those of us who have gone through schools will know that in one particular class there may be 90 per cent who may be worthy of a commission, whereas in some other class there may be only 40 per cent or 30 per cent. It is my opinion that so long as you leave it to the officers commanding the various schools there will be discrepancies that should not exist. If a man is capable of graduating from a school and worthy of his wings, whether he be pilot, observer or gunner, then he is worthy of being commissioned in his majesty's service. I urge upon the minister that this discrepancy be abolished, because I know it must have given him more than one headache. Take two buddies graduating from an air force school about to leave the country. They are on their last leave, arranging to meet at a certain port to go overseas, arranging to occupy the same quarters on the same transport. One receives word while he is at home that he has been commissioned, the other receives no such news and will go over as a sergeant pilot. You cannot expect absolute team-work under those conditions. I know the minister will agree with me that in this great service, the air force, the important thing is team-work, and you cannot get it unless you ensure that two men who are going forth in the same service shall 
be in the same rank if they are doing the same job. When they graduate from a particular school they should be on the same level. It is not fair or worthy that some commanding officer should be allowed to say to one, "You shall be a commissioned pilot", and to another "You shall be a sergeant pilot".	[DOT]
I urge that this question be given careful consideration at the forthcoming conference of the united nations-the United States, Canada, Great Britain and the other countries who will meet here. They will recognize the lead that Canada has given, and I hope that out of that conference there will emerge the principle of equality with regard to the men who graduate from our schools, whether they be pilots, gunners, observers, or whatever they may be. So long as they are worthy of going into the air and operating planes they should be put on an equality. We see men walking around the streets to-day and we know that this equality does not exist. This has been a source of trouble to the minister, I am sure; it has been one of the headaches from which he has suffered. I say to him that instead of cutting down 50 per cent, or 30 per cent or 20 per cent of the graduates of a class, every man who is worthy to wear the wings should be a commissioned officer in his majesty's services.


Mr. BENCE:: There are one or two matters I should like to bring to the attention of the minister, and I want to ask some questions in connection with the statement that he has just made. Before I do so, however, may I congratulate him on the complete and at the same time the concise manner in which he has given us the information which he has put before us this afternoon. The minister painted a glowing picture of the commonwealth air training plan, and I am sure that all hon. members will agree with him that Canada is indeed proud of the contribution it is making in this regard. Certainly to most of us it is our greatest contribution. In any event, it is certainly the most romantic, one of the most interesting, and one which we in Canada are eminently fitted to make. The tragedy of our reverses in the war up to the present time has been unfortuna.tely the result of lack of air strength or air superiority. Unquestionably if we had had that air superiority we would not have suffered the reverses we did in Crete, we would possibly be in command of the situation so far as the far east is concerned, and we would not be faced with the gigantic problem we have in connection with the shortage of rubber and matters of that kind, which I am sorry to say is crippling a part of our war effort.

War Appropriation-Air Services
In the course of his comments the minister made no reference, as he did last year, to the headaches that bothered him at that time. I presume that most of those difficulties have been solved.


Charles Gavan Power: No, I was expecting hon. members to tell me. I have new ones.


Alfred Henry Bence: Last year the minister
referred to certain headaches, as he called them, in the plan, and out of this discussion and the questions that will be asked here, I have no doubt that we shall ascertain how many of these headaches are still there and how many have disappeared. In connection with the commonwealth air training plan itself the minister indicated last year, and I believe he corroborated it in his statement this afternoon, that the new plan had been pretty well completed and we are now in the process referred to last year as being "levelled off". If I am wrong in that regard he will correct me. May I ask him whether or not the S344,000,000 which has been appropriated for the joint commonwealth air training plan is the figure which he estimates will be required annually for the carrying on of this plan, or is there in that figure a sum which has been set aside for the purpose of extending the plan? Has he completed the whole picture with respect to establishments across the country?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Alfred Henry Bence: I refer particularly to air training schools.


Charles Gavan Power: No new aerodromes, if I can help it. That is a headache.


Alfred Henry Bence: That was one of the first headaches I was going to refer to. My question is whether or not a part of that $344,000,000 is intended to be used for extension, whether the minister had in contemplation, as a result of the coming conference, any extension of the plan in Canada; whether he had in contemplation setting up any additional schools and aerodromes across the country. I know the minister, as he stated last year, has been greatly concerned over the pressure that has been brought to bear on him and on the department with respect to the establishment of such schools, and that sort of thing, and my thought was that if he did contemplate an extension as a result of this conference which begins next week; if he should decide to build more aerodromes and set up more service training schools and the like in Canada, he might very well state at the outset that matters of representations, and what we might call pressure, will receive
not the slightest regard as far as the selection of these places is concerned. I feel sure the minister has paid very little attention to that sort of thing in the past; but if he should expand the plan I believe that by announcing in the first place that pressure of this kind would have no effect, he might head off this deluge of delegations, representations by boards of trade, members of parliament and that sort of thing, and thereby save himself and probably the country a very great headache.
During the course of his remarks the minister made some statements in connection with recruits and the number of men now being turned out by the air force. Among other things I think he said there were now some 115,000 men in the R.C.A.F. When the minister makes a further statement during this discussion I should like him to indicate, on the same basis that he indicated last year, the proportion of the men in training in Canada who are Canadians and the proportion who come from Australia, New Zealand and Great Britain. At the same time he might indicate, if he will, in greater detail what is being done in connection with this reserve that was set up last year. At that time the minister referred to the fact that there was a six months' reserve on hand. Again this year he has referred to the fact that there is a six months' reserve on hand. What is being done with these men? As I recall it, last year they were being enlisted two or three months ahead of time and being put on guard duty, and that sort of thing. But conditions must have been altered to some extent by the calling up of men under the National Resources Mobilization Act and by the pressure that is being exerted in connection with recruiting for the army. What steps are being taken by the department to ensure that the reserve, which the minister called a "precious" reserve, is maintained, to be called upon as soon as the training facilities are available?
There are so many questions to be asked in connection with the minister's department that I intend to mention only one or two now, hoping later on in the debate to be able to put specific and categorical questions to the minister. In connection with repairs and equipment, the minister stated that at present he had enough planes to meet the requirements. From this statement I presume that the deficit from which he suffered last year, particularly the shortage of twin-engine machines, of which the minister said last year he had only 46 per cent of what was required, has been made up. At the same

War Appropriation-Air Services
time I should like the minister to give us some indication, if he would, of how far his department has advanced toward the objective of 6,000 planes for training purposes, which he said would be required by 1943. At the time the minister spoke last year he said they had 2,400 machines on hand. Now, after a year's progress, and with the passing of half the period mentioned by the minister, I should like to know how many planes he has on hand for training purposes, and whether he anticipates that he will obtain the required number of 6,000 by 1943.
There is another point that seems to me most important. Last year the minister said the matter of repairs, replacements, spare parts and so on, was giving him a great deal of concern. He did not mention that matter this afternoon. In view of the fact that the United States, from whom we obtained a great many of these spares, is now in the war, has its own training plan, and is producing aeroplanes for its own use, has the situation been alleviated or made more difficult than before? If it has become more difficult, what safeguards does the minister anticipate putting into effect in order to make sure that accidents in training, for example, do not occur, and that the men who are training in Canada have the very best of equipment and the very safest facilities, in order that they may complete that training?
With further reference to the matter of recruiting, the minister mentioned that he had obtained a considerable number of men who had been called up; I think he referred to them as R recruits. I presume he meant men who, after they had been called up, in some way had been brought into the air force. Was that as a result of the air force or the [DOT]army going to these men and inquiring whether or not they wanted to join the air force, or was it because after they were called up they indicated a desire to join the air force?


Charles Gavan Power: After they were called up.


Alfred Henry Bence: In that connection the minister mentioned last year that he was very much in favour of what he called "combing the mane to sharpen the tooth," I think borrowing an expression used by Mr. Churchill-in other words obtaining recruits from the active army. Is there any question of canvassing the active army, to determine whether or not there are men in it who are particularly qualified to become pilots, gunners, and so on, and who would be of more value to Canada's war effort if they were trained as such? In that connection I can understand that the minister might come in conflict with the Minister of National Defence, who naturally would not want to lose any men from the army. But I 
suggest that there are in the air force a great many men who enlisted for general duty. The minister mentioned that some of those men were being reclassified, but there must be a great many of them who are not qualified to become pilots or air crew, but who at the same time are physically fit and who could go on active service. I suggest to the minister that he might consider taking up with his colleague the Minister of National Defence the possibility of working out some system under which these general duty men could be transferred to the army, and men taken from the army who could be trained to become air crew. After all, I take it that maintaining a sufficient number of recruits for air crew is the most important part of the whole plan, because if you have not the men the plan becomes completely useless. I should think the minister could replace a great many of these general duty men-and I understand this is being done to a certain extent-with medically unfit men, ex-service men perhaps, and particularly with the new branch which has been set up, the women's branch of the air force. As I understand it, that was the original purpose in setting up this women's division, and perhaps the minister would give us some idea of the extent to which these women are replacing men in the air force and permitting them to be transferred to more active theatres of war.
I should like to offer a suggestion to the minister with regard to a matter which has been brought up on several occasions during the discussion of this war appropriation bill, with particular reference to the army and navy. It has to do with the question of the pay and allowances of men in the air force, particularly with respect to the fact that a distinction is made between the air force and the army in the case of men who are missing. So far as the air force is concerned, the dependents' allowance is cut off at the end of the month during which the man is reported missing, whereas in the army the pay and allowances are continued for a longer period of time. The other day the Minister of National Defence told us that in the army, pay and allowances are continued until the man is either presumed dead or it is definitely established that he is dead.
So far as the air force is concerned my information, which I have reason to believe is accurate, is that if a man is reported as missing in- the middle of the month his pay is computed until the end of the month and sent to his wife. Thereafter however she is immediately put on straight pension, and her income is consequently immediately reduced to the 160 a month provided for the

War Appropriation-Air Services
wives of those up to and including the rank of flying officer. It seems to me that that is a discrimination which the minister should take in hand and remove. The wife of a man reported missing suffers a terrific shock, and she is at the same time faced with considerable financial difficulty, particularly if her income is immediately cut down. I have known it to be cut down by as much as $25 or $30 a month. I have known of children being born to wives of men overseas after their husbands were reported missing. The fact that their income is cut down during that time makes it very difficult for them to carry on and pay the cost involved in the birth of a child, as well as meet other obligations they may have entered into.
In view of the hardships thus being suffered by the wives of these men, I suggest that the minister consider this matter, and very soon, in order to rectify what I believe to be a discrimination. I am not the first hon. member to bring this matter before the committee. It has been raised on several occasions before. I commend it to the minister's most serious attention.


Charles Gavan Power: Perhaps I should answer at
once the questions of the hon. members for Lambton West and Saskatoon City, so that these questions will not pile up.
First may I say that the air cadets are now to all intents and purposes part and parcel of the Royal Canadian Air Force. We have retained our connection with the air cadet league so that the league might function as a propaganda organization and, with the help of public-spirited citizens, arouse interest in the air cadets. To all intents and purposes we now supervise the work of the air cadet corps, because we consider it one of the most important fields for obtaining recruits in the future, particularly air crew recruits.


Ross Wilfred Gray: Does the department finance
it?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes-perhaps not entirely, but to a very considerable extent.


Richard Burpee Hanson: And the
training?


Charles Gavan Power: We are giving them training, too. As a matter of fact that has caused another headache. We are taking them to some of our schools and the question naturally arises whether we will give the boys rides in aeroplanes. Well, if we have 7,000 cadets, as I expect we will have this summer, it would take a good many flying hours to take them up one by one. I suggested to some of our pilots that we might take five or
six at a time in big machines. But one of them said, "Would you like to have a lot of squalling brats crawding all over you in the machine?"-and I said no. As a matter of fact we would have difficulty obtaining permission from parents, and one thing and another; and I believe to take them up in aeroplanes would be too great a risk for us to take. However, all that is by the way.
Now with respect to commissions, I share the views of the hon. member for Lambton West. The situation is that when this air training scheme was inaugurated part of the plan was that 50 per cent of the pilots and observers should obtain commissions. The wireless air gunners were supposed only to become sergeants. It was also arranged that 33 per cent of these commissions were to be granted on graduation, in accordance with the marks attained by the pupil, as in any other school. The other 17 per cent were marked as recommended for promotion.
Well, these lads all went over. Many of them became attached to the Royal Air Force; some of them were in the middle east. We have many hundreds of our men in the middle east. As a matter of fact I have forgotten the figures, but we have a squadron of our own in the far east, and more than one in the middle east, in addition to many hundreds -perhaps thousands-who are connected with the Royal Air Force. The boy who is twenty-first on the list, the twenty preceding him having obtained commissions, may be away off somewhere in Syria. I am sure his commanding officer is not aware of the recommendations made by the commanding officer at Uplands, and I have always felt that that recommendation in many instances was of no value whatsoever. The records do follow the men, in theory; but I doubt if they do in practice.
We had a great deal of difficulty in getting commissions for the 17 per cent who were promised, as part of the plan. Commanding officers in fighter groups, fighter squadrons, bomber groups or bomber squadrons are not apt to worry very much whether Canada has obtained the full 50 per cent of commissions to which it was entitled under the plan. If an individual sergeant is serving in any part of the world his commanding officer may find him to be a good sergeant. But there may be other sergeants of the Royal Air Force who in the opinion of the commanding officer are more worthy of promotion. The officer is not particularly concerned whether Mr. Sergeant, Canadian, comes in under the 17 per cent which would bring the total up to 50 per cent. The result was that for many months we were not getting the quota to which we were



War Appropriation-Air Services
entitled. One of the objects of my visit to Great Britain last year was to insist that somehow or other we be brought up at least to that 50 per cent. It took a long time, but I am glad to say that since December some 350 to 400 of our graduate sergeants have obtained commissions, to bring us up to the 17 per cent. These are rough figures; if required I could put the exact figure on Hansard. However we are away off the total number we should have at the present time.
One of the matters I took up at that time, and which I hope to take up in the forthcoming conference, is the advisability and the absolute justice of making every member of air crew an officer. We are bound at the present time by our undertakings under the joint air training plan. Possibly treasury control in Great Britain has something to do with it, because, as is well known, Great Britain contributes the pay and allowances of the men attached to Royal Air Force squadrons, with the exception that we bring the pay up to the Canadian rate. That means an addition of about one-third more. That may have had something to do with the reluctance of the British treasury to do anything further at the time the plan was inaugurated.
I read in British Hansard-and I believe this appeared in the Winnipeg Free Press-an account of a bomber returning from a raid over Germany. The pilot of the machine was a sergeant while the observer was an officer. They had been together for eighteen to twenty hours and had gone through a veritable hell of flak fire. When they returned the man who brought the machine home walked into the sergeant's mess and the fellow that he had carried home went into the officer's mess. As one labour member in the British house put it, one walked into the players' and the other walked into the gentlemen's room. There is neither rhyme nor reason or common sense about that.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: It is a hangover of ia past age.


Charles Gavan Power: It may be a treasury matter, but so far as I am concerned it will not be a a treasury matter in Canada. It is one of the matters to be taken up at the forthcoming conference. May I say, in case I have given an unfavourable impression of the feeling of the high command in Great Britain, that I have spoken to some of the highest officers in the Royal Air Force and they are in entire agreement that every member of the air crew should be an officer. It might have been better if we had called them all ensigns or had adopted some kind of intermediate title indicating that they were not
tMr. Power.]
fully graduated as officers in the sense of having gone through an officers' course such as one has to undergo in the infantry or in the artillery. Except in certain instances, they are not taught to lead men. A man who is running his own machine, perhaps a single-seater fighter, may be the finest pilot in the world, but until he becomes a flight commander or squadron leader or wing commander he need not necessarily have the qualities of leadership which may be required in a man who leads, let us say, a platoon or a company of infantry. Nevertheless in a machine they all take the same risks. As the hon. member for Lambton West, has pointed' out, in many instances they left home as buddies, went through the same school, and because of a difference of one or two points, one has to be a gentleman and the other has to be a player. I can assure the committee that we will see that that is not done, if I can help it.
With respect to the many questions asked by the hon. member for Saskatoon City, I may say that of the $344,000,000 in the estimates, some will be required for the construction of additional accommodation. It seems to me that we are always building something or other. Even with the shift that we expect to make, the changing of certain areodromes and schools from one destination to another, this will be necessary. Certain elementary schools will disappear and be replaced by operational training schools. We are extending the scope of our training so that in many instances a man will be fully trained operationally on operational machines. Other schools will be doubled, and some will be tripled. But with all that, I do not visualize any extended programme of building or the establishment of new schools this year. It may be necessary to add two or three schools in order to balance the new set-up, but that I think will be mostly in the way of location of additional aerodromes this year. It must be understood that this refers only to the joint air training plan. We have located- one of the reasons for my recent trip to western Canada was this-a certain number of aerodromes on the Pacific coast and elsewhere in spots where they will be most useful for the defence of the coast. There will be new aerodrome construction on both east and west coasts for defence, but not for air training purposes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is consideration being given to the abandonment of other plans? I have heard some statement that perhaps Pennfield Ridge will be abandoned.


Charles Gavan Power: Perhaps I am not supposed to say so, but that school was used for astral navigation. In that part of the world they

War 'Appropriation-Air Services
never seem to see the sun, so that we are using it for another purpose, one for which it is well fitted indeed. The climate there is somewhat similar to the climate in certain parts of the old country, and some of the work which has been carried on in the old country can be transferred to Pennfield Ridge.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I was not thinking of its being abandoned, I was thinking that some change might be contemplated. I hope the committee will not take the minister's statement too literally, that we never see the sun in the county of Charlotte.


Charles Gavan Power: It was the stars I meant. The hon. member for Saskatoon City wanted to know what had become of our reserves. The reserve we have at the moment is probably not very large; I think about 1,000 men are on leave without pay to report at a certain date. We have a considerable number on what we call tarmac duty, which was formerly called guard duty, and on guard duty.


Alfred Henry Bence: Is that the extent of our reserve?


Charles Gavan Power: At the present time I would say that we probably have three or four months ahead of us. We also have a reserve of those who are undergoing youth training. I think I said there were 1,300 under youth training. Then we have those whose applications have been completed and others whose applications are incomplete. We anticipate no great difficulty in obtaining recruits, certainly for six months. Then based on last year's results a large number of boys will have matriculated from high school and will come in during the summer. Figuring on that, I think we are well away for the next year anyway.
With respect to the number of planes that we have, I believe I committed an indiscretion in stating the number which we should have for training. I am only too willing to renew it by saying we are so close to 6,000 now it is no fun. Spares will always be a problem. Only recently I was speaking to a friend of mine in the army who is closely connected with a munitions assignment in the United States. He tells me that there, as in Great Britain and as in Canada-perhaps it is better now-no matter what it is they wish to procure, whether it be tanks, trucks, guns or rifles, it is difficult to get the manufacturer to make spares. They all want to be able to say that they have turned out so many of such and such an article. I think our spare situation is easier than it was. We are still meeting with difficulties, but there is no chance of our being bogged down now as I felt there was over a year ago.
44561-149i


Alfred Henry Bence: Are they producing more in this country?


Charles Gavan Power: We are making more and more as time goes on. I was told a year ago that there were certain spares that could not possibly be made in this country. I was informed only a few days ago that they are being made, and made in reasonably large quantities.
With regard to our recruits from those in military camps who have been called up under the mobilization act, the Department of National Defence under an arrangement made a year or so ago, or at all events early in the war, permits us to recruit these men if they have not been with the army for more than two months. At the end of the two months the army says: You have had a chance to get these men for two months, and you have not taken them, so now let us carry on with them. After all, the army has been spending money od them, and it would not be fair for us to take them away from the army after that length of time. We have no arrangement at present for taking men out of the army :n Canada because it does cost the army a lot if money to train the men and it would hardly be fair to allow a man whom the army has trained for six months in some trade to change his mind and come over to us. But we have made arrangements with the Canadian forces overseas to take from the army a certain number who wish to. join the air force. Presumably they did not have the same opportunity of joining the air force in Canada early in the war, when it was almost impossible for many men to get into the air force. So that the men serving overseas with the army, if they so desire, have the opportunity of transferring to the air force.
With regard to pay and allowances of the missing, I was not in the house when my colleague the Minister of National Defence spoke of the different treatment between the army and the air force in regard to members of the forces who are missing, and I use the word "missing" advisedly because they must be declared missing. Furthermore, I do not know of anyone in the army who has been declared "missing" as yet.


Richard Burpee Hanson: They have not yet got to that stage.


Charles Gavan Power: No. I will say this. The British government have the same system as we follow in the air force whereby almost immediately, or at least at the end of the current month, members of the forces who are missing are listed as missing even before they are listed as presumed dead. In our own case, in the air force, I have here a memoran-

War Appropriation-Air Services
dum from the dependents' allowance board which I took the trouble to get-the hon. member for Davenport had asked the question, which I looked up in Hansard, and the ruling of the dependents' allowance board applies to both the army and the air force. Their memorandum is as follows:
When a member of the Royal Canadian Air Force is reported as missing the following procedure is carried out in regard to his pay and dependents' allowance.
(X) Any assigned pay, or assigned pay and dependents' allowance which is in payment is continued to the end of the month in which the casualty is reported and then ceases as such.
(2)	From the end of this month the dependents' allowance board immediately institutes a special temporary allowance to the dependent in an amount not greater than the amount to which the dependent would be entitled as pension if the man were reported as dead. This allowance continues until the fate of the man is definitely decided.
(3)	If the man is reported alive, either as prisoner-of-war interned in a neutral country, or having returned to duty, service pay and dependents' allowance is reinstated retroactively over the period during which he was reported as missing.
(4)	If the man is officially reported as dead pension ruling is immediately given by the pension commission. Arrangements are made so that the allowance paid by the dependents' allowance board ceases as soon as pension is in payment.
(5)	Where assigned pay only, and no dependents' allowance is in payment it is considered prima facie evidence that the recipient of the assigned pay is not dependent on the man and the payment of the assigned pay therefore ceases at the end of th'e month in which the casualty is reported.
(6)	Members of the Royal Canadian Air l'orce who are reported as casualties while serving with the Royal Air Force receive the same treatment, and at the same rates as if they were serving with their own force.
That is the situation with respect to the missing, and from my information. I would say that it applies as well to the. army as to the air force. The situation is this. Hardships may arise, depending on the amount of pay which the man assigns. Let us say that the wife of a pilot or sergeant receives a dependents' allowance of $40 a month-I do not know the exact figure, I think it is $35; but for the sake of illustration we will say $40.-and that the pilot assigns $40 more to her. That makes a total of $80 a month. If he is posted as missing, at the end of the month his wife receives $60 a month, which is the maximum she would receive by way of pension, and of course she loses his assigned pay. So that there is a difference of $20 between the $60 a month she receives when he is missing and the $80 a month she was formerly receiving. The reason for that-I am speaking subject to

the information I received from the dependents' allowance board-is that the board does not want to pile up against the man's wife, in case he should afterwards be declared dead, $20 or $30 or $40 more a month than she would be entitled to by way of pension.


Alfred Henry Bence: Not if the board would have to ask for it back.


Charles Gavan Power: But the crown would have no right to pay the salary and allowance of a man who was dead, to be quite frank about it. If a man were not posted as missing but was known to be dead, his dependent would go on pension and the presumption of death, I take it, would be retroactive. That would be my interpretation of the regulations after many years of playing around with pension law and regulations in that regard. I know that that is done by the dependents' allowance board, and I would think it the logical if not the sympathetic way of interpreting the regulations. I know it may strike the members of the committee as not being the right thing to do, but I do not know what else could be done unless the house were to vote a certain sum of money to be allocated to dependents of the missing until such time as they were presumed dead.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: Paragraph 5 of the memorandum which the minister has just read deals with the cutting off of assigned pay when a man is reported as missing. I have in mind a specific case of that kind. What is the mother to live on until some adjustment is made?


Charles Gavan Power: It is assumed, I take it, that if the man has not arranged for his mother to receive a dependents' allowance she is not a dependent, and if he does not ask that she shall receive a dependents' allowance the question naturally arises: Should the state do so?


George Alexander Cruickshank: In the particular case I have in mind the man was assigning $50 a month to his mother. He was reported missing on the seventeenth of the month. She received no assigned pay for that month, none for the previous month, and none of his regular pay, and she had nothing to go on with. The man had been assigning $50 a month to his mother, who is a widow, and it should be assumed by the board that he is her support, since his pay, including his assigned pay, was being sent to her.


Charles Gavan Power: I am under the impression that in order to establish dependency a man must at least advise the board that his mother is dependent upon him.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Richard Burpee Hanson: He has
to apply on. her behalf.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes. I get $20 a month
assigned pay from my boy in the Royal Air Force. If I am not mistaken, they are allowed only to send a certain amount of money, and perhaps they send it to their parents in order that their parents can return it to them in pounds. The fact of assignment would not necessarily mean dependency on the part of the parent. If I am not mistaken, a great many young fellows in the air force draw only Royal Air Force rates of pay in England; the pilot's Canadian rate of pay is deferred, and they get the Canadian rate of pay forwarded to their parents and the parents send it back.


Alfred Henry Bence: But that, as I understand
it, is not permitted unless it is established that the mother is a dependent. As a matter of fact cases have been referred to the Minister of National Defence in which there was a refusal to allow a release of the money because it was not established that the mother was dependent. . Investigations are constantly being made by various associations which are affiliated with the dependents' allowance board to determine whether the mother is dependent and should get this assigned pay.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think that in our
service there is any rule against anybody assigning pay to a relative; I do not know about assigning it to an outsider. If you do not want to attach dependency to it, that is no crime. Perhaps the army rules differ in that respect from ours, because I gather that in the army there is a deferment of pay, that they do not permit the man to receive immediately the entire amount on his arrival here from the other side. So far as we are concerned, when a man comes back from the other side, if he has a credit coming to him he has not much trouble in getting his deferred pay if he wants it; we do not keep it until after the war.


Mr. ROSS (Souris):: Would the dependents' board acknowledge a power of attorney? I know of a case similar to that mentioned by the hon. member for Fraser Valley. Two boys in the air force assigned portions of their pay to parents who needed the money, but never applied for any other assistance. There was a third boy who has, I believe, become a prisoner of war in Java. A power of attorney was given because the father had had a partial stroke and the lad thought that something more serious might happen to him. The board however refuses to allow the father to cash the cheque under
his power of attorney. They are very independent people, but there is a real need, and it is creating hardship.


Charles Gavan Power: I hope I shall not be
brought into a discussion, concerning the dependents' allowance board, which is not my baby, but so far as it relates to the air force, once a man has established dependency I believe the right is admitted. Perhaps conditions are freer and easier in the air force than in the army.


Mr. McIVOR:: I congratulate the minister
on the sketch he has given us of the work of his department. He assured us that he is a real pilot, that he knows his chart, and that he goes places from which he expects to come back.
There are one or two things I should like to suggest. First, there is the matter of entertainment. Any group of men who are under great strain need to have a bit of good clean fun. I noticed a trainer who had been for a ride, because the recruit was the one who was doing the flying; he came back from about six hours in the air and sat down and just looked at space. These men need the best kind of entertainment so that their vision will be clear and their nerves steady and in such shape that they can stomach anything they may encounter. Therefore I compliment the minister on the splendid entertainment which he has given not only to the air force but to all Canada in sponsoring hockey, here in Ottawa and all over the dominion. Any hockey team which can defeat a team from the head of the lakes, whether Fort William or Port Arthur, must know its stuff. We believe that we at the head of the lakes have the best amateur team in Canada. Instead of being criticized the minister should be commended for taking young men who were formerly professionals and putting them in line again to show the young fellows how to play the game. It is true that they met their match when they ran up against the Bearcats of Port Arthur. This provides entertainment of the right kind, because the boy who is a good athlete and keeps his body and mind in right shape will make a great aviator.
Another thing. There are 422,000 in the volunteer forces of Canada, and if it takes fifteen men to keep one man equipped, it is gong to take about 6,300,000 persons outside of the forces busy to keep those men at the front equipped. Therefore I would ask the minister if he expects to displace a great many men, who are working in the air force,

War Appropriation-Air Services
by young women. They will not have the same risk as the fighting men, and it would free men in the force for other work.
I do not suppose there is one man in this chamber who does not wish to heaven he were on the young side of thirty so that he could take a course as an air pilot. I know that I would like it immensely. Of course some of us will have to go up in the air in other ways. But no one can overestimate the tremendous risks which these young fighters incur. I have been informed by men who have been overseas that a large percentage of those who make the first thirty trips over to Germany do not come back, and less than 11 per cent of those who make the second thirty trips come back. When you think that 89 per cent of those young men will not return, you realize that it is the duty of Canada to uphold in every way possible the hands of the men who are taking to the air and fighting for us. We must see that they are properly equipped in every possible way. I am sure also that the minister will see to it that they have the opportunity of plenty of entertainment and fun and those things which they need to help them to live through their times of quiet.


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: Further in regard to missing pilots, may I refer to a letter from a lady in Peterborough. She states that her son was in the air force stationed at Gander, Newfoundland, and continues:
Last December 29, 1941, I had a telegram telling me that my dear son was missing. That was December 29 last. I received his allowance on December 30 and have received nothing since. On February 6 I wrote to the officer commanding about his personal belongings, and I happened to mention about the allowance being stopped. I will have to wait six months before Ottawa declares my son dead. They are not sure of his death yet, but they have stopped my allowance.
I understand that if the man had been a prisoner of war the allowance would have kept on, but owing to the fact that he is missing it has stopped. Here is a woman whose husband is seventy. Her son was giving her $20 a month before he left and now that is stopped and they have nothing to live on.


Charles Gavan Power: Assigned pay or allowance?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Assigned pay.


Charles Gavan Power: Not dependents' allowance?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: No, assigned pay. These people are absolutely in want.


Charles Gavan Power: I have no idea why he did
not make an assignment, why he did not arrange to establish dependency on her part.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I have a letter from her in which she says that she does not think the boy knew how to do it or understood it.


Charles Gavan Power: That would be a case to put before the dependents' allowance board itself. If my hon. friend will send me the letter I shall be glad to see that some of the officers of the department make a claim on the dependents' allowance board and get the law and the prophets on it, whatever it may be.


Mr. MACDONALD (Brantford City):: I join with other members who have commended the minister for the splendid and concise statement he has given the committee. It is indeed in keeping with the two statements already given by the other ministers of national defence who preceded him. Now we have a perfectly clear picture of the defence departments of Canada. Personally I should like to do away with the word "defence". We must have more of the fighting spirit if we are going to win the war. Staying back in Canada and hoping to win the war by merely defending Canada will never bring success to our arms. We must go out and meet the enemy and fight him wherever he can be found. Therefore I would prefer that instead of designating these ministers as ministers of national defence we call them "ministers of war".
I join with the hon. member for Lamb ton West (Mr. Gray) in the suggestion regarding commissions for all men who are part of the air crew. I was very happy indeed to hear the Minister of National Defence for Air say that he also was in sympathy with this suggestion. It is quite natural that he should agree with it; for hon. members will recall that he himself enlisted in the last war as a private and went through the ranks, finally becoming an officer. He does not believe in keeping commissions for the favoured few, and I do hope that the day will soon come when all members of the air crew will be commissioned officers.
There is one class which I hope will receive commissions fairly soon. I refer to the young men who are now in Britain who fly night after night over Germany. In Britain there are officers flying aircraft over Germany and there are also sergeant pilots, sergeant observers and sergeant air gunners. These men risk their lives every time they fly over Germany, and any man who is gallant and courageous enough to fly over that country should be a com-

War Appropriation-Air Services
missioned officer and should be entitled to the very best that this or any other nation can give him. Therefore I suggest that one of the first things the minister should try to do should be to forget the rank with which these men graduated from the air schools in Canada, whether they came first or last, because they are now in England flying over Germany and they should take second place to none; they should all be commissioned officers.
These men who fly over Germany are entitled to the best that can be given them in Britain. It wras my privilege last fall to visit Britain. It was my privilege with five other members of the house to visit certain stations from which men fly over Germany. I recall visiting one of these commands one morning about nine o'clock. Two nights before the men from that command had flown over Germany. Did we find them living in comfort, men who had come back after risking their lives? I do not want to paint a picture of hardship as applying to the conditions under which they live, but I do not believe they are living in the comfort in which they should live after making such hazardous trips. An hon. member who preceded me referred to hockey teams in Canada. I would say without hesitation that the men who play on a hockey team live more or less like kings compared to the men who fly by night over Germany. I do not think that is right. The men who man the aeroplanes should get the very best treatment, the treatment that is given any athlete. They should be treated as our hockey players or baseball players or other athletes are. What do we find however? I recall that visit. It was a rainy morning, dull and cold. We entered a so-called sergeant's hut, not at all comfortably furnished, and there we saw three men huddled around a stove in one comer of the hut with blankets wrapped around them, trying to keep themselves warm. The other members with me on that occasion will recall our comments. We said, "These men are entitled to something better than this." I believe they are entitled to something better than that and I trust that something better can be given them. I trust that the best that can be provided will be theirs.
There is one other matter to which I would refer, namely, the airfields which we have in Canada. We are very happy indeed to have in the neighbourhood of the city of Brantford two airports, and I can only speak in the highest terms of the personnel of those schools. The commanding officers, the officers, the instructors and the young pilots and the ground crew have all established for themselves a place in the hearts of the people of Brantford city and we are indeed happy to have them in
our midst. The air schools are both beyond the limits of the city of Brantford. Let me refer first to No. 4 wireless school in the township of Brantford. As I said, we are glad to have these schools in our midst, but I would point out to the minister that the land on which they are located is exempt from taxation. No. 4 wireless school is in the township of Brantford in school section No. 7. The total number of acres exempt is 374. The total assessment of that school section is $289,900, while the assessment for the land and buildings of the school, which are exempt, is $17,300, or approximately 7 per cent of the total. The tax rate in that section is 2-9 mills, and there is no outstanding debt. The amount lost in taxes is $401.07, or 7 per cent of the total amount of taxes.'
Then the Burford airport, which is also in the township of Brantford and which is known as No. 5 service flying training school, comprises 582 acres, all in school section No. 9. The total assessment of that school section is $340,795; the assessment of the lands and buildings of the school, which are exempt, is $28,400, or approximately 8 per cent. The amount of taxes lost on that airport is $787.65. So that the total amount of taxes lost to the township of Brantford by virtue of these airports is $1,118.72. That does not seem a large amount of money, but in these two school sections it is a fair proportion of the total, amounting to 7 per cent in one case and 8 per cent in the other. Someone has asked what the school sections get out of it. They get very little out of it in dollars. As I said before, they are happy to have these airports located there, but after all an airport does not bring only happiness to a district. It is not a pleasant thing for those in the vicinity of these airports to have aeroplanes flying a few hundred feet over their buildings all day and almost all night.


Mr. POTTIER:: Better than bombing.


William Ross Macdonald: Much better than bombing, and they are very glad to have those airports; let me make myself clear on that. The people in those districts welcome the airports, but I still say it is not the most comfortable thing for those living in the immediate vicinity of these airports to have aeroplanes flying over their houses and buildings all day long, whether they are awake or asleep. As we all know, when these aeroplanes land, they come very close to these buildings. I see some hon. members smiling and laughing, but I ask those hon. members how they would like to sleep in a building adjoining an airport and have aeroplanes flying only a few hundred feet

War Appropriation-Air Services
over their heads day in and day out. And more than that, it is not altogether a pleasant sensation to have the beacon lights flashing in your windows every few seconds all night long, every night of the week. The people are not complaining about having these airports in their districts, but there are two sides to the story. We sit here in comfort. We do not have the aeroplanes, flying over our heads while we are in this building; the lights are not flickering all night long, and we must be fair with the people who live in these districts. I think, as I have said already, that we should express our deep appreciation of the way they have welcomed these airports, in spite of the discomfort that has resulted.
The point I should like to make is that something should be done in regard to the payment of taxes to the townships in which the one hundred airports in Canada are located. It would not amount to very much money for the government- to pay, but every person living in these districts pays taxes; why should not the dominion government also pay taxes on these airport properties? I ask the minister to consider the suggestion. I ask him to consider whether it would not be fair for the dominion government to pay taxes, just as taxes must be paid by any person who happens to live in the township.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I should like to
offer a solution to the minister in this connection. In my riding I have no war industries, and I suppose they have two or three hundred industries in Brantford. If it hurts their feelings to have aeroplanes flying overhead, and if they are too tired to pull down the blinds to keep out the light, you can put all the airports you like in my riding, and we will not care about the $1,188 in taxes.


Mr. MacNICOL:: First I want to thank the minister for having answered a question which I asked some days ago. I believe at the time he was away on some other business, but the fact that he answered my question is just another indication of his meticulous attention to duty.
With the others who have spoken I honour these wonderful young men of the air force, many of whom, including the sons of my three immediate neighbours, have come from my riding. Certainly they have held high the honour of Canada, as the minister has said, on every field of battle throughout the world. I only wish we could double, treble or quadruple our efforts. I am not finding fault with what has been done. I think we have done splendidly; but if we could greatly extend our facilities for training these wonderful 
young Canadian aviators I am sure they would help bring the war to a conclusion in a much shorter time.
Two years ago, and again last year, when this subject was before the house, I said that aeroplanes would either win or lose the war. When we have such wonderful young men in Canada, and when we have plants producing areoplanes, I do not see why we cannot greatly increase our facilities both for training aviators and for making aeroplanes. Only to-day the latest reports indicate that three British destroyers have been sunk in the Mediterranean by axis areoplanes. If we had an abundance, a superabundance, of aeroplanes not only in the Mediterranean but in every other field of battle, our destroyers would not be sunk, nor would the Repulse and Prince of Wales have been lost off Malaya. Both those battleships were sunk because of the lack of air protection. And even more recent than the sinking of the battleships we had the loss of two cruisers, at least one of which had a very distinguished record, having taken part in the sinking of the Graf Spee or the Bismarck. Both these cruisers were sunk through lack of air protection. I am wondering, with all the minister's ability and energy, if he could do more than he has done. Perhaps no one else could have done as much, but it is possible that he could do more to train more aviators here, and also order more planes.


Charles Gavan Power: I am sorry to say we have so far fulfilled our contract that they do not want any more at the present time.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Well, that passes all
comprehension.


Charles Gavan Power: It is not my business.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Whether anybody wants them or not, they should be built. If the British do not want more planes and more aviators, I would feel that some one wants to lose the war, and I cannot conceive that they want to lose the war. I am convinced that they want to win the war, although sometimes it looks as if somebody in behind is 'blocking the winning of the war-but not intentionally; rather it is through something they do not have in their hearts or heads. However, that does not affect the minister.


Charles Gavan Power: No; they got all the pilots they could hold, for the moment.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Let us consider a case in point. Last year the aeroplane factory in the constituency of Fort William, the representative of which spoke a few moments ago, ceased making bombers. That factory was building hurricane bombers. I believe they were turning out about a hundred a month.

War Appropriation-Air Services
They may have been turning those planes out for an English order; I do not know. However, for lack of orders they shut down on bombers, and remained shut down for six or seven months. This means that aeroplane facilities, for both defence and attack, for Great Britain and her allies, are short by six hundred or seven hundred bombers they should have had-and could have had. Those bombers could have been made in Fort William. The plant has now started again producing at the rate of a hundred a month. We are not responsible, of course. I believe that the planes manufactured there were sent to Great Britain. But could we not have taken any extra planes they could supply? Could we not have put them in stock? Could we not have sent them out to the east?
Only recently we have learned that after displaying wonderful valour our troops retreated through Malaya. They retreated three or four hundred miles. We learned that they had to retreat because they had not sufficient air protection. Then, when they retreated out of Malaya into Burma, the same story was told us in the press. We are told now that they have retreated a distance of three or four hundred miles north, up along the Irrawaddy river. What is the reason given? They have not sufficient aeroplane protection.
Somebody is responsible for the fact that British troops everywhere have not sufficient aeroplane protection. If Canada can produce aeroplanes-and we certainly produced the pilots and the air crew-then we should produce them.'
Our young men are thrilled with the story of Bishop and those other Canadians who distinguished themselves so much in the last war, and who so brilliantly electrified Europe with their ability to shoot down our enemies. Canadians could do it again. Why, then, can we not give them the planes-thousands of planes, and air crew in thousands and thousands, so that our brave sailors on the seas will not have their ships sunk from under them through lack of aeroplane protection, and our brave troops on land will not have to retreat because of lack of aeroplane protection.
I am convinced that if the minister were given a carte blanche order to turn out another ten thousand aviators, no matter what the cost, he would do so. I have every confidence in his ability and in the organization of his department to build more training fields, and to turn out any number of aviators required. Then, since we are not to blame, who is to blame for the fact that
everywhere we have not the aeroplane protection we should have?
Something was said a short time ago about repair parts for aeroplanes. Perhaps there is a reason for the shortage along that line. That is not in the minister's department, and I would not criticize the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) because he, too, has done a splendid job. But somebody, somewhere, is to blame for the whole aeroplane industry not having been producing more. The men at the head of it are big enough to organize it. I know many of them. I have the background of what is behind the fact that they have not been turning out more planes, so I will not criticize anybody. But the fact is that they could do infinitely more. Why, Canadian plants did not get into really high speed until after Japan came into the war. Between the time of the outbreak of war and the fall of France our aeroplane companies were running, I presume, at about 20 per cent capacity, and between the fall of France and the advent of Japan in the war they were turning out not more than 75 per cent, at the outside.
So I should hope that through the minister's energy and ability something will come about whereby Canada will produce thousands more planes and thousands more crews to man those planes. If that happens, the war will end just that much more quickly.
I should like to thank the minister for a reply he gave me yesterday in writing. I had received a long wire from Drumheller, a place I visited last summer. It is a very beautiful town in Alberta, in fact one of the most beautiful I have been in. It is a town to which I would recommend anyone who travels to the west to visit. In that vicinity are great resources of coal. The wire intimated that if the government intended extending the building of fields in the west, Drumheller might be considered. In that vicinity they produce about a million and a half tons of coal a year. I am happy to say that a large proportion of that coal comes to Ontario, and I hope much more of it will come here. In the production of that coal there is a great deal of slack. While out there I learned with keen interest how cheaply they can produce power from their slack coal. Therefore, if the minister in future extends air facilities in the west, I would submit he should consider the vicinity of Drumheller as a place where he could have an air field. The cheap light and power would be one inducement, I should think, and the vast abundance of coal in the vicinity would be another.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Charles Gavan Power: Will I send the hon. member for Brantford City to Drumheller to explain ;he disadvantages?


John Ritchie MacNicol: My suggestion is a
fair one, since the hon. member for Brantford City is not altogether too pleased with all that is happening in Brant county. If you do happen to move them out of the county of Brant, you might put one or two in the county of York. We have quite a number, but we could take one more. Then you could send some of the surplus ones out to Drumheller.


William Ross Macdonald: I stated that the county of Brant was very happy to have these air ports in its midst.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I know it is. I know the county of Brant pretty well.
I happened to come across a number of complaints yesterday. It may be that they are not worth while talking about, but if they are real complaints I know the minister will take steps to clean them up. A father told me a few days ago about his boy, who had enlisted in the air force. At two camps, and perhaps a third one, the boy had been acting as guard, and had been doing scrubbing, and work of that kind. This boy graduated as a senior matriculant. Perhaps in passing I might mention that he is an only son, although I realize, of course, that that point has no particular bearing. I have known this boy quite well, and in my opinion he is a bright young man. The father came to see me and pointed out his distress at the fact that after being in the Royal Canadian Air Force that length of time the boy had not been posted to anything other than scrubbing or guard duty. Of course, that may be part of the training; I do not know. If it is, then all right. But if there is such a surplus of young men around air training camps, there should not be. Certainly there should not be a surplus so great that they have to be put at scrubbing, cleaning and guard duty. They should be thoroughly trained and trained as quickly as posible so that they can get into the work for which they have joined the army.
I should like to know how men in the Royal Canadian Air Force are posted to the Royal Air Force. I have in mind a young man who recently went overseas as an aviator -perhaps this is the case to which the minister referred a short time ago-and was in England only a short time when he was sent to the Royal Air Force in Gibraltar. The next day he was in Malta and the next day he was shot down. The question is whether 
or not he was thoroughly trained to go on a bombing expedition of that kind. Are our men trained sufficiently in Canada so that when they reach England they can go immediately on bombing expeditions? Do we plan to train our men in Canada to the same extent as our cousins to the south do? When their men leave the United States they are evidently trained 100 per cent and can go into action immediately, as they demonstrated with such daring over the Coral sea during the last few days.
I have just one further point to raise. A few days ago the picture of a hockey coach appeared in our papers. I shall not give the name of this man, but he had1 been quite active in sports, about which I know very little. It may have been thought desirable that such men should be kept physically fit, but the fact is that when he was sent to the air training camp he was posted immediately to the administrative department. The father of a boy in the same camp wrote me a letter inquiring why his son who had been there for a long time and had applied on various occasions for a promotion to some administrative post could not get that promotion whereas this coach was immediately placed in an apparently preferred position. I wonder if every one who joins the air force is treated exactly the same? I hope later on, when the Minister of Munitions and Supply is before us, to try to work out some way so that the minister may have ten planes for every one he has now? I heard him say in the course of his remarks that he has more men trained for the air than there are planes in which to put them.


Charles Gavan Power: On the other side.


John Ritchie MacNicol: In Great Britain, but
not here. That bears out a remark I heard when I was in an aeroplane plant a short time ago. They told me that they had1 more planes here than we had men to man them.


Charles Gavan Power: I did not say that. I said
that our output has been more than sufficient to meet all the requirements we undertook to meet on the other side, so much so that there is a surplus. That is where we want our men.


John Ritchie MacNicol: A conference is to take
place later on this month between the heads of the air forces of the allies. I should like to see some arrangement made whereby they can collectively produce planes more rapidly and in greater numbers than is being done to-day, and at the same time train crews for those planes so that in the not long distant future the skies above Germany will be black with British planes and the skies above Russia

War Appropriation-Air Services
will also be black with British planes supporting our ally. Throughout the world, in Libya, in the Mediterranean, in Bengal, in the Coral sea, in Australia and elsewhere we must have clouds of planes in the skies to act against the enemy and to support our ships and our men on land.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: This is the third arm of Canada's defence service which has presented its report, and I think it is only right that a tribute should be paid to the men- who yesterday sat in our high schools and played on our ball fields but who are to-day flying the fortresses and combat planes in the skies wherever the allied forces are meeting the enemy. Canada's achievements in connection with each one of her armed forces are the object of pride to the Canadian people. I think Canada is particularly proud of her air force. One feature of the air force which warrants considerable tribute is the fact that it has been able to adapt itself to rapidly changing technique. Anyone following developments realizes that as bombing tactics are changed, as the effects from bombing are found out from bitter experience, as the form of fighting changes, rapid changes must be made in training, in the arming of aeroplanes and in the construction of aeroplanes. I think the Canadian air force and the Department of National Defence for Air deserve a tribute for what has been done in this connection.
It must have been satisfying to all of us to hear the minister state that we are now sending men to Britain in numbers sufficient to equal any demand that she may make. Almost every hon. member knows scores of lads of yesterday who are now fighting, or who have paid the supreme sacrifice. It was also with considerable satisfaction that we learned from the minister that he has plans for expanding the air training scheme and that the expenditures for this arm of the service are to be expanded this year.
When the records are tabled covering the number of flying hours put in, I think it will be found that the western provinces have proved to be particularly suitable for elementary training. This is due to the clear skies and the type of terrain which are to be found in that part of the country. It is hoped that the airfields in the west will be expanded in order to meet any further commitments. The record of the commonwealth air training scheme is one of which we can feel justly proud. One thing that mars it in my opinion is the fact that there appear to be almost limitless expenditures in order to get the job done. At times it seems to me that there is a wasteful procedure in connection with certain phases. When the minister was making
his statement last year he told us that they had had to pay rather high prices for materials and services because they wanted aerodromes and other services constructed with the greatest possible speed.
I had a return brought down in the house a short time ago, and I was rather sorry to learn from it that there is no departmental repair depot for engines in Quebec, that some private concern was doing this repair work for Quebec and parts of Ontario. It is to be hoped that private enterprise is not to enter to too great an extent into the services in connection with our armed forces. I was pleased to hear the minister state this afternoon that they are going to take away the elementary training schools from private companies.


Charles Gavan Power: Pardon me, I never said that.
I did not mention them at all, but if I were to say anything, I would say we are going to enlarge.


George Hugh Castleden: I am sorry if I was wrong, but I understood the minister to say that he was going to reduce the number of the elementary training schools.


Charles Gavan Power: On the contrary, if I had the opportunity I would enlarge the scope of private enterprise in the elementary schools. I can prove by figures that it pays us much better.


George Hugh Castleden: Is it not true that it was recommended in a recent report that the net profits from flying hours be reduced?


Charles Gavan Power: Oh, yes.


George Hugh Castleden: And that too much profit has been made by the elementary training schools?


Charles Gavan Power: They turn the profits back.


George Hugh Castleden: And the minister would extend these schools, probably to give larger profits. That would probably be the policy of the minister.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think it is fair to say that. I do not know of one elementary school that actually takes any profit. I think I could show by comparative figures, if the committee would permit me, that the comparison is all in favour of elementary schools under civilian auspices compared with elementary schools operated by the Royal Air Force.


George Hugh Castleden: Is that the Royal Air Force of Canada?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


George Hugh Castleden: I hope that the minister will place those figures on the record so that they will be available to all.

War Appropriation-Air Services
With regard to training air crew, I am sure that it has been of inestimable value to have a large staff of British officers come over to Canada to assist in the setting up of the plan, but I hope that as soon as possible the minister will take advantage of the opportunity to replace them by trained Canadians who have had experience in actual combat, and in control work, in administration, in training and instruction in the old country and in various theatres of war. The minister stated this afternoon that he thought the treasury board had probably as much to do with it as anybody that he was restrained from carrying out the policy of granting commissions practically to everyone who was trained in Canada to fly.


Charles Gavan Power: Not our treasury board, but the British treasury board.


George Hugh Castleden: I am referring to the British treasury board, and I should like to have a statement from the minister showing to what extent the British treasury board does exercise control over here, over the policy of his department and administration, and the precise nature of that control.


Charles Gavan Power: They do not exercise control over my department. They pay these pilots when they get overseas, and they do not want to pay out officer's pay when they can get a man as a sergeant. These men are handed over to the Royal Air Force when they get over there.


George Hugh Castleden: But the minister said that in his opinion every member of an air crew should have a commission.


Charles Gavan Power: Certainly.


George Hugh Castleden: Would the minister's department not be able to grant the commission and make up the difference in pay?


Charles Gavan Power: Not under the agreement made in 1939, whereby only 50 per cent could be granted commissions. That agreement was made between the four partners in the deal.
I had nothing to do with that.


George Hugh Castleden: Those were the details I wanted. I wanted to know to what extent the minister was prevented from carrying out policies that he thought would be advantageous.


Charles Gavan Power: Read the agreement.


George Hugh Castleden: 
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: The Minister of
National Defence for Air is one minister who invariably commands the attention of the house and of the committee because when he refers to what is being done in the air he invariably says "Canada" is doing this or that, for which "Canada" should1 be proud, instead of referring to the great efforts that have been made as if they were a party or partisan affair. As I listened1 to his magnificent peroration this afternoon, to his outline of activities of his department and to his plea to the members of this house for an armistice on political partisanship during the period in which the united nations air conference is to meet in Ottawa, it seemed to me that the arguments he advanced in that behalf were equally applicable to times when the air conference is not meeting, and they constituted a very fine commendation of the necessity for a national effort in Canada to-day by a government divorced from political or partisan considerations whose one aim would be victory on behalf of the empire.
There are two or three matters I would bring to the minister's attention. He very frankly agreed with the contention of the hon. member for Lambton West that airmen who have won their wings in the air force should receive commissions. I think that would do very much toward improving the attitude of the men serving to-day in the air force. A few days ago en route to Ottawa I talked with a number of Australians. They have the same system, of course, under the British commonwealth scheme that we have. They mentioned an instance such as was portrayed in the house this afternoon, of the return, of our men after flying over Germany, and then the sergeants going to their mess and the officers to theirs. They said that a new scheme had

War Appropriation-Air Services
been adopted in the Royal Australian Air Force in the east whereby,, instead of having an officers' mess and a non-commissioned officers' mess, officers and men met together in what is known as an air crew mess. I think _ the adoption here of such a scheme would do much to improve morale. It is hard sometimes to see young men, friends through collegiate, friends through university, taking their courses as airmen to be together, followed on graduation by separation, some becoming officers and others non-commissioned officers.
When officers take to the air they get, I understand, $2 a day flying pay, whereas noncommissioned officers who take to the air receive only SI. Is there any reason why officers and non-commissioned officers over Germany or anywhere else, doing identical wrork, should receive any difference in compensation as flying pay? I suggest that if it is impossible under the British commonwealth scheme to make all the crews who have earned their wings commissioned officers, at least the discrimination, if I may call it such, as far as flying pay is concerned, should be done away with.
There is one other matter to which I should like to refer. The hon. member for Yorkton spoke of elementary training schools, to which the minister replied, and rightly, that there is no profit other than 5 per cent paid to those who contribute as shareholders to the establishment of elementary flying training schools. But that is not the position of affairs in air observer schools, which are set up, managed, and operated in various parts of Canada by civilian companies. The elementary schools, with I believe three exceptions, are sponsored by flying clubs. The distribution of profits earned in the operation of elementary flying training schools is that, after 5 per cent is paid to the shareholders-generally members of flying clubs-the remainder is set aside in a common fund and at the conclusion of the contract or of the war will be turned over to the flying clubs setting up the respective schools. That is not so in the case of the air observer schools.
Under the contracts which were made between the government and the air observer schools there was provision for a profit of SI per flying hour. Recommendations were made by the committee on national war expenditures for a reduction of that profit to 35 cents. Would the minister explain whether when, I believe on April 1 of this year, new contracts were drawn with the air observer schools, an alteration was made in the provision relating to profit as far as profit per flying hour is concerned.
There are at the present time-I speak subject to correction-about ten air observer schools in Canada. These schools, set up and constituted for the purpose of training observers and air crew, are owned by private corporations, and there are no controls on the profits which the private companies operating these schools may earn. The position is that they receive a very large amount per month as management fees, and in addition, at the conclusion of the contract they receive 25 per cent of the saving upon maintenance provided for in the target price as set by the department. Be it also noted that these air observer schools are situate in the most strategic parts of Canada. When this war is over there will necessarily be a tremendous expansion of civilian air transportation. It is of great significance to know in whose control these air observer schools are. To-day, if I understand aright, none of them is owned by the Canadian National Railways, but several are owned by the Canadian Pacific railway or its subsidiaries-


Charles Gavan Power: Six.


John George Diefenbaker: -and I think it is only fair that, if a system of private ownership is to continue, some of these should be turned over to the Canadian National Railways, or that railway should be given an opportunity to operate them, so that when the war is over, control of civil aviation will not be exclusively in the hands of one corporation. I have no criticism to offer of the operation of these six schools by the Canadian Pacific railway, but there should be provision made now that when hostilities end, the entire control and maintenance of civil aviation in Canada should not be vested in one transportation corporation. I wish now to ask a series of questions of the minister which, I trust, will clear up the situation as far as these schools are concerned.
What restriction, if any, is there upon the profits to be earned by air observer schools?
How many air observer schools are there in operation?
Are any of them owned or controlled or operated by the government or by the Royal Canadian Air Force?
What are the names of the companies operating these various schools?
What is the capitalization of each of the companies operating these schools?
How much did each of said companies receive, during every lunar month since it commenced operation, as the management fee?


Charles Gavan Power: Will my hon. friend send me a copy of these questions before the recess?

War Appropriation-Air Services


John George Diefenbaker: Certainly. It is impossible to take them down as I am reading them?


Charles Gavan Power: I am not a good stenographer.


John George Diefenbaker: What expenditures were made by each under the head of management for each lunar month since the commencement to date?
How much did each of said companies receive for each twenty-four hour period since commencement of operations, for operation and maintenance, and what was the disbursement for each of said periods under this head?


Charles Gavan Power: For each twrenty-four hour period?


John George Diefenbaker: For each twenty-four week period.


Charles Gavan Power: I was getting a little worried.


John George Diefenbaker: It would be a fairly substantial sum for each twenty-four hour period, too, but I am asking for the amount for each twenty-four weeks.


Charles Gavan Power: It was the trouble of digging it up that I was worrying about.


John George Diefenbaker: I would point out in connection with operations and maintenance that a company operating an air observer school receives 25 per cent of the saving thereon.
What profit per flying hour is now provided in the agreements between the government and each of the said companies?
If a reduction has taken place, when was the reduction made and has it been accepted by all the companies?
I mention the air observer schools because the other evening, and again to-day, there was apparently a misapprehension in so far as the difference is concerned between the operation of elementary training schools and air observer schools. The elementary schools provide for no profit for the shareholders beyond 5 per cent; air observer schools allow unlimited profits.
I also wish to ask whether consideration has been given by the minister, and a decision has yet been arrived at, as to the continuance of air observer schools under private ownership.


Charles Gavan Power: I have not the entire list, but in so far as the decision to continue to operate air observer schools under private ownership is concerned, not only will we continue to operate them but we will double their capacity. There are ten air observer schools in Canada. The cost to the crown per graduate pupil is SI,260. The original estimate of

the cost per pupil intake was $1,650 while the actual cost to the crown at the present time is SI,075. The net annual profit remaining to each operating company after making provision for income taxes approximates $5,000. The operating efficiency of all these . schools is of a high standard, both as to training and as to maintenance of property and equipment, as well as from the economical point of view.
As regards the six companies operated by the Canadian Pacific, and the question as to why the Canadian National does not operate any, my hon. friend will remember that when these contracts were given out-if I remember rightly it was in 1940-a large number of these independent companies had not as yet been absorbed by the Canadian Pacific Railway. The Canadian Pacific, as I recollect, came into the airways field only after these companies had obtained their contracts. Some of the companies are the Yukon Southern and Prairie Airways. I do not know whether it has a contract or not. At any rate, there are six such companies, so that in so far as the Royal Canadian Air Force is concerned it is not our fault if the Canadian Pacific happens to be in a strategic position with respect to airline traffic after the war. I do not know, because I was not in the department at the time, whether T.C.A. was offered contracts, but I presume it was not, because most of these companies were at that time independent; these independent companies were naturally anxious to get into this field, and the department was anxious to have them since they had at their disposal at that time a comparatively large number of trained pilots. It is true that since the plan has been expanded, the pilots as a rule are men who are trained by ourselves, so that what we get mostly is management, knowledge of maintenance, knowledge of the way in which to run aircraft, in perhaps a more efficient manner than would be possible if we did it ourselves. So much have the Royal Air Force been impressed with the work done by civilian companies that they have asked many of these companies to take over the proposed R.A.F. schools in Canada on the same basis as the J.A.T.P. are operated at the present time. With respect to the Canadian Pacific, leaving aside the question of strategic position, which could be discussed more properly in the railway committee because it really has not much to do with the R.A.F., Mr. Coleman wired me yesterday, or rather to the financial adviser, to the following effect.


Mr. HARRIS (Danforth):: It is rather late to discuss T.CA. affairs now in the railway committee when the report has been tabled.

War Appropriation-Air Services


Charles Gavan Power: I was not aware of that.


Ross Wilfred Gray: I agree with the hon. member for Danforth (Mr. Harris).


Charles Gavan Power: This is the wire addressed to the financial adviser of civilian flying schools:
Confirming conversations and our suggestion made some two months ago concerning operation of air observer schools-


Ross Wilfred Gray: I agree with the hon. member for Danforth.


The CHAIRMAN:: Is the hon. member rising to a point of order?


Joseph Henry Harris: The point is that the minister suggests that this matter might be reviewed by the railway and shipping committee when they are considering the report of Trans-Canada Air Lines, but that report has been considered, dealt with and reported by the hon. member for St. Boniface (Mr. Howden), and there is no opportunity now, nor will there be for the rest of the session, to deal with it. I hope that the minister will not pass by that particular feature of our review of this situation by just suggesting that it might be considered by that committee. The point of order is that the minister should withdraw the suggestion that we have an opportunity to consider that particular matter, and leave the matter open for discussion in this chamber in due course.


Charles Gavan Power: I had not thought of the railway committee at all.


Joseph Henry Harris: Trans-Canada Air Lines-


Charles Gavan Power: I said that the question of the strategic situation of the Canadian Pacific vis-a-vis Trans-Canada Air Lines was a matter that did not concern the Royal Canadian Air Force.


Thomas Vien: There is no point of order. In the first place, the matter can always be referred to a committee by special reference of the house. Even if the committee had discharged its obligation with respect to a previous reference, the house is always at liberty to make a new reference to any committee, and therefore I do not think the point of order is well taken.


Joseph Henry Harris: It is not necessary to have this referred to the committee on Trans-Canada Air Lines.


Charles Gavan Power: It is not my concern as R.A.F. to discuss the strategic position of C.P.R. air lines, vis-a-vis Canadian National air lines, because at the time the Royal Canadian Air Force originally entered into contracts, these
companies, as far as I am aware, were independent concerns. May I read the telegram before the committee rises:
Confirming conversations and our suggestion made some two months ago concerning operation of air observer schools on non-profit basis. Canadian Pacific desires to confirm its intention to operate schools under present contracts on non-profit basis and to return all accrued surpluses and reserves to the crown at termination of contracts or earlier at minister's option.


John George Diefenbaker: Are those elementary schools?


Charles Gavan Power: No; air observer schools operated by the Canadian Pacific.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. CLEAVER:: Mr. Chairman, just before six o'clock the hon. member for Lake Centre returned to his attack on the air observer schools, in respect of their profits and in respect of the fact that they are being operated by civilian companies. I think the time has come when these attacks, which I consider rather unfair, should be answered.
The committee will recall that the whole question of civilian operated air training schools, that is elementary flying training schools and air observer schools, was referred to the war expenditures committee, which in turn passed on that part of its work to subcommittee No. 1. As chairman of that subcommittee I think I should remind the hon. member and the committee of a few of the facts. His first charge or attack was that these schools are being operated by private companies, and his contention was that they should be operated by the service. I should like to remind my hon. friend that he was a member of subcommittee No. 1, which on June 2 last 'brought in a unanimous report, in which the hon. member himself concurred. I should like to read what that subcommittee had to say with regard to the fact that these air observer schools are being operated by privately owned companies:
The training command of the Royal Canadian Air Force express their complete satisfaction in the training results of the elementary flying training schools and the air observer schools operated by civilian companies, and they stated any attempt to place the responsibility of this type of training upon schools operated by the service would place "an intolerable burden on the service", in which statement the committee concurs. The committee recommends that we should continue to take advantage of the services of these civilian flying companies, and that the services rendered by them be extended to their full capacity.

War Appropriation-Air Services
Up to that time the subcommittee had not had an opportunity to look into the profits being made by the air observer schools, but the committee continued its studies during the summer months and as a result brought in a further report with respect to air observer schools. I should like to remind my hon. friend of part of the contents of that report, first as to the efficiency of the operation of the schools:
The subcommittee finds that the air observer training schools are being very efficiently managed. The operating cost was originally estimated at $1,653.57 per pupil. The actual operating cost as of March 31, 1941, is $1,001.27 per pupil. With something over ten million miles flown to date these schools have had no casualties of either trainees or operating personnel.
That is truly a remarkable record, I submit, and one which could not have been attained except under the most efficient management.
Then my hon. friend complains of the size of the profits which were being made by the air observer schools, and of the fact that those profits were being earned by civilian shareholders. As he well knows, the whole question of profits was thoroughly gone into >y the committee, and in this connection I should like to read another short extract from the report:
The subcommittee has carefully considered the question of profits which will be earned by the operating companies. Partly on account of highly efficient management and partly on account of the pupil intake as fixed by the contract being increased without proportionate increase in management costs it was found that substantial profits were being earned. The following examples of lunar monthly profits from one of the schools show an average profit of $1,112. . . . This would indicate a yearly profit from that school under favourable conditions of $14,456. In this instance the profit is being earned by private individuals and while the contract restricts the declaration of dividends to 5 per cent annually yet at the conclusion of the contracts there would then be a distribution of accumulated profits. The subcommittee fully appreciates the fact that the air observer schools are being very efficiently managed and that these schools are performing an important war task and also appreciates the fact that measures of economy should not be permitted to slow up our war effort but as the actual circumstances have altered sharply since the contract was first entered into the subcommittee decided that a conference should be called of executive officers representing all of the schools, that the facts should be frankly placed before them and their cooperation invited. The conference was held on June 4 and as a result the operating companies have all voluntarily offered to agree to a reduction of what is described in the agreement as flying hour profits from $1 per flying hour to 35 cents per flying hour.
That was a voluntary effort by the operating companies.

The subcommittee recommends that the contracts should be amended accordingly and expresses its appreciation for this commendable attitude on their part. The subcommittee fully appreciates the fact that even after this reduction in profits is made, efficiently operated training companies will still earn net profits of approximately $5,000 annually after payment of taxes at existing rates, but believes that under the special circumstances surrounding these training agreements the recognized yardstick of measuring profits by their relation to capital employed is not an accurate system to use. In this instance the department is not purchasing goods or commodities but, on the contrary, is purchasing skill and experience. As to all existing professions, tariffs of fees have been established by practice but there are no tariffs available to guide your subcommittee in reaching a correct decision with respect to the present problem. In the light of all the surrounding circumstances the proposed change will satisfactorily meet this problem.
In view of the fact that these operating companies came to the committee voluntarily and offered to reduoe their profits to the point where they would earn only $5,000 annually, for all of their services, I do suggest to my hon. friend that these continuous attacks on civilian owned companies, which are doing such a wonderful war task, should cease.


Mr. CHURCH:: In the last war the headquarters of the Royal Air Force were in Toronto; there was no Royal Canadian Air Force then in Canada, and during the course of that war over 16,000 air cadets and mechanics were trained. This training was carried on with headquarters at Toronto and suburbs and at camps at Leaside, Armour Heights, Camp Borden, Beamsville, Trenton and many other places. The headquarters of No. 4 school of military aeronautics was at the university of Toronto and affiliated colleges, and the city which supplied and gave all their buildings and grounds and affiliated colleges. Some very fine pilots were turned out. Among those who were trained there were a large number of young Americans, many of them from United States universities and from California and the other Pacific coast states.
Those air men, when they went home, did not do like the Canadian people did. They did not forget all about the war, the air and all that kind of thing. They went into commercial aviation business, with the result that when the Chamberlain government announced its programme of aeroplane development and rearmament a few of these persons in commercial aviation got large contracts. I must say that Colonel Barker, V.C., Colonel Collishaw, M.C., D.S.O., the present Air Marshal Bishop, V.C., and another one named Frank McGill, now air commander at Trenton, urged the authorities of the day to continue

War Appropriation-Air Services
aviation in a commercial way, and also by way of rearmament. But very little was done until shortly after this war broke out, because the pacifists seemed to have control of almost everybody in Canada.
Even some of the school boards abolished the cadet movement, which has always been the backbone of the three arms of his majesty's forces in recruiting. In London, England, the present home secretary, Mr. Morrison, as head of the London county council, refused to give the use of one of the schools in the evening to the Royal Air Force, or allow Jellicoe's speech to be distributed. The same thing happened in Canada. It happened in Glasgow, where they would not allow signs to be put up in street-cars, for air force and army recruiting, because the pacifists reigned.
In 1939 a first return was presented to the house showing the numbers in the army, the navy and the air force, asked for by me before the war. That return, dated April 24, 1939, showed that the Royal Canadian Air Force was composed of only 257 officers and 1,927 airmen. A return was placed on the table two weeks ago and, if the minister would be good enough to look into it, I should like to have it placed on Hansard. It shows the pay and allowances, and other emoluments of the officers and men of all ranks in the air force. The Minister of National Defence supplied this return at my request on an order of the house for all the services, and a number of hon. members have asked for a copy of the air part of the return. I should like now to hand it to the minister to have it checked up, and to see if it can be placed on Hansard, as has been done on occasions by the Minister of National Defence and for the women's army. When war broke out I had a resolution on the order paper, and the, return, No. 44, came down for all his majesty's forces and the women's army on March 24, 1942.


Charles Gavan Power: If the committee permits the hon. member to place this on Hansard, I would have no objection; but I have no right to permit the hon. member to do so.


Thomas Langton Church: Possibly the minister could check it up to date.


Major James William Coldwell: Are the rates the same as at present in effect?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


Thomas Vien: The placing of something on Hansard, without first reading it into the record, requires unanimous consent. Do I assume the hon. member has unanimous consent?


Major James William Coldwell: I suggest that any table of pay and allowances now placed on the record should be brought up to date, and I believe that is what the hon. member desires.
I suggest this return should not be placed on Hansard, if it is not up to date.


Charles Gavan Power: I gathered it was a return which had been tabled recently.


Major James William Coldwell: I thought it was 1939.


Charles Gavan Power: If the committee wishes to have a table of 1939-an obsolete table- placed on Hansard, I have no objection.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I believe the hon. member is asking the minister to have the table checked by his officials, brought up to date and then placed on Hansard.


Charles Gavan Power: I should be very glad to do that. I thought the hon, member wanted my permission to place it on Hansard, and my reply was that I have no objection to his placing anything on Hansard.


Thomas Vien: I understand the hon. member has not the unanimous consent of the committee?


Charles Gavan Power: From what the hon. member said I understood he wished me to have the return checked by my officials, so that it might be placed on Hansard after it has been checked.


Richard Burpee Hanson: And
brought up to date.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes. This seems to be a return of March 24, 1942, and would seem to be pretty well up to date.


Major James William Coldwell: I thought it was 1939.


Thomas Langton Church: Any action taken with respect to the recent return will satisfy me. It is the pay of all ranks in the air force. It may have to be brought up to date, a few days. I acquired it from the clerk of records.
Since war broke out I have had a resolution on the order paper asking for better allowances and better protection to the men of his majesty's forces and Canada's soldiers, including the air force, and asking specially for a system of life insurance on all soldiers, so that they will be taken care of after leaving the forces at the conclusion of the war and for sickness and unemployment insurance. I have asked, too, for a cost of living bonus for dependents, and free fares and better accommodation on trains and ships, and a bill, No. 6, to amend the Railway Act (free fares). I hope that some effort will be made to carry

War Appropriation-Air Services
these suggestions into effect, and that special consideration will be given to supplies to the air force.
Before the war broke out, municipal, provincial and federal authorities had spent nearly a billion dollars on the dole, during the period of depression and unemployment. In the years 1936, 1937 and 1938 I urged on the government on my motion as a private member that it should adopt a system whereby young people out of high schools would in an apprenticeship system of three years learn military drill, get pocket money, clothing, lodging and deferred pay by signing up for from three to five years and work as apprentices in industry or mechanics in eight or nine key industries. If that had been adopted we would have had about 25,000 skilled mechanics from these industries when war broke out and nearly that number of air mechanics. I am sorry it was not adopted. The money was spent, anyway, on the dole and wasted, and when the war came we found that we were away behind in our preparations.
Many of our young Canadians were overseas a year or two before the war. Some of them had to go at their own expense or on cattle boats to enlist, and that matter has been discussed here. There was some discussion as to whether we should send them over a year before we took part in the war, at Canada's expense, for the Royal Air Force. I know of one young man at Belleville who was helped out of gaol on my request by the Minister of Pensions and National Health. The young man told the magistrate at Belleville that he was sixteen when, in fact, he was only fourteen. The minister interested himself in the young man, and he was released. He was only fourteen, but gave his age as sixteen or seventeen so that he could go overseas in a cattle ship to the old country in order to serve.
I have been pleased to see the work done in connection with cadet services. The school boards of this country deserve a great deal of credit. Long before the South African war, in fact after the Fenian raids, school boards and boards of education supported the cadet movement in the schools of Canada. That movement was the backbone of the militia in the last two generations; it is the backbone of the reserve army, air force and the naval cadets to-day. Boards of education in Canada have done good work in that connection.
I was sony that five or six years ago parliament struck out the vote for the cadet movement. As I have said to some hon. members, I think it would have been far better if the government had left the air force the way it was; that is, actively connected with the army

and the navy, through the school boards. In that way I think we would have had a unified cadet system under public control. True, some say that private citizens and organizations furnish equipment. That may be so, but cadet air services receive, I believe, a $25,000 grant.
One of the most ardent workers in connection with air cadet training has been Right Reverend Bishop Robert J. Renison, of St. Paul's Anglican church, Toronto, a veteran of the great war. I believe that at the annual air cadet service there were 1,200 of all cadet denominations at his church. He was a leader in education and military matters. His son went to the old country in 1938, at his own expense, and joined the Royal Air Force in England. He was a young varsity student and is now a prisoner of war in Bonn. The bishop, one of Toronto's leading citizens, has done a great deal of work in connection with the air cadet services. His other son is with the 48th battalion in England.
A return was brought down in the British parliament in connection with the help given by the women's army, as far as the air service is concerned. I believe that in the pay service, and in many other occupations they could be used to displace some of those between the ages of seventeen and forty-five and release some for overseas and home defence.
An air force return was brought down by the minister, No. 29, on February 26, 1941, with reference to sickness in the manning pool at Toronto. It seemed that the air force got the horse palace and cattle stable buildings there, good modern brick buildings, and the return states that in one there were 864 cases of respiratory throat trouble as well as many other illnesses. Now that the government has taken over this property, on which $23,000,000 had been spent on grounds, buildings and permanent exhibits by the city, the air force should get better equipment and buildings on these grounds like the navy have, and better than they have in connection with the present manning pool.
The empire training scheme has been commented on very favourably many times. Complaints have been made, and I know the minister is doing everything he can in connection with them, about the accommodation on Canadian trains as well as on boats in the ocean service. The minister has been most sympathetic toward these complaints and I know he is doing everything to have an improvement made in better transit accommodation and cheaper meals and all along the line, and as to fares my bill asks for free fares.

I should like to say a word about the losses and deaths in training that have occurred in the air. Of course these losses cannot be compared with the loss of life occasioned by the motor car. In the city from which I come 107 people were killed last year in motor car accidents, and the losses all over Canada from motor cars are most appalling. When a loss of life occurs in connection with the air training scheme I think a copy of the evidence taken at the inquest should be made available to the relatives. These inquests are not civil inquests; they are military inquiries carried on under the regulations of the department. Civil inquests are in public. I have no complaint to make, but the families should have a copy of the evidence and findings and I would offer the suggestion that greater care should be taken to prevent accidents to young pilots in the Royal Canadian Air Force.
I know the authorities have been careful and that accidents are likely to happen when we have such a large number of camps spread all across the country, with a great variety of climatic conditions, but I think every care should be taken. Many of these young men come from other empire countries such as New Zealand and Australia and the most extreme care should be taken. These young pilots are placed in positions of responsibility and accidents will happen. I realize it is not fair to draw rash conclusions; we must compare our losses now with those that occurred in the last war and take into consideration the hours of flying, miles travelled, and so on. Everybody admires these young pilots who fly the skies after a great deal of training, after weeks and months of study. While some of them have the necessary skill, many of them do not have the confidence they should have. The government should see that the camps have the best equipment available, and have rigid inspection of pilots, equipment, and over flights.
I hope that great care will be taken to prevent accidents. We should take into consideration, not only the climate but the position of the camps. I understand from what the minister said last session that he does not locate these camps, that that is done by the Minister of Munitions and Supply. In the case of some of these camps great difficulty has been encountered in getting sewers, water and transportation facilities. Some of the camps in the west and in other parts of the country are not located where they should be. The climate and weather conditions are important factors. Many of these young men who come to this country are not used to our fogs and prevailing climatic conditions, and they may not have as good judgment for distances in
War Appropriation-Air Services
bad Canadian winter weather and other matters as they should have. Referring to this question of accidents in the British House of Commons, Captain Balfour, joint undersecretary for air, said the other day in the house on a discussion of this very matter of air training:
I was very glad indeed that the hon. gentleman raised the question of accidents, because one of the tragic aspects of the administration of a service department such as the air ministry, which my right hon. friend and myself have to face, is that the air, even in peace time, has always taken its toll of human life and that in war the toll is much greater. I can assure him that we regard accidents as incidents which must be investigated and sifted to the uttermost. We are always anxious about accidents; we can never be happy or complacent or satisfied so long as accidents, which might possibly be avoided, occur. We have a complete accidents branch; we sift out statistics of all accidents with a view to finding out whether a particular type of aeroplane is more prone to accidents than to others and whether a particular age group is inclined to be more prone to accidents than another; we study meteorological conditions and get a series of cross sections of all the circumstances attending accidents.
A member inquired about the operational work being carried out with monoplanes, and Captain Balfour replied:
I will gladly answer that point. Biplanes are used to any extent in the training of pilots, only at the elementary stage, and at this stage the biplane has been found to be satisfactory and economical in use. It is our experience that pilots receiving their initial training on biplanes show no variation in skill, as compared with pilots who have received elementary training on monoplane types. I cannot agree that the biplane is inefficient or wasteful, or is not giving our young men a fair chance. On the other hand, the biplane lias not got all the modern developments associated with the low-wing monoplane.
I am satisfied that here in Canada a great deal of care is being taken but, when accidents do occur, I think the parents should be informed immediately and be provided with a copy of the evidence taken before the military court.and its finding. I am sorry that the universities of this country have not received more support from the government in their air programmes and syllabus. The technical school at Toronto applied for a new wing, but their request was not granted. They have been doing a great deal of work in training students, both in the day time and in the night time, in order to qualify them to work in munitions plants and other plants manufacturing aeroplane equipment and all that kind of thing. I believe something should be done to help them because it is essential war work of the greatest national value for total
war.

War Appropriation-Air Services
Have any experiments been carried out, either by the government or by the Canadian National Railways, in connection with the use of air ambulances? These flying schools are located all over Canada, and I am sure that many lives could be saved if we had a proper system of aeroplane hospital ambulances and nursing services. I think this is worthy of immediate consideration. When this war began there were some cardinal errors made in connection with lack of bases and protection of the air force and their aerodromes overseas. Britain was not ready. The pacifists in government were to blame. There are three elements which have caused a heavy loss of life in the air in this war by our naval disarmament. I refer to the reduction in our cruiser strength from seventy, to fifty by the Washington treaty, which reduction was contrary to all Admiralty advice. This has led to great losses of life in connection with flying. Then there was the limitation of our destroyer flotillas on the incorrect assumption that flotilla strength should be determined by the submarine strength of the other powers. Also there was the abandonment of the bases in Ireland. All these have caused a considerable loss of life in connection with the battle of the Atlantic on land, sea and in the air.
Canada should study the effect of the development of the air arm in the conduct of war at sea. We might have some statement about that. After two and a half years of war it should be possible' for this country properly to value and assess the part that air warfare has played so far in this war and what is expected of it to the war's end. It has had some successes in this war and some failures, some successes which were least expected and some failures where success was anticipated. To-night we hear of an enemy submarine sinking a freighter in the St. Lawrence. The enemy is at our front, side, and back doors.
We can learn lessons from the bombing of Britain. Blackouts, per se, are of little value alone. In the daylight attacks on Britain the enemy were favoured by good long-range conditions and by having a ring of bases all round Britain from which their bombers could attack the island, and industries and dense population all together, but the British people withstood the attack. The daylight bombing was a failure. The combination of the Royal Air Force fighters and the antiaircraft guns broke up the daylight attacks. The guns broke up the German formations, and the fighters of the Royal Air Force concentrated on the scattered enemy units. That was responsible for the wide difference

in the figures of losses given out by the Germans and the British. At night the only defence Great Britain had at first against attack from the air was the barrage balloons, which prevented dive-bombing on moonlit nights by the German air force. At first neither the British anti-aircraft guns nor the fighters were effective against the German bombers at night. There were two main reasons why all the cities of Britain did not suffer the fate of Coventry. First, the enemy did not have sufficient heavy long-range bombers available, and there was, secondly, difficulty in routing their formations flying at high speed on dark nights and bad weather from widely separated bases. But the night bombing by the German air force was overcome in time through defence improvements and the British defence of radio location, together with anti-aircraft gunnery. The May blitz on London was the worst, and it was also the most costly for the attackers, and in the result the invasion in the air was on the whole a failure, though a lot of lives were lost and there was heavy civil damage.
I appreciate what has been done in the commonwealth air training plan. The type of recruit offered is most excellent, and we have had no difficulty in getting recruits for the air force as well as for the navy, under the voluntary system. If the proper methods had been adopted from the very beginning of the war, there would have been no difficulty in getting recruits for the army and under voluntary recruiting I think a million men could have been obtained, but as I said when the war started it was almost as difficult to get into the army as it was to get into the Rideau club, which is supposed to have a long waiting list. The policy at that time in getting recruits for the army was on-again, off-again, on-again. If we had had a better system, I believe we would have got the recruits. The military authorities did all they could, and I am not criticizing them at all, far from it, because they are a very fine body of men, and in that tribute I would include the three good ministers of the war departments of his majesty's forces and the Minister of Pensions and National Health, who are all experienced, trained soldiers. I still say, however, that if we had had a proper system of voluntary recruiting for the army at the start we would have done very much better than we did.


Mr. McCULLOCH:: Mr. Chairman, I am not in the habit of taking up very much of the time of the house, but some three years ago an airport was started in New Glasgow and the town was asked to buy a large tract of land, which it did and deeded the same to the

War Appropriation-Air Services
government. At that time the government spent in the vicinity of $20,000 in levelling off this field and putting it in shape for hard surfacing. In the last four months four planes have crashed in this vicinity, one at Lismore, which plane was damaged considerably. One landed at the airport and stuck in the mud; another one landed to help it, and I understand that they are both there yet. Three weeks ago another one crashed at the Allan shaft within two miles and a half of the present airport. If this airport had been in condition these planes probably could have landed safely at it.
The damage done to the first plane at Lismore would have more than paid for the hard surfaces of this airport. Planes are flying over New Glasgow night and day. Not having an airport to land at when they are in trouble they may crash, as occurred in the instances of which I have spoken, and at any time there may be loss of life.
I want to read a few paragraphs from a letter I received from Mr. L. D. Payzant, chairman of the airport committee of the New Glasgow board of trade. He says:
Since writing you the above letters, disaster has taken place to three more planes in this area, largely I believe due to the fact that the government have no adequate airport here which means that they did not implement their contract signed with the town of New Glasgow on March 1, 1940.
The additional accidents to which I refer are, I think, familiar to you. Several weeks ago a plane landed on the airport, which of course lacks hard-surfacing, and in the muddy condition of our spring it was injured. A second plane came to its rescue and was likewise mired in the mud, and so far as I know both planes are still there awaiting weather that will dry up the surface of this field. Such a situation is really pathetic when a few thousand dollars would have put the field in shape for emergency use.
On Saturday last another disaster took place. A military plane had to make a forced landing at the back mines just about three miles from our air field which, of course, he probably did not recognize as there are no markings on it whatsoever and no record in the manual supplied to flyers. If the difficulty to planes mentioned herein and those referred to in my letter of January 12 continue, and they are likely to do so as flying around this district seems necessary, it seems the height of folly on the part of the department to ignore the contract with the town. All we are asking for at the present time is to have this field hardsurfaced and made available for planes in emergency.
I submit that for the minister's consideration.


Mr. ADAMSON:: First of all, I should
like to congratulate the Minister of National Defence for Air upon one particular phase of the excellence of the joint air training plan, and that is that I have never at any time
heard any complaints in any way, shape or form that the slightest tinge of politics was mixed up with this magnificent plan.
There are one or two suggestions I wish to make, possibly from a military point of view. It has been my privilege to discuss the campaign in Libya not only with air force officers but also with army officers and with United States observers of that campaign. Nearly all of them have said this one thing, that a break-down was caused by lack of cooperation between the two forces, the air and the army. They simply did not think in terms of each other's weapons.
I suggest to the minister that here we have a great air training scheme, as well as a military training scheme, and eventually the army and the air force will have to fight together. It seems to me that at the coming air conference some suggestion should be made for using Camp Borden, where we have an air force training school and the Canadian armoured corps, to train the two forces to cooperate and learn the characteristics of each other's weapons, so that as far as the army is concerned, we shall know what we look like from the air, and the air force will know some of the difficulties, the lack of vision, the peculiarities and the strain upon drivers of armoured vehicles in the army. I have made a similar suggestion before. Both the air and the army authorities have invariably agreed that this would be a good idea, but the air force said, "We have not the pilots to train these men, nor have we the machines." I suggest that this is one of the essentials. We should send both our army and our tank crews overseas with some knowledge-you cannot make it extensive, but at least it can be a basic knowledge-of each other's point of view. In this way you will start off with a cooperation which you must have in any mobile war.
There was an announcement in the press the other day that His Majesty the King was pleased to assent to the formation of a Royal Army Air Corps. I have seen nothing further about it, and I should like to know whether there is any foundation for the statement.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know anything
about it. It is not my business.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I believe it was a Canadian Press dispatch, and appeared in a Toronto paper.
There has been considerable discussion this afternoon and this evening concerning commissioning of air crew personnel who have graduated. The minister suggested that they should become ensigns. The difficulty, I believe, is that after a certain period, when

War Appropriation-Air Services
they go through and get their wings, the highest fifty per cent are commissioned and the rest are made sergeant pilots. I suggest to the minister that he consider giving all graduates the king's warrant-making them all warrant officers-until they have had so many hours combat flying. I suggest that as an idea which might work, because I realize a difficulty arises. Because one boy gets 86 per cent and another gets 84 per cent, the one becomes an officer and the other a sergeant. I believe that is an unfair system. Perhaps there are/ difficulties about making them all officers where there are large bomber crews containing as many as eight men. But this discrimination seems to me bad and undemocratic in principle.
There are two or three more suggestions I should like to make to the minister. A large number of Royal Air Force personnel proceeded here from England and trained in the United States. They came back, and we met them. All of them had a certain amount to say. A large number were failed, and they believe they had been failed unfairly. This is an administration matter, but I must point out that these stories were general; we talked to many who came back. Was there any reason why so large a number did not qualify as pilots in the United States?
Before a man can join the air force he undergoes an aptitude test. I believe that is general, applying to both the ground crew and the air crew. In my opinion there should be an aptitude test for every recruit before entering any branch of the fighting forces, and it would be interesting if the minister would give us some information or suggestions about how this test has worked for his air crews and his ground crews.


Charles Gavan Power: All I can tell the hon. member is that the minister tried it himself, and failed.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I was afraid to try it.
.But I should like to know whether, after the experience of a year or so, it has proved a success. The psychologists thought it would.


Charles Gavan Power: They say it has been successful.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The air crews-pilots, observers and air gunners-go through the schools and train until they get to their combat planes. I believe the committee would like to know what percentage of their training they get in Canada before they are capable of engaging the enemy in a combat plane. I understand they go to a combat centre in England and then to their fighter aerodrome. How much more training could

we do in Canada? What percentage of the finished article is made in Canada? What is left to be done in England?
If section 3 of the National Resources Mobilization Act is done away with, a great deal of time and effort might be saved by having joint recruiting stations. Frequently a man in the army, particularly at a basic training centre, thinks he is unfairly dealt with because he has not had an opportunity to go into the air force, and the military authorities have quite a lot of trouble in convincing him that the air force is full up as regards ground crew and that he has not the qualifications for air crew. I believe it would be a saving if joint recruiting offices for the three services were set up, wherein each applicant would be tested and sent to the service with which he was going to fight. He could then go on, knowing from the very beginning that he had had his chance of joining whatever service he wanted to join. He would not continue during weeks and perhaps months of training with the psychological handicap of wishing that he was in some other service.
I leave these three or four suggestions with the minister, and I would again particularly stress cooperation between the air and the army. We feel that we are kept in the dark about air matters, and there is a certain amount of resentment in many sections because it is believed that the air force does not cooperate with us. I dare say the fault is partly ours, but I think this is a war of three dimensions and, no matter what weapon we fight with, we have to be conscious of air warfare. I would suggest most earnestly to the minister that during the coming conference, right from the basic beginning, cooperation between the army and the air be taught, and taught in such a way that the army will become air-minded and that those in the air force will have a better understanding of our problems on the ground.


Angus MacInnis: I think the eulogy of the flying schools by the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Cleaver) is likely to lead the committee astray. I was on the war expenditures committee last year when the second report was made, and when the subcommittee, of which the hon. member for Halton was chairman, presented its report to the main committee it was not accepted but was referred back to be amended. I see no reason why the commendation should be so effusive even if the flying schools are doing a fairly good job. Why they should make any profit at all is the amazing thing to me. After all, the civil aviation schools put only a very nominal

War Appropriation-Air Services
amount of money into these institutions. All the capital is provided by the government. To set up a school complete, requires, I understand, some $800,000. The original shareholders in the aviation schools provided $35,000, on which they are allowed a dividend of 5 per cent. Why they should make any profit over the 5 per cent paid on the invested capital is quite beyond me.
Let us look at the fourth report of this subcommittee, concurrence in which has not yet been moved in this house. I find this:
The subcommittee finds that in every instance all of these clubs and companies are devoting their entire effort to the war training work. They are highly efficient and are carrying on their task without any thought of profits to the company or to private individuals.
That appears on page 593 of the minutes of proceedings, and two pages further on I find this:
In regard to profits to be earned by the training companies under the agreement, the amount of profit which would accrue under the agreement was determined as accurately as was possible at the time, but there was no previous experience on which to base an estimate. The subcommittee has carefully checked the profits which are being earned and finds them to be excessive, due to increased flying hours necessitated by increase in pupil intake.
Here is an organization which the committee says is carrying on without any thought of profit, and yet in the next breath it finds that the profits that are being made-mind you, by an organization which is working without thought of profit-are excessive. I wonder what the profits would be if they were operating for profit. Certainly they do wonderfully well when they are interested only in performing a public service. I mention this because I refused to accept the recommendation made by the subcommittee when the report was submitted. The government, as I have pointed out, provides the buildings, the planes, the gas, the oil, the food and everything. All that the schools provide is the management, for which they are allowed so much for salaries.
The report, a copy of which I have here, states that the companies operating the flying training schools are doing so under an agreement the terms of which were negotiated after conferences with the Canadian flying club association. It says:
Under the present contract the crown supplies the site of the school and all necessary buildings and equipment. The training company furnishes all management and operating personnel excepting a small supervisory air force personnel resident at the school to maintain proper discipline of the trainees and to see that the syllabus of training is adhered to.
Let us see what the government supplies. The first item is management:
This item includes salary of manager, secretary-treasurer, office staff and all items of management. This payment is a fixed amount of $1,400 per school, per lunar month.
Then there is operation and maintenance:
This item includes the salaries of all instructors, instructor pilots, engineers, electricians, mechanics, labourers, etc., and also includes cost of all spare parts and material used in connection with the maintenance of the aeroplanes. This item also includes heat, light, insurance, etc. The agreement calls for payment of a monthly target price, which in the first agreement was $16,000.
Then flying hours:
This item covers payments for three separate items. A monthly target price is set up to pay for cost of gas and oil. Any surplus earned as to gas and oil is the property of the crown and there is no profit feature to the company in regard to this item in any way.
Then messing:
The sum of 90 cents per man per day is paid the training company for messing. As no provision is made elsewhere in the contract for costs of the caretaking of quarters and for laundry, the training companies are paying for these services out of the amount allowed for messing, and in most instances the messing is sublet to a firm of reliable caterers.
Here we have the whole cost paid for by the government. And remember that in the first instance all the capital that the flying schools supplied was $35,000, whereas the capital required for a school is some $800,000 or more. Despite that, I find in the fourth report something to which I objected at the time the second report was being prepared, and which was not included in that report:
The subcommittee has already recommended that all profits should be invested in noninterest bearing Dominion of Canada bonds so that all profits earned will be available for war purposes until the end of the war. Most of the companies are already following this practice. The subcommittee has already recommended that the agreement should be amended making this compulsory. If this is done and if all the common stock of the training companies is held in trust for the flying clubs sponsoring the training company with federal charters in the terms recommended in this report then the question of profits is adequately protected.
Let me remind you, Mr. Chairman, that this common stock was given to the owners of the original $35,000 capital, and they did not pay anything for it. So the government of Canada is paying dividends or profits on common stock that did not cost the shareholders anything.


Charles Gavan Power: Oh, no.


Angus MacInnis: That is the principle to which I am objecting in this instance. It is a crime and a shame, and for the life of me I cannot see how the committee could recommend such a procedure.


Mr. GRAYDON:: My remarks this evening will be on a different subject and perhaps of a different nature from those which have been made by previous speakers, but I find it difficult to keep my seat when a matter so important to the country generally as the air force of Canada is under discussion.
I believe the Canadian people have a very deep sense of appreciation of the tremendous sacrifices that are being made by a certain group of our citizens, that is, the men who risk their lives day and night in the air crews of the Royal Canadian Air Force and the Royal Air Force itself. It seems to me that if ever a truth was self-evident it is the fact that when the actual testing time comes to our people, the youth of our country always measures up to the very best traditions of both age and experience. Those of us who have carefully watched the work of the men of our air crews are brought to our feet to pay a well merited tribute to these men who night and day sweep the skies over Germany, over the desert sands of Libya and over the expanse of the oceans from one end of the world to the 
other, who take risks perhaps greater than those taken by any other branch of our armed forces, and I say that without desiring to cast any reflection upon the dangers faced by those in our other armed services. But it does seem to me-and I am sure this must have occurred to many members of this parliament as I know it has occurred to many people throughout the country-that if we are to have some approach to equality of sacrifice in this war, and if some men are to be paid more than others, it should be the members of these air crews who face perils and dangers night and day, whose lives at best are very short, and of whom the Prime Minister of Great Britain said in those memorable words which will echo down the corridors of time, "Never was so much owed by so many to so few."
So it seems to me that, while there may be good reasons why in committees like this questions of pay should not be unduly emphasized, at the same time since there is a difference in the amounts paid to the men serving in the civilian as well as in the military branches of our war effort, we should review once and for all the whole question of pay in order to make proper recognition of the dangerous activities which we ask these men to undertake. I know something of the difficulties with which the minister is faced in connection with many of these matters. There are some things for which I do not give the minister credit, but I do believe he is sympathetic to the men in the air force of which he is the head. So I appeal not only to his mind but to his heart, to see to it that these men of the air force are given some sort of return which will compensate them in some measure at least for the tremendous risks and the great dangers which they must face day and night for you and for me.
I should also like to offer a suggestion to the minister in regard to a matter which has come to my attention on more than one occasion, as I am sure it has come to the attention of the minister and other hon. members. It is in connection with the embarkation leave, which particularly to the members of the air crews is a very significant and important leave. It seems to me we should take into consideration the vast distances in this country, and see to it that each man secures his clear fourteen days leave in every instance. I understand that is not always the case in some branches of the service, and I hope that when the minister scrutinizes his own regulations carefully he will make the necessary adjustments. I ask the minister to consider this matter seriously, because nothing less than the best should be given to these men. I

War Appropriation-Air Services
know the minister will see that that is done, after he has given the matter that attention which I suggest it so richly deserves.
What I am about to say, in closing my remarks, was to a great extent prompted by what was said by the hon. member for York West (Mr. Adamson), when he spoke of the desirability of having the three branches of the service united in some kind of joint enlistment bureau. I have no doubt that from time to time the minister has received complaints to the effect that young men attempting voluntary enlistment in Canada have a difficult time in trying to assess the position in which they find themselves. They have difficulty in locating the type of service into which they wish to enter. I have always felt that as a country we have not done enough to provide information leading to the objectives these young men wish to reach. Even if it is rather late, it seems to me that something might still be done. It is better late than never. I believe we could provide voluntary enlistees in Canada with more information as to the available types of service, and the work which may be open to them when they wish to enter any of the three branches.	.
I am sure the minister has had young men come to him-I have had the same experience -and say, "Well, I do not know where to go. I am depending upon a rumour here, and a story there. I am told it is best to go into this branch of the air force, or that branch of the army." It seems to me that the government should take some steps, before it is too late, to see that these men learn through some authoritative channels the types of services and the openings available in the three branches of our armed forces.
Therefore I would supplement what the hon. member for York West had said, with the further suggestion that we might properly have some kind of information bureau to carry out the suggestions which have been made. While at this time I do not wish to tread upon dangerous ground in connection with our present defence position in Canada, there are one or two questions I should like to ask. Of course the minister will be careful in his answers to any questions I may raise in this connection. However, there has been in the minds of many people in Canada the thought of the imminent possibility-perhaps not imminent, but certainly a possibility -of air attack on the dominion. I remember having brought this matter to the attention of the Minister of Pensions and National Health a year ago. I really went quite a piece with him, because I suggested the setting up of a new ministry of home security. I pointed out at the time that the minister knew I was making no reflection upon him, because, having regard to the fact that he is a bachelor, there was no use in giving him home security to look after.
I made the suggestion seriously, however, because I felt, as did many Canadians, that there was a definite possibility of air attack on the dominion. I believe the situation is more imminent to-day than it was then. There are many citizens-you may call them armchair critics, if you like, and among the number you may place me-who think that the dominion should have the assurance that if we are attacked from the air we have in our air force in Canada sufficient combat planes with the necessary equipment, guns and power to see to it that whatever does come across the seas, either from aircraft earners or otherwise, will be dealt with in the manner in which we as Canadians would want our nation defended.
I would therefore ask the minister to give the house and the country some assurance that every possible precaution is being taken, not only in connection with our coastal antiaircraft defences, which I know are being developed, but also with respect to interceptor planes and other types of combat planes. I know we have plenty of trainers; but, on the other hand, that would not be sufficient, provided we were subjected to air attack. Would the minister consider that question and, if possible, satisfy our people by an assurance that the air force in Canada is reasonably able to take care of any emergency such as I have outlined.


Charles Gavan Power: No minister in any country in the world can give the assurance that there is adequate air protection at any time As to telling my hon. friend as to the combat planes and bombers, or interceptor planes we have on hand he knows very well I cannot tell him that.


John George Diefenbaker: Just prior to the evening adjournment I asked the minister a number of questions which, I realize, he has not yet had an opportunity of answering. However, the hon. member for Halton took it upon himself to .answer the questions I had asked. I do not wish to enter into any controversy with that hon. member in regard to what took place in the committee on war expenditures, and for that reason I am not going to answer many of the statements he made this evening.
I do, however, wish to point out that no attack was made on any system. The



War Appropriation-Air Services
stand I take now and the one I took last summer was that in a time of war there was no justification for profiteering on the part of any company or any individual in Canada. If the answer to the questions I have asked reveals that there was in fact no profiteering, then of course the entire answer has been given to the questions I asked. This evening the minister said that in so far as air observer companies were concerned, after payments of all income tax and the like the average profit had been $5,000. That, of itself, signifies little. It shows that after all expenses have been paid and all deductions made, these companies have been receiving a net profit of 10 per cent in connection with the doing of work, the producing of air observers, for our flying forces. Let me say that what the true profit is can be determined only when there is an answer to the question I asked as to how much money was paid by the operating companies to the parent companies. The present set-up in some cases is this: There is the parent company. Then there is the company which receives the contract from the government. I suggest to the minister that the records will show that one or more of these companies with contracts, when arriving at a net profit of $5,000, failed to take into consideration sums of money running up to $12,000 and $14,000 which were paid to parent companies that existed before the war. Therefore the true state of affairs is not revealed by the statement that the net profit is merely $5,000.
This afternoon the minister stated that, either yesterday or the day before, the Canadian Pacific Railway company agreed voluntarily to continue the operation of air observer schools without profit. That attitude on their part deserves the highest commendation. The work they are going to do in connection with the training of air observers is the type of service which was so highly spoken of by the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon), and they are going to do it without profit. The object of the questions I asked this afternoon was to place before the minister and the country the situation which prevails in so far as certain companies operating air observer schools is concerned. They are permitted to make profits on an average of $5,000 after having deducted large sums of money which were paid over to parent companies. I understand that, in addition to that profit, 5 per cent has been guaranteed to each shareholder.
The present position is that these companies which were set up by private individuals received contracts from the government, under

which they first received a management fee of $2,700 a month. On the basis of that management fee and the savings thereon, a large portion of their profits is determined. Then there is a maintenance and operation account on which they receive $17,500 for every period of four weeks. At the expiry of their contract they receive 25 per cent of the surplus savings under this particular head. Finally there is the flying profit. Previously they received $1 and then it was reduced to 35 cents. The hon. member for Halton says that this was done voluntarily, but I do not intend to enter into a discussion of the definition of "voluntarily". However, I would point out that the operating companies agreed to do this only after the matter had been discussed before the committee. I ask the minister to furnish the committee and the house with information to which the members of the committee cannot refer because the evidence was given behind closed doors. Will he furnish answers to the following additional questions? What was the gross profit of each company operating an air observer school?


Charles Gavan Power: Are these the questions the hon. member sent me this afternoon?


John George Diefenbaker: I shall send these over to the minister. First, I want to know the gross profit of each company operating an air observer school in Canada before the deduction of any taxes. I want to know which companies operating air observer schools paid anything to parent companies for experience and the like. How much was paid by each company to its parent company during the first year of operation? The answers to these questions and to those I asked this afternoon will afford an opportunity to this country and the committee to know whether the contention of the hon. member for Halton is correct or whether the contention I am placing before the committee is correct, namely, that some of these companies are taking an unfair advantage of this country's being at war. I am glad to note the patriotic attitude of the Canadian Pacific Railway.


Mr. REID:: Better watch the C.P.R. too.


John George Diefenbaker: I have the assurance of the minister that the C.P.R. is not getting any profit, and I take it that they are not going to expect any profits from the inception of their contract.


Thomas Reid: They have other things in mind.


John George Diefenbaker: The hon. gentleman may cover that. I say again what I pressed this afternoon, namely, that the Canadian National Railways should have an opportunity of having air observer schools and the like so

War Appropriation-Air Services
that, when the war is over, our two transportation systems will be on an equal footing in so far as the development of post-war air transportation is concerned. I am asking the minister to answer these several questions so that the situation with regard to air observer schools will be known to this committee and to the country.


Charles Gavan Power: Rather than indulge in an acrimonious debate with my hon. friend with respect to this matter, I have taken the liberty of asking the officials who are most familiar with it to prepare categorical replies to his questions. I do not know that it would serve any useful purpose for me to controvert the statements made by my hon. friend, although perhaps if they go out to the press to-night it will be found that a great many of them are not in accord with the facts. However, I am not going to discuss them. I am sure I shall be able to answer every one of my hon. friend's questions in such a manner that he himself will have to admit that some of the aspersions which he casts on either the companies or the department, I do not know which, were not founded on fact. I have not my papers before me, but I am quite sure that there are no profits paid to parent companies by the operating companies. If I am not mistaken, most of the air observer companies have no parent company; they are dealing directly with the department.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister has said that I made statements which were incorrect.


Charles Gavan Power: I think so.


John George Diefenbaker: If he does not know, then I wish to point out to him that there are companies which have parent companies that, have received varying amounts, as high as
813,000	or $14,000, from the companies holding contracts with the government and paid for experience and other services.


Charles Gavan Power: I will check.


John George Diefenbaker: I think the minister was most unfair to me when he said that I was casting aspersions that would not be borne out by the facts, when I simply asked questions for the purpose of having the situation determined.


Charles Gavan Power: It is not fair for the hon. member to draw conclusions from his questions until he has had the answers. That is the only objection I have.


Mr. GOLDING:: I think my hon. friend wants to be fair to both the elementary and the observer schools. He was a member of the war expenditures subcommittee along with myself, but there is one thing in connection with these schools that has not been pointed
out. They had contracts with the government for three years, and the rate per flying hour was based on forty-eight pupils. After the collapse of France things were stepped up and this number was doubled, with the result that with a few more personnel and a few more planes they were getting a larger number of flying hours per lunar month than was expected when the original contracts were let. When we came to investigate their profits, I must say that I was proud of the men in both the elementary and the observer schools because they came here and assured us that it was not profits they were after, and they voluntarily offered to reduce the flying hour profit in the elementary schools from fifty to twenty-five cents, and in the observer schools from SI to thirty-five cents. It was the increase in the number of pupils which they had to handle that was giving them the greater profits which we considered too much. I do not think that has been brought to the attention of the committee before to-night, and I think in all fairness to the schools it should be mentioned.


Mr. NOSE WORTHY:: Mr. Chairman, I want first of all to commend the minister for having built up from scratch an excellent department. I am quite sure that the Canadian people appreciate the great work that is being done by the air force of this country under the minister's direction.
I want to pay tribute to the thousands of young men, mostly from the high schools of this dominion, who have gone into the air service, and particularly do I pay tribute to several hundreds of those boys who have gone from my own classes in my own school. Tonight I should like to pay especial tribute to the memory of one of those boys, Flying Officer McCormick, who was reported killed in a crash a few weeks ago. He had flown his thirty trips over Germany and had been decorated for bravery, and then he had the sad misfortune to be killed while engaged at a training school in England. While paying this tribute to the courage of these young men and to the great work they have done, I repeat that I am confident that the country as a whole is proud in the main of the work of this particular department.
What I want to say to-night is not by way of criticism but rather to ask for information. Would the minister tell us whether there is any collaboration between his department and the Department of Transport in the location of training schools and aerodromes? We have heard of the great part that aviation will play in civil life when the war is over. Canada is spending vast sums of money on the construction of these schools, and it seems to me that

War Appropriation-Air Services
the taxpayers of this country have a right to expect that these schools, as far as military exigencies will permit, shall be so located that when the war is over they can become a part of a great government-owned commercial air service. But I have been informed that many of our government-owned training schools and aerodromes are being built in waste places where, when the war is over, they will probably be left to fall into dilapidation. I think we have a right to expect that there should be cooperation between the two departments in the location of these schools, and it has been suggested to me that, wherever possible, they should be located where they can easily form part of a government-owned commercial air service after the war.
The second point on which I should like information is this: To what extent does the minister's department collaborate with the Department of Munitions and Supply in the letting of contracts? Actually the only criticism I have heard of the service now under discussion pertains to the letting of contracts.


Charles Gavan Power: If I may answer at once, we do not let any contracts at all. The Department of Munitions and Supply are our contractors.


George Hugh Castleden: Does the minister's department not give advice in the matter?


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: My question was that to which the minister has given answer, whether his department was responsible in any way for the letting of contracts.
A few weeks ago I visited one of the factories near Toronto, a comparatively small plant, and I found that it was working at that time on five different contracts. The walls and ceiling of that plant were littered with wings and other parts of planes made for types of machines which had been abandoned. I was told just this week-end that one of the plants near Toronto is now engaged in manufacturing a machine, many of the parts of which have to be brought from England. That appears to be handicapping to some extent the building up of our air arm, and I have heard a great deal of criticism on that point.
The third matter to which I would direct the minister's attention does not rightly belong to his department but is one in which I think he should be interested. We have a plant at Malton, situated fifteen or twenty miles from the city of Toronto. The roads to that plant are probably among the worst in Ontario. The Department of National Defence, the province of Ontario and the municipalities through which these roads run have been engaged ever

since that plant was built in childish quibbling over whose responsibility it is to keep those roads in good repair. On the night of February 8 of this year those roads were snowbound, and on February 9 the plant was closed down entirely on account of the condition of the roads. During a light snow-storm just before the Easter recess, the last snowfall we had in Ontario, the roads to that plant were so impassable that an official of the company stated to me that 5,000 man-hours were lost because of the road conditions- enough time to build one aeroplane. I have a letter from a representative of three thousand employees in that plant, sent just a week ago, relating that as a result of the rains that had fallen the road to that plant was almost impassable. The wear and tear on tires and springs and the extra use of gasoline made necessary because of the nature of that road are something of which either the minister's department or some other dominion authority should take control. It is definitely hampering our war effort.
We heard an excellent appeal from one of our members that the men engaged in the air force should receive the best possible treatment the country can afford. With that I agree. I have heard from a number of the younger married men in the force who are concerned because the government has not granted to their wives and dependents a cost of living bonus. I should like to call that to the attention of the minister and ask him to let us know what consideration has been given to the matter. Unquestionably the dependents' allowance fixed for these men was fixed before the cost of living bonus came into effect. Since that date the cost of living has gone up; it is costing the wives of our airmen as much to live as it does the wives of our civilians, and there is a feeling abroad among the members of the air force that their wives are as much entitled to a cost of living bonus as are the wives of civilian workers.
There is one-final-matter to which I should like to call the minister's attention. This, I believe, comes under his department: I have had correspondence with his department on this matter. It pertains to the wages paid to a group of civilians known as mess-men, employed by the air force. According to information from the minister's department these men are paid 850 a month, plus 81 a day subsistence allowance. From that the sum of $2.50 a month is deducted, I think for superannuation. These men get $78.50 a month. For three months following August, 1941, they received a cost of living bonus. Then it was discovered that their subsistence allowance had been increased at some time

War Appropriation-Air Services
since what is known as the basic period; and, after having this cost of living allowance for three months, it was cut off without notice, in October, 1941, and has not yet been restored. My correspondence from the minister's department states that representation has been made to the treasury board. Apparently the treasury board's interpretation of the conditions under which a cost of living bonus is to be granted precludes the department of air from paying that cost of living bonus. I should like to call the minister's attention to the fact that a great many of these men are returned men. Many of them are unable to serve their country in any other way; they went into this work feeling that here was one humble manner in which they could serve. My correspondence from the minister's department has this remark, which I am quite sure the minister himself will not approve. It calls attention to the fact that these men are receiving more than stenographers, typists and clerks in class grade I under the civil service commission. There should be no comparison between either the type of work these men are doing or the responsibilities that most of these men undertake-


Charles Gavan Power: That is not much of an
argument, I will admit. Whoever wrote that letter is not very logical.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Many of them are
returned men, and I think they are entitled to more consideration than stenographers and typists in the civil service.


Charles Gavan Power: I agree.


Joseph William Noseworthy: May we have the
assurance of the minister that the plea of this group of workers will be given consideration?


Charles Gavan Power: I shall be very glad to. I hope I did not write that letter; I certainly would not want to write any letters in which I gave as an argument for a low wage to these men that they are getting as good a wage as stenographers and typists. I will not use that argument, anyway.


George Hugh Castleden: Relative to the matter of which the minister spoke just now, regarding cooperation between his department and the Department of Munitions and Supply in the letting of contracts, I asked for a return with regard to the construction of an auxiliary airport in my constituency, and in the return, P.C. 9252, in giving a record of the proceedings, it is stated:
That following the receipt of tenders, the Department of National Defence (Air Service) has advised that an additional 20,000 cu. yds. of cut and fill would be required and that
cedar shingles would be used throughout; and negotiations were carried on with Waterman-Waterbury Manufacturing Company Limited;
That this firm has offered to perform the additional cut and fill at a price of 35 cents per cu. yd. less a reduction of $490 for the change in shingles. This firm has also advised that there is an increase of $2,750 over the original tendered price owing to the lateness of the season.
Apparently it was on the advice of the Department of National Defence for Air that the contract price was increased by something over $9,000.


Charles Gavan Power: In all probability, if we required more work to be done we advised the Department of Munitions and Supply to get it done. We increased our specifications, I assume. That is done every day. If I must have 20,000 more cubic yards of fill, I simply tell the contractor to go ahead and do it. I do not know the cost.


George Hugh Castleden: It was just in reply to the statement the minister made that he gave all contracts to the Department of Munitions and Supply and did not give any advice in regard to them.


Charles Gavan Power: I said that the Department of Munitions and Supply was our contractor. When we want a job done or when we want to buy something we simply turn it over to them and ask them to do it or to buy it for us, but we must at least specify what we want and the kind of thing we want and provide specifications of the buildings and the runways or whatever it is we require. We do not ask them to specify for us; we specify, and they carry out the contract.


George Hugh Castleden: That is the very thing that an hon. member was asking here.


Charles Gavan Power: No, he did not. He asked me if we did the purchasing. We do not do the purchasing. W7e ask the Department of Munitions and Supply to purchase certain supplies for us, and they do so. If we ask them to manufacture aeroplanes for us, they enter into contracts with the aeroplane manufacturers. We do not go near the aeroplane manufacturers.


Richard Burpee Hanson: You do the requisitioning.


Charles Gavan Power: We requisition; that is all.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Who is responsible for determining what type of aeroplane a certain factory shall make, and when it shall cease to make that type and start on another?


Charles Gavan Power: We are responsible for determining what types of aircraft we require. We requisition a hundred or a thousand aircraft of

War Appropriation-Air Services
a certain type, and my good friend the Minister of Munitions and Supply goes and gets them made wherever he likes, as far as I am concerned.


Mr. CARDIFF:: First, I should like to congratulate the Minister of National Defence for Air upon the statement he made this afternoon about his department. I think he is to be congratulated upon the success of his department, and I sincerely hope that continued success will attend his efforts for the duration. Coming from a county that has four airports I am naturally air-minded, and I cannot say that the people in that county are not like the hon. member for Brantford City (Mr. Macdonald). I have not heard any complaints in the county of Huron about the nuisance of aeroplanes. In fact, we welcome the drone of the engine to put us to sleep. They fly constantly over my house and, since they are in the air they do not interfere with us on the ground. If Brantford wants to get rid of some of its training schools, the schools can easily be moved to Huron and we will accept them with the ones we have.
I want to ask just a few questions. Take a man being drafted to the army. If he prefers to enlist as a pilot, or elsewhere in the air force, can he be transferred?


Charles Gavan Power: Hitherto a draftee or trainee has had two months after joining the army in which to make up his mind whether or not he wishes to join the air force, provided we require a man of that particular category or that particular type. The request has been made by the army, however, that we no longer exercise that right since it is not likely that we shall be needing very many more men of types other than air crew.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: I understand then that after a man has been sixty days in the army he cannot be transferred into the air force. What has been done by the interdepartmental committee set up by the minister to coordinate all medical services in the army, the air force, the navy and the pensions department? Why have there not been regular meetings?


Charles Gavan Power: Is that in connection with the war expenditures committee's report?


Lewis Elston Cardiff: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: I happen to know something about that committee, because at one time, when the present Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) was away, there was some dispute between the air force and the army, and as I was a bit bothered about it I thought that the best thing to do was to dispose of the question in the old-fashioned,

time-honoured way of setting up a committee. This committee turned out to be a good one. One of the members was a representative of the Department of Pensions; another represented the navy, another the army and another the air, and the committee functioned for the purpose not only of coordinating the work but of endeavouring to avoid duplication. I do not know that it was set up as any particularly stable and formal governmental body, but I do know that whenever the occasion requires, this particular committee functions. I do not remember having seen any reports within the last three or four months, but the Minister of Pensions and National Health says he has seen such reports. I do know, however, they, were excellent, and in many instances they saved a great deal of duplication in different departments.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: They do keep reports of the different meetings?


Charles Gavan Power: Any time my department is interested I receive reports.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: Why are there separate medical offices and clinics and separate R.C.A.F. personnel, as well as Australian and New Zealand?


Charles Gavan Power: Australia and New Zealand are separate countries.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: But we have Australian pilots in our commonwealth air training plan, and so has New Zealand as well.


Charles Gavan Power: They attend the schools of
the commonwealth air training plan in the same way as Canadians.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The hon. member is asking if they have separate clinics of their own.


Charles Gavan Power: There is only one clinic.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: I mean, separate from the army and navy.


Charles Gavan Power: Oh; that is another matter. That involves a large question with regard to separate army and air force medical corps. There was a great deal of discussion at the time the air force decided to separate itself from the army in this regard. The experts inform us that there is a specialty in air force medicine. .As far as ordinary medical care of the men is concerned, I suppose they could get along very well, but there is such a thing as air force medical specialty. They study such questions as air pressure, blackouts, the effect of high altitude on pilots and so on, and I am informed by our medical

War Appropriation-Air Services
people it is essential that we have special studies and special courses in medicine. I am speaking purely as a layman in that matter. It took a long time for me to become convinced that there should be a separate air medical corps, but after a considerable time and perhaps a great deal of pressure and a lot of argument I came to that conclusion. At that time I was Minister for Air, I was also acting Minister of National Defence, and it was a long time before I became convinced of the value of a separate air medical corps. Since then the knowledge, as well as the experience, which I have gained, leads me to believe that it was a very wise measure for us to take. I cannot give the medical reasons. The hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Bruce), who knows more about it than I do, will possibly controvert the reasons which have been advanced by the men in the air force, but they are quite satisfied that the very best thing that could have been done for the air force itself was to have a separate medical corps.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: I appreciate that answer. Are the courses for training the same for the Royal Canadian Air Force, in connection with the commonwealth air training plan, as for the Royal Air Force?


Charles Gavan Power: The R.C.A.F. administers
and manages the joint air training plan. All the pilots who now become members of the home war establishment of the R.C.A.F.-I think this is what my hon. friend means- go through the joint air training plan.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: Have these men the latest types of machines for their training, at each
camp?


Charles Gavan Power: We have established certain types as being those required for training, some at the elementary schools, some at the service flying training schools, some at wireless schools and some at bombing and gunnery schools. Possibly someone else has developed better or more advanced types. I do not know, but my officers advise me that the planes we use are as good1 as any in the world for the purposes for which they are used.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: The only reason why I asked that question was that I understand they are getting new machines at Sky Harbour, though I have not had any report on the matter lately.


Charles Gavan Power: What is the name of Sky Harbour in my language? Is that No. 12 school at Goderich?


Lewis Elston Cardiff: The elementary training
school at Goderich.


Charles Gavan Power: Some time ago we decided to use a new type, what is known as a low-wing monoplane called the Freshman, to replace the Fleets and Moths. This is because we believe it will be more convenient to have a low, single wing than what we had formerly. This is a change of type which was decided upon well over a year ago. It is now coming into production, but that does not mean to say that the Fleets and Moths, in which our men were trained formerly, are in any way unsafe or undesirable from the point of view of training. The new machines are perhaps a more modern type of training plane, but the Moths and Fleets are similar to the machines on which the British have been training for many years. The Freshman is a United States designed plane which will come into production very shortly.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: I have only one further question to ask the minister. Why does the R.C.A.F. need a special refrigeration and cold storage plant at manning pool, Toronto?


Charles Gavan Power: I have no idea whether
they have or have not one.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: I have been informed
that this cold storage plant is used to store garbage, which garbage is then sent to the piggeries. Is that correct?


Charles Gavan Power: I shall be only too glad to find out. I am sure the Minister of National War Services would be glad to learn that we took that much care of our garbage, and that we were saving our garbage for salvage all over the country. However, I shall certainly inquire.


Mr. HAZEN:: War Appropriation-Air Services
half dozen such men have mentioned this to me, mostly friends of mine in the R.F.C. or R.A.F. who rejoined the army or air force in this war and are not permitted to wear any service ribbon. Two of these are disfigured for life on account of air force accidents. Yet the government does not permit them to wear any recognition or ribbon, whereas boys who had a lovely trip and saw England but no war service can do so. although they did not go under any particular danger. ... I feel flying those okl Jennies, with all the crashes, represented as much danger, and yet X cannot wear even one ribbon. I was talking to-night with . . . He is medical officer in the air cadets, and I imagine later on will be asked to wear a uniform for certain inspections, etc. He is lame and broken nose and jaw, etc., due to crash in the camps last war. Yet he cannot wear a service ribbon of any kind. I think he should be privileged to do so, or any other who volunteered for service in 1917. There must be hundreds of such cases in Canada and it does not seem fair or right. Besides, I think it adds to a soldier's or officer's morale and prestige to be able to wear some recognition of the fact that he was in the service of his own free will.
This matter, which affects those who served in the last war, should, I think, be given consideration. I believe the same circumstances will arise at the end of this war. I realize the minister has a great many other duties to perform, but I would ask that he make a note of this point and see whether some recognition cannot be given these men.


Charles Gavan Power: So far as my recollection
goes, the right to wear medals or decorations is a matter of royal warrant. I speak subject to correction, but I am under the impression that neither the Department of National Defence, the Department of National Defence for Air nor even the government of Canada has the right to specify the persons who may wear decorations from the last war. What the authority is in connection with this war I am unable to say, but I think I am pretty accurate when I say that this was all laid down by royal warrant or by a decree of the war office at the end of the last war. My colleague the Minister of Pensions and National Health says he thinks that was the case, but I shall be very glad to look into the matter for my hon. friend.


Mr. BRUCE:: A moment ago the minister referred a question to me, and I should like to answer him. The medical problems connected with air service are highly specialized, and in my judgment warrant having a separate medical service. I think the minister for air is fortunate in having such a capable officer as Air Commodore Ryan as head of that service. He has spent many years in the study of the problems connected with air flights, and is thoroughly competent in every branch of that work. He has gathered around

him an excellent staff of specialists which ensures that everything possible will be done that medical science can devise for the health and welfare of our airmen.
I might add that the late Sir Frederick Banting did a series of experiments in connection with flights, and particularly as to how changes in altitude and pressure affect airmen. He was taking the result of his work to England, when he met with the fatal accident. That work has been carried on by others, and I am informed that as a result a special apparatus is now about to be made, if it has. not in fact already been completed, which will protect men doing the hazardous task of dive bombing. Formerly many of those men became unconscious while engaged in that operation. It is possible now to maintain pressure by the new apparatus in such a way as to prevent this disaster from happening. I have no doubt that it has been called to the minister's attention.
I wish to commend the minister for his discernment in the selection of the men he has gathered about him to do this particular work and in establishing a separate medical service for the air.


Mr. WARREN:: The hon. member for Huron North discussed a question which reminded me of something that is happening at Petawawa camp. He spoke about garbage being kept in a refrigerator. I do not know anything about that, but I do know that at one of these camps the disposal of garbage was found most expensive. However, the authorities got busy, and during the past year they discovered a farmer about thirty miles away from the camp who succeeded in relieving the condition. This farmer was engaged in feeding hogs on an extensive scale. His pens passed inspection; and with the addition of new pens, the purchasing of a couple of trucks and the establishment of a boiling system at the camp, the garbage, instead of being handled at great cost, is handled under more favourable conditions. I believe that formerly the camp authorities had to arrange for digging trenches and burning the garbage. Under present conditions, however, it is boiled, and either once or twice a day it is taken to the farm. The man is feeding from 600 to 800 hogs. Instead of the refuse from the camp being wasted, that food is now being turned into bacon.
The farmer assures me that after being fed the garbage his hogs have made better gains than they did before from the feeding of grain, and his bacon receives a better grading. The waste food which was formerly thrown away is now being turned into thousands of pounds of pork. I do not know whether that

War Appropriation-Air Services
is being carried on in other camps across Canada, but certainly it is a plan worthy of consideration. In this particular instance it is working out exceedingly well. It is a great pity that good food should be wasted when it could he turned into bacon for shipment overseas.


Mr. TUSTIN:: Are the Royal Air Force stations manned by Royal Air Force personnel part of the commonwealth air training scheme?


Charles Gavan Power: No.


George James Tustin: Are any officers of the Royal Canadian Air Force posted to any of those Royal Air Force stations?


Charles Gavan Power: The Royal Canadian Air Force has a kind of general control over the Royal Air Force schools, and it so happens that frequently-I cannot say the number of occasions-officers and men of the Royal Canadian Air Force are posted to Royal Air Force schools, in the same way that Royal Air Force men are frequently posted to us.


George James Tustin: Then, as I understand it,
when the United States entered the war there were many United States citizens in the Royal Canadian Air Force. At that time they were given the option of remaining in the Royal Canadian Air Force or of being transferred to some service in their own country. I have in mind a specific case of a man who came from the United States, enlisted in the Royal Canadian Air Force and was given a commission. When the United States entered the war that officer applied to his commanding officer, and offered him his resignation. This was a Royal Air Force station, by the way. The resignation was accepted, but for some reason this man has been kept running back and forth between his home in the southern United States and Ottawa. He has had to run between the Royal Air Force station where he was stationed, and Washington; and for a period of three months-


Charles Gavan Power: Did this United States
citizen happen to be a member of the Royal Air Force or the Royal Canadian Air Force?


George James Tustin: The Royal Canadian Air
Force. He was kept running back and forth, and as a result was put to great expense for three full months before his discharge from the Royal Canadian Air Force became effective. Meantime he found himself unable to enter any of the services of the United States because-the minister shakes his head, but I have this on the authority of the man himself-the authorities at Washington could not take this man into the United States service until his discharge from the Royal Canadian Air Force became effective.
I bring this to the minister's attention because I believe that when a man comes from another country, offers his service and his life to fight for this country, and is then given the option of transferring back to his native land, it certainly does not reflect any gratitude on our part to place him in a position where he is kept out of all service and, as I understand, without pay, for a period of three months. I draw this matter to the attention of the minister in the hope that it will not recur in the future.


Charles Gavan Power: I should be very glad if
the hon. member would in confidence send me the name of the officer, so that I could check up. But the whole question with respect to the return of United States officers and men in the Royal Canadian Air Force has been definitely settled. Negotiations went on for some time. I may add that from the moment the United States entered the war instructions were given in a broad and general way that, provided the United States government held out something for the individual to do, there would be no objection to the United States citizen returning to his own country.
Since then, I believe about two or three months ago, a general agreement was arrived at with the United States government whereby United States citizens serving in the Canadian forces who wished to transfer to the United States forces could signify their desire before a certain date, either the 1st of April or the 1st of May. As a consequence of this agreement a travelling board of officers of the United States forces is going through the country interviewing members of the forces to ascertain just how they will fit into the United States forces. Up to the present time, out of 4,451 United States citizens in the Royal Canadian Air Force, 1,961 have signified their desire to transfer to the United States forces. The cases of these men are being looked into by this travelling board of United States officers, to which I believe some of ours are attached.


Mr. GERSHAW:: The minister has made it quite clear that there will be no new air schools built in the immediate future. However, quite often we see in the papers that the commonwealth air training scheme is to be expanded and new schools opened. This always brings up the question of where they are to be located. Some hon. members have complained about the roads to the schools; others have complained about the noise and about the taxes; but I can assure the minister that if there is any possibility of developing schools in a large portion of southern Alberta, there will be no trouble about roads and taxes and there will be nobody to kick about the noise.



War Appropriation

Air Services
There are places there which feel that they have been overlooked in the location of war activities. There are many places with good water facilities, and there are other sections where the government itself has land reserves, like Bassano, Bow Island and Foremost, in Alberta.
The minister stated that some of the present air schools may be enlarged. I hope, when that matter is being considered, he will take into account the success which has been achieved in certain schools. Sometimes we wonder why some schools are located where they are with the wind and snow and rough country and so on. Other schools with more suitable flying conditions have been able to show a greater number of flying hours. Would the minister suggest what the considerations will be in determining what schools will be enlarged?


Major James William Coldwell: The minister has said that the general supervision of the R.A.F. establishments in this countiy was given to the R.C.A.F. I have heard boys who were in the R.C.A.F., serving at some stations with the R.A.F., complain that the food is not as good in the R.A.F. station as it is in our own. Apparently the food in our own establishment is excellent in every respect.
While I am on my feet I want to say how pleased I was to hear the minister say this afternoon that he hoped some steps would be taken to eliminate the distinction between sergeant pilots and pilot officers. I do not know if any other member of the party which was in England has mentioned this before, but when we were there we visited a bomber station one evening and met a number of pilot officers who approached us and asked us, when we had an opportunity, to endeavour to persuade the authorities to establish a joint mess. The officers and the sergeants flew together, lived together and sometimes died together, and yet when they got back to the base they were separated. They wanted a place where they could meet together, talk over operations and generally be comradely after the show was over. We took the matter up in London with Mr. Massey and, I believe, also with the British authorities. I am bringing this to the attention of the minister so that if nothing can be done in the other matter, that is with the imperial authorities, at least at our own stations some arrangement may be made whereby the sergeant pilots and the pilot officers can be together.


Mrs. CASSELMAN:: I want to commend the minister for the enlistment of women in the R.C.A.F. I think this will help to solve the question of food wastage. He is enlisting
[Mr. Gershaw.}
trained dietitians who have been accustomed to buying and preparing and serving food in the proper manner, giving it to the men in the way that will appeal to their appetites. There is a dietitian in charge at the initial training school at Edmonton, and it has been found that there is little waste to feed pigs or anything else after the men have had their meals. I think it will be good for the health of the men to have skilfully prepared meals, and I look forward to there being less waste in the future, when trained dietitians are more fully in charge of this department.


Mr. EMMERSON:: I should like to ask a question with regard to the difference in pay of men in the R.C.A.F. and men in the R.A.F. Is the difference in the pay of our men attached to the R.A.F. credited to their account, or is it paid to them during their service on the other side?


Charles Gavan Power: Credited to their account.


Henry Read Emmerson: Our pilots are trained with single and multi-engined planes, but is there any intention of training glider pilots in Canada? This has been done on the other side, and since it has been mentioned in the press, I think this information is public property.


Charles Gavan Power: The matter is receiving our most urgent consideration at the moment.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: In view of the announcement made by the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services (Mr. Macdonald) about the sinking of a freighter in the St. Lawrence river, and in view of what has been said about cooperation among the navy and army and air force, would the minister care to say a few words?


Charles Gavan Power: We do cooperate on both coasts. Recently a supreme commander to coordinate the efforts of all three services has been appointed on each coast. General Elkins has been appointed on the east coast and General Alexander on the west coast,


Mr. GREEN:: Has consideration been given to setting up an air command for the St. Lawrence region?


Charles Gavan Power: We have an eastern air command which covers the whole of our defensive aerodromes on the east coast, including the St. Lawrence river.


Howard Charles Green: Would it be better to have the St. Lawrence command separate?


Charles Gavan Power: I hardly think so.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I should like to express my appreciation of the manner in which the minister reviewed the activities of

War Appropriation-Air Services
the air force so comprehensively and without encumbering his statement with too much detail. His statement to-day, following the one he gave last fall, furnishes the basis for a few questions. But first I should like to pay tribute, like so many others have done, to the gallant boys of the Royal Canadian Air Force. Just in passing, I might say that I was at a service on Sunday of the Upper Canada college boys, and old boys, where it was announced that over 650 of the boys and old boys of the college are now in the service of their country.
An eloquent plea has been made by the hon. member for Peel and several other hon. members that th^ dependents of the boys in the air force should get the cost of living bonus. I heartily concur in their suggestion. I feel it is a great pity that there should be that gap following the time a man is reported missing during which no allowance is paid. It is the mothers of the boys who are joining the air force that I have particularly in mind. Remember, these lads in the air force are younger than the men in the army. We have persistently argued that a dependent mother should be treated, in the matter of allowance, in the same way as the wife, and it is a great pity that that so far has not been done. I know of a young lad in the air force whose mother has been supported by his brother and sister. They have their home, but the father is out of the picture. The boy in the air force is giving his mother $20 a month; I presume that is assigned pay. But now the brother who has been helping to support the mother has been called up. He had wanted to enlist but felt himself unable to leave his mother in her present circumstances. I do not know what will happen now, because there is only the sister left at home. It seems to me that we should not approach this question of an allowance from the point of view of giving charity or asking ourselves: What is the least we can get away with? But that is the way we are treating the mothers to-day, and it must be remembered that it is mostly the mothers who are the dependents of the young boys in the air force. I do not think we should consider how small an amount we can give to the mother who has been dependent on her boy who has joined the air force.
The Minister of National Defence asked the other day: "What are we depriving her of?" That seems to be the basis the government goes on. But I would point out that not only the mother I speak of, but many others are going to be deprived of $20 a month, plus the boy's assigned pay of $20 a month, and that is something which certainly should receive further consideration by the minister and the government.
Another matter has been drawn to my attention. A mother had not heard from her son for a long time. She wrote to me, and I took the matter up with the minister's secretary. She did not know where to get hold of her son or how she could communicate with him.
I received a letter from her to-day by special delivery. I am sure that there are many more mothers in her position, because the air force is so widespread in its operations that mothers have difficulty in knowing just where their sons are. This particular mother has not heard from her boy in the air force for seven months. I should be glad if the minister would tell the house and the country how that mother can reach her boy by cable in England or some other place. I have told her where she could write, but after not hearing from him for seven months she wants to send a cable.
Last year I put a question on the order paper with reference to the grounding of planes for overhaul and repair, and the minister gave an interesting reply. I have not the figures here, but he will no doubt remember. It would be interesting to know how much shorter is the period now required for overhaul and repair, with the modern methods and new equipment of to-day at the various schools. Perhaps the minister, without going into too much detail, would pick out a few types of planes and state for how long a period they now have to be grounded for overhaul and repair.
The special committee on war expenditures presented a report on "salvage" and said, referring to the chief salvage officer:
The officer above referred to stressed the point that salvage is not chiefly a matter of disposal of waste goods but in the better sense is a saving of these goods by repair for further use.
The board has only recently come into existence and its work has just commenced, and therefore the committee was not able to pass any final judgment on the work being done hy this board, but is of the opinion that if the programme as outlined is carried out it should result in very substantial economies.
It was indicated to the subcommittee that this board will function solely in the army, that it is somewhat of an experiment, and that should it prove successful, its programme would be extended to include the air force and the navy.
The people of this country, to-day particularly, in view of the shortage of oil, rubber and other products, want to see no waste, and I would ask the minister whether the air force is functioning in cooperation with this salvage board which has been set up.


Charles Gavan Power: We have a salvage organization of our own and, I understand, a very good one.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The suggestion in the committee's report was that the air force,
23S0

War Appropriation-Air Services
the army and the navy should all cooperate with this salvage board, and I was wondering whether that was being done by the air force.


Mr. CLAXTON:: I have one hope which
I should like to express to the committee and which I trust all members will share. It is suggested by two remarks which have been made during the course of this debate. The first was made by the minister, when in his fine speech he quoted the Right Hon. Malcolm Macdonald, British high commissioner, as paying high praise to the work of the Canadian air force, but, he added, we did not perhaps blow our own trumpets enough. The second remark was made by the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) when he referred to the exploits of Colonel Bishop and others during the last war. He said, quite properly, that they had electrified Europe. I have the feeling that the hon. member for Davenport would have liked1 to put his tongue to the names of some Canadian heroes of this war if they had come quickly to his lips. But the fact is that they did not, and I suggest to the committee that this brings home to us that we are not making enough of the heroes of the air on whom our whole survival depends to-day. This war is unlike any other war in this respect, that to-day our very existence, the existence and continuation of our institutions, depend not so much on great masses of armies working blindly, but on hundreds and thousands of individual feats of heroism such as have never been matched in the history of the world. I suggest to the committee that we have been carrying on a kind of a Maginot line attitude in respect of our acclaim for the men on whom we depend for our survival. Hon. members will remember that we began the war in a very drab way, without bands and without flags; we did not think they were necessary; we thought they were undesirable. We are finding out how wrong that was. But there is still a hangover in some respects, and I suggest that there is such a survival in respect of the attention being paid ,to particular exploits of individual heroism by our fliers. The fact that the hon. member for Davenport did- not bring his tongue to the name of one Canadian pilot who distinguished himself in this way clearly proves what I have said.
We are proud of what our air force have done. We know that they are doing magnificent things. But I believe that we would be still more proud if we knew the individual exploits of individual fliers, if we knew how many planes they had to their credit. Not long ago I had to make a speech in the United States, and I thought it would be interesting
I Mr. Ross (St. Paul's).]
to them if I could pay tribute to some of their great fliers,-O'Hare and others. I knew how many planes they had to their credit; and I made inquiries of the public relations officers of our air force to find the number of planes that Canadian fliers had to their credit, so that I could tell our United States friends and ask "them to share our pride as we shared theirs. But I could not get the number of planes that Canadian fliers have to their credit, because the numbers are not given out, I was told, by the Royal Air Force.
Already we know that we have some magnificent heroes of the air. There is the man who came back only in the last few weeks and who is now in Ottawa, Larry Robillard, whose record as told in the newspaper? is one of the most astonishing of this or any other war. I am informed that not half the story has been told to the newspapers; it cannot yet be told. There are people like Pilot Officer Dougall of Montreal; Pilot Officer Morin of Ottawa; Pilot Officer Blair Russell; Pilot Officer John Fauquier; Wing Commander Timmerman; Sergeant Duffield.


Charles Gavan Power: Pat Christie.


Brooke Claxton: Pat Christie, and dozens of others who are more or less known by reason of casual mention in the press, but whose names do not mean so much to us Canadians as do the names of the men- that appear week by week in the great United States magazine Life. I suggest that is not good for us. We share the pride of the United States in the exploits of her sons. We need to have pride in our own, and in order to have that pride we must have knowledge. 'The knowledge must be related to the individual, and it must be given quickly, while the matter is new. I suggest to the minister that the whole machine for getting news from the fighting front into the minds and into the hearts of the people of Canada, who need the cheer which the tale of heroism will give, can well be improved. The importance of this is shown by the way in which our own hearts respond to the story of heroism whenever we hear it. Most hon. members must have heard President Roosevelt's great speech on April 28. They must have observed how the last third of his speech was not given to a discussion of great events, great battles; it was not given to a discussion of high policy. He told three simple stories of heroism. He told of Doctor Wassell; he told of the crew of the Squalus, and he told of Captain Hewitt T. Wheless. He closed his three stories by saying of the last named, Captain Wheless, "I hope he is listening"; and twenty or thirty or forty

War Appropriation-Air Services
million people listening in to President Roosevelt hoped that. Our hearts were cheered by those stories of heroism. We know that our own Canadian air force is the equal of any air force in the world. We have a right to be told about it, told about it freely, promptly and in a way which gives full credit to their exploits. It may be said of them as it was said of another fighting force by A. E. Housman:
Their shoulders held the skies suspended,
They stood, and earth's foundations stay.


Charles Gavan Power: May I thank my hon. friend for drawing my attention to that. I have often thought that we do not give the credit which we should give to these young heroes of the air force.
One reason is because of the British passion for anonymity. When I was over in England last year I did my very best to induce them to permit our press to get the latest possible news on the deeds of our men. I think the situation has improved to a considerable extent. It was with something of the same idea in mind as my hon. friend who has just spoken had, that I had a list compiled of the commanding officers of the Canadian squadrons overseas. There is hardly a child in this country who does not know the names of the generals, the officers commanding divisions, even officers commanding brigades in the army, but I am willing to wager that not one man in this house would be able to give me the name of one commanding officer of a Canadian squadron overseas; and the Canadian squadrons are doing the fighting. Therefore, with the permission of the committee- I have torn off the numbers of the squadrons, because we are not permitted to give the numbers-I will insert in Hansard the names of the officers commanding the Canadian squadrons overseas. It will be noted that all but four of them are either Royal Canadian Air Force or Royal Air Force Canadians:
Wing Commander H. W. Kerby, R.C.A.F.
Squadron Leader A. G. Douglas, R.A.F.
Squadron Leader R. E. Morrow, R.C.A.F.
Squadron Leader C. N. S. Campbell, D.F.C., R.A.F. (Reported missing 27-4-42)
Wing Commander P. H. Woodruff, R.A.F. (Can.)
Wing Commander J. E. Fauquier, R.C.A.F.
Wing Commander D. G. Morris, D.F.C., R.A.F.
Wing Commander A. C. Brown, D.F.C., R.A.F. (Can.)
Wing Commander A. C. P. Clayton, D.F.C., R.A.F. (Can.)
Wing Commander P. Y. Davoud, R.C.A.F.
Squadron Leader M. Lipton, R.C.A.F.
Squadron Leader R. B. Newton, R.A.F.
Squadron Leader R. C. Weston, R.C.A.F.
Wing Commander J. D. Twigg, R.C.A.F.
Wing Commander D. M. Smith, R.C.A.F.
Wing Commander E. L. Wurtele, R.A.F. (Can.)
Squadron Leader L. Y. Chadbum, R.C.A.F.
Squadron Leader P. B. Pitcher, R.C.A.F.
Wing Commander G. H. Gatheral, R.A.F.
Wing Commander J. Fulton, D.F.C., A.F.C., R.A.F. (Can.)
Wing Commander D. A. R. Bradshaw, R.C.A.F.
Squadron Leader F. W. Kelly, R.C.A.F.


Mr. McNIVEN:: Is that right from the beginning?


Charles Gavan Power: I have them only for the present time.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The minister suggested last fall in the House of Commons that he would issue a bulletin. I was reading it to-day, and I wondered why he stopped it.


Charles Gavan Power: Unfortunately we receive our bulletins a little too late so that they are no longer news. They are not what is called "hot news." I should like to give a sample of these bulletins to indicate the work done by some Canadian squadrons overseas. I happened to be reading one last night, and I said to myself that if the opportunity presented itself I might give some of the highlights to the house. This is a Spitfire squadron, and the period mentioned is 12-4-42 to 26-4-42; that is twelve days. During those twelve days their operational flying time was 442 hours, and the number of pilots-the Spitfire is a single pilot machine-is only twenty-three. I figured it out, but I have not the figure at the moment. That makes-


Mr. COLD WELL:: Twenty hours each.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes. I find in the bulletin, for example, under date of April 12, convoys carried out. April 13, aircraft were scrambled to such and such a place. April 14, aircraft part-time formation flight over France, in such and such an area. April 15, 20,000 in the air, five miles inside the French coast, so-and-so's engine failed and he landed safely at such and such a place across the channel. April 16, squadron with wing acted as escort cover to eight Hurricane bombers whose target was Dunkirk. April 17, squadron acted with wing as close escort to six Boston bombers whose target was a parachute factory at Calais. April 18, a wing sweep to such and such a place, recrossing the coast at such and such a place. April 19, convoy patrols carried out. April 24, a sweep of such and such an area was performed. April 25, a squadron acted as escort cover to eight Hurricane bombers. April 26, squadron acted as escort cover to nine Bostons whose target was such and such a place; and so forth. There are two pages of it;

War Appropriation-Air Services
they are out every day. We do not hear a word about it, and this particular squadron is composed of an air crew 95 per cent Canadian and ground crew of 92 per cent Canadian. It is unfortunate, I submit, that it is not possible for us to give a more detailed story of the deeds of these young men who are carrying on in our behalf.


Mr. JACKMAN:: When I visited the old country last November I gathered that the R.A.F. does not wish to publicize the deeds of individual aviators or individual members of the air crew because, if they do, it will tend to weaken the esprit de corps in the rest of the personnel of the force. Does the minister agree with the official R.AE. point of view, or does he agree with the point of view that I would put forward, namely, that the publicizing of individual exploits would do a great deal to build up the morale not only of the R.A.F. or the R.C.A.F., but of the people generally. Will the minister fight for a change-over generally as far as R.C.A.F. pilots and aircrew are concerned?


Charles Gavan Power: I definitely and most emphatically disagree with the air ministry, perhaps by reason of our education and our proximity to the United States. The fact is that we are a people who read headlines, though perhaps we do not read enough of what appears under the headlines. At any rate, we make our heroes readily. We can learn to love or hate a person when we are not particularly interested in institutions. The RA.F. as R.A.F. or the R.C.A.F. as R.C-A.F. does not mean much to us, but O'Hara, or O'Shea, or Corbett-


John Ritchie MacNicol: Or Mackenzie.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, or any name like that, means a lot to us, and, as I say, perhaps because of our Hollywood upbringing, we are prone to read headlines. It may not be our fault; it may not be logical. However, we must take the people of Canada as we find them; and I sincerely believe that, to the utmost of our ability, we should make heroes of those of our boys who are heroes, for the sake of the morale of the air force and particularly for the sake of the morale of the Canadian people, who probably need it more than the air force does.
Progress reported.


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

Wednesday, May 13, 1942