March 31, 1944

NAT

Gordon Graydon (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. GRAYDON:

And it was an American train?

Topic:   REFERENCE TO COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
Subtopic:   CHINESE NATIONALS
Sub-subtopic:   REMOVAL FROM TRAINS PROCEEDING TO CANADA FROM THE UNITED STATES
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Alexander Crerar (Minister of Mines and Resources)

Liberal

Mr. CRERAR:

Of course, it was an

American train. .

Topic:   REFERENCE TO COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
Subtopic:   CHINESE NATIONALS
Sub-subtopic:   REMOVAL FROM TRAINS PROCEEDING TO CANADA FROM THE UNITED STATES
Permalink

PRICES AND TRADE BOARD


On the orders of the day:


LIB

James Layton Ralston (Minister of National Defence)

Liberal

Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Acting Minister of Finance):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Lalonde) asked me what steps had been taken by the wartime prices and trade board regarding J. A. Forget, local representative of the board at Mont-Laurief. I am advised that the board has dispensed with Mr. Forget's services.

Topic:   REFERENCE TO COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
Subtopic:   PRICES AND TRADE BOARD
Sub-subtopic:   CHARGES AGAINST REPRESENTATIVE AT MONT-LAURIER
Permalink

WAR APPROPRIATION BILL

PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY


The house resumed from Tuesday, March 28, consideration in committee of a resolution to grant to His Majesty certain sums of money for the carrrying out of measures consequent upon the existence of a state of war-Mr. Ilsley-Mr. McCann in the chair. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT Air services branch- 3. Civil aviation: operation and maintenance of municipal (terminal) airports, $398,260.


NAT

Thomas Langton Church

National Government

Mr. CHURCH:

Mr. Chairman, last Tuesday night I had risen to take part in the debate on civil aviation, although I had had no previous knowledge that it was coming up. There always seems to be a mystery as to when this subject will come up, yet there has never been a more urgent matter of national and international importance on which there has been such a wide division of public opinion. The minister and the government need not criticize the opposition, because, after all, what we are doing is submitting constructive suggestions. Let it not be forgotten that a whole year has been wasted in dealing with this problem, ever since April 2 of last year when the policy was announced in which the empire was not linked up at all as a unit. It will be April 2 next Sunday again, and in all that year nothing has been done about this problem. True, the

TFar Appropriation-Transport

minister did go to London last May and a conference was held there and an announcement made, but the announcement does not go far enough.

Between these two great wars, Mr. Chairman, the question of civil aviation has been almost a forgotten topic, and any work done in civil aviation has been done by private enterprise and by private companies with little or no support from the government, even in the old land. In this country civil aviation was left to private enterprise entirely. Those great war pilots, Bishop, Barker, Collishaw and Frederick Handley Page, were in Toronto after the last war and I discussed the matter of civil aviation for many days with them then and there and with Frank McGill. But as a dominion we seem to have forgotten all about civil aviation ever since the last war. We left civil aviation to struggle as best it could. Very little money was provided for it in the estimates; it was left, like John Brown's body, to hang on a sour apple tree. Then came the great war, and we have seen the glorious achievements in the air of the young Canadians who joined the Royal Canadian Air Force and the Royal Air Force. In the battle of Britain our very existence was at stake, and we as a nation owe an unrepayable debt to those brave young men who went up by night and day to save the world and civilization.

In the domestic aspect of this question, in my humble opinion, mistakes have been made. In the period before the great war and between the two wars the national railways spent large sums of money on useless branch lines and duplication of facilities, while the rival road pursued the policy of private ownership. What I object to in connection with this particular policy of the government is that it is a small nation policy. I tell the government that the day of small nations is over, and that this war has shown it. Mechanized hordes have trampled down small nations all over Europe. Our resources as a people are limited; we cannot compete with the great powers; our only course is to play the game cooperatively, to lay all our cards on the table, and unite on this great problem as a unit with the mother country and our sister dominions. True it is that I approve, as I believe my party on this side of the house approve, of continuing Trans-Canada Air Lines. But one of the weaknesses of the government policy is that it omits entirely any reference to the empire as a unit, and little or nothing was said about the London conference

which had to be continued at Washington-except a quotation from Lord Beaverbrook. I have urged for four years a

unified empire policy. We as part of the empire should not forget that it is through Britain's command of sea power for the past three hundred years that the oceanic empire was developed. Let it be so again in the air.

I believe also that the Canadian Pacific Railway through its affiliations should be allowed to carry on its airways and continue the good work it has done. I do not urge this as an opponent of public ownership. I have been a real public ownership man all my life-not a supporter of public ownership in the sense that the national railways sometimes have been carried on in the past, but favouring real public ownership, for instance, of light, power and transportation utilities in the city I come from, where they were taken over and are operating at a large profit. I believe the Canadian Pacific Railway has done a great deal for the British empire on land, sea and in the air., and particularly in uniting the empire before the war through their magnificent ocean services.

So far as our domestic policy is concerned, there has been no interference by the mother country with the dominions. Each has its own status, its own sovereignty, its own autonomy. Under the statute of Westminster each dominion looks after its own home defence and domestic affairs along the lines indicated. Let us not forget that.

I repeat that we must regard the British commonwealth of nations as an air unit'. No part of that empire is more than two thousand miles away from another part. I am wholly in favour of developing an interlocking empire service. By so doing we shall forge a strong link to hold the empire together. This can be done in a whole-hearted cooperative way, and if that atttiude is taken I am sure the cooperation of the other dominions will be obtained. Mr. Fraser and Mr. Curtin, those two great imperial statesmen who are the prime ministers of New Zealand and Australia, have shown and led the way. But this can only be accomplished by subordinating sectional interests in the empire sense and not trying to gain local advantage for this country or that. Let us cut red tape and seek to deal with the matter on the principle of lease-lend, which has been so effective hitherto in this war. The dominions expect the mother country to take the lead, and if they are given an energetic lead all will be well. The position of Britain and of the empire and of this-country as a world power depends upon the place it holds in the air. The greatness of Britain as the centre of the commonwealth of nations arose from the fact that for two*

War Appropriation-Transport

hundred years she was predominant upon the sea, and she can be equally dominant in the air if only she rises to the occasion.

As regards air transportation, I think that our officers and men of the air force should be allowed to transfer to the civil organization. As regards management, I could never understand why a public ownership body like the Canadian National and T.C.A. had to go to private ownership for an air leader, nor do I understand why they should continue that policy in future. Why should they not look to the thousands of young men who are protecting us in the air overseas? Many of the best business executives we have in the country are serving us in the skies overseas. After all, who is paying for our part in this war but the Canadian taxpayer? In my opinion Trans-Canada Air Lines should be reorganized, and somebody put at the head of it who is a real public ownership man, who is not satis-a real public ownership man, who is not identi-support it from beginning to end.

It will be one year next Sunday, April 2, since the Prime Minister made an announcement of air policy. There are two or three things I like about it, but I oppose its isolation and lack of empire outlook.

Reference has been made to the selection of the Douglas DC-4 by the Trans-Canada Air Lines. It is obsolete. They say that the Lancaster is unsuited for civilian purposes, but it has been shown by Handley Page and others in the old land that some of the bombers can be readily adapted in a few days for use as transports, and also Lancasters by simple changes in design by research at Malton.

I do not believe that in connection with this aviation problem we have given sufficient attention either in this war or the last, to scientific research. As I said last evening, one needs at each large university a chair in this particular work. We know what science properly applied has done in the last seventy-five years in the utilization of oil, gas and falling water and many other agents of power and industry. It has won the admiration of the whole civilized world. Why? Because science argues from fact; it does not argue in the realm of doubt and opinion. Look at the progress which medicine has made in the last fifty years. Properly stimulated, similar progress could be made in research in the air. I believe that the government will waste a lot of money by utilizing the Douglas DC-4 for its civilian air service. A much better plan could be worked out along the lines I have indicated. Canada should try to take the lead in the field of design and should prepare a

definite policy for the next twenty-five years. Fundamental changes will occur in the future. Aviation in Canada is yet only in its infancy. Research, design and experimentation will be more important than ever. In Canada and in the empire we are on the threshold of a grand new age which will revolutionize aeroplane construction and the development of aeroplane engines. In this field high speed is essential to supremacy. Problems of all sorts arise; science and research will provide even lighter alloys and new types of wings, engines and parts which will withstand various climatic conditions the world over.

I do not think Canada should have a monopoly in connection with civil aviation, any more than she should have a monopoly in connection with design. No doubt immediately after the war improved aircraft for the transportation of passengers, emergency foods and many other articles will be absolutely necessary, because when the war is over the railways and other forms of transportation will be choked. So it will be of the utmost importance that there be close cooperation and mutual understanding between Great Britain, the United States and the dominions.

I believe this question, instead of being a secret with the minister and the government, should be considered by the committee on railways and shipping, which dealt with one aspect of this question the other day. It should hear all sides of the question. Trans-Canada Air Lines, Canadian Pacific Air Lines and private lines in this country, which carried on the work of civil aviation between the two wars, should be heard and a proper policy should be adopted. We are now embarking upon a policy of complete isolation from the mother country; we are going over the heads of Australia and New Zealand, and I say we are at the parting of the was^s. I warn hon. members of the danger; I say we should stop, look- and listen to the advice of those who have seriously considered this matter. When the young people come back from the war and look for employment, where will they find it? The other night reference was made to Russia. That country will have nothing to do with this internationalization of air routes; neither will the United States. Washington simply shudders, as does the Republican party, at the mention of any sort of internationalization which will lead to another war. I believe we should clean our domestic house first of all. We should solve the domestic air problem; then we should move into the imperial problem in consultation and collaboration with the other dominions. After that is done, and we have a real empire policy, we can move into the international sphere. The mother

War Appropriation-Transport

country led the world on the sea for two hundred years; she will lead the world in the air in the days that are to come.

I suggest to the administration that one of the most important things to be done is completely to reorganize Trans-Canada Air Lines. One of the greatest mistakes we made in this war as a people was to surrender too much military, financial, economic and social initiative to Washington. It is of the utmost importance that we should come to an agreement and understanding with the United States, our great ally, and I believe one can be reached quite easily; still I say we were asleep between the two wars. This empire came into being because of the sea and it cannot exist except by the sea. As far as the personnel of T.C.A. is concerned, I think both officers and men agree that after the war in Canada the civil service of the air should be a fine field for them, with steady work. The situation in regard to the management is most important also, and I hope the government will see that those charged with this duty will get the very best men available, whether it be left with the present minister or transferred to someone else or some other department.

Having laid down some principles as to policy, the first question to be considered will be that of the freedom of the air. The closed air doctrine following the last war gave rise to a great deal of trouble internationally. There seemed to be a great fear of allowing the passage of aircraft over countries, as by our navigation laws ships are allowed to pass over the waters of the oceans to our ports. The main point is that we should decide on the right policy and carry it through. At the present time this empire needs another Joseph Chamberlain to carry this great empire air scheme to the dominions. He was a pathfinder for the empire, and at the present time we need some great statesman as a pathfinder to deal with this air question, as it has been dealt with by Mr. Curtin in Australia and Mr. Fraser in New Zealand. The new empire in the world to come after the war is over will be held together largely through the air, and Canada will not be able to exist or prosper without a proper policy in that regard. There is no use starting out to hog all the rights in the air. The air should be free for all who wish to use it, under our domestic law; the laws of the air should be on the same basis as the laws relating to navigation by ships. Canada must not say, "We want it all in home affairs; we will not have any domestic competition." Competition is the life of free transportation, and there must be freedom

of the air under drastic regulation, in both domestic and international affairs. No one in Canada wants a mad race in connection with air transportation; that will only lead to the kind of waste we saw for thirty years in connection with rail transportation. If we follow that policy we will be back where we were in 1920 and 1922, when the two great railways in 'this country were so shortsighted that they did not see what highway transportation by buses and trucks would mean in the way of competition. These bus and truck lines would have been feeders for the steam lines if the problem had been faced intelligently, as the Toronto street railway solved it in 1921. So in the future world these small air lines and both our large ones will be feeders in connection with the air routes of the world.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Munitions and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

My attention has been drawn to a statement made by Premier Drew, in the legislature of the province of Ontario, on Tuesday last. I have not read the complete text of the statement, but I have before me certain excerpts as contained in a press report of the Globe and Mail. Premier Drew stated that it was the intention of the Department of Munitions and Supply to place the contract for the manufacture of the DC-4 aircraft in the government-owned aircraft plant at Malton, Ontario, which is operated by the crown company, Victory Aircraft Limited. He charged, on what authority I have no way of knowing, that the contract was switched from the Malton plant to the plant operated by Canadian Vickers Limited in Montreal, because Mr. H. J. Symington, who is president of Trans-Canada Air Lines, which will be the chief user of the DC-4, is also an officer of the Royal Securities Corporation, a Montreal investment firm, which-and I quote Premier Drew's words-was heavily interested in the financing of Canadian Vickers Limited. Premier Drew stated further that, and I quote his words again:

Canadian Vickers Limited, by a recent deal, had passed out of the control of those who organized it and is not now controlled by Canadians, Britishers, or United States citizens.

I shall deal first with the charge that there was a change in plans on the part of the Department of Munitions and Supply with regard to the placing of the contract for the manufacture of DC-4 aircraft. A few months ago it was decided that we must undertake the manufacture of a transport aircraft for use by Trans-Canada Air Lines in services operated on this continent. It was decided, after very thorough investigation, that the type of aircraft most suitable for such service was the DC-4. Manufacturing rights

War Appropriation-Transport

were obtained from the Douglas Aircraft Company Inc., of the United States, and immediate plans were made for production. In selecting the plant in which the DC-4 would be manufactured, we had to be very certain that the production did not interfere with urgent war programmes. We selected the government-owned plant in Montreal, which is operated by Canadian Vickers Limited, because the programme on which that plant is now engaged will terminate late this year. The government-owned plant at Malton is just coming into volume productic"'. on a very large order for Lancaster bombers. The Lancaster bomber is, as I have already told the house, the airplane that now has the highest priority in Canadian production. We could not possibly have given consideration to the placing of the DC-4 contract in the Malton plant under these circumstances, and I may say that at no time was there any intention of doing so. The only interpretation I am able to place on Premier Drew's remarks is that we should have permitted the production of an aircraft for civilian use to take precedence over the production ()f a bomber aircraft which at this very moment is the most urgent of all aircraft requirements overseas, and this as a concession to sectional interests. Since Premier Drew has made reference to the question of employment I may say that the Lancaster programme in terms of dollar value is the largest aircraft programme we have undertaken. So far as we can now estimate, the dollar value of production at the Malton plant of the complete programme will be in the neighbourhood of 200 million dollars. The contract for the production of the DC-4 is a small contract as aircraft contracts go, having a dollar value in the order of fifteen million dollars. The employees of the Malton plant, to whom Premier Drew obviously has directed certain of his remarks, will appreciate the significance of these figures in terms of continuous employment. So much for the placing of the contract.

I come now to the second of Mr. Drew's charges, that concerning Mr. H. J. Symington. Mr. Symington is president of Trans-Canada Air Lines, a director of Canadian National Railways, and also power controller. In all these positions he has rendered distinguished service to Canada. I have no hesitation in saying that he has been one of my most valued advisers, both during my term of office as Minister of Transport and during the years I have been Minister of Munitions and Supply. He has never hesitated to undertake any public responsibility I have entrusted to him, even when this involved great personal sacrifice. I would remind the house that this is the second occasion on which Premier Drew has

[Mr Howe.]

made a personal attack' on Mr. Symington. The specific charge is that Mr. Symington has used his office as president of Trans-Canada Air Lines to further the interests of a private corporation with w-hich he is associated. What are the facts? The Royal Securities Corporation, of which Mr. Symington is an officer, has no financial interest in Canadian Vickers Limited. When the bonds of Canadian Vickers were first offered to the public, in 1927, the Royal Securities Corporation was one of a ' number of financial houses which distributed these bonds. Otherwise the company has not had any connection with either the financing or the management of Canadian Vickers. Further, I may state categorically that Mr. Symington was not consulted about the placing of the DC-4 contract, nor had he any knowledge of the intention of this department with regard to the placing of the contract until the contract had actually been placed.

The third charge of Premier Drew was that the control of Canadian Vickers Limited had passed into the hands of persons who are not British or United States citizens. The committee will recall that this question was raised a few days ago by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar. I stated at the time that it was not the practice of the Department of Munitions and Supply to inquire into the stock control of its contractors, since companies incorporated in Canada were subject always to the provisions of the Companies Act. However, in view of Premier Drew's charge, I have investigated the stock control of Canadian Vickers Limited. Of a total issue of 19,000 preferred shares, residents of Canada hold 13,614; residents of the United States hold 413; of Newfoundland 167; of England 83; and of Bermuda 35. The remaining 4,688 shares, or 24-67 per cent, are held by a Canadian investment corporation known as Losanac Limited. Of a total issue of 52,000 shares of common stock, Canadian residents own 36,680; residents of the United States 3,302; of Bermuda 325; of England 253; and of Newfoundland 20. The remaining 11,420 shares, or 21-96 per cent of the total issue of common stock, are also held by Losanac Limited. It will be seen from this analysis of stock control that 75-33 per cent of the preferred stock and 78-04 per cent of the common stock is held by British and United States citizens. Colonel Drew's statement that the stock control is now in the hands of persons who are not British or United States citizens is, to say the least, something of an exaggeration. Since the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar inquired into the ownership of Losanac Limited, I have also investigated the control of this company. It is owned by Solvay et Cie., a Belgian banking

War Appropriation-Transport

firm, whose affairs are now administered by Baron Rene Boel. Baron Boel is a resident of London, England, and is adviser to the Belgian government (appointed by order in council to that official position), which is now located in that city. Losanac Limited has not now and never has had any connection with any holding company in Basle, Switzerland. There is not now and never has been any German interest of any kind in the company. The Belgian banking firm, Solvay et Cie., decided to invest Belgian funds in Canada. For this purpose a Canadian company, Losanac Limited was incorporated. The president of this company and its officers are Canadians. Since reference was also, made to the holdings of Losanac Limited in the International Nickel Company, Hollinger Consolidated Gold Mines, Dominion Steel and Coal Company, and the Asbestos Corporation, I have also ascertained that the company is not a large holder of the preferred or common stock of the International Nickel Company or Hollinger Consolidated Gold Mines Limited. The company has substantial holdings in the Dominion Steel and Coal Company and the Asbestos Corporation, but these do not approach control of the stock of these corporations.

The Belgian ambassador has drawn my attention to the statement made in the House of Commons on March 28 with reference to Losanac Limited. He was much concerned with the implications attached thereto, as they were likely to cast aspersions on the Belgain interests concerned. He expressed the hope that they might be corrected and assured me that Baron Boel has rendered and is rendering distinguished services to his government.

The facts which I have submitted to the committee will indicate how much truth there is in the charges made by Premier Drew. These facts were available to Premier Drew, but with his customary omniscience in all matters affecting the conduct of the war he has thought it desirable to make his charges without ascertaining the facts. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that irresponsible statements of this kind are most damaging to Canada's war effort, particularly when they come from one who occupies a high position in Canadian public life.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
NAT

Gordon Graydon (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. GRAYDON:

I had not intended taking any part in this debate until the minister made his almost unprovoked attack upon the premier of Ontario.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Munitions and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

What about his attack?

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
NAT

Gordon Graydon (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. GRAYDON:

I did not interrupt the minister when he was making his speech, and I want to make mine with as few interruptions as the minister can possibly arrange. May I say-

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
SC

Ernest George Hansell

Social Credit

Mr. HANSELL:

I rise to a point of order. I understood that we were discussing civil aviation. I believe the Minister of Munitions and Supply interrupted the debate to make a statement. As a courtesy we give that right to the ministers. If the statement is to be debated I am afraid we shall go off on a long course and may not be able to return to civil aviation this afternoon. I do not want to prevent the leader of the opposition from speaking. I think perhaps he should answer the minister, but let us not get off on a sidetrack now. Let us return to civil aviation when the leader of the opposition gets through.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

James Joseph McCann

Liberal

The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. McCann):

Does any other hon. member wish to speak to the point of order raised by the hon. member for Macleod? I think the minister was quite within his rights in speaking as he did, because in my opinion, the matter to which he refers comes within the purview of civil aviation.

A'fr. GRAYDON: I shall not be very long. As I stated at the beginning, I had no desire to take part in the debate at this stage. But the points which the minister injected into this discussion require some comments, I believe, from the official opposition. Not only did the minister make certain statements that I think were unbecoming to him, but he went too far in the remarks he made. So far as the Malton situation is concerned I do not think Premier Drew of Ontario, or any other premier of that province, needs to have anyone offer any apologies for him when he attempts to be the spokesman for what he considers to be in the best interests of the province of which he is head at this time.

I have not, nor apparently has the minister, seen any exact record of what Premier Drew said, except what appeared in the press. But on that statement we must rely, so far as this discussion goes. It seems to me that the premier of Ontario was definitely drawing to the attention of the minister and the government the fact that the Victory Aircraft plant at Malton is a plant which perhaps has no peer or parallel in the whole of Canada, in the production of aeroplanes. I think the minister himself will admit that.

Not only is the Malton plant in an excellent position for future production, but it has turned out in production a kind of plane which we, in the Malton area, have felt would1 be utilized in connection with what the minister said last spring-for civil aviation in the future, and for the great development of air transports in the peace-time period that, let us hope, will follow. I think the minister, in

War Appropriation-Transport

making the charge he did against the premier of Ontario to-day does a disservice not only to Ontario, but also to the Dominion of Canada, so far as his allegations went.

We have at Malton some 9,000 employees who are working on Lancaster planes. It is a production which is gradually being stepped up, and that production was brought about under circumstances which in years prior to this presented certain difficulties. The Malton plant is situated contiguous to perhaps one of the greatest airports on the continent. There is no other plant in the -whole of Canada in a better position geographically, and from the production point of view, to turn out that type of plane, to serve the post-war trade in the manufacture of planes, than is the Victory Aircraft plant. And upon that basis-well, I do not wish to be uncharitable to the hon. member for Fort William, but he will do the minister a favour if he does not interrupt me at this time.

I wish to say this to the minister, that with regard to the position of that plant, there was every reason for the premier of Ontario to take the position he did with respect to the post-war period as it will affect Malton. There has been a tremendous development there. Many people have been brought in. The whole district is developing, and is looking forward with eager expectancy to the post-war manufacturing of planes. That has been the whole -shall I say-Malton idea, from beginning to end, so that it may not be a mushroom settlement, and so that it will be more than a temporary move.

When the minister announced, quite out of the blue, to the house that the DC-4 was being made at Vickers in Montreal, I fancy- and I think most hon. members will agree-* that that was greeted with dismay by those in the Malton area, and others in that particular part of Canada, where they are looking forward with keen anticipation to what will happen in the post-war period. They have the right to hope that the wheels will be turning to the manufacture of peace-time planes in that area, as they are turning at this time of war to the manufacture of Lancasters.

In addition to that there was the feeling, and I think perhaps with justification, that the .Lancaster has no peer in the way of performance in that type of aviation, or in the same type of aviation as will be required for civil aviation when the war is over. When Premier Drew undertook to champion-and that is the word, "champion"-the plant at Malton, and the Victory Aircraft company, he was trying to make sure that those 9,000 men and women would be kept working when this war is over, in a civil aviation plant, as they are now working in the war-time period.

That is why I do not think anyone need apologize for the stand Premier Drew took in the Ontario legislature, and I am not going to do so. I am going to commend him for having done it.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Munitions and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

Go to it.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
NAT

Gordon Graydon (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. GRAYDON:

May I say this, that when the Minister of Munitions and Supply in his reply to Premier Drew which appeared in the press-as I read it-in connection with the Lancaster matter, talked about transferring and changing the orders-well, I do not know whether he was serious. I certainly hope he was not serious when he made the suggestion with respect to changing and transferring orders at this time from Lancasters at Malton to DC-4's at Malton.

I think the minister must have been pretty hard up for an argument, when he used that, after all the tooling up that has been done at Malton during all these years. I say that because the minister must have known, as every member who read the statement by Premier Drew knew, that the premier had no intention, nor have I the intention this afternoon, of suggesting that we should at this moment change the manufacture of Lancasters in Malton during a war-time year into peacetime production, nor would any responsible citizen suggest that.

But the Minister of Munitions and Supply, apparently for his own purposes, and to bolster up and support his argument, attempted to place another interpretation upon the words of the premier. That is not the way to meet Premier Drew's arguments. The way to attempt to meet his arguments is to try to bring the true facts to bear with respect to the whole problem under discussion.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Munitions and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

Premier Drew made no argument.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
NAT

Gordon Graydon (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. GRAYDON:

Well, let me tell the minister that the premier is able to look after himself very well, so that we will all go on our way together.

When the minister speaks of the premier of Ontario as being irresponsible, then I say the minister knows full well that that is not right. Premier Drew of Ontario is as responsible a public man as there is in the whole Dominion of Canada. More than that, the premier of Ontario has, I think, the confidence of his province in a way that the minister and his followers would like veiy much to have in that province to-day.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Munitions and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

We will look after ourselves.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink

March 31, 1944