But, as a matter of fact, under the Bren gun contract there was an opportunity to make a million in profits. That is one of the things which was most offensive to the people. If there had been some such provision as appears in the bill, a limitation of profits to five per cent or ten per cent on the capital, there would not have been the same danger of huge profits such as are going to be made in the Hahn contract.
There are a couple of suggestions I should like to make in regard to the bill. One of the great flaws in it-I mentioned it the other day in my remarks-is that there is not close enough connection between the proposed defence purchasing board and the defence council. As the minister knows, the defence council is made, up of the Minister of National Defence, as president, and the deputy minister of national defence, as vice-president; and the members are the chief of general staff and the director of naval services. The associate members are the adjutant general, the quartermaster general, the master general of the ordnance and the director of the Canadian air force. I believe one of the weaknesses of the bill is that there is not sufficient liaison, if I may use that term, between the defence council and the board proposed in the bill. I suggest there should be a closer association-
Subtopic: CREATION OP DEFENCE PURCHASING BOARD TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS FOR MUNITIONS, EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES