I might answer, the two hon. gentlemen who have just spoken by saying this matter was discussed very thoroughly yesterday, when what I thought were cogent reasons were given as to why attendance at R.M.C. and Royal Roads should be considered as different from service in the non-permanent active militia. Briefly, the reason was that on entry into the Royal Military College and the Royal Roads Naval College a cadet does not take an oath of attestation; he does not form part of a corps as it is defined in the Militia Act; he is not liable to service; he is not in fact a soldier or a sailor. As I pointed out, this matter is not new; it has been like this since there has been a military pension act. The question has been considered and discussed frequently, and the position I have just stated has been taken consistently.
I would point out another position which is not at all dissimilar. Take the case of a civil servant who, after a period of service, becomes entitled to a pension because of his service. There never has been any suggestion that such civil servant should count for pension purposes the time he spent at the university or at a law school or a school of mines qualifying himself to become a civil servant.
Subtopic: EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS OF ACT TO CERTAIN GROUPS