Mr. ROWE:

And no better soldier.

Mr. EDAYARDS:

I am also proud to say, if I may be permitted so to do, that my opponent in the last general election was none other than Colonel D. G. L. Cunning-ton, who is now G.S.O. II in military district No. 13.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

He must be a good man.

Mr. EDWARDS:

He was a good soldier; there is no question about it. The official organizer for that candidate now holds a very high office in military district No. 13. In fact, to such an extent has this policy been carried out by the present officers that my supporters are beginning to wonder whether or not any Liberal can possibly qualify for an office in his majesty's service at the present time.

I think the government is to be commended for this policy. I am sure that it has been carried out in spirit and to the letter sa far as Calgary West is concerned; indeed, so far as the city of Calgary is concerned.

[Mr. Ralston.!

Supplementary War Appropriation Bill

What may be the experience elsewhere I do not know, but I am quite frank and sincere when I make these statements with respect to my own constituency, and I believe that if we stick to the facts in that regard, we can speak with firmness and conviction.

As I say, the government is to be commended for its policy. In my opinion the officers in charge .of these departments are to be commended. My criticism, if any, and criticism on the part of the public, is that in those very departments some of the high officers, most of whom received their appointments, but not in the same way twenty years ago, may yet be mindful of their party affiliations, and there may be some justification for that criticism. I do not know. I should dislike very much to believe it. At least so far as Calgary West and other parts of the west are concerned, wre are now told, "Don't go and see your representative in the House of Commons because he cannot do anything for you, but consult rather the officers in charge of the various departments."

It was not, however, with respect to that matter that I wished particularly to speak at this time. This government has announced from time to time that it is its policy to rely as far as possible on technically trained men, and so far as the army is concerned, it has enunciated, and, I believe, has carried out in practice, the policy of relying upon career militarists, men who have made a life study of military matters, rather than upon those who happen to wear a political badge as the credential entitling them to preferment in his majesty's services. I think the government is to be commended for adopting that policy, which, so far as I am aware, has been carried out. With regard to the services in connection with the furnishing of munitions and supplies, I believe the government is to be commended, too, in that it has gone out and obtained the services of men who are skilled, trained, and experienced in the production of those commodities which are required.

I now come to a matter which is surely a perplexing one, perplexing to any government and particularly to the present administration. It is the question of how to distribute in a satisfactory manner the various endeavours contributing to the war; I mean from a geographical point of view. Coming as I do from Alberta where industrial plants, machinery, equipment and trained mechanics are comparatively few and far between, I may say that we in the west are quite reconciled to the fact that, so far as any manufacturing or industrial endeavour is concerned, our contribution can be but very

small if this government is to adhere to the principle which I believe they have tried and, I hope, will continue to try to follow, namely, that commodities should be made and produced, and that soldiers, sailors and airmen should be trained, as efficiently and expeditiously as is humanly possible.

This brings me to the one subject that appeals to me as a layman who has had some little experience in flying, one who was raised in Ontario as a boy, who knows something about the geography and the lay of the land and who has spent the last thirty years of his life in western Canada. It so happens that I come from the city where the Chinooks blow. The chinook wind may have little or no significance to the members of this house, but it is a wind that comes over the mountains and is most perceptible in the winter time when it makes itself manifest by the rapid disappearance of any snow which may have fallen the night before. It accounts in part, for the droughts that occur in the southern and eastern portion of Alberta and extend into Saskatchewan as far as Moose Jaw and Regina, with their devastating effects, of which hon. members have heard some evidence in this house, in the repeated annual discussions with respect to the dried-out areas.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

So that is the cause of all your troubles.

Mr. EDWARDS:

It is not the cause of all. In that so-called dried-out area, east of the city of Calgary and extending as far as Medicine Hat, there is produced wheat of the highest protein content grown anywhere in the world.

I wish, for a few moments, to direct the minds and thoughts of hon. members to our empire air training scheme. Some days ago. when the other vote was before the house, I asked the Minister of National Defence for Air what the determining factor was so far as the geographical location of our air training schools was concerned, because I had in mind the fact that both Great Britain and Canada realize perforce that possibly the greatest determining factor in the successful outcome of the war would be the rapid training of competent, skilled airmen. That seemed to be the crying need.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

That was the crime of 1938.

Mr. EDWARDS:

I do not propose to discuss that question with the leader of the opposition. That is another matter.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

It is part, and parcel of the same thing.

2070 COMMONS

Supplementary War Appropriation Bill

Mr. EDWARDS:

I was not here at that time and frankly I was not vitally interested in it then. But an air training scheme having been decided upon, the thought that would occur to the mind of any normal citizen is this: Where will they train their airmen in order to train them most speedily, economically and efficiently and with the minimum of hazards? From my knowledge of Ontario, the maritime provinces, western Canada and the Pacific coast, I thought, and I believe properly, that that air training scheme would find its heart and centre in a place where airmen could be trained the year round with a minimum of hazards and a minimum of expense. But in answer to my question of a few weeks ago, the Minister of National Defence for Air referred me to page 736 of last year's debates, and I find that this was the policy laid down:

Emergency landing grounds on the Trans-Canada airway owned by the crown, controlled by the Department of Transport, developed as unemployment relief projects, mostly to an extent usable for emergency purposes only.

Naturally there was a general impression that advantage should be taken of these existing facilities. However, most of them were found unsuitable for the training plan because of, inter alia-

And these presumably are the features which were to be avoided:

(a) location in rough or mountainous country unsuitable for flying training.

If we apply that test to southern Alberta, any hon. members who know that section know it is a foothill and prairie country, relatively smooth, with absence of mountains, trees, buildings and, fences, stones, stumps and water.

(b) impracticability of economical development to the size and clearance necessary for a flying training school.

I find that this condition does not apply to southern Alberta, because there one finds ample clearances. Any hon. members who have flown over that country or even travelled over it by automobile or rail must have been impressed with the fact that those difficulties do not apply there.

(e) location remote from centres of population.

Any part of southern Alberta is readily accessible to centres of population.

(d) location in areas of heavy snowfall.

I think I can truthfully say I have seen more snow in the last six weeks in Ottawa than I have seen in the last fifteen years in Calgary or anywhere else in southern Alberta. This afternoon a man who has just come to Ottawa told me that at the present time the farmers at Claresholm are preparing their soil for seeding.

In the concluding paragraph the minister says that he relies on his technical officers for surveys and so on, and he continues:

From a study of the preliminary survey reports by representatives of the Department of Transport and of the Royal Canadian Air Force, sites were tentatively selected for specific types of schools, distributed geographically throughout Canada as evenly as possible considering reasonable economic development and flying requirements. [DOT]

I suggest that some criticism may be justly founded on the fact that these air fields are found distributed not only across the prairies but down through Ontario and Quebec and the maritimes. I have tried for the last two and a half weeks to get definite statistical information to support the argument I am now making. I have been unable to get sufficient to cover all the ground, but I think most of what I shall say is a matter of common observation. Land in western Canada is cheaper than similar land in Ontario and Quebec, adjacent to centres of population. Second, lands adjacent to cities in eastern Canada offer more hazards to aviation, and they must be cleared of the natural growth thereon in the form of trees. Farms in Ontario are for the most part one hundred acre farms divided into three or four fields; so it is not an unfair assumption, but one which I think will be borne out by the statistics when they are produced, that the cost of levelling and clearing airfields in eastern Canada is higher than in western Canada. Having cleared the field, let us assume that the cost of runways, erection of buildings and housing for the men is the same. There is, however, still the necessity of keeping the runways clear, which entails, I am sure, enormously greater expense in eastern Canada, where there is such a tremendous snowfall as has been the case this winter, as compared with the insignificant snowfall in southern Alberta this winter or in any and every winter, because of the weather conditions and the beneficient influence of the chinook wind.

I now come to what I consider an even more forcible argument, namely, the atmospheric flying conditions. The term "sunny" is not just a meaningless adjective tacked on to the name of the province of Alberta. In that province the day the sun does not shine is a rare day. And you do not have the rainfall; if you did, there would be no wheat problem so far as Alberta is concerned. Nor do you have sleet and snow in abundance such as you have here in eastern Canada. The falling of each and all those elements must necessarily constitute a real hazard to flying, at least to the training of the young and unskilled pilot, and must, as a result of grounded flying machines, militate against the expeditious training of these men.

Supplementary War Appropriation Bill

The crying need of Britain has been and is at this time for trained pilots. Such statistics as I have been able to get from the department reveal that the number of hours that a plane is grounded by reason of weather is much greater in other parts of Canada than it is in southern Alberta, or that area which stretches shall I say, to Moose Jaw. Yet we find airports and training fields established in the woods in these eastern provinces.

I can readily understand that the department will have in mind the use of these various air fields after the war. Quite properly they might have in mind selecting fields in proximtiy to cities in consideration of the use that may be made of them afterwards as airports. But having in mind the paramount consideration, namely, the expeditious training of air pilots with the minimum of hazard to the pilot and the machine and of expense to the government, there should be a wider development and concentration of flying in southern Alberta.

Mr. McNIVEN:

And southern Saskatchewan.

Mr. EDWARDS:

And southern Saskatchewan. Remember this, that I do not say this having in mind my own home city of Calgary, which probably has, with one or two exceptions, a greater air development than any other city in Canada. I was frank enough to confess, much to the amazement of some of my political friends, that as far as the selection of some of the air fields there was concerned, I had nothing whatever to do with it. My constituents were astonished when I confessed that they knew these sites had been selected before I did, because I read about it in the Calgary newspaper which I received here three days after the news was made known in that city. But if the policy of the government is to distribute these air schools evenly across Canada, I believe that is a mistaken policy, involving needless expenditures of money in the purchase, clearing and upkeep of fields for training purposes, and creating additional hazards and delays in connection with the training of pilots; for it must be remembered that when a plane is grounded, the pilot perforce cannot fly. It is not that I have asked for any field in the Calgary district, or that I hope any training school will come to Calgary because of any representation I might make, which were not based on sound reason and logic, that I have spoken this evening. So far as I am concerned, I will never raise my finger to get anything for Calgary or for western Canada which I do not believe can be justified on sound economic grounds and will contribute the maximum of efficiency to

our war effort. But if this is the policy that has been laid down, and it has been correctly stated, then in all conscience and in all seriousness I urge that the government should revise same and give consideration to the possibility of training our pilots in that part of Canada where the training can be carried on most economically and with the minimum of hazards to the pilots themselves.

Mr. RALSTON:

The Minister of National Defence for Air is not here, but I think the principal matter on which my hon. friend has laid emphasis is the selection of sites for air schools. I can only say what I know to be a fact that in connection with the selection of these sites the minister had the benefit of the assistance of a board of technical officers who understood the requirements in connection with flying training. I think there was also on the board an officer from the transport department with long experience in connection with the construction of aerodromes, who knew the sort of soil and location best adapted to that work. I have no hesitation in saying to the committee that I am satisfied that not a single site for an air training school was selected except on the recommendation of this board, who were regarded as better qualified than anyone else to decide where these schools should be located; and that they worked without interference of any kind by the minister or anyone else. I know my hon. friend has not suggested that there was any interference, but I say to him that the choices were made deliberately by people who were supposed to know, and who, I believe, did know, better than anyone else in this country what was necessary for these schools, what ground facilities were required in order that the best possible job might be done in the shortest possible time.

Mr. HANSON York-Sunbury): I hope the ministry will give heed to the plea just made by their supporter. He almost made me weep at the injustice that had been done to southern Alberta. With regard to the selection of air training schools, I know definitely that one site was turned down by that board and that now nearly half a million dollars has been spent in building an air training school at that very location. Therefore I am not so much impressed by the statement of the minister that the joint board selected all these sites. I know it to be a fact that the Pennfield site was absolutely turned down by this board. The hon. member for Charlotte made a plea for the establishment of a school at that point, and half a million dollars has been spent on that school. So something

Supplementary War Appropriation Bill

happened in regard to Pennfield. Just what it was I do not know, and I am not very particular about it, because I was also anxious to see that school developed. It is not in my constituency, but it is adjoining, and it is in my old home county.

I was not so much impressed with the statement of high policy to which the minister gave expression. There have been changes made. The objection to the Pennfield site was fog. Well, the fog from the bay of Fundy is still there and always will be there. I have lived along the bay of Fundy for some sixty odd years now, and the fog is still there. I nearly wept when I heard the hon. member for Calgary West tell us about what had happened in his community and certainly his statement requires a reply by the minister with regard to this apparent discrimination against beautiful, sunny Alberta about which the hon. member orated a few moments ago with such telling effect. With respect, however, to the appointment of these Tories to high offices in the army, let me tell the hon. member for Calgary West that among the most patriotic men in this Canada of ours he will find leading Conservatives in every walk of life, prepared to do their duty by the empire and by Canada, to-day and always.

Mr. RALSTON:

I cannot reply to the reference to the Pennfield airport; I do not know the circumstances. But I repeat with all the emphasis at my command that the Pennfield airport, and every other airport where training is being carried on, were selected by this board. The board may have changed its mind, or the tactical situation may have changed. As I speak, I have some recollection that the Pennfield airport was established for tactical reasons after the break through, because of the possible threat on the Atlantic coast, when the Atlantic command was established, in order to have a reserve base for planes back from the seaboard. I think my hon. friend will find this to be the reason.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

I know I was trying to help with regard to the matter, and the location was condemned by the board because of fog. For some reason a change was made, and I was happy to have the change and never inquired as to the reason for it.

Mr. RALSTON:

I think my hon. friend will find the reason to be as I have stated it. I wish I had known the matter was coming up but I am quite certain now that Pennfield was selected as a reserve base back from the seaboard.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

I have no doubt that there were good reasons for the change.

Mr. HAZEN:

In the absence of the

Minister of National Defence for Air, I should like to direct a few questions to the Minister of National Defence -with regard to the training of squadron leaders under the common-' wealth air training scheme. I am not in a position to discuss this matter in any detail; as a matter of fact, I know nothing about it, but one hears rumours and reports. If the minister is not in a position to answer these questions now, perhaps he will do so at his convenience. The questions are these: Under the commonwealth air training plan are airmen trained in Canada as squadron leaders? Has any difficulty been experienced in training squadron leaders in Canada for service overseas? Have airmen been trained in Canada as squadron leaders who are now in charge of squadrons overseas; and, if so, how-many? Is it proposed to make any change in the commonwealth air training plan in connection with the training of squadron leaders?

Mr. RALSTON:

I can only say to my hon. friend that I shall try to get the information for him. Just offhand, however, I think he is mixing up the air training plan and the home war establishment. Of course squadron leaders are being trained in the home war establishment; that is to say, officers who serve in the air defences of Canada and those who go overseas to man our own squadrons over there. Probably there also will be some of these officers in some of the squadrons which will be formed as a result of the commonwealth air training plan. There is no doubt in the world that squadron leaders are being trained in Canada. Whether squadron leaders are being trained under the commonwealth air training scheme, I cannot say, but I have-the idea they are not.

Mr. HAZEN:

How are squadron leaders

being trained, and where?