Mr. KNOWLES:

For a copy of all correspondence, memoranda and reports, in the possession of the Department of Munitions and Supply, leading up to the launching of a prosecution against Canada Comforter, Limited, as indicated on page 3610 of Hansard for June 8, 1944.

Also for a copy of any correspondence, memoranda or reports, in the possession of the Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation, made available to the Department of Munitions and Supply in connection with the above case.

Mr. CHEVRIER:

There is an objection to this motion also, on the ground that the correspondence and reports sought by the hon. member concern a matter which is now before the courts. It is the practice of the house to refuse to produce papers under these circumstances, and I am objecting to the passing of this motion for that reason.

Mr. COLD WELL:

Has this case been proceeded with?

Mr. CHEVRIER:

Yes.

Mr. COLD WELL:

Is it in the courts?

Mr. CHEVRIER:

It is now before the courts. Charges have been laid.

Mr. COLD WELL:

And not withdrawn?

Mr. CHEVRIER:

My understanding is that they are proceeding.

Motion dropped.

Mr. KNOWLES:

For a copy of all correspondence, memoranda, reports and other documents in the possession of the Department of Finance or the Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation regarding the recovery by the said corporation of subsidy pay-

ments, or any portions thereof, made to manufacturers of mattresses or other bedding products.

Mr. ABBOTT:

A similar reservation will have to be made with reference to this motion as was made to the motion of the hon. member for York-South (Mr. Noseworthy); that is, that interdepartmental reports will not be produced, as being privileged, and correspondence or other documents which reveal the total amounts of subsidies paid to individual firms will not be produced. Subject to these reservations the order may pass.

Mr. COLD WELL:

Since this is the position of the government, may I suggest that this case should be referred to the war expenditures committee? The information I have would warrant that proceeding.

Mr. GRAYDON:

It had better go to the public accounts committee rather than the war ' expenditures committee.

Hon. R. B. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

I desire to direct to the Minister of National Defence a question of which I have given him verbal notice. What are the reasons of security which prevent the Canadian people from knowing the extent of the casualties in France, having regard to the fact that Lieutenant-General Bradley, at a press conference on the beachhead on June 17, disclosed to the war correspondents present that American casualties for the first eleven days of the invasion totalled 16,883, including 3,283 known dead, and 12,600 wounded? If there is to be one rule for the people of the United States and another for the Canadian people, I think the position should be clarified, and we should be given convincing reasons why they disclosed the casualty figures and the Canadian government refuses to do likewise.

Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):

In the first place, Mr. Speaker, I wish my hon. friend and the house to note that it was not the United States government that made the statement which was given; it. was the field commander. As a result of arrangements which were made prior to operations in the Mediterranean in July last year, it was agreed that the actual number of casualties would be released only if and when the commander in the field who is responsible for the conduct of the operations feels that such release will not prejudice the progress of the operation. I have always considered this arrangement binding, and I have never per-

Dominion Coal Company

mitted a release of casualty figures which might be regarded as in any way endangering the security of our forces. Any releases authorized by me have been the subject of prior consultation with our allies. _

When the hon. member asked the question on Friday I told the house that nothing but security reasons prevented these figures from being announced, but that I would have to consult our allies before an announcement could be made. I must say I was very much surprised to learn on Saturday morning that an announcement had been made from the field respecting United States casualties. The house will recognize, I am sure, that I would want to take instant action in respect of it. I cabled Canadian military headquarters, as I indicated on Friday that I would do. I stated that since the totals had been announced for the United States I did not see why we could not announce the Canadian casualties as well, and I asked that communication be made with the appropriate officers so as to ensure concurrent statements on matters of this kind in the future. The reply I received this morning gave the circumstances under which the announcement was made by the field commander, which I will not disclose. The reply does, however, state that there is an agreement that no additional statement will be made public at present and that we shall be advised regarding any further announcement so that a simultaneous release can be made in Canada.

When I received this reply this morning. I telephoned to Canadian military headquarters and pointed out to them the incongruity of one country issuing a statement and others not doing so. And questioning whether an agreement should be made under these circumstances, they advised that the request had come from responsible officers connected with the combined operations, and very strongly advised that it would be definitely regarded by those who are in charge as a breach of security if figures were released by Canada at this time. I may say that figures have not been given by any of the other principal allies, that I have heard of. -I have given full consideration to the matter and under the circumstances I am not prepared to overrule the judgment of those who are on the spot, who are closer to the position than we here can possibly be. They know the detriment which might be caused to the troops -and that includes Canadian troops-and to the success of the operation itself by the giving of this information. I can only ask the house and the public to accept their judgment, as I do, and to await the announcement of the number of casualties whenever it is considered, by those in charge, that they may be safely released.

May I say further that casualties, no matter how limited they may be, are always too many. However, there are two statements I can make which I think should afford considerable relief. In the first place, in these almost two weeks of fighting in France, the Canadian casualties are moderate and below the total number estimated for the initial phase of the operation. That is gratifying and must be given at this time without amplification. The numbers will gradually disclose themselves by the publishing of lists as time goes by; but, as they explained to me, what they want to avoid is the giving out of the number of casualties for any particular phase of the operation.

The second point is that in this operation the system of reporting individual casualties is functioning, I think, with maximum efficiency. I can assure the house that almost every casualty sustained up to Friday last has been reported directly to the next of kin, and they are being kept informed of the progress of those who are wounded. It is proposed that this service shall continue to be given to the next of kin without interruption. I think we can be sure that they as well as the public are conscious of the security restrictions and would not insist that casualty figures should be given out if responsible authorities on the ground consider it inadvisable.