The Dominion FRIDAY, DECEMBER G, 1918. REPATRIATION

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 61, 6 December 1918, Page 4

The Dominion FRIDAY, DECEMBER G, 1918. REPATRIATION

Thk debate on the Repatriation Bill in the House of Representatives lias left an impression that the Government is not in all respects as well prepared as it should be to cope with the problem of restoring soldiers to civil life. It is evident from the speeches of members that they were to some extent in the dark in regard to very important aspects of repatriation, and the inevitable result was that

the debate was less fruitful than it might have been in helpful suggestions. It is, of course,' obvious that, the Government has been dilatory in elaborating and expanding the machinery of repatriation in this country. No doubt it was anticipated that time would be available in which to develop the organisation now contemplated at least some months before the end of tho

war. On the other hand the Government as long ago as August, 1915, created the nucleus of the central organisation which is needed, when it set up the Discharged Soldiers' Information Department under the control of the HON; A. L. Hekdjian, and in addi-

tion it has various detail measures and preparations in hand which take an important place in the repatriation scheme. A comprehensive survey might show a much more promising state of affairs than Wednesday's debate suggested, and it is a pity that such a survey was not undertaken before tho House of Eepresentatives was asked to deal with the Repatriation Bill. It is incumbent on .the Government to at once make a full and clear statement on repatriation policy in its present and prospective developments in order that Parliament and the country may understand to what extent and in what

respect preparations in hand fall short of what is necessary. The principal weakness of tho Repatriation Bill a-s it was brought down is in the nature of the central authority it proposes to create—a board of four Ministers. The

idea underlying this proposal evidently is that the board would afford a means of co-ordinating the work of the Departments intimate-

ly concerned with repatriation activities, and from this point of view there is perhaps something to be said for it. But any advantages incidental to_ the arrangement are heavily outweighed. Such a board would be of, necessity cumbersome and slow-working, and if

the repatriation schemo is to work smoothly prompt decisions and speedy action will frequently be called for. This consideration is vital, the more so since the Domin-

ion is called upon to complete rapidly an organisation which should have been completed months ago. The right course undoubtedly is to make the Director of Repatriation responsible to a single Minister, and not to saddle him with the impossible task . of 'satisfying four Ministers, who might on occasion take divergent views. There should be no difficulty in arranging the necessary co-ordination of departmental activities without interfering withJ the centralised control of repatriation which is essential if a clear-cut policy is to be instituted and carried into effect. The Repatriation Board proposal has been condemned so generally in Parliament and by non-political organisations closely interested in demobilisation problems that the Government should feel no difficulty in substituting control by a single Minister. _ While division of authority in this case is open to most serious objections, nothing but good could result from taking all possible advantage of non-poli-tical co-operation. Local and district committees to co-operate with the officials of the Repatriation Department are provided for,-but a central advisory committee, would be a useful addition to the organisation. At the stage reaohed the urgent demands of the situation are that the Director of Repatriation should be appointed as soon as possible, and that all detail measures and preparations should be brought into harmonious working relation. Although there are important stops still to bo taken, and any further avoidable delay would be unpardonable, the Government already has a good deal to its credit whore repatriation is concerned. Since it was formed three years • ago, the Discharged Soldiers' Information Department has done excellent work. It has dealt with 26,000 returned soldiers in the past two years, and no doubt its organisation will readily broaden out to meet the larger ■ demands now to be faced. Hundreds of ox-soldiers have been established on country holdings, and thousands have been assisted to obtain employment. The Government'has now taken authority to grant loans not exceeding £300 to returned soldiers as an aid to establishing or ro-esfcablishing themselves in business. At tho same time it has in part provided for the exceptional demand for employment th;it must be expected by earmarking a sum of £2,000,000 to be devoted over a period of two years to "public' and other works for the 'purpose of providing employment for soldiers." Part of this amount will be made available for expenditure by local bodies. This stands as supplementary to a general programme of development work, which, prosecuted with due energy, will not only widen the field of employment for returned soldiers, but will meet the general disturbance and readjustment of . employment conditions that may

be expected during the next, year or two. Although the problem of reabsorbing some fifty thousand ioldiers during the next twelve months is very much more formidable than anything the Dominion has yet accomplished in the way of repatriation, it is undoubtedly open to a satisfactory solution if sound- methods are followed. At every step, however, thoroughly efficient organisation will be demanded, and the _ Government cannot too speedily round off its preparations where they arc incomplete.