Experiencias del uso de WebEx en diferentes contextos o instituciones

Canada’s war effort fundamentally transformed the country in myriad ways and as the defeat of Germany and Japan appeared more certain, the challenges of transitioning

65

Forbes, “Consolidating Disparity,” 3-27; Firestone, Locations and Effects of Wartime Industrial Expansion in Canada 1939-1944, 24-40.

66 _{J. L. Granatstein, Canada’s Army: Waging War and Keeping the Peace, (Toronto: University of Toronto} Press, 2002), 316.

24

between war and peace became increasingly urgent. As Howe told the House of Commons in April 1945 when presenting the White Paper on Employment and Income, “the central task of reconstruction, in the interest of the armed services and civilians alike, must be to accomplish a smooth, orderly transition from the economic conditions of war to those of peace and to maintain a high and stable level of employment and income. The Government adopts this as a primary object of policy.”67

The White Paper

outlined the various issues expected to arise during the transition period and it also elaborated on what the federal government was doing to fulfill its promises for a smooth transition, high employment, and higher living standards.68 That this policy would be accomplished best through the divestment of public ownership and economic policies designed to reinvigorate private enterprise was a central element of the Liberals’ reconstruction efforts. As the White Paper explained “the Government does not believe it to be either desirable or practicable to look to the expansion of government enterprise to provide, to any large degree, the additional employment required. It follows that a major and early task of reconstruction is to facilitate and encourage an expansion of private industry, including primary with other industries.”69

A central postwar issue was the unprecedented expansion of the federal government, its role in mobilizing war production, and the reconstruction of this new political economy into a viable peacetime framework. Government ownership and regulation was a wartime necessity, as Canada’s industrial mobilization did not happen by happy accident. It occurred because the government had rationalized the normal flow of business patterns, effectively suspending the laws of supply and demand for the duration of the war.70 As Joy Parr explained in Domestic Goods, the wartime economy stood normal business practices on their head. During the war, need trumped demand, so

67 _{C. D. Howe, “Canadian White Paper on Employment and Income” Federal Reserve Bulletin Vol. 31,} (June, 1945), 536. Presented to the House of Commons in April 1945.

68

W. A. Mackintosh, “The White Paper on Employment and Income in Its 1945 Setting,” in S. F. Kaliski eds., Canadian Economic Policy Since the War: A Series of Six Public Lectures in Commemoration of the Twentieth Anniversary of the “White Paper” on Employment and Income of 1945, (Ottawa: Canadian Trade Committee, 1965), 9-22, especially 15-21.

69 _{Howe, “Canadian White Paper on Employment and Income,” 537.}

70 _{Even conservatives conceded the necessity of public-ownership in times of war. See: House of} Commons, Debates, 19th Parliament Vol. 4, 12 June 1944, statement by J. H. Blackmore, 3725.

25

the normal channels through which goods and resources flowed were reorganized and redirected to support the war effort and not patterns of civilian consumption – particularly after 1941. More generally, this meant that federal authorities increasingly intervened to regulate almost every aspect of economic activity and public investment was used as a tool for redirecting production away from a free market system towards something approaching a “command” economy with the federal government at its core.71

Successfully divesting this power and influence to support private enterprise required an immense amount of preparations and diligence. As a result, plans for the postwar period began very early in the Second World War and were prompted largely by the interwar experience with veterans’ rehabilitation as well as the economic turmoil of the Great Depression. As Peter Neary explained, for many contemporaries the 1920s and 1930s represented a postwar world that none wished to recreate. The hard lessons of the interwar period loomed large in the minds of all policymakers and motivated them to avoid another postwar disaster.72 The sentiment was widespread in government circles. As a 28 November 1942 memo from the Economic Advisory Committee (EAC) stated “if the government has not prepared a program in advance, the country will run grave risks of facing mass unemployment, social unrest, and a chaotic industrial situation which no ad hoc improvisations will be able to master.”73

Clearly, Canada needed an elaborate and multi-faceted exit strategy.

Although it was impossible to predict the future, the major challenges of peace were anticipated in one form or another. As a result, government officials worked hard during the war to create plans and programs for postwar reconstruction, reconversion, and rehabilitation. By 1944, the major elements of the government’s exit strategy were ready for Parliamentary assent. Consequently, the 1944 legislative agenda became one of the most important in Canadian history. That year legislation was tabled creating three new

71

Parr, Domestic Goods, 21-39; McInnis, Harnessing Labour Confrontation, 19-45. 72 _{Neary, On to Civvy Street, 62-63.}

73 _{As quoted in: Peter McInnis, “Planning Prosperity: Canadians Debate Postwar Reconstruction,” in Greg} Donaghy, ed. Uncertain Horizons: Canadians and Their World in 1945, (Ottawa: Canadian Committee for the History of the Second World War, 1997), 234. See also: Robert A. Wardhaugh, Behind the Scenes: The Life and Work of William Clifford Clark, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2010). See also: William Lyon Mackenzie King, Canada and the War: Victory, Reconstruction, and Peace, (Ottawa, 1945), 60-61.

26

federal departments (Reconstruction, Veterans Affairs, and National Health and Welfare). Legislation was also passed establishing family allowances that paid families to help with the cost of raising children.74 A new version of the National Housing Act was introduced that created the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) to alleviate the growing housing crisis by regulating the real estate market, guaranteeing mortgages, and constructing homes through two crown companies.75 Furthermore, a whole series of acts were passed to provide veterans with war service grants, gratuities, support services, and educational benefits.76 Other legislation was passed to help farmers with loans for equipment and farming implements, while businesses were aided by the creation of an Industrial Development Bank that helped with financing peacetime industrial expansion. Moreover, a whole host of laws were also aimed at re-establishing foreign trade by loaning export credits for the purchase of Canadian products.77

It was within this larger context of postwar preparations that the plans for the disposal of surplus munitions and supplies were formulated. Since the disposal problem emanated from wartime procurement, it only emerged as a major concern once Canadian industries started breaking production records. As Chapter 1 demonstrates, it was only in mid-1943 that policymakers started realizing the future scope of the disposal problem. After some extensive studies and discussions over the summer and fall of 1943, Cabinet approved PC9108 on 29 November 1943. PC9108 was a critical order-in-council that created the Crown Assets Allocation Committee (CAAC) and the War Assets Corporation (WAC). The CAAC was an inter-departmental committee designed to act as a hub for the paperwork associated with declaring surpluses and formulate general

74 _{See: Raymond B. Blake, From Rights to Needs: A History of Family Allowances in Canada, 1929-1992,} (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2009).

75 _{See: Richard Harris, Creeping Conformity: How Canada Became Suburban, 1900-1960, (Toronto:} University of Toronto Press, 2004).

76 _{See: Walter Woods, Rehabilitation (A Combined Operation): Being a History of the Development and}

Carrying Out of a Plan for the Re-Establishment of a Million Young Veterans of World War II by the Department of Veterans Affairs and its Predecessor the Department of Pensions and National Health

(Ottawa: HMSO, 1953). 77

David Slater, “Colour the Future Bright: The White Paper, the Green Book, and the 1945-1946 Dominion-Provincial Conference on Reconstruction,” in Greg Donaghy, ed. Uncertain Horizons, 191-195. See also: R. B. Bryce, “From Policy to Legislation, 1944,” in David Slater, War Finance and Reconstruction, 193-210

27

policies about disposal. The WAC handled the physical aspects of disposal by collecting, maintaining, storing, selling, or destroying everything declared surplus by the government. A few months later in July 1944, Parliament passed the Surplus Crown Assets Act which formed a permanent legal, organizational, and administrative framework for the disposal of surplus government property.

The formation of the CAAC and WAC is a starting point for understanding the argument and direction of this dissertation. Over the course of seven chapters, this study elaborates on four critical themes: 1) the continuous and evolving nature of public pressure for government action on disposal; 2) the role of the CAAC and WAC in administrating and controlling disposal operations; 3) the way the objects of war require stewardship from one use to the next; and 4) the process through which munitions and supplies are reduced, reused, recycled, and upcycled into new forms, functions, and intentions. Collectively these themes constitute the dissertation’s argument which is that through the CAAC and WAC the government disposed of its surplus munitions and supplies in order to support, and not hinder, postwar reconstruction and rehabilitation in Canada. Although disposal was not perfect and left behind some questionable environmental legacies, the conversion of surplus assets into peacetime purposes ensured that objects gained new uses and meanings thereby mitigating their threatening nature to economic stability, political authority, and public safety.

The creation of the CAAC and WAC straddles the line between the first and second themes and demonstrates how the government responded to the political, social, and economic pressures it faced from interest groups. As Chapter 1 explains, business interests were initially the first to voice their apprehension about the future economic impact of government surpluses, but they were quickly followed by local and provincial governments and various other associations from across the country. Business interests were most concerned about the deflationary economic conditions that might arise if an uncontrolled flood of second-hand goods entered the marketplace. This was threatening because it would force the postwar economy into competing with the vestiges of wartime production and thereby lower prices for new goods of similar types, employment, and profits. Businesses wanted the government to eliminate this threat and some trade

28

associations even went as far as suggesting that all unneeded things be destroyed rather than resold in domestic markets.

By contrast, political and social interest groups were less concerned about the economic ramifications and tended to view the impending liquidation of government property as a valuable opportunity to acquire cheap assets to assist with their reconstruction and rehabilitation programs. Like businesses, they also favoured increasing government regulation to control the flood of goods, but instead of accommodating corporate greed, they wanted surpluses deployed to improve social welfare programs wherever possible. Therefore, the disposal of munitions and supplies became entwined within the larger postwar debates about the role of the state and social security. It is worth noting that in regards to disposal, neither the right nor the left of the political spectrum objected to increasing government regulations and controls, though neither side agreed on the ultimate objectives for disposal or how the CAAC and WAC should implement their new powers.

Pressure for government action also emerged within the bureaucracy itself. As Chapters 1 and 2 explain, in line with the mounting public pressure, a collection of bureaucrats and military officers came to grips with the disposal problem. The rapid development of military technologies and the immense training facilities located in Canada prompted an increasing need for disposal arrangements for production wastages, worn-out equipment, and obsolescent weaponry. As a result, a group of people inside the government and military were exposed to disposal early on and foresaw a future problem when more than just worn-out and obsolete kit required disposal. As a result, they pressured their superiors for action and later formed an important nucleus inside the disposal administration created by PC9108 and the Surplus Crown Assets Act. Although it proved difficult to keep some of these experts (many of whom were dollar-a-year-men) employed in the WAC long term, they were instrumental in formulating early plans and preparations. Later, once the flood of surpluses developed, their replacements adapted and expanded the WAC’s operations to meet a new series of challenges and problems.

Chapter 2 elaborates more on the problems involved in managing disposal policies and procedures to accommodate as many interests as possible. In effect, the government’s

29

attempt to control the disposal of its surpluses ended up becoming a battle against diminishing returns. Not only was the value and utility of each asset depreciating over time, but every policy and procedure created an inconvenient mix of productive and deficient outcomes. In sum, an immense number of forms, receipts, and reports were generated when tracking and controlling disposal operations in order to ensure that assets were disposed of strategically. This, however, buried the Corporation and Committee in paperwork that grew to unwieldly proportions when the tidal wave of surplus declarations barrelled into the CAAC and WAC at the end of the 1945-1946 fiscal year. Processing paperwork, appraising inventories, and negotiating sales took time and significant delays and bottlenecks developed. These delays engendered a renewal of public pressure and criticism that was exacerbated by several related postwar problems that disposal operations were supposed to help remedy: severe material shortages, delays in industrial reconversion, labour disputes, a growing accommodation crisis, and widespread unemployment. Therefore, disposal operations were never perfect. Although they achieved a great deal, policies developed along pragmatic lines that were not always popular or without controversy. Having few precedents upon which to base such an extensive program of divestiture, the operations of the CAAC and WAC evolved with every trial and subsequent error.

The third and fourth themes shift the dissertation’s focus to the objects of war themselves and the process through which they gained or lost utility in peacetime. When the war ended, the munitions and supplies – whether new, used, or surplus – did not just vanish on their own. Rather, they continued occupying a physical space, and until the disposal process affected their forms and functions, they also remained entirely capable of fulfilling their primary and intended purposes. This was quite problematic considering the vast stocks of surplus weaponry and ammunition, but less so for supplies and non- lethal assets with a high degree of convertibility in peacetime. Whatever the case, objects cannot change their forms and functions on their own. Instead, the implements of war were ushered through the disposal process so that old uses, meanings, and owners were discarded for new ones. Change was imposed on munitions and supplies after the war and a concerted government program managed, controlled, and facilitated this transition.

30

Chapter 3 discusses two of the most critical aspects in the stewardship of objects: collection and storage. Following a major reorganization from August to October 1945, the WAC moved quickly to collect and store the objects that were physically impeding the return of peacetime operations on factory floors, the closing of military bases, and civilian pastimes. The WAC’s clearance and warehousing operations allowed the government to maintain custody of its surpluses, facilitate their repair or renovation, and ensure that the government received a fair reimbursement for its property. In doing so, the WAC formed a reservoir of assets – filling more than six million square feet of indoor storage space at its peak – which supplied reconstruction and rehabilitation programs throughout the country. The reservoir also acted as a shock absorber in that it allowed the WAC to control the flow of goods entering the domestic market. However, clearance and warehousing operations were not perfect. In general, the main difficulty surrounded the management and handling of an inventory comprising over 200,000 different types of items. Moreover, clearance and warehousing were also shaped by their high financial costs, the geographic dispersion of surpluses, the abandonment of assets, the extent of onsite pollution, and unexploded ordnance (UXO).

Stewarding objects through the disposal process only started with collection and storage. In fact, hoarding assets was only a temporary measure and largely redundant if the inventories amassed never left the WAC’s possession. As Chapter 4 explains, there were only two ways to divest government property: either through sales or destruction. Fears of economic ruin through a faulty disposal strategy were commonplace in the 1940s. Looking back at the experiences following the First World War, when sales of surpluses were largely unregulated and speculators profited handsomely, policymakers and politicians tacitly connected the onset of the Great Depression with the booming supply of cheap government property in the 1920s. This prompted the WAC to heed the advice and warnings of business interests and devise a selling strategy that explicitly favoured big business. As a result, the WAC decided to limit the public’s access to surplus stocks and only sell them through legitimate trade networks and businesses. In effect, this strategy turned established businesses into middlemen who reconditioned and resold the surpluses they bought from the WAC.

31

As can be imagined the public despised these measures since they could not buy direct from the WAC and had to pay higher prices for second-hand goods marked up by dealers and distributors. Moreover, the public’s anger surged whenever reports of the WAC’s destruction programs surfaced. The charges of waste and profligacy stemmed from what was perceived as the wanton and indiscriminate destruction of public property. To individual customers, the WAC’s selling and destruction policies were outrageous: there were significant material shortages in postwar Canada and a ready demand for cheap things, but instead of accommodating the marketplace the WAC refused to sell direct to anyone without proper business credentials and destroyed the remainder. Although this infuriated many desperate Canadians, few people understood the full scope of the WAC’s situation and responsibilities. The Second World War was incredibly wasteful and officials in the WAC faced the daunting challenge of mitigating the continuing costs of depreciating assets.

Victory in 1945 produced vast quantities of leftover junk, while new goods quickly deteriorated in value, utility, and condition. Derelict equipment, lethal weaponry, and obsolete kit had limited value in civilian markets but their storage, maintenance, and marketing continued soaking up public money. Every surplus item entering the WAC’s possession cost it financially and over time these expenses far exceeded the profits from any sale. If no business wanted to purchase the materials or if the assets were considered dangerous to public safety, then the WAC had no recourse except to label them scrap and have them destroyed. However, contrary to public opinion, the WAC’s destruction