Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, members of parliament will have already learned with satisfaction that a treaty of mutual guarantee was signed this morning at Brussels by representatives of the governments of the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. This pact represents a partial fulfilment of the idea of a western European union put forward by the United Kingdom foreign secretary on January 22 last. This pact is far more than an alliance of the old kind. It is a partial realization of the idea of collective security by an arrangement made under the charter of the united nations. As such it is a step towards peace, which may well be followed by other similar steps until there is built up an association of all free states which are willing to accept responsibilities of mutual assistance to prevent aggression and preserve peace.
May I read, in this connection, two articles of the western union agreement:
Article III. The high contracting parties will make every effort in common to lead their people towards a better understanding of the principles which form the basis of their common civilization and to promote cultural exchanges by conventions between themselves or otherwise.
Article IV. If any high contracting party should be the object of an armed attack in Europe, the other high contracting parties will, in accordance with the provisions of article LI of the charter, afford the party so attacked all the military and other aid and assistance in their power.
Hon. members will, I am sure, also welcome the significant statement made to the congress of the United States at noon today by President Truman in which, referring to the Brussels agreement which had just been signed, he spoke of the determination of the United States to help those five western European nations to protect themselves.
The Canadian government has been closely following recent developments in the international sphere. The peoples of all free countries may be assured that Canada will play her full part in every movement to give substance to the conception of an effective system of collective security by the development of regional pacts under the charter of the united nations.



COMMUNIST AGENTS


Mr. JOHN BRACKEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, the Rrime Minister has just referred to the pact between five European nations guaranteeing mutual aid over a long period of time. I am sure that all members of the house will feel like congratulating those nations upon having reached such an agreement. I am aware, Mr. Speaker, that a statement of this kind by the Prime Minister is not debatable. I think that is unfortunate, because only the other day in this house some members asked for an opportunity to discuss matters relating to external affairs but the government did not find it expedient to allow that discussion. And a day or two ago I asked the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) if he would, before Easter, be moving the house into committee of supply, which would give us an opportunity to discuss external affairs, but no such opportunity has yet been afforded. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I ask leave, seconded by the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) to move the adjournment of the house under standing order 31 to discuss a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, the menace to the peace of Canada arising from the activities in this country of communist agents-a .matter calling for immediate attention at this time because:
(a)	Canada is regarded by the communists as of supreme strategic importance in the communist bid for global domination;
(b)	Communist agents, some of them under diplomatic immunity, some of them Canadian citizens, have succeeded in corrupting officials of the public service of this country;
Communist Agents in Canada

(c)	Canada is regarded by the communists as a vital source of information respecting the development of the atomic bomb;
(d)	Communist agents are boring into the labour organizations of this country with a view to wrecking recognized labour organizations and undermining industrial peace and crippling the productive capacity of the country both in peace and in the event of war;
(e)	Recent events in Europe, especially in Czechoslovakia and Finland, can leave no reasonable doubt that the aim of communism is to destroy democracy, wherever it exists, and substitute for it puppet police states.


Mr. SPEAKER:: If the hon. gentleman will look at standing order 31 he will see that it reads in part as follows:
Leave to make a motion for the adjournment of the house (when made for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance) must be asked after the ordinary daily routine of business.
I would suggest that the hon. member wait until we reach that stage.


John Bracken: I was advised, Mr. Speaker, that this was the proper time to make the motion, but I am in your hands.


James Horace King: After the ordinary daily routine.
[Later A


James Horace King: We have before us a motion moved by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken). Standing order 31(3) reads that the mover-
-then hands a written statement of the matter proposed to be discussed to Mr. Speaker, who, if he thinks it in order, and of urgent public importance, reads it out and asks whether the member has the leave of the house. If objection is taken, Mr. Speaker requests those members who support the motion to rise in their places and, if more than twenty members rise accordingly, Mr. Speaker calls upon the member who has asked for leave.
Mr. Bracken moves, seconded by Mr. Smith (Calgary West), for leave to move the adjournment of the house under standing order 31 to discuss a definite matter of urgent public importance. Is it the pleasure of the house that the hon. gentleman have leave to proceed?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


James Horace King: The hon. gentleman will proceed.


John Bracken: Mr. Speaker, I have raised this issue today to emphasize the seriousness of the communist menace to Canada as well as

to the world and to give the government the opportunity to tell us what it is doing and what it proposes to do in every department of government having any relationship to this question. I think hon. members on all sides of the house want to do everything that can legitimately be done to stamp out this menace.
Today is March 17, 1948. In addition to being March 17 it is the day on which the President of the United States made a very important statement to congress; it is the day on which in Brussels Mr. Bevin made a very important statement respecting the European five power pact, the matter the Prime Minister mentioned here today; and it is only two days following a similar important statement relating to communism by the Prime Minister of Great Britain.
I want to summarize briefly a part of what Mr. Truman said to congress this morning. We heard it over the air just a few hours ago. I will mention only three things he said bearing on this subject. First, he said it was important speedily to complete the European recovery program as the most telling contribution to peace which congress could make in a time of critical importance; second, he urged the prompt enactment of universal training, because, to use his words, "we have paid a terrible price in the past for unpreparedness"; and third, he urged the immediate enactment of universal training for all men and selective service for the regular forces. And he added these words: "We must be prepared to pay the price of peace or we will pay the price of war". Then he went on to give a long indictment of communism and of the relationship of one great country-Russia -to that doctrine.
At the same time, in another country another statesman dealt with a matter relating to the same question. Mr. Bevin spoke over the air from the Belgium foreign ministry in Brussels, and briefly among other things, this is a part of what he had to say. He said they had agreed upon the creation of a permanent consultative council among five nations for a period of fifty years. Secondly, they had agreed to guarantee mutual assistance to each other against aggression by either a resurgent Germany or any other power. I presume the question of a resurgent Germany was agreed to because France particularly would want an agreement on that. I presume the reference to any other power had to do with Russia, that great power which is moving westward over Europe all too fast for our comfort. Thirdly, he said they had agreed to the mutual exchange of information and assistance in economic and cultural matters.

Communist Agents in Canada
This very day that we are gathered here President Truman spoke to the American people as I have indicated, and Mr. Bevin spoke to the world indicating how five nations in western Europe had1 agreed' to stand together for half a century to face the future. Only two days ago, on the 15th of this month, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, as reported in the New York Times announced to the House of Commons the cabinet's decision to transfer communists, fellow travellers and fascists in any government work vital to the national security. I do not know what he means by "transferring them", but at least it is an effort on the part of the British government to do something to face up to the communist menace.
I have mentioned the president of the great nation to the south of us; I have mentioned Bevin and the council of five western European nations; I have mentioned what Premier Attlee of Britain had to say.
What is being said in our own country with respect to this matter? I am sure I do not need to say to hon. members what has been said for some time now. One paper at least has taken the lead in dealing with it. I am referring to the Windsor Star. It has carried dispatches for some time now showing the extent to which this revolutionary cult of international communism is growing in Canada. These dispatches are now being copied, carried and favourably commented upon by many other metropolitan papers in Canada. I will take only a minute to indicate the content of some of them.
This is what the Windsor Star of March 8 carried: "Communist threat grows. Canadian fifth column waits." In a later issue we find the following: "Time to strike. Revolutionary cult of international communism in Canada has gained widespread and dangerous power." I shall make no more than a very brief comment on the content of these statements.
On March 10 the following appeared: "Loyal Canadians duped to aid Red fifth column." In comment a little farther down the article the following appears:
Public apathy is the most valuable asset the communist conspirators have. More desirable for their treacherous purposes than soap-box orators or drawing-room radicals are the plain people who shrug their shoulders by the hundreds of thousands and say to one another, half believing and half wishful: "It can't happen here."
I shall mention only one or two other comments. In the issue of March 11 the
following appears:	"Red hierarchy traced
from Moscow to here." Then this comment follows:
It is a diabolically ingenious machine of which each separate tiny part is a complete whole, able to function by itself.
In the issue of March 12 the following appears: "Labour battles threat of Red rule or ruin." I shall not take the time to elaborate on any of these. Another one is as follows: "Loopholes in law admit Europe's Red saboteurs."
The defence against the communist threat is, as I said, being taken up by other metropolitan papers across Canada. Among others, the Winnipeg Free Press, and I am told the Calgary Herald and nearly all the leading metropolitan papers, are taking up this question and pointing out its seriousness.
In my motion I referred to four or five reasons why we should give this matter some consideration in this house. Let me refer to these specifically for a moment.
I have said that Canada is regarded by communists as of great strategic importance in the communist bid for global domination. Today Canada and the United States are giving a great deal of attention to our arctic defences of this continent. What does that mean? It must mean, if it means anything, that we regard that territory as a possible future cockpit of a major world conflagration. I mention that only to emphasize the importance of this question.
Secondly, I said that communist agents, some of them under diplomatic immunity, some of them Canadian citizens, have succeeded in corrupting officials of the public service of this country. We all know the sordid tale of what took place in this country within the last two or three years, and I do not need to repeat it here. But have we any reason to believe that these efforts have been discontinued? The answer is that we obviously have not. The evidence of infiltration generally is clearer today that it has ever been before.
I pointed out, again, that Canada is regarded by the communists as a vital source of information respecting the development of the atomic bomb. One needs only to mention two names out of many, one of them a British scientist working in this country, another a Canadian scientist working here, both having to do with the atomic bomb. Today they are both in the penitentiary.
I said they were working on the atomic bomb and they were both convicted of unlawfully giving information to a foreign nation with respect to that secret bomb. I have no
Communist Agents in Canada

doubt that steps have been taken to try to see that communists and their fellow travellers are not closely associated with the atomic energy enterprise in Canada, but none of us doubt that communists are making every effort to find out what they can and to transmit it to another country that would like to have it.
I said further that communist agents are boring into the labour organizations of this country with a view to wrecking recognized labour unions and undermining industrial peace, crippling the productive capacity of the country not only in peacetime but particularly in the event of war. Perhaps that is the most dangerous thing that is facing the internal peace of Canada, a danger that is facing the whole future of this country, the infiltration of communists into the organized labour groups of the country.
At this time I wish to compliment organized labour on their efforts to date to purge themselves of communist agents. And I wish to say to the government, to this house and to the Canadian people that organized labour needs every assistance it can get from the parliament of Canada in its efforts to save itself and to save us from this kind of infiltration.
Then I referred to what has happened recently in Czechoslovakia and what is happening at this very moment in Finland, two nations in the way of the western movement of communism in Europe. Czechoslovakia has been scuttled from within. The methods of Hitler are seen to be here again right before our eyes. Finland is in a situation somewhat similar to that in which Czechoslovakia found itself a few weeks ago. While the technique in the instance of Finland is a little different, the objective is the same. And it looks as if the end will be the same. Finland is now engaged in so-called negotiations with the fear of military occupation at her elbow, the fear of military occupation by a large power predetermining every move of that little nation.
I now wish to say something about communism itself. Communism is the most widely discussed topic in the world today. For the vast majority it has a vague shapelessness which inspires some with panic and permits others to hold it in blind adoration. If we are successfully to control it we must understand its true nature and purposes.
Communism, in my judgment, is just a blood brother of nazism and fascism. Under all three the individual has no rights against the state and no purpose on earth but to serve the state. Communism is essentially nihilistic; it is a creed of destruction. It was conceived

in hatred, it is being nurtured in violence. It has been brought to maturity in Russia where it is being used as a weapon of world conquest.
I have not referred to any nation critically in this connection. I have referred to communism wherever it is found. I wish, however, to quote the views of two men who have had exceptional opportunity to understand it. They mention a foreign nation by name and I pass it on as their view. One of them, whose position is made clear, is the American ambassador to Poland from 1944 to 1947, A. B. Lane. He saw communism at work and his opinion was stated as follows:
There will be no turning back on the part of Stalin. On the contrary, he will proceed on his policy, which was also that of Hitler, of seizing control, state by state, until he obtains world domination or until he meets the effective resistance of a stronger power.
The other view, by one of the great workers for world peace, Sir Norman Angell, winner of the Nobel peace prize, warns us about the alternatives in these words:
If w'e in the west adopt a policy of indefinite retreat before Russian power, we must face now just what that involves . . . When it is on top of us, it will have attained a momentum too great to stop. A policy which, adopted early could have prevented war, fails of prevention when adopted late.
Let me now make one comment on the matter I referred to a moment ago, namely the fifth column aspect. We must not forget that the communists, together with their brothers the nazis, have developed a new weapon, the fifth column. That is the most hateful of weapons; it is one which drives the people of a nation against themselves, splits countries in two, sets brother against brother, and produces something of the condition we have seen in parts of Europe.
I wish to make two or three other observations in closing. What is it our responsibility now to do? Without going into details I suggest, first that this nation, in association with other nations must be strong-strong economically and collectively-so strong collectively that no other nation will dare to attack us. That is the immediate responsibility of those who would guard against this danger. That is the primary purpose of the main principles of the united nations.
Second-and this applies particularly at home-we must serve better here than communism can serve anywhere. What is the defence against the attack of communism at home, the infiltration of our labour organizations and every other device that is being used? The best defence at home is for us in this parliament and those in provincial

Communist Agents in Canada
legislatures and in municipal councils to see that our communities are served better than communism can serve their people. Faith in our capacity to do that may have been wavering in recent years. I suggest that it is time we had a new and revitalized faith in that respect. I have confidence, and I am sure everybody in this house has it too, that we can serve society better than communism can. Let us stand up and demonstrate that fact so that communism cannot grow in Canada and so that it cannot expand in Europe.
Third, today we must help other nations to re-establish themselves after the tremendous sacrifices they have made in war. Particularly is this the case with respect to our customers in western Europe. We have every moral, economic and political reason for giving to the extent of our capacity to help our customers and others over there to re-establish themselves. Otherwise they cannot resist the pressure that is now upon them.
I have mentioned .that we must be strong, that we must serve better and that we must help our customers to re-establish themselves. Fourth, we must help other nations to help themselves. The great nation beside us has been left with the responsibility of accepting the economic leadership of the world; I refer to the United States of America. It is our responsibility to associate ourselves with that great nation on this continent and accept our share of the moral and economic leadership of the world. That responsibility has fallen to this continent through no particular credit to ourselves, but perhaps partly as a result of accident or as a result of geography, as well as the result of war. But here in Canada we are beside the strongest economic unit in the world-I am referring to the United States. We are a sister nation, smaller, but similar in many ways, believing in many of the same things and having many of the same advantages. We too must carry our share of the responsibility, as I said by sharing in giving moral and economic leadership to the world beside this great nation I have referred to-the United States. This nation cannot feed the rest of the world and cannot bring prosperity to every section of the world by giving to them. But the United States of America, this country and others who think in the same way can give leadership to other nations to help themselves in the future.
I have only one other thing to say, Mr. Speaker. As I said in my opening remarks, I raised this question to re-emphasize the seriousness of the menace we are facing in this country and throughout the world, and to ask
the government, either now or on an early occasion, to state what it is doing in every department that has any relation to this question, and what it proposes to do. I think that the government and this parliament owe that to the Canadian people. I think the government owes it to the Canadian people to say what it is doing and what it proposes to do to stamp out this threat to Christian democracy. That is what it is. The struggle today is between two ideologies-communism on the one hand and Christian or other democracies on the other. Communism is the major threat in the world today.
In this connection I have a suggestion to make to the government. We all know that the government want to get through some of the measures that are now before us. On behalf of this party I should like to assure the government that, with regard to all these matters which are pressing today, we will help them to see they get through before next Wednesday or Thursday. That does not mean to say that we shall not talk about them as we go along, because that is our job. That is what we must do and that is what we have no choice but to do. Some of these measures we recognize must be put through. That is not so perhaps with all of them. But with respect to those considered to be essential to pass before the Easter holidays, we shall help the government to see that they are passed. But I seriously suggest that the government ought to provide one day or at least part of a day for the discussion of foreign affairs, and particularly of this question.
Let me say this, Mr. Speaker. I have raised this question today in no sense of narrow partisanship. This question and these times are too serious for that. I wish to say just one sentence in closing. It is with respect to the position of this party regarding communism. I can do it most briefly in these words. This party is in favour of, and will give its wholehearted support to, the government's taking every step possible within its legislative competence, to halt the march of communism in this country.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I should like to be the first, Mr. Speaker, to thank my hon. friend the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) for the promise he has just made that he and his party will do all in their power to assist the government in helping to defeat the menace of communism. There is no menace in the world that is greater. I think I have stated that repeatedly before. There is no comparable menace in the world. We all must face it in common, with all the strength, resource and
Communist Agents in Canada

power it is possible for us to muster. I am quite sure that when other hon. gentlemen speak for the other parties opposite they will be equally prepared to give the government the assurance that has just come from the Leader of the opposition.
As the house will have noted, I have taken no exception whatever to my hon. friend having brought up this question as he has. But I do take exception to his having said, or implied, that he was bringing it up at this moment because the government had denied to hon. gentlemen opposite the right to discuss external affairs before this time of the session. For my part I think my hon. friend brought the question up at this moment because of the exceptional interest aroused as a result of the statement which was made this morning by the president of the United States.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No, no.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It is perhaps fortunate, because of the President's statement, that he has brought it up at this time. Naturally the question will be receiving more attention in various parts of the world today as a result of that address. But may I point out, as I have more than once before, that in arranging the business and the order of business of this session I did confer with hon. gentlemen opposite. I recently made a statement in this house as to what we as hon. members were agreed as the best procedure to adopt in order to get through the business as rapidly as possible. I need not go over what we were agreed upon in regard to giving the emergency measures and the debate on the address first consideration. When I was seeking to carry out that arrangement in planning the business of the house from day to day. I was not imposing my will on this house. I was seeking to carry out what had been agreed to by the house itself and by members of all parties. If external affairs has not been reached before this time it is because we have not yet completed the program upon which we had agreed. Hon. members know, or at least the leaders of the parties opposite know, that only a day or two ago I discussed with the leaders quite frankly the matter of the remainder of the business to be dealt with before the Easter recess, and I informed the house of the result of the conference we had and the agreement we had reached. At the time of that conference, there was no suggestion that external affairs should be given precedence between now and the Easter recess. I think it was felt by all that external affairs questions would come up very soon after the Easter recess and that we would have, not a sudden debate on a great question, sprung

without any notice whatever, but an opportunity for a full discussion in this house, perhaps running for days.
Now I say to my hon. friend that the government has been given no notice of his intention to bring up this question at this time. He asks what has been done in this direction and in that. Had I had any previous knowledge that such was desired I could, for example, have brought him today data answering some of the questions he asked, particularly in relation to what steps have been taken over the past year or two to make certain that the public service was not being infiltrated by those holding communist views. I could have made a statement at some length on that matter, but at this moment I am not going to attempt to go into details of that kind.
May I just remind this house, and Canada itself, that, after all, ours was the first government in the world to expose the activities of communists in the public service, and I may add I was the first to stand up in this parliament and indicate how appallingly dangerous the possibilities were. I did not confine what I had to say to parliament here. I made it a point to visit the United States personally and to confer on this danger with the highest authorities in that country; I made it a point to visit Britain and confer with the highest authorities in the United Kingdom. In both countries I disclosed what we had discovered' in Canada with respect to communist infiltration into the public service, and the dangers to which it was likely to lead and to methods that were being employed. And at this moment I do not forget that my colleague, the then Minister of Justice, the present Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. St.. Laurent), was taken pretty severely to task because it was alleged that, in authorizing the steps necessary, he was interfering with individual liberty. He took the only possible immediate steps it was effective to take at that time. I do not forget, either, that we on this side have since heard more about our alleged interference with individual rights and human liberties than about almost anything else, because of the action we took to suppress communism.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No, no.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Well, I listened respectfully to the leader of the opposition. I hope hon. gentlemen opposite will listen equally respectfully to me.


Mr. HOMUTH:: Stick to the facts.


Mr. CASSELMAN:: He was non-political.

Communist Agents in Canada


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am not going to trouble doing so at the present time, but I have no doubt there will be those who will be interested enough to look up Hansard. I would suggest that anyone who is interested in seeing which political party in this country has taken the most active means and measures to suppress communism, should look through the Hansard of this parliament and see what has been said in the debates here with respect to interference with the liberty of the individual.


Mr. ROWE:: Look through the ballot boxes.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I would rather hope that, on a subject such as this, we might all find ourselves in such complete agreement that no difference of view would be expressed. In order to indicate how completely I am in accord with the statements of the leader of the opposition upon communism as a menace-I do not say I take the literal words, but their general trend-I intend to read the paragraphs he has read and indicate the extent to which I agree with them. The first was:
Canada is regarded by the communists as of supreme strategic importance in the communist bid for global domination.
I do not know what country the communists *regard as most important. I am inclined to think that, at the moment, their minds are more upon the countries of Europe and some of the countries of Asia than upon any countries in the western hemisphere. Nevertheless I do believe that anyone who had regard to future world development would look upon Canada as one of the most enviable portions on the whole globe. The next statement was:
Communist agents, some of them under diplomatic immunity, some of them Canadian citizens, have succeeded in corrupting officials of the public service of this country.
My hon. friend has referred to the trials that have taken place in the last two years. May I ask, was it at the instance of hon. gentlemen opposite or was it at the instance of this government that those people were brought to trial? I am pointing out that it was this government that fearlessly took the necessary steps to bring to trial those in the public service who had lent themselves to corrupt influence.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Who hired them?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It seems perfectly clear to me that some hon. gentlemen opposite are thinking more of the political effect of their remarks than they are of the seriousness of the subject being discussed at the present time. May I say that any individual or any party which thinks it is going to make political capital in dealing lightly with this question of communism is making a very grave mistake indeed. The people of Canada realize how serious this question is, and they expect all parties and all persons in Canada to unite and do their utmost to defeat the ends of the communists. The next statement is:
Canada is regarded by the communists as a vital source of information respecting the development of the atomic bomb.
Where did my hon. friend get that information? It came as a result of an inquiry made at the instance of this government, and made in the only manner which could have been effective in dealing with a question of this kind. Yet I recall vividly how bitterly this government was attacked because some of our mounted police undertook to keep within certain restrictions those who were about to be examined in connection with betraying secrets with respect to the atomic bomb and other information.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Let us have some more politics.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend the leader of the opposition has spoken about a scientist who was imprisoned in Britain as a result of having revealed atomic secrets. It was this government that acquainted the government of Britain with the activities of that gentleman. It was the government of this country that had him followed across the Atlantic, so that there would be no possibility of his escaping the consequences of his actions.


An hon. MEMBER:: Why not?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend says, "Why not?" Of course we should have done it. What I am taking exception to is my hon. friend interrupting me as if I were saying something which everyone should not be pleased to recognize as the truth. I come to the next statement by the leader of the opposition:
Communist agents are boring into the labour organizations of this country with a view to wrecking recognized labour organizations and undermining industrial peace and crippling the productive capacity of the country both in peace and in the event of war.
We as a government have within the last few days received delegations of labour organizations, the Dominion Trades and Labour Congress, the Canadian Congress of Labour, and the railroad brotherhoods. In the representations which were made by those organizations to our government there was nothing but
Communist Agents in Canada

words of appreciation with respect to what the government had done and was doing to cooperate with those organizations in helping to prevent communism from developing within their ranks. I should add that exactly the same position was taken by a delegation representative of the Catholic syndicates.
I do not believe that the extent to which the communists have bored into labour organizations is as great as some people in this country think. There may be here and there individual organizations, in fact I believe there are, of which a considerable number of communists may be members, but it is not always the easiest thing, by looking at a man, or seeing him in a particular employ, to discover whether he is a communist working with a view to destroying industry or whether he is a citizen who is doing his best to earn a livelihood. It is very easy to condemn wholesale men who are working in industry, but it is another thing to interfere with, as we have been hearing right along, the liberty of an individual in an attempt to arrest and bring someone to trial simply because he is alleged to be of communistic persuasion.
The Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) has been most fortunate in having had right along the active and helpful co-operation of the leaders of organized labour in Canada in furthering the government's effort to suppress the communist movement. I agree that Canada owes a great measure of thanks to the leaders of labour organizations in our country for the part they are actively taking in seeking to suppress any development of communism. No one knows better than members of the labour organizations themselves what the full effect of communism would be if that movement ever made any headway in their midst. It has been one of the privileges of the government to give, in this particular, to leaders of organizations that are furthering organization in a legitimate way as much assistance as they are able to give.
May I point out that in dealing with a problem such as communism one does not always make the most effective progress by publishing from the housetops everything that is being done. I think we have been successful in combatting communist tendencies in Canada in a large part because we have gone quietly about discovering where those forces were at work and, instead of advertising to the world what we are doing in all directions, have sought to gain our objective by quiet and effective means. My hon. friend1 said:
Recent events in Europe, especially in Czechoslovakia and Finland, can leave no reasonable

doubt that the aim of communism is to destroy democracy, wherever it exists, and substitute for it puppet police states.
Concerning Czechoslovakia we have all been saying that. That is the view which i3 held in all free countries. While Czechoslovakia has suffered in the manner she has so suddenly and unexpectedly it may well be that the disaster to that country may prove a beacon light which will guide the free nations to her deliverance as well as to the deliverance of other nations held in thrall by communism.
My hon. friend said that he wanted to give the house his views in regard to communism and to state how strong they were. As he read his views, and I say this to him most kindly, it seemed to me that he was reading from a speech which I made on January 20 of this year, in which I gave to the public of Canada my views on communism on an occasion which I believed would best serve to attract attention. If there is anyone here in this country who has expressed himself more strongly than I have about- communism and the necessity of combating communism at every possible turn, I should be happy to be told that person's name.


Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):: Mr. Speaker, may I say it is unfortunate that a debate of the importance of this one should rise in the manner in which it has risen. I think most of us who would wish to take part in this discussion would have liked to have a little time in which to read what President Truman said today and also what has occurred at Brussels and the speeches which have been made as well as the statements which have been issued. I am not blaming the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken), nor am I going to blame the government. I am simply blaming the manner in which we conduct the business of this house. I think long ago we should have got farther ahead with the business of the house. I am not blaming any party; we are all responsible. We should have got ahead with business and it seems to me that from time to time, because of the grave conditions which face the world, we should have an opportunity in this house to discuss international affairs. I do not think those opportunities need be frequent, but from time to time we should have a chance to evaluate the international situation.
I speak as one who, throughout his public life, has been an opponent of communism. I think all those who know me know that I have never compromised with the communist

Communist Agents in Canada
party. As long as I am in the position in which I am today, there will be no compromise with those who wish to overthrow the government by force and to undermine our democratic institutions, whether those people come from what is sometimes called the extreme left or indeed from the extreme right. We face a danger, not only from the extreme left but from the extreme right.
I only wish that I could say to the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) this afternoon that what he has said with regard to the attitude, not of himself perhaps but of the party which he leads, has been as open as the record of the movement with which I am associated. I have before me the article written by Tim Buck which appeared in the communist or Labour Progressive publication National Affairs Monthly, the February issue. In that article he recommends that the Labour Progressive party should try to infiltrate into my own party, to undermine its leadership and to use it as a vehicle. I am going to say that no opportunity will be given to the Labour Progressive party to infiltrate into this party or to undermine it in any way. [DOT]
All who have watched the international situation in the last month surely realize now that you cannot co-operate as democrats with a party that is anti-democratic, lest it destroy you in the end.


Mr. KUHL:: They are all opposed to private enterprise.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: Let us leave that out this afternoon. I may say to my hon. friend that I am prepared to discuss private enterprise with him. I am prepared, if necessary, to quote from the statement made a few weeks ago by the state department of the United States. The state department told the United States people in its report on Europe "that western European socialism is one of the strongest bulwarks against communism." That, my friend, is a statement from the state department of the most powerful capitalist government in the world, and my hon. friend's interruption indicates that he does not know very much of what he is talking about.
I am going to say to my hon. friends opposite that I think they are guilty to a large extent for the degree to which communism has developed in this country in the last few years. I have in my hand this article by Tim Buck, from which I want to read one paragraph. He is defending the
association which they promoted with the Liberal party in 1945, and this is what he says:
I think, however, that we must once and for all agree that the Liberal labour coalition which grew up in the fight on the plebiscite, around the fight for a "yes" vote, around the fight of the trade unioif movement for production, and against the Tory attempt to take over and replace the King government, was fundamentally correct.
Some comrades raised the question as though there were a principle involved, as though, well, now we can get back to communism, to Marxism; we strayed by allying ourselves with the capitalists. In "Left Wing Communism"-
I wonder how many members of the house have read the works of Lenin or Marx. If they had they would be under no illusions but would understand precisely the pattern of things as they have happened in Europe. It is laid down in the left wing communism of Lenin. Tim Buck goes on:
Lenin points out quite categorically how the Bolsheviks allied themselves with the liberals and right-wing social democrats and left-wing social democrats and cadets, and were correct in doing so, to secure the immediate objectives. And Stalin on that question pointed out that anybody who claims that they must never ally themselves with sections of the capitalist class is not a Marxist and does not understand Marxism. There was nothing non-Marxist in our alliance.
That is, their alliance with the Liberal party.
It was a class alliance that saved Socialism and defeated fascism. It would not have been defeated without it.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: May I ask my hon. friend a question? In his reading from a statement by Tim Buck, does he take Tim Buck's utterances at their face value? Does he attach importance to them?


Mr. COLD  WELL@: I do not take Mr. Buck's statement at its face value. I would not take anything at its face value. I want evidence to show that it is true. Hon. gentlemen on all sides of this house know, if I may mention one particular by-election, the Grey North by-election, that the advertising of prominent speakers of the communist party who were to speak on behalf of the Liberal party in that by-election was paid for, according to the advertisement itself, by the Liberal association. Moreover, in other areas in Canada I know from my personal observations, that hon. gentlemen opposite were receiving the support of the communist party.


Mr. MITCHELL:: Were these speakers my hon. friend refers to advertised as communists?

Communist Agents in Canada


Mr. KNOWLES:: I will go upstairs and get the advertisement.


Major James William Coldwell: That was one of the big factors in the deception. They were not advertised as communists.


Humphrey Mitchell: I would just say this-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Sit down.


Major James William Coldwell: I do not mind a question but my hon. friend will have an opportunity to make a speech later.


Humphrey Mitchell: If the defenders of liberty will keep quiet I would ask my hon. friend, were they advertised as trade unionists or as communists?


Major James William Coldwell: I will read the heading: "Union Leaders Coast to Coast Support McNaughton." Everybody knew who these speakers were. Here they are:	Harold
Pritchett; Jack Shaw; Nigel Morgan; George Harris; C. S. Jackson; Pat Sullivan, at that time communist president of the Canadian Seamen's Union and others. Everybody knows who these gentlemen were. They were the leading lights of the communist party and they were there masquerading as union leaders. The advertisement says at the bottom "Published by the authority of the Grey North Liberal Association."
I am not doing this merely to score a debating point off the Liberal party, but because the movement with which I am associated in this country has taken a great deal of misrepresentation from members of the Liberal party and I want to set the record right. We have never co-operated with the communist party in this way, and as long as I occupy this seat we never shall.
Coming to the question before us, the leader of the Progressive Conservative party asks for an investigation into the civil service and he referred) to Mr. Attlee's action. I quite agree that persons who cannot be regarded as loyal to this country should not be in positions of trust where they can betray the interests of this country at a given time. But I do not believe that because a man holds particular views, though he be a communist, he should be denied the right to make a living. I like the statement made by the Prime Minister of Great Britain, who said: We are going to remove from positions of trust people whom we cannot trust. We are going to remove them from certain positions in the civil service but we shall do so in some manner which will enable us to give those people some position where they can continue to make a living.

I do not think in our country we should try to penalize people on account of their views. We have right to see to it that we do not have people in positions where they can betray the country should the opportunity arise.
I think the Benelux treaty today, judging from the statements I have seen, is a step in the right direction. Primarily it is a step for the rehabilitation of western Europe economically, and I am one of those who believe that if western Europe be rehabilitated economically we shall have gone a long, long was' towards maintaining peace and defeating the onward march of communism, because communism thrives on poverty, misery and want. We can all shout hysterically in this chamber about the menace of communism, but unless we remove these factors which, among the distressed masses of the people, bring about communism we shall not succeed in meeting the menace.
Let me say this to the Minister of Justice (Mr. Usley), I know of nothing that will promote communism and subversive activity to a greater extent than the denial to the working class of this country of the right to organize into unions of their choice. When I picked up the newspaper this morning and read of the legislation that had been passed in one of our own Canadian provinces, in Prince Edward Island, outlawing not only international unions but national unions, I said to myself, there is something that will promote discontent and will play right into the hands of those who say that, when the time comes, the capitalist governments will destroy the legitimate working class unions of the country.


William Earl Rowe: Was that a Liberal government?


Major James William Coldwell: Yes, it is a Liberal government. I would say to the Minister of Justice that if there has been one act passed in recent years that should be looked into with a view to reservation at least, or the exercise of the power of disallowance, it is this one. It is a much more menacing measure than some of the things that were disallowed in Alberta. I say it is a measure which should be considered by the government with a view to protecting the rights of men and women in that province as Canadians in the exercise of their civil rights.
I do not think action, as is sometimes suggested to prevent the spread of communism, can be effective unless we remove the causes of social and economic injustice. There are two spots in the world today where international affairs are pointed up. One is the failure of

Comviunist Agents in Canada
the governments to solve the problem of Palestine, and bloodshed on the 15th of May may well come about and Palestine may set the world aflame. I hope that the government of Canada will use every means in its power to persuade all the great powers, including Britain, to consider how best the situation can be handled when the 15th of May arrives. After all, these powers are all members of the united nations, and, while I am not asking for any direct approach to these nations, we are represented on the security council and our representative there can make the necessary pleas to the great powers to reconsider the position and see to it that bloodshed in that area is prevented, because bloodshed there may mean bloodshed over a much wider area. Then, of course, the jolt we had recently in Czechoslovakia has been mentioned in the house. I want to read not what I said, although I said substantially the same thing, but what the national executive of the party I represent said on the Czechoslovakian situation. It said this:
Czechoslovakia offers the latest example of communist ruthlessness and contempt for democratic principles and methods.
The Czech people had for centuries carried on a struggle for democratic self-government. After world war I they established a republic whose institutions and social progress were a model of democratic advance. During world war II. Czechoslovakia turned voluntarily toward the Soviet Union in its foreign policy. An all-inclusive Czech government had been formed and all parties kept loyally to a proSoviet external policy and to an internal policy of socialization and land reform. In short, in the new Czechoslovakia, Russia had a firm friend and the domestic communists a dominant influence. Yet these things did not save Czechoslovakia.
Communist methods are the same everywhere. They are utterly irreconciliable with the aims, program and methods of the C.C.F. Our sympathy goes out to all Czech democrats, whose plight strengthens our determination to oppose communism. Whatever their line at any particular time, the communist goal always remains the same: the destruction of democracy and, with it, of the democratic socialist movements.
We emphasize however, that the only effective way to combat communism is by the establishment of social and economic justice in our own countries.
Mr. LaCROIX: Will the hon. member permit a question?


Mr. COLD  WELL@: Yes.
Mr. LaCROIX: Does the hon. member not think, if the communist party had been outlawed in Czechoslovakia, it would not have attained power?


Major James William Coldwell: No, I do not think so. I think, as a matter of fact-
Mr. LaCROIX: If they had been outlawed at the beginning?


Major James William Coldwell: As a matter of fact, I think the outlawing of political movements throughout history has shown that these movements gain strength through sympathy. I am not one of those who believe that by persecution and outlawing and suppression you can kill a movement.
Mr. LaCROIX: They would never have attained political power.


Major James William Coldwell: It is like a germ. You expose a germ to the full rays of sunlight and it dies. I prefer to know where my opponent is rather than have him working underground, in the dark like a mole.


Mr. FOURNIER (Maisonneuve-Rosemont):: I think we should remember the beginning of Christianity.


Major James William Coldwell: Yes.


Sarto Fournier: They were outlawed at that time.


Major James William Coldwell: Perhaps the persecutors of the early Christians and the outlawry of those who carried the gospel throughout the world did much to promote the gospel across the world. I do not think that outlawry would in any way remove the causes which make communism grow.
As I say, I would have liked to discuss this problem at greater length. I have tried to make the position clear-


Mr. TUCKER:: Will the hon. member permit a question? Does he not think the government of Czechoslovakia did the very best they could to remove the causes that lead to communism, but they did not succeed there?


Major James William Coldwell: Yes, they did. I think no little nation in the world did more in the time at its disposal to remove the causes which would promote communism than Czechoslovakia did. Let me point out that Czechoslovakia had just emerged from war. After all, it is less than three years since Czechoslovakia was liberated; and do not forget that her boundaries were adjacent to the great communist state, the Soviet union. Unquestionably, there was pressure from without as well as a well organized movement from within. One other tragedy was this, of course. During the early years of the war when Czechoslovakia was invaded by Hitler the communist party was there. It was not averse to Hitler. Indeed
Communist Agents in Canada

the communists of the world were co-operating with Hitler, and the leaders of the socialist democratic movement like Benes, Masaryk and Doctor Nemec who was here as our minister, leading socialist democrats, all fled; but the communists remained, because at that time, as in France and in other countries, they were cooperating with Hitler, because of the Stalin-Hitler pact. The leaders of the social democrats had all gone into exile or to death; the communist leaders remained and organized. There is no doubt that once Russia was attacked and was in the war, all the communist leaders in the country who were left behind were there to conduct the leadership of the underground against Hitler as soon as Russia was in the war, and the result was that they placed themselves in the position of leadership and strengthened their party. I do not want to enter into an argument with my hon. friend-


Walter Adam Tucker: What has my hon. friend to say to the statement of the Labour government of Great Britain that communism in a democratic country cannot get into power without the support of socialists?


Mr. COLD  WELL@: As a matter of fact, that is not the only statement of the Labour party in Great Britain. Here is part of the statement:
The issues before us no longer permit of any prevarication. Socialism is meaningless without democraoy. Democracy cannot live without freedom of speech, press and organization, without the right to protection against arbitrary arrest, the right of appeal to a non-political judiciary.
Any attempt to achieve socialism by means which deny democracy and human rights, particularly by the operation of an all-powerful secret police, must lead inevitably to a dictatorship indistinguishable in its impact on the common man from fascism as it existed in Italy and in Germany, and as it still exists in Spain.
Czechoslovakia is an acid test of sincerity. Those who seek to condone this crime show that they are false to the principle of democratic socialism for which the Labour party stands.


Walter Adam Tucker: That is not the statement to which I refer. The statement I refer to is the one that in Czechoslovakia, without the support of left wing socialism, no communist government could arrive in power.


An hon. MEMBER:: You are quoting Tim Buck.


Walter Adam Tucker: I am not quoting Tim Buck.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: The hon. gentleman is right. There is a sentence earlier in the statement which, taken out of its context, would mean exactly what my hon. friend says:
But Czechoslovakia teaches us something more. Communists cannot achieve their aims

without support from a minority within the camp of democratic socialism.


Walter Adam Tucker: Exactly.


Major James William Coldwell: I do not deny that, and I say I agree with what the Labour party says, that Czechoslovakia is the acid test of sincerity; and those who seek to condone this crime show that they are false to the principle of democratic socialism for which the Labour party stands.


Walter Adam Tucker: May I ask another question? Can the hon. gentleman be sure that a minority does not exist in his own party today-


Major James William Coldwell: May I say this to my hon. friend, that we can be sure of nothing in this world. Can the hon. gentleman be sure that, sitting all around him, in various places opposite, there are not hon. gentlemen who were elected and given their majority by communist support in their constituencies?


Walter Adam Tucker: Mr. Speaker, we do not believe the same fundamental principles of complete socialization of everything.


Major James William Coldwell: The hon. gentleman can make a speech if he wants to. I think he will agree with me that at no time have I endeavoured to fight a provincial election in this chamber. I suggest to the hon. gentleman that the place to do that is in the Saskatchewan legislature.


Walter Adam Tucker: This is more than a provincial matter.


Mr. GARDINER:: Might I ask a question?


Major James William Coldwell: Yes.


James Garfield Gardiner: Did the hon. member ever know Eric Bee?


Major James William Coldwell: Yes.


James Garfield Gardiner: Did Eric Bee travel with the hon. gentleman through Saskatchewan in a campaign?


Major James William Coldwell: Yes.


James Garfield Gardiner: And was not Eric Bee afterwards proven to be a communist?


Major James William Coldwell: Afterwards.


James Garfield Gardiner: He was afterwards
proven to be a communist. In other words, you do not even know sometimes that your travelling companion is a communist. That is one method of infiltration.


Major James William Coldwell: Perhaps my hon. friend, since he asks me a personal question, will acknowledge 'this, that one of the little books which I read in support of communism the

Communist Agents in Canada
hon. gentleman himself lent to me in 1931 or 1932, "Soviet Primer". Perhaps the hon. gentleman remembers that.


James Garfield Gardiner: I do not remember having lent my hon. friend a book on communism, but I have read books on communism, and that is one of the reasons why I do not agree with it.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: The same here. I have been driven by a lot of people across the country and I have had very good drivers who turned out to be pretty good Tories, I have had good drivers who turned out to be good Liberals, and in this case I had a driver who afterwards turned out to be a communist. I do not think we should penalize people in our own country, our own citizens, for their political views. As far as I am concerned, I have never allowed a man's politics to interfere with my personal friendship, and I do not intend to do so, whether he is a communist or not. The Minister of Agriculture would probably know that another old friend of mine was a communist, and let me say this of that old man, who dropped dead some years ago. He was a communist and I detested his philosophy; but, do you know, I never in my life met or was associated with a man who exercised Christian principles to a greater extent than my old communist friend. He would give the last penny he had, or his shirt from his back, to anyone in distress. I do not think the fact that I knew a man of his description, who was a communist, should blacken me, any more than I drove with a man who was a communist.


James Garfield Gardiner: Any more than the man who happened to turn out to be a communist afterwards addressed a meeting on behalf of a Liberal candidate in a by-election.


Major James William Coldwell: Now, Mr. Speaker, I have spoken too long. I have said some of the things I wanted to say, and if a debate on international affairs comes up I hope we shall have an opportunity to stick to international affairs and not merely debate political issues of this sort.
Mr. SOLON E. LOW (Peace River): I feel that I should take a few minutes to make a declaration of faith on behalf of the Social Credit group, especially, sir, because the resolution brought up by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) is at this time so very important to the people of Canada.
I too would like to have had some time for preparation. I shall have to speak entirely extemporaneously, but I hope I shall be able to add at least a few things to the debate on the positive side.
Let me say at the outset, Mr. Speaker, that I should like to have seen in this house some weeks ago a full dress debate on external affairs. I do not believe that an occasion of this kind could1 possibly substitute for such a debate. This is a good opportunity, however, to discuss the dangers that Canada faces from the creeping paralysis of communism, which seems to be engulfing all of Europe and much of Asia, and which seems also to have some of its roots well established in our own land.
I want, it definitely understood from the outset that as a Social Crediter, from the time I became interested in public affairs I have denounced communism. I have constantly and consistently opposed communism not only by what I have said but, I hope, also by the way I have acted. I believe in and advocate policies which are diametrically opposed to the principles of communism. I shall continue to do so as long as I have breath, Mr. Speaker, because I believe that those policies of Karl Marx which were spawned in the cesspools of Europe are evil things and must not be allowed to be transplanted into fertile soil in Canada. There is no room for an imported evil thing like that in our country.
I believe that anybody who takes the trouble to examine the records will find that the Canadian Social Crediter, the little newspaper which has been published weekly now for a good many years, has consistently, week in and week out, exposed communism and the program of the communist international for world domination. Years ago, before any activity was noticeable in other parties in this country, our little newspaper was pounding this thing out. Not only that, but the hon. member for Wetaskiwin (Mr. Jaques), on practically every occasion on which he could get the ear of this house, has denounced communism and has warned the Canadian people against it. Moreover, he has shown in many instances the ways in which communism has hoped to install itself as the ruling force, not only in Europe but in this country as well. Week in and week out he has given of his knowledge and understanding of this whole matter. Sometimes he has been heaped with opprobrium because of his work in this regard, but I honour him for his determination to do everything he possibly can to counter this evil thing. Social Crediters have consistently advocated policies which, if they had been introduced into Canada, would have left little if any fertile soil for the growth of this international thing, this totalitarian form of dictatorship.
At- this stage I should like to pay tribute to that courageous and dynamic newspaper,
Communist Agents in Canada

the Windsor Star, for what it has been doing during the past two weeks to expose the whole communist plot. I think it is rendering a signal service to Canada and is helping to ensure the security of the Canadian people. There is only one way by which we can warn the people against the evils of communism, and that is by getting over to them the truth about it and then by comparing with it what we have been able to accomplish under a private-enterprise free society. The Windsor Star is doing a great job. I have no idea as to just how accurate some of the things are which the author of the articles in the paper has said, but from my own knowledge much that he has said about the whole communist plot is founded on fact.
There are certain organizations in Canada which must bear some of the responsibility- how much, I am not prepared to say, but- some at any rate-for the condition in which Canada finds herself today. I shall not give names, but I will say this: It was unfortunate that in a wave of hysteria there were organized in Canada, back about 1943, a number of organizations which have since proved to be nothing but communist fronts. Social Credit warned the people of Canada against those communist fronts right from the beginning. Unfortunately those organizations numbered among their members university professors and public men of every description. By their activities they lent aid and assistance and gave comfort to this terrible thing which now is creeping and spreading its limbs and branches over the whole world.
There are certain other organizations which must bear some of the responsibility for the situation. If Canada is in danger today, as certainly she is, then I must say that the party of my hon. friend the leader of the C.C.F. must bear some of the responsibility.
I was happy to hear his declaration of faith today; and I believe that he is sincere and in earnest, in declaring to the world that so far as he is concerned communism will not get into his party-I think he used the words "infiltrate itself" into his party. The trouble is that the C.C.F. have constantly advocated policies in this country which are nothing but marxism.


Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: Nuts.


Mr. LOW:: "Nuts" if you like. The hon. member for Winnipeg North certainly knows all about nuts. He is one of the people who has advocated friendship for Russia and a softening of the attitude towards communists. SO the hon. member for Winnipeg North has nothing to say.


Major James William Coldwell: Has the hon. member for Peace River forgotten the Edmonton byelection in 1938, when the premier and the leading communist celebrated the victory of Mr. Orville Kennedy?


Solon Earl Low: That, of course, is not at all founded upon facts.


Major James William Coldwell: Oh yes, it is.


Solon Earl Low: My hon. friend does not know the first thing about it.


Major James William Coldwell: Yes, he does.


Solon Earl Low: No, he does not. They certainly did not do that.


Major James William Coldwell: They spoke together.


Solon Earl Low: I am putting forward the thesis that the party of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar must share a good deal of the responsibility for the spread of communism in this country.


Major James William Coldwell: Don't be ridiculous.


Solon Earl Low: I hope I shall not be ridiculous at all, but I am just placing before the house some of the things which I think my hon. friend will have to admit as facts. I do not wish to cast a reflection on any hon. member in this house. But in order to show what I am getting at, I must read an extract from the Edmonton Journal of June 27, 1945, just after the election of 1945, that involves a member of his own party. Before I read, however, I should like to say this. Nobody can say whether his party contains people who are communists. Nobody can say that he can vouch for every person within his group. There is not one of us who can say that no communism will insinuate himself into his party. It is a thing which it is impossible to say with certainty. But it would be quite possible to say that if any communism shows its head in our party, we will mighty soon take action towards getting it out; and that is the position that I take.
Mr. LaCROIX: That is what we have in Quebec.


Mr. WRIGHT:: A louse never attaches itself to anything that is not alive.


Solon Earl Low: That is true; and let me say to my hon. friend from Saskatchewan that even a louse clings to the flesh on which it feeds.


Percy Ellis Wright: We realize that,


Solon Earl Low: These are serious things, Mr. Speaker. These things must be carefully weighed while we are talking about communism and the dangers of communism as far

Communist Agents in Canada
as Canada is concerned. It is easy for us to say that we will have nothing to do with communism; but I will say that it is no mere accident that the communist party has declared that it is going to support C.C.F. candidates, whether they want that support or not. That is not an accident, and I will show you why. It may be thoughtlessness on the part of some members of the C.C.F. party when they say things like this, but it is just such thoughtlessness that undermines the faith of the people and spreads confusion and chaos.
Speaking at a banquet in the Corona hotel in the city of Edmonton on June 26, 1945, the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. Irvine) who had just been elected, is reported as having said this:
The C.C.F. party in the recent federal election lost a great "weapon" when it failed to capitalize on the popularity Russia achieved in five years of war, Mr. Irvine said. We should have made it clear to Canadians that Russia, a socialist country, is our type.
Our political opponents could hardly say that Stalin is a nazi. But for some reason we dissociated ourselves from the type of socialism they have in Russia.
Well, Mr. Speaker, that is perfectly clear; and it is patent now that when the danger begins to show itself the party which had played around with communism feels that for political reasons it has to get up and denounce communism. Not only that; those parties and those organizations in this country that have advocated policies which are contained in the principles outlined in that book, the Communist Manifesto, must bear a share, and a great share, of the responsibility for the softening of the people to communist principles in this land. When anyone who goes about engendering class strife, trying to set off one class against another, whether it be labour against the industrialists or whether it be labour and farmer against the rest of us, it must be realized that the idea emanated from the classless society idea of Karl Marx and Engels. That sort of thing has been preached in this country until a good many people believe it. Anyone who votes for centralization at every possible opportunity promotes the idea that the only way we can get security in this country is to centralize everything in the hands of a few bureaucrats; so you cannot blame the people for falling into error in their thinking when such policies are constantly advocated and when the opposite idea of decentralization is scorned and held up to ridicule as the reason so many people have to suffer.
Let us go on. This idea of government ownership, government monopoly, is a Marxian principle. How in the world can we now protest against communist beliefs when that sort of thing has been preached so assiduously in this land for the last twenty years? The idea of the redistribution of poverty, levelling everybody down, has been preached far and wide, and has been given as one of the means by which, in due course, this country will be able to have security, and that this is the only way it can be brought about. Howt in the name of common sense can we expect people to do other than look with some favour and sympathy upon communism and upon Russia in the face of such propaganda?


Mr. ARCHIBALD:: Don't you have government ownership in Alberta?


Solon Earl Low: No, we have not.


Mr. MATTHEWS (Kootenay East):: Is the hon. member repudiating the government-owned telephone system in Alberta?


Solon Earl Low: No. We have government ownership in Alberta only in connection with services which definitely lend themselves to government ownership.
I say, Mr. Speaker, it is not by accident, by any means, that the L.P.P. in this country have decided the only way they can get into power is through the C.C.F. party.
There is one other thing I believe should be said at this time. Canada has been pursuing policies which have put us in a position of great danger should a communist coup ever develop in this land. For example, it seems we have done our utmost to centralize the control of communications. Take our radio, for example. How easy it would be to cripple communications, simply because of the degree of centralization we have attained in this country. Some of us, realizing that several years ago, warned the people and advocated decentralization as a security measure. Let me point out that when Field Marshal Montgomery was here the government held a state dinner for him at the country club. Speaking at that dinner the field marshal mentioned, among five important things Canada would have to do if we were to be strong, the matter of decentralization. It is true he only developed one phase of it, that is military decentralization, but he certainly indicated that the decentralization of various things would have to be accomplished if we were to make Canada safe and secure. I say that anything which tends to centralize the control of vital things in Canada in the hands of a few people

Communist Agents in Canada
becomes a great danger when there is the possibility of a general strike or of a communist coup.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: If the hon. member will permit a question, does he agree with the president of the Saskatchewan social credit league that communist and fascist activities are carried on within the Social Credit party?


Solon Earl Low: I did not even know he had said such a thing.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: He said so, in a broadcast.


Solon Earl Low: I would have to make certain he did say it before I answered the question.
I was saying that anything which tends to centralize the control of vital things in the hands of a few becomes a danger in times of crisis. Today in Canada we are centralizing the control of food in the hands of a single board. We are taking step after step in that direction, and I say that becomes a very dangerous thing in case of crisis involving a communist coup. It seems to me we ought to begin, just as soon as we possibly can, the opposite course and try to decentralize controls, and place back in the hands of the people to the greatest extent possible the control of those vital things which in time of crisis might be used by enemies of the free way of life to lead us into the clutches of these totalitnrians who wish-there is no question about it-to get us in their grasp. It seems to me the government ought to forsake some of the policies they have been following and turn to policies of decentralization.
I want to assure the Prime Minister and his government of every support this party can possibly extend in meeting whatever may develop along the line we have been discussing. We want to help the government to clean house. We think there should be a house cleaning. We think the government must be making efforts right now; I am quite sure they are, and I commend them for whatever they have done and are doing. The Prime Minister did not hear any discouraging remarks or adverse criticisms from this party at the time Mr. Gouzenko made his revelations. We supported him throughout, because we knew he had to take unusual means to deal with a very dangerous situation. And we are prepared to go further and support the government in anything they feel they must do to secure Canada and make it impossible for communism to get a hold here. Only we say go ahead!
There are a number of positive things that can be done, I throw out these sugges-

tions which may be of help. It seems to me that instead of being afraid to look at communist literature we should call upon the departments of education in the various provinces to take the communist manifesto and, by whatever means may be in their power, make known to the people what it contains. It is only through lack of knowledge of the truth that the people fall into error. I want to see the people of Canada thoroughly familiar with what this book contains. Not only that, but side by side with the principles set out in the communist manifesto I would like to see made known to the Canadian people just how far Canada has gone in giving the people the results that Marx and Engels declared a hundred years ago they would give the people, and how it has been done without seriously lessening the freedom of Canadians, and under a system of private enterprise.
I believe we have the greatest country on the face of the earth. I believe that Canada is capable of yielding the finest standard of living to its people of any country in the world. I go further and1 say that if the Canadian people really know what communism means, and if they know at the same time what we have accomplished through private enterprise and what yet might be accomplished through the application of scientific principles of finance under our democratic way of life, there will not be much danger from communism. The best way to fight communism is to make our democracy yield results which spread happiness and contentment amongst our people.
I submit that in our citizenship we ought to attempt to develop a dynamic faith in democratic institutions. I pay tribute to what was said here a short while ago by the hon. member for Athabaska (Mr. Dechene). I think everyone ought to be careful to guard his tongue and see to it that he does not undermine the people's faith in democratic institutions and democratic processes. I say without fear of successful contradiction that until Canadians develop a dynamic faith in their way of life, a faith in Canadian democracy that is as dynamic as the faith which communists have in Russia, we cannot hope to combat communism.
I think we should make more of our citizenship. We should inculcate into our people, especially into our youngsters in the schools, pride rather than apology for our way of living. I am afraid that too often propagandists play up the wrong side of the picture. We are all guilty of that more or less, and I hope we will come to our senses and stop

Communist Agents in Canada
it. The only way to develop pride in anything is to become aware of the fine things in it. It seems to me that it is high time all of us put aside any prejudices we may have and combined our efforts in helping our people to attain that pride in Canada, that pride in Canadian citizenship, that pride in our way of life, which will tide us over any kind of crisis that may come.
I would have liked to say something about our external policy as it relates to this whole matter of communism. At the first opportunity I am going to discuss questions that are of interest to me, particularly those with which I had something to do when at the united nations assembly last fall. I should like to throw out one suggestion. In dealing with problems at the united nations or in connection with our external relations I think it is dangerous in the extreme for the Canadian delegates to take a stand on any problem that may require unusual means of implementation, before they have decided how the solution they decide upon is to be implemented.
I am not going to discuss the merits of the Palestine partition at the moment; I shall refer to that at another time. But I am quite certain that Canada made a mistake. I believe that the Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs now believes that we made a mistake. I have in my hand a clipping from the Ottawa Journal of March 3 to which I should like to refer briefly to support my belief. Mr. L. B. Pearson speaking at the united nations said:
We feel, in short, that the commission is not now in a position to carry out its mandate in Korea.
Then a little further on he says:
The ones who will, of course, suffer most from this policy of the USSR are those who least deserve it, the Korean people. I hope that nothing I have said will be interpreted as suggesting that my government is not anxious to see a free, united and democratic Korea brought into being at the earliest possible date.
My government strongly supports that objective and feels that the policy of the USSR in preventing its realization is to be condemned. We do feel, however, that it would, be unwise to seek to associate the united nations with an effort to achieve this desirable objective, by asking its commission in Korea to do things that it has not, under its terms of reference, the power to do.
If what Mr. Pearson says is good for Korea it should have been good for Palestine. We must not be led or pushed by any pressure into making decisions that we just have not the power to implement. I am afraid that perhaps we have let ourselves in for some criticism through having done that already.


Right Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I think I should say a few words on this motion because I am at the head of the Department of Justice. Attorneys general and ministers of justice in various democratic countries of the world are peculiarly interested in communism. They are peculiarly interested in it because it is a menace to established law and order. Perhaps the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) is to be commended for having brought up this matter, but I think it would have been better if there had been some notice so that we on the government benches could have been prepared to deal with it more completely.


John Bracken: May I just say I understood, and I think others understood, that we had asked for an opportunity to discuss this matter, and while I do not criticize the government, the opportunity was not presented.


James Lorimer Ilsley: We had no notice of this motion until we got into the house this afternoon, and therefore were not prepared to deal with it in as complete detail as we otherwise would have been.
One fact which the debate has brought out is that there is not much, if any, division among members of the house in their views with regard to communism. All parties deplore its inroads, and while there may be some difference of opinion as to what steps should be taken, that is whether it should be outlawed, all hon. members feel that it is a menace to our parliamentary institutions, to our civil liberties and to what we call our way of life. It is important that the people of Canada be awake to what is going on in the world and to what is going on in Canada. I have here a recent book which has received favourable reports. It is entitled, "World Communism Today" and is written by Martin Ebon. In the first chapter he gives a rapid review of the development of the strategy of communism since 1920 when the third international was formed.
According to this writer, we are now in what he calls the seventh strategy. The first strategy was from 1918 to 1920. During that time the communists were advocating world revolution. They believed that world revolution was imminent, that their society was the form of society which would be established very shortly the world over. But events did not materialize in the way expected by them, and so a second strategy was adopted between 1921 and 1927. This was a retreat from revolutionary activity to agitation. The strategy followed during that period was agitation instead of armed revolt.
2320

Communist Agents in Canada
The third strategy was from 1928 to 1934. This strategy centred on Russia. Russia was regarded as the important state, the state which must be developed as the mother of communism, the country which must succeed, which must be put on her feet if communism was to make inroads in other countries. Therefore revolutionary extremism was promoted in the world at large as a protection for Russia. That was the third strategy.
The fourth strategy was from 1935 to 1938. That was the period of the united front when the communist party joined with other parties, socialists and other parties in various countries; for instance, the Blum government in France.
The fifth strategy was from 1939 to 1940. That, of course, was the period when the agreement was made between Stalin and Hitler. The communists the world over then began to denounce the allies as vehemently as they had previously denounced the nazis. They made a very sharp turn in 1939 and caused their followers everywhere great difficulties, but- they carried them with them pretty well during that period from 1939 to 1940 and early in 1941. If Canadians as a whole would really acquaint themselves with what communists said and taught and advocated in Canada in that period they rvould be appalled, because they would realize that fundamentally persons who are true communists have no loyalty at all to this country as Canada. That was abundantly proved in the period of the fifth strategy. That is the period of the war which they described as the imperialist war against Germany.
Then, when Russia was invaded in 1941 the period of the sixth strategy set in, when another sharp turn was made, and communists in countries such as Canada and elsewhere joined with the governments of these countries in prosecuting the war and doing the best they could to help defeat Germany and helping Russia indirectly to win the war.
Then in 1945 or 1946 the period of the seventh strategy set in, which is the period we are in today. It is different from any of the others. It is a period of national revolutions rather than a world revolution-national revolutions brought about in a peculiarly subtle and insidious manner. The technique is familiar to everyone in this house. The communists, often very experienced and extremely able, many having received training in Moscow', and then coming back to their own countries for which they had fought bravely during the period of the sixth strategy when they were seeking to promote the victory of Russia

these communists by one way

or another get into governments and, if possible, get control of the department which has charge of the police and the department in charge of the radio, and sometimes the Department of Justice, sometimes the Department of Defence, but most of all the Department of the Interior, as it is called in most countries, the department that controls the police. From then on there is a gradual disintegration of the government. The police take charge; if they can, the communists get control of the radio as well, and before very long the government breaks down and becomes a communist government. Then the leaders of the other parties are imprisoned, often tried, sometimes executed. Other parties are outlawed. Just about that time an election is held, and when the election is held the communists are elected overwhelmingly.
This is the period of the seventh strategy, the period of national revolutions brought about in this insidious way. Parallel with this attempt to get control of governments there is a skilful infiltration into the trade unions, which in Canada is a more important factor than the other. In Canada we have today no communists in this house. We have no communist party here. The communist party in the legislatures and in municipal councils is very weak. The Labour Progressive party does not amount to much as a political party in Canada, It is not strong and does not cany its elections. But proportionately they are very much stronger, I am afraid, in some of the trade unions in Canada; and I would say, without tiying to cause any undue alarm, without saying anything that would cause panic or anything of that kind, that the situation at present in Canada is such that Canadians would do well to examine all the facts and be alert to this matter, and be alert to it every' day, and see that it does not spread very much further. We are acquainted with the communist mentality. It is a sort of fanaticism they have for Marx and Lenin and their other prophets. In their eyes the end justifies the means and ordinary rules of morality do not apply. They are quite ready to join civil liberties associations and any other kind of association and to advocate freedom of thought and freedom of speech and freedom of action and freedom of religion until that time when they will suppress all those very freedoms themselves. And the people of Canada should realize that.


William Earl Rowe: If- the minister would permit a question, does he think anyone who has been a member of the communist party should be employed in the civil service of Canada?

Communist Agents in Canada


James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Speaker, my answer is, no, I do not think so. I certainly do not believe anyone who is a member of the communist party of Canada should belong to the civil service of Canada. But the hon. gentleman's question was, should anyone who has been a member of the communist party be employed in the civil service? There might be a case of genuine conversion among these people. I do not know that I would go to the length of saying there could not be, but I do say that no communist should be allowed to serve in the civil service of Canada. In that respect I would go. farther than the Labour government in Great Britain has gone, because I understand they have simply made a declaration that communists should not occupy positions of trust in the government service. I do not believe that goes far enough.


William Earl Rowe: I am glad to hear the minister say that. Just one more question. I am not, of course, endeavouring to insinuate that the government are hiring any communists; I do not believe they are, but does the minister not think it would be wise to have an investigation of the whole civil service of Canada to see if there are any in the civil service who are communists?


James Lorimer Ilsley: The government has been
very alert about that. We have avoided answering questions about it. Not many questions indeed are asked. It is not an easy thing to explain or to deal with. A general investigation would be a most difficult thing. In the United States they have run into terrific difficulties in trying to assess the political beliefs of people in the civil service and to deal with them in accordance with their beliefs. It is a most difficult problem. It is easy to talk about making criminals of them, or putting sections in the criminal code to deal *with them. But the government has decided that the situation is such that there are sections of the Immigration Act which can be applied to prevent this influx of communist labour leaders from the United States who cannot work there because of the Taft-Hartley Act. We have decided that that influx can be stopped and will be stopped under our Immigration Act. We have decided, also to do everything we can to protect our civil service against any infiltration of this sort.
Mr. COCKERAM; Is any action being taken to get these communists from across the line out of this country?


James Lorimer Ilsley: The answer is yes. Let me proceed. I want to deal with the divisions of importance of the address of the leader of the opposition. He made certain suggestions. He 5849-148J
said we should see that we serve society better than the communists can serve society. I wholly agree with that remark; and all the statutes, all the information that we have, indicate that by any comparisons which have been made our standard of living is higher, the return per capita for the same amount of labour is very much greater and our system does work better than any known communistic system works. But that does not excuse parties; it does not excuse governments; it does not excuse parliament from keeping continually before them as the primary objective of their activities the welfare of the masses of the people, and that must, of course, at all times be done. I think the leader of the opposition expressed it very well when he said that we must serve communities better or serve society better than any rival system. We think we are doing that. I am confident myself that we are doing that very much better; but the leader of the opposition is thoroughly sound on that, that the welfare of the masses, the welfare of society, the sort of things that improve the lot of the rank and file, and so on, should remain right to the fore in the objectives and the programs of governments. That was the first suggestion. It was a general and perhaps an obvious one; nevertheless it is one with which we thoroughly agree.
Another suggestion was that we should associate ourselves with the United States of America and accept our share of the moral and economic leadership of the world. Well, I agree with that. We have done so to such an extent that we are criticized by some on the ground that we have too many people abroad, at the united nations and at the food and agricultural organization, and at these various specialized agencies of the united nations, and so on. But certainly this country has co-operated to the full not only with the United States of America but with the United Kingdom and with other countries that are interested in the rehabilitation of the world.
Another suggestion was that we should help other nations to re-establish themselves; that we should see that our customers are put back on their feet. I was glad to hear my hon. friend say that because he has not been very consistent on that. I remember about a year ago that he went on the radio and spoke about export credits. He said something like this: we are lending to people in other countries money with which to buy our own goods. And we have been under very strong criticism because of the money we have lent to other countries.	[DOT]
In the United. States of America they have at the present time what started as the
Communist Agents in Canada

Marshall plan. Last June, at Harvard university the United States secretary of state made a speech in which he indicated the willingness of the United States of America to help other countries that were willing to help themselves, and that has developed into what is now called the European recovery plan. It has passed the United States senate and is, I believe, before the house of representatives. It proposes the expenditure of $5,300 million in the next twelve months for the assistance of sixteen European countries, these countries having first made and prepared a plan of selfhelp among themselves. So far as Canada is concerned, we were, I was about to say, pioneers in this program of assisting or promoting European recovery. During the war, in spite of considerable criticism, we foresaw that developments might be something along the line of what they have been; that is, that after the war, there would be a terrific shortage of purchasing power on the part of the countries that were engaged in the war. We adopted the policy of mutual aid, and this policy of mutual aid was considerably greater per capita for Canada than the similar lend-lease aid of the United. States of America. Then, since the war we paid our share of UNRRA, which was very great. It was on a per capita basis proportionate to that of the United1 States of America. After the end of UNRRA, we have paid some money for post-UNRRA relief; but our last program, our extension of credits to the United Kingdom and to other European countries, has been very great.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: And cancellation of debt.


James Lorimer Ilsley: And the cancellation of debt of the United Kingdom for the British commonwealth air training plan. A while ago the ambassador of Canada to Washington made a speech in the United States in which he pointed out that the credits authorized since the end of the war have in Canada amounted to something over $1,750 million. They have not all been used yet. I think the amount used is something like $1,500 million, but the credits authorized for the United Kingdom and these other European countries is something over $1,750 million, and that is considerably more per capita than the credits that have been authorized by the United States of America, if considered with relation to national income, or if considered with relation to the population of the United States. As a matter of fact,

in his column not very long ago Mr. Walter Lippmann had this to say. I happen to have it here:
Man for man, family for family, taxpayer for taxpayer, the Canadians have borne a heavier part of the burden of European reconstruction than we have. Though the Canadian population is only one-twelfth as large as the American, though the Canadian national income is only one-eighteenth as large as ours, the Canadian contribution to European reconstruction is one-fifth as large as ours.
Of course this country has a continuing interest in seeing that these countries in Europe have their prosperity and purchasing power restored; but apart from economic grounds altogether, we have this other interest, which is that if a condition is allowed to develop which leads to revolution and chaos in these countries, then we have the spread of communism over a very much greater area of the world's surface. We then are driven to measures of some kind to prevent it from coming any farther. If it eventually succeeded, our liberties, our laws, those freedoms to which we are attached and which we prize so highly are gone, and consequently we have the greatest interest in seeing that European recovery is promoted. Therefore I again agree with the leader of the opposition in that section of his address.
Some parts of this debate this afternoon have taken a political turn. I do not want to add to that. Canada has made considerable contribution to the exposure of the methods of the communists, and in that way, I think, to the combatting of communism. In the book to which I referred -this passage will be found at page 273:
The report of the "royal commission to investigate the facts relating to and the circumstances surrounding the communication, by public officials and other persons in position of trust of secret and confidential information to agents of a foreign power" was published in Ottawa on June 27, 1946. It is the most thorough official document relating to communist activities to appear since the announcement of the Comintern's dissolution. The report and the testimony of Igor Gouzenko suggest that communist parties elsewhere may be employed for similar purposes.
The steps that were taken, which in my judgment were necessary, even though they were extraordinary, if those who were guilty were to be convicted, were strongly criticized. They were strongly criticized in this house and I could refer to the debates, but I should like to say this. I think my predecessor as minister of justice, the present Secretary of State for External Affaire (Mr. St. Laurent), is to be

Communist Agents in Canada
complimented upon the courageous and competent way in which he made provision for that extraordinary situation, because we rendered this country a great service by bringing out these facts. No other country did a thing of a similar kind and, as the situation is developing, we have rendered the country and the world a great service by the steps which the Secretary of State for External Affairs took on that occasion.


Mr. GREEN:: May I ask the minister a question? Does he consider that the laws of the country as they stand at present are sufficient to enable the government to deal with the menace of communism within Canada?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Well, the question as to whether there should be any amendments is a difficult problem. I do not know that I should like to deliver a final judgment on that and give it as a final opinion. If the hon. member has any specific change in mind-


Howard Charles Green: No. I am asking this question. Does the minister consider that our present laws are sufficient to enable us to deal with the situation?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not know that I should like to answer that question finally. So far as criminal prosecutions are concerned, the sedition sections are the only ones I know about. But communism can be combatted in other ways than by criminal proceedings, and it is a great question as to how far one should go along criminal lines in assessing a man's beliefs and subjecting him to criminal penalties for reasons of that kind.


Mr. A. L. SMITH (Calgary West):: Mr. Speaker, I feel I must say something about this problem, particularly since I have seconded the motion before the house. I have enjoyed very much the discussion to which I have listened this afternoon. Like the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ilsley), I think perhaps politics might have been left out of it, but that, of course, was begun by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King).
My general criticism of the discussion is this. To me it sounded somewhat like a discussion between academicians rather than a discussion by people who have a real problem to deal with at the present time. ,
Let us take one aspect, and I refer to paragraph (d) of the motion. That is the one dealing with infiltration into labour unions, the effecting of disorganization of peaceful relations, and disorganization of the production of industry both in peace and in the event of war.
How serious is this? I go to the Pacific coast. There we have two large labour organizations, and, practically speaking, only two. They are the people engaged in logging, the people engaged in mill and mine, and the smelter workers. The first one is headed by a man by the name of Pritchett. He frankly admits he is a communist. He is an officer of that organization and of the communist organization. The other is headed by a man named Harvey Murphy. At least, that is the name he goes by. I know him personally; I do not know Mr. Pritchett. So we find there that the chief officers of these two major organizations are avowed communists, and they make no bones at all about it.
I am going to say this about the city in which I live. There we have what is known as the trades and labour council, which is a central body having to do with all labour organizations in that city. On that executive are some splendid men, one named Gordon Cushing, who is secretary and who is also an alderman in the city of Calgary, elected a short time ago. No finer man exists. As vice-president we have a man named Longworth, an avowed communist, his wife being secretary of one of the unions; and the assistant secretary of the trades and labour council, a man named Yore Daniels, admits that he belongs to that organization.
Here in central Canada, take your electrical workers and you will find that the Canadian boss is a man named Jackson, who was interned during the war and released after the attack upon Russia. I want to be realistic about this. I want to make it plain that I am not suggesting for a moment that the individuals in these organizations are, by and large, communists. They are not. But we have these people who have risen to these positions of authority and who, from these positions, are constantly promoting disorganization in industry and will continue to do so unless something stronger is done about the matter than we have done up to the present time.
It is not my business; it is not within my province to tell this government what it should do, but I am going to point out one thing to the Minister of Justice and I am sure he will agree with it. It is this. I suggest that anybody in Canada, if he is a Canadian citizen, who avows a higher loyalty to some other country shall immediately lose that Canadian citizenship, I say, further, with respect to those persons who came from elsewhere and who have now accepted Canadian citizenship, that if they profess a higher loyalty to some country other
Communist Agents in Canada

than Canada, then-and we have the legislative competence to do this-such persons should not only lose their Canadian citizenship but be deported to the countries from which they came. Let them there carry on their activities, which were largely taught them there.
Everybody who reads knows of a school in Moscow with a constant enrolment, a revolving enrolment of 10,000 people who are being taught today. Today we have in this country men like Buck. His name has been mentioned half a dozen times. He is a revolutionist and nothing else. Yet he is permitted to go around, in the name of freedom of speech. I give way to no one as a supporter of freedom of speech and freedom, of assembly. But this country has recently been at war. We then gave up certain privileges of citizenship because it was for the good of the whole body politic, the whole people of this country. I say it is straining the phrase "freedom1 of speech" to allow people to go around advocating the overthrow of the institutions of this country by other than democratic means. That is not freedom of speech; that is license. I think it is criminal now under the appropriate section of the criminal code with respect to sedition. But if we can strengthen our position in that "way, I think we should do so. I realize the difficulty of getting into people's minds, as was pointed out by the Minister of Justice. I appreciate that difficulty fully. But when this thing is going on, as it has been going on, we should be in a position to treat these people for what they are; we should be able to treat them, not as politicians but as criminals; because that is what they are. I go farther and say this. Here we have the communist party now named- the Labour Progressive party. They admit that. I am not making any accusations that have not been frankly admitted by these people themselves. I think it is about time that we, whether Social Credit, C.C.F., Liberals or Progressive Conservatives, ceased to regard them as a political party and started to regard them as a subversive outfit of some sort, which is really what they are. There is no question about that.
For example, I have here a letter which to me is offensive in appearance. It is signed by William Kashtan, administrative secretary of the Labour Progressive party. It is dated March 15. I shall not go into its contents to any extent. He wrote to me because I had asked the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. St. Laurent) about the barring of certain people coming into this country every day. He encloses a copy of a letter from Mr. Norman Robertson who is our commissioner in London, which is dated last November and in which he tells Mr. Pollitt

that there is nothing in the Immigration Act which can possibly keep him home. I shall not bother about that. But I wish to comment on the nerve of anybody who would have a letterhead like that, with a red top and bottom. That is not accidental. That is the red flag being waved right in our faces. I have not answered that letter; and, needless to say, I do not intend to do so. Where do we go from here?
I agree- with all the things that are said to the effect that we must show people that this is a better system than the one which they are being propagandized about. Even these displaced persons who have come over here recently are getting it up in the woods, as the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. Rowe) has said. We know this is spreading all over. What is the position and- what must, it seems to me, be the position of every member of this House of -Commons? It is to say to the government in the language- which, I think, was so well used by my leader-and I take a little bit of credit for the fact that he showed it to me before we came into the House of Commons-as follows:
This party is in favour of, and will give its wholehearted support to,, the government's taking every step possible within its legislative competence to halt the march of communism in this country.
Surely that must be the attitude of every member in this house; that is, if we believe the danger of communism is real. How many hon. members in this house who went home last week end did not have someone speak to him about this business of communism? I doubt if there is a single man who went home who did not have that brought up to him. It is not enough to say that our country is a democratic country. I think it is. I do not think there is any question about that at all. Perhaps some of us have been failing in not making that sufficiently known. It seems to me that is one job which politicians have in their home constituencies. But we as individuals can never catch up with the lying propaganda which is being circulated. Those who know anything about the laws of libel know that, no matter how many apologies are published in the newspaper, they will never catch up with the libel and, so to speak, write it off. So this thing is going on at the present time. I want to give the Minister of Justice credit for something he said a moment ago. Having been many years ago in the business of prosecuting people of this type, I realize fully that the minister in his position, cannot give us all the facts. To do so, of course, would immediately give warning about certain individuals and perhaps ruin all the efforts
MARCH 17, 1&48
Communist Agents in Canada
which are now being made by the authorities to keep up with this thing and stamp it out. I realize that fully. But I say our laws should be simplified and made much plainer, so that our mounted police-if that be the body which is used; and I do not know whether or not it is-whoever the enforcement authorities may be, may act accordingly. The laws should be simplified and made much plainer, so that people bearing allegiance to another country may be convicted of that offence and also may be convicted much more simply of propagating this propaganda of which I am speaking.
I have here an editorial which is illuminating. It was in a local paper. I want to assure the members of the C.C.F. party, who no doubt have read it, that I accept in its entirety the statement made by the leader of that party to the effect that he is not permitting and will never permit the communists to associate with his party. I accept that statement in its entirety, but I read this editorial because it is of interest. It is headed "A kiss of death." I shall not read the first part, inasmuch as I obtained this for the purpose of reading a statement made by this man Buck, who said as follows:
If we want to find a lever to move polities in Canada, then we have to admit that the way to get them into motion is along that channel -the C.C.F.
. . . We are not here proposing a propaganda campaign. We are proposing to elect the C.C.F. and to elect the C.C.F. we will have to do those things which will elect their candidates. There will be plenty of constituencies where they vi 11 red-bait, and we will have to just volunteer to canvass for them, be election workers and mobilize that section of the labour movement which is under our leadership; because what we need most of all this year ... is a C.C.F. victory.
... If we elect a C.C.F. government in Ottawa it is quite obvious that the whole perspective for Canada will be changed. Certainly then our road ahead will be through the social democratic regime.
. . . After we have elected a C.C.F. government and are faced with the question of how to work further to develop socialist consciousness in the majority of the working class, we can truly say that the party that did this is a Marxist party, the party of socialist Canada.
I repeat, Mr. Speaker, I am not suggesting that anyone in the C.C.F. has made any such arrangement or has approved anything of the kind.


Mr. THATCHER:: We do not want their support at all.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I agree, and I am trying to say just that. I believe every word the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) said in connection with it, and
I cannot go farther than that. I read that, however, because I think it was the seventh strategy in Ebon's book, which the Minister of Justice just read. This is not an open thing. The communist party is not seeking great numbers of members. I do not know how many in this house took time, I think it was two years ago, to read what, I believe, is easily the finest thing in short form I have ever read on this question. It was a pamphlet of eight or ten pages written by an economist named Jackson, whom I do not know but who at one time was a professor at the University of Toronto.


Humphrey Mitchell: Gilbert Jackson.


Arthur Leroy Smith: That is the name, but I do not know much about him. He was speaking at a meeting of insurance companies in Chicago, and the subject of his address was, "Let us celebrate the first one hundred years of Karl Marx," which end this year, 1948. He said something which interested me very much; it was that their scheme is not to seek great numbers but to have a hard core of highly disciplined people, along with the hangers on, the fellow travellers and that sort of thing on the outside. That is why, as the Minister of Justice indicated in his quotation from Ebon a moment ago, they first want to get hold of the department of the interior, because in European countries that department usually has charge of the state police.
We saw it happen the other day. The pattern is not new. We have watched it march across western Europe. We have bragged- and I use the word respectfully-about the position we have reached in connection with trade. Speaking in this house last year, the then Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. MacKinnon) told us that we were now the third of the big three in international trade. I am sorry the Minister of Justice mentioned these gifts and unpaid loans a moment ago. I do not want to be political, but I remember that the then Minister of Trade and Commerce told us how wonderful our trade was, and then the other day the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) came along and told us we were not going to get paid for it anyway. But we shall leave that out of the picture and let the two ministers reconcile those statements. However, I do say we have achieved a position in world trade, and along with that must go, cannot fail to go, leadership in world affairs.
What is the right thing at the moment? The right thing at this moment is the elections in Italy, which are to take place very soon. When you find His Holiness the Pope for the first time from that high office asking people
Communist Agents in Canada

to vote a certain way, I for one conclude that things there are very serious indeed) when he has broken precedent in that way. Do not misunderstand me; I am glad he made the statement, but things must have come to a pretty sad pass over there. If Italy goes, there go Greece and Turkey, outflanked; and bordering as Italy does on France, what is the situation there? In the northern countries, Sweden and the others, they are worrying today. They see Finland going, and the Scandinavian countries think probably they are next.
My thought is this. Here we have Canada, successful in trade, ever growing, with a happy and contented population. If we could have sent from this Canadian House of Commons a message to those beleaguered countries- because they are beleaguered, just as though rows of swords were around them and cannon were pointing at them-saying, "We will stand by you; we will clean our own house as an example of what may be done in a free, democratic country", then indeed would we have done something real for world stability and world peace.


Mr. DANIEL McIVOR (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, I do not know how long you will give me, but I think I can take five minutes. My first words are of congratulation to the men who have occupied the position of Minister of Justice of Canada. As I listened to the minister today I felt that the government of this country, as far as legislation and enforcement are concerned, is in fine hands.
Any man who is elected as a member of this house to represent a constituency should have the cure for anything which may tend to destroy our Canadian civilization. I would say that you, Mr. Speaker, give us that cure every day during the prayer, when you say, "They Kingdom come". The reason I do not support communism is that it leaves God out; and any nation or any movement that leaves
God out is sure to come to naught. Look at Germany today. Where is she, and why? Because she crucified those who believed in God and drove out those who believed in the Christian faith. I know this is true. I spoke to a young man whom I knew to be a communist, because I think we should speak to them personally. I said, "What church do you go to?" He replied, "I have no use for that -" and I am not going to give it the name he used. He had hold of a little man by the hand. In sheer pity I said to him, "If ever you need a friend, and you will need one before you are through, I hope you will find him in me". Today that young man is in northern Ontario as an organizer for that which the Windsor Star is hitting so hard; and I join with the hon. member who commended that newspaper on the work it is trying to do.
Throughout the length and breadth of Canada we have churches, Protestant and Roman Catholic, which have the cure for communism. That cure can be heard any Sunday. Oh, I do not mean by singing hymns, saying prayers, giving in the collection or sermonizing. It is the principle that is practised every day. If that principle is practised every day it will do what the great St. Patrick did for Ireland; it will revolutionize the country and send its missionaries across to convert Scotland into the bargain.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

William Lyon Mackenzie King: Tomorrow we shall follow the program that had been set for today. First will be the Transitional Measures Act of the Minister of Justice; next, wheat; third, the Minister of Finance dealing with the excise taxes. Possibly tomorrow we might answer the questions that have been passed over today.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, March 18, 1948