NAVAL SERVICE ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. NORMAN McL. ROGERS (Minister of National Defence) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 2, to amend the Naval Service Act.
Mr. STIRLING:: Explain.


Mr. ROGERS:: The purpose of this bill is to make subject to naval discipline persons who have agreed to serve as civilians in a particular ship or in such ships as may be determined by the minister. These are persons who are not members of the Canadian naval forces and eligible for all the benefits such as pension and so forth applicable to such forces. The bill is identical in form with one passed by the United Kingdom parliament to meet a similar situation arising in the Royal Navy. It will avoid the emergence of questions which arose at the end of the last war with respect to persons emplo3red in the Canadian naval forces in a similar capacity.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. MILITIA PENSION ACT



PERMANENT FORCE NAVAL OFFICERS TO BENEFIT IN RESPECT OF ONE-HALF OF PREVIOUS NON-PERMANENT SERVICE

[Stage Direction]
Hon. NORMAN McL. ROGERS (Minister of National Defence) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 3, to amend the Militia Pension Act.
He said: The purpose of this bill is to enable officers of the permanent naval forces to reckon for purposes of pension one-half of any former time served in the non-permanent naval forces, thereby placing these officers on the same basis as officers of the permanent military and air forces with respect to the inclusion of one-haif their previous service in the non-permanent military and air forces.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. NORMAN McL. ROGERS (Minister of National Defence) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 4, to amend the Department of National Defence Act.
He said: The purpose of this bill is to enable the administration of service estates to be effected under regulations made by the governor in council. Regulations in this regard have already been made under the War Measures Act, and, so long as that act is capable of being invoked, such regulations have the force of law. Of necessity these regulations may have to be continued in force and effect for some time after the War Measures Act is capable of being invoked, and, in consequence, some other statutory authority is required to enable the governor in council to make such regulations.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. NORMAN McL. ROGERS (Minister of National Defence) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 5 respecting the Royal Canadian Air Force.
He said: The Royal Canadian Air Force was constituted under the Aeronautics Act, which pertains rather to the regulation of aeronautics generally than to the constitution and maintenance of an armed force. The naval forces and the militia are each constituted under their respective acts, and it is considered advisable that like provision should be made for the air force.
The present bill does not alter the existing constitution of the air force, and is in principle similar to . the Naval Service Act and the Militia Act, except that it omits a number of provisions contained in those two acts which are either not applicable to the air force or need not, having regard to the circumstances of the air force, be made applicable.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Joint use oj Terminals


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 6, to amend the Canada Evidence Act.
He said: By a statute of 1938 amendments were made to the Canada Evidence Act having for their purpose the facilitating of evidence in certain matters; it was provided that an affidavit should be accepted as evidence without the necessity of hearing certain witnesses who might live a very long distance from the court. This amendment is for the purpose of making the first amendment easier of application, inasmuch as it will not be necessary to prove the official character of the person making the affidavit unless it is challenged.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. JAMES A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 7, to amend the Canada Grain Act.
He said:	The purpose of this bill is to
correct three inaccuracies that appear in the amending act of 1939.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: What are they?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: An explanation will be given on the second reading.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Transport) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 8, respecting the appointment of auditors for national railways.
He said:	This is the usual bill introduced
annually to provide for the appointment of auditors for Canadian National Railways.
Richard Burpee Hanson: The same auditors?


Mr. HOWE:: The same as those of last
year.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



JOINT USE OF CERTAIN TRACKS AND TERMINALS FOR PURPOSES OF NEW ENTRANCE INTO VANCOUVER

[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Transport) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 10, to ratify and confirm a certain agreement respecting the joint use by Canadian National Railways of certain tracks and premises of the Vancouver, Victoria and Eastern Railway and Navigation Company, at Vancouver, in the province of British Columbia.
He said:	The purpose of this bill is to
ratify an agreement with Canadian National Railways for running rights over certain tracks and premises of the Vancouver, Victoria and Eastern Railway and Navigation Company at Vancouver in order to give the Canadian National Railways an entrance into Vancouver. This object could be approved by the board of transport commissioners to be operative for a period of not more than twenty-one years, but as the agreement is in perpetuity it is necessary to apply for the approval of parliament.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Transport) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 9, respecting the Beauhamois Light, Heat and Power Company.
He said:	By chapter 19 of the statutes of
Canada, 1931, the Beauharnois Light, Heat and Power Company were granted the privilege of diverting 53,000 cubic second feet of the flow of the St. Lawrence for power purposes. The object of this bill is to increase that diversion by 30,000 cubic second feet.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. T. A. CRERAR (Minister of Mines and Resources) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 11, to amend the Yukon Act.
He said:	As far back as 1919 power was
conferred upon the Yukon territorial council enabling them to provide for a tax on raw fur exported from the Yukon. A doubt has arisen, curiously enough at this late date, as to the precise powers which the territorial

council had to impose such a tax. This bill is intended to make it clear beyond any question of doubt that they have the power, and also to confirm whatever actions they have taken in the past under that power.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. T. A. CRERAR (Minister of Mines and Resources) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 12, to amend the Northwest Territories Act.
He said: Under the Northwest Territories Act as it stands at present the superior courts of Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia have jurisdiction in civil matters with respect to persons and property in that part of the Northwest Territories which lies west of the SOth meridian. This bill confers similar powers on the Ontario superior courts to deal with matters of the same sort east of the 80th meridian in the Northwest Territories. It also- makes express provision conferring surrogate powers upon the provincial courts in the territories adjacent to the provinces. Under the Northwest Territories Act as it now stands the minister is authorized to make arrangements with the Lieutenant Governor of Manitoba for the care of insane persons. Similar powers do not exist in the provinces further west, and this amending bill will confer such powers.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 13, to amend the Dairy Industry Act.
He said: The law now provides that products under the Daily Industry Act shall be put up in parcels of pounds or fractions thereof. This has made it difficult for those who have been processing cheese to use the whole of cheeses which are round in form. The bill proposes so to amend the act as to make it possible to dispose of the residue of such cheeses.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.
Wheat[DOT]-Pegging o) Prices TRANSPORT ACT AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Transport) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 14, to amend the Transport Act.
He said: This bill provides for several amendments to the Transport Act having to do with the sections relating to carriage by water and by air. The amendments are put forward at the suggestion of the board of transport commissioners. The bill also has two new sections, one providing for the regulation of motor vehicles operated within dominion government parks, and ithe other having to do with the regulation of motor vehicles operated across an international boundary.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. E. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle):: 

INQUIRY AS TO INTERIM PAYMENTS ON 1939 CROP

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ROBERT FAIR (Battle River):: As
the group with which I am associated has already officially requested that an interim payment be made on the 1939 wheat crop, and according to a press report of March 21 last the Hon. J. G. Gardiner, Minister of Agriculture, speaking at Wilkie, Saskatchewan, promised that the Liberal government, if returned at the pending election, would introduce amendments to the wheat board act providing that an interim payment of ten to twelve cents a bushel would be made on the 1939 wheat crop, I would ask the government whether this payment will be made under an amendment to the wheat board legislation or under the War Measures Act.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: The question might be
allowed to stand as a question on the order paper.

*



SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. H. A. BRUCE (Parkdale):: I should
like to address a question to the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe). The attorney general of Ontario has proposed that subversive elements in Canada should be placed in internment camps, in the same manner as alien enemies. I believe this proposal has been made to the minister, and that he has stated he would make a statement in the house. Is the minister prepared to make such a statement in the house to-day, or if not, when?


Right Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice):: I am pleased to say that
I am in a position to make a statement which will answer my hon. friend's question.
The Hon. G. D. Conant, attorney general of Ontario, wrote to me under date of May 14, 1940, respecting subversive activities and the defence of Canada regulations. As, however, his letter was given to and published by the press, I think it appropriate that I should make a statement to the house; so I anticipated the wishes of my hon. friend.
Mr. Conant suggests in effect that all persons, whether British or aliens, who are accused of subversive activities be detained without trial, but subject to what amounts to an appeal, under the authority of an order of the Minister of Justice, in the same manner as enemy aliens are detained.
I may point out that the position of the two classes, that is, offenders against certain regulations, and enemy aliens, is entirely different. In the case of enemy aliens their nationality is known and a trial is not necessary or desirable. In the case of those in the other class it is essential, under the present regulations and under our system of justice, that, subject possibly to exceptions in particular cases, they should be proven guilty in a court of law in the usual manner. The regulations contemplate and provide for this procedure.
The powers contained in regulation 21, referred to by Mr. Conant, would under the present regulations be exercised by the Minister of Justice only with regard to persons other than enemy aliens and exceptional cases or where an emergency or extraordinary situation existed and no other appropriate or effective procedure was available.
It may be, however, that an amendment to the regulations might be desirable whereby after conviction in the trial court bail would be prohibited and thus the convicted person would not be at liberty pending any appeal

The Address-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
that might be instituted. This suggestion, together with others, will be referred to the committee of this house to be set up for the purpose of considering the Defence of Canada regulations.
The constitutional responsibility for the internment of enemy aliens rests with the dominion authorities, and the procedure -adopted with respect thereto is not applicable to prosecution for subversive activities. The constitutional responsibility for the administration of justice, which includes the enforcement of the present regulations dealing with subversive activities, rests with the provincial authorities, and I feel confident that they will continue to carry out their responsibilities in this respect as they have in the past.
I may say, in view of the fact that a committee of this house is to be set up for the purpose of considering the defence of Canada regulations, that it is my intention to suggest to the committee that it consider, amongst other things, the whole quesion of the enforcement of the regulations and the procedure therefor.


Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East):: I am in receipt of a communication from the mayor of Vancouver which states that there is considerable feeling in that city against enemy aliens and enemy sympathizers. The communication further expresses the fear that unless there is an assurance from the federal government that adequate measures are being taken to cope with subversive activities of such people, citizens may organize for that purpose. Under the circumstances I think a statement from the minister would be useful.


Ernest Lapointe: I think, Mr. Speaker, that the statement I have just made largely answers my hon. friend's question. However, I may assure him that the government-, through the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and other agencies, is keeping close supervision on the persons referred to in the telegram from Vancouver. May I note, however, -that until a few days ago all the criticisms which I received on behalf of the government as Minister of Justice were to the effect that the defence of Canada regulations were much too arbitrary and severe, and that they Should be altered in that respect. Apparently there has been a change in public opinion, and now the criticism is the other way. The whole matter, I am pleased to say, will be considered by a committee of the house. The original intention in appointing the committee was to give an opportunity of expression to those who criticized the regulations because they were too drastic. Apparently now the committee will hear instead those who find the regulations not drastic enough.



SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Friday, May 17, consideration of the motion of Mr. Lapointe (Lotbiniere) for an address to His Excellency the Administrator in reply to his speech at the opening of the session.
Richard Burpee Hanson: Mr. Speaker, I am deeply conscious of the responsibilities that devolve upon me at this time. In approaching a discussion of the resolution now before the house I cannot disguise from you, sir, or the members of this house, that my mind, and I hope and trust the mind of each of us, is filled with anxiety over what has taken place on the other side of the ocean during the past few days. I intend to go quite fully into the question of Canada's war effort at a later stage of my remarks; at the moment I desire only to say that I believe we are engaged in a just war. If ever in the history of mankind there was a righteous war it is my firm belief that Canada is now participating in a war of high spiritual values, a war for the preservation of the maximum of individual liberty and indeed for the preservation of our Christian civilization. Because the background and the objects of the war in which we are engaged are of such importance it occurs to me that it is time for clear thinking on the part of each of us; and may I say it is time for reasonably straight talking. This afternoon I shall approach this question from no partisan point of view but rather, I hope, from the point of view of a Canadian national whose country, together with that of our gallant allies, is confronted with one of the greatest problems of our time.
First, however, there are some things which it is customary to say on this occasion. Already, Mr. Speaker, reference has been made to your election, and you will pardon me if I do not repeat now what I said previously. We all wish you well in the discharge of your public duties.
I come now to a brief consideration of the speeches we heard on Friday last. I am sure the two young gentlemen who distinguished themselves on that occasion will pardon me if I do not follow all the ramifications of their addresses. I want to congratulate them both, particularly on the composure they displayed in addressing this house for the first time. I confess to you, Mr. Speaker, and to the members of this house, that it was a long time before I caught the atmosphere of this chamber to an equal degree, if I ever did, and I have heard other hon. members, some of whom have taken prominent parts in the
22	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Hansen (York-Sunbury)
discussions of this house, make the same confession privately. I am making my confession publicly.
I desire to offer to the hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. Lapointe) my particular congratulations. I read his remarks very hurriedly, but they emphasized two points to which I might refer briefly. He truly stated that youth will be the chief sufferer from this great international disaster that has come upon us. Undoubtedly that is so to-day, as it has been so in the past and will continue to be so as long as ware occur. As I conceive it, the carrying on of war so far as man power is concerned is the burden of youth, governed by the mature judgment and experience of older men. Then the hon. gentleman referred to the post-war period. That, of course, is important, and I believe the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has placed upon the order paper, thus early in the session and early in the war, a resolution to set up a committee to study and report upon this question. Of course it is important, but it does seem to me that the winning of the war is of much more importance and that we might well postpone consideration of post-war conditions, because at this time who could say what those conditions might be?
I should like to offer my sincere personnal congratulations to the right hon. Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe), the father of the hon. member for Lotbiniere. In the words of a great statesman on a similar occasion in the imperial parliament-
It was a speech which must have been dear and refreshing to a father's heart.
Those were the words of Mr. Gladstone during the heat of a debate on Ireland, addressed to Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain after his son, Mr. Austen Chamberlain, had made his maiden speech. I think they are applicable on this occasion also; therefore I congratulate the right hon. gentleman. I would not -have him think, however, that the situation is unique even in the history of this Canadian parliament. I am reminded that from my neighbouring province of Nova Scotia there came to this parliament in the early days of confederation two gentlemen named Tupper who made a real contribution to the early history of this country. First there was Sir Charles Tupper, one time prime minister of Canada; then there was his son Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper, member of many an administration and holder of more than one federal portfolio. So that there was a similar occurrence in those earlier days; and the Tuppers made a distinct contribution to government in Canada. It has

always been a matter of regret to me that there has been no substantial recognition of what Sir Charles Tupper did for Canada in its early development. AVithout him confederation would not have been possible, and in my view Canada should have commemorated his place in her history by a monument on parliament hill.
May I at this point congratulate the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair), who seconded the address in reply on Friday last. Surrounded as he is, it must have taken a marked degree of courage to give utterance to the sentiments which he expressed on that occasion. Today he finds himself mentioned on the front pages of the great newspapers of Canada, and upon his courage I congratulate him.
What was it he said that struck the imagination of the Canadian people? May I draw the attention of hon. members to what he said, as reported at page 16 of Hansard:
For far too long we have taken for granted the rights and privileges of British subjects, and the vast resources and the boundless opportunities of this land of ours. Now that all of this is in jeopardy we realize that these things are infinitely precious, that life without them would be impossible.
And later:
This parliament meets in the darkest days since our nation was born. The hopes and the prayers of all Canada are with us to-day.
I would ask hon. members, Mr. Speaker, to be good enough to note these words:
This is no time for complacency. It is a time for united effort, for ceaseless endeavour; above all, for action, fearless action.
May I from the bottom -of my heart reecho these words, and again I congratulate the hon. member upon having had the courage, from his place in this house and on the first occasion, on which he addressed it, to give utterance to what I consider to be noble sentiments. I wonder if it occurred to the hon. member that for the most part -those observations were received in silence by his colleagues, but with an indication of the greatest pleasure by hon. members on this side of the house. This is a fact which should give him food for thought.
In the speech from the throne no reference was made to the visit of Their Majesties the King and Queen. I have no doubt that at *the last session of parliament, or during the session which closed about the time of their departure, reference wras made to this very important event in our history. But since I was not in the house at that time I may be pardoned if on this occasion I make some reference to it. No matter who suggested it,

The Address-Mr. Hanson ( York-Sunbury)
whether it was the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) or somebody in England, I consider that the visit of Their Majesties t.o Canada just a short year ago did more to cement Canadian unity than any other event in our history.
I was delighted to have the opportunity of being at least an onlooker during a portion of that visit. I know that irrespective of class, race or creed the Canadian people responded to the utmost on that occasion. If the Prime Minister was the author of the idea may I take this opportunity of congratulating him upon it, and upon having carried it through to a successful conclusion. It gave to our people from one end of the country to the other an opportunity of seeing in the flesh a wonderful young man and a glorious woman, the king and queen of our empire and of this Canada of ours. I am confident that our people enjoyed the visit to the full. It was a matter of regret to me that during the day they visited New Brunswick they were rushed unduly; but so many people wanted to see them that a rush could not be avoided, and I am sure they did not regret the labours of that long and arduous day.
In the speech from the throne reference is made to the death of Lord Tweedsmuir. Except in a very general way it was not my privilege to know the late governor general; I met him on one occasion for a matter of only three minutes. But I have known John Buchan since the days when I began to read his books. I enjoyed reading those books, and without hesitation I would commend to every hon. member a thorough reading of his writings. If one wants to read a good story he cannot do better than read "John McNab". I have recommended that book to many of my friends. On the other hand, if one prefers history, then I know of no modern writer who better exemplifies the best traditions of English literature than has John Buchan in his lives of Montrose and Cromwell. I am pleased to reflect that upon his appointment to the high office of governor general in Canada he lived up to the best traditions of the office. In his travels throughout Canada he made friends at all points, and in large measure was the interpreter as between the mother country and the Canadian people. It was with the deepest personal regret that I learned of his death, and in my humble way at this late date may I extend to Lady Tweedsmuir and to his family my sincere expressions of sympathy.
In the address he has put in the mouth of the Administrator the Prime Minister has mentioned the appointment of the Earl of Athlone as the successor to the late Lord
Tweedsmuir. I can say only that when he and the Princess Alice arrive, Canada will offer them a loyal and hospitable welcome.
Recently we had an election in Canada. I have no desire to rehash the issues of the recent campaign, nor have I any recriminations to offer. The people have spoken, as is their sovereign right, and I accept the verdict. Such is democracy. We may think that that verdict was unfair, that it was unjust, that it was not the real voice of the Canadian people, but votes count and seats in this house count. I am not going into an analysis, such as I have heard in days gone by, to show how many more thousands of Conservative votes it took to elect one Conservative member of this house than it did Liberal votes to elect one Liberal member. I shall not refer to the fact that it took only a few thousand votes to elect a member in the group angularly opposite. This is a phrase which was used frequently in this house when I first entered it. I shall not refer to the fact that it took a great many thousands of votes to elect a member of the group immediately to my left. The fact is that the government succeeded in getting about 54 per cent of the 4,500,000 votes that were polled in the election, while they have 75 or 80 per cent of the seats in this house. That hardly seems enough under the circumstances. It looks to me like an embarrassment of riches. Aside from the war issue, at the moment I have no hope of any palace revolution taking place over there. I am sure that in normal peace times there would be none because they are so intent upon one thing. There may be a palace revolution as time goes on and things become progressively worse in the war, but time alone will tell.
Of course I do recognize that the Prime Minister and his government have received a great mandate. In my view the meaning of that mandate is clear, and I wish to put this on the record. If the Prime Minister differs with my view I shall be glad to have him point out wherein he differs when he comes to speak. My view of the meaning of the mandate to the government is that we should pursue with all the power of all the resources at our disposal the work of assisting the mother country and her gallant allies in the supreme task of winning this war and driving back the ruthless invader. There must be a preservation of the maximum amount of liberty and of our Christian civilization. Above all I desire to make it clear that in my view the mandate is not for a limited liability contribution. Let there be no mistake about that.
At tips point I should like to make some observations with respect to the National
24	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
Conservative party which I have the honour to lead in this house for the time being. Compared with the votes which were polled in the country we are few in number, but as I look around and see the earnest young men who sit beside me I realize that what we lack in numbers we make up in quality and in devotion to Canada and to the empire. The results of this election should not be the occasion for tears or beating of the breast.. Any party that can poll approximately one and a half million votes in Canada is neither dead nor dying. We must continue to pursue our war efforts and give consideration to the economic problems that confront this dominion, but we should also devote ourselves to the upbuilding of a truly Conservative party, a party which will truly reflect the views of that sober and solemn element in the country which in thought and action is always Conservative. This does not mean that we shall be a static party, but rather a party of orderly progress, holding fast to that which is good in our past, lopping off the mouldered branches of yesterday. Above all the Conservative party will continue to give its unyielding loyalty to the British crown. This is one of the cornerstones of our very existence. I want to express a profound conviction that I hold, that there will always be a Conservative party in Canada. This will be so because of the character and mentality of our people. We are proud to think of the achievements of that party in the past. I do not intend to traverse this situation. Rather should we put forward our voices, rather should we prepare ourselves to be an alternative government at any time. The king's government must go on.
I should like to make a brief reference to the retirement of the gentleman who preceded me in this position. He leaves us with the respect and regret of every one of us. In saying that I feel sure I express the attitude of the members of all parties in this house. Doctor Manion is a great Canadian. During the years he served Canada, in the army, in the government and in this house, he made a great contribution to his king and country. He is still, comparatively speaking, a young man, and I am confident that he has many years of useful service ahead of him. I should like to add that my own relations with him were most happy. The}' extended over a period of twenty years or more and I shall always look back with pleasure to my association with him.
I should like to give brief consideration to some of the matters contained in the speech from the throne, other than the reference to our war efforts. I should like to congratulate

the Prime Minister upon being brief for once -or perhaps it is the second time. I was not here last January when the speech was- no doubt-the briefest in the history of Canada. The speech from the throne this session takes second place. I shall not revert to what took place last January, but I can tell him candidly that when I heard the announcement over the radio on January 26, when I was down in the southern part of this hemisphere, I could gladly have assassinated him. However, I do not believe in threshing over old straw, although 1 have views on that subject. It was an affront to parliament to call members here and then dissolve parliament. It was an affront to the Canadian people. But times are too serious to dwell upon this now and the election has washed out any indictment that may have been preferred against him by reason of what happened on that occasion.
Reference is made in the speech from the throne to unemployment insurance on a national scale, the exact statement being:
-resolutions will be introduced for an amendment to the British North America Act which would empower the parliament of Canada to enact at the present session legislation to establish unemployment insurance on a national scale.
Of course that is absolutely the correct constitutional way to proceed. I am reminded by a smile on the face of the Minister of Justice that on a former occasion another government did not proceed in that way. Well, I really thought at the time that, having regard to the treaty-making power contained in the British North America Act, having regard to the previous legislation and resolutions passed by this parliament with respect to the Geneva labour conventions, we had brought ourselves within the jurisdiction of parliament to enact such legislation. That has been ruled ultra vires. Again I accept the verdict-this time of the courts of the country. Willy-nilly I must. I think that this is the proper course to pursue, the orderly course of amending the constitution in accordance with the powers and the precedents in that regard. But I am wondering, in the first place, if it will be possible at this session of parliament to pass such an address and such resolutions as are requisite and necessary and to have them assented to by the imperial parliament in time to put through important legislation of this kind during the present session. I am also wondering what attitude our friends in the provinces are going to take with respect to this matter. Are we to wait and obtain from them their assent to the important amendments of the constitution which will be necessary, or will they attack the provisions as being an invasion of provincial autonomy?

The Address-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
I do not know. These are queries which are coming up in my mind with respect to the matter.
Down in the province of New Brunswick we had, until last November, a gentleman who took very strong ground with regard to the invasion of provincial rights by the federal authority. Well, that brushwood has now been cleared away by the election. I warn my right hon. friend the Minister of Justice that there are obstacles left in that direction; however, I say to him, persevere, do not take too seriously the opposition which may come to you from that quarter.
I am one of those who have always thought that we ought to have a strong central government in Canada. I do not care who criticizes me for that opinion. I have found that the more power we gave to the provinces the more money they would spend and the deeper in debt they would put the people of this country. If you want to visualize what the founding fathers of this confederation had in mind, apply to our constitution the acid test of a war-time condition: then you will realize that the basic function of government in Canada is or should be found in the federal legislature.
I doubt very much whether it is possible to enact at this session an unemployment insurance act. If this matter is of the importance which I believe it to be, it seems to me that we have lost five precious years. I would go a little further. I suppose that if in the last twenty years my right hon. friend has promised unemployment insurance legislation once, he has promised it half a dozen times.


An hon. MEMBER:: Twenty times-every year.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Well, I will not go that far. For five years I was not here, and I did not pay very much attention to what was going on in this parliament. As a matter of fact I really never anticipated coming back. If I may tell you, Mr. Speaker, a personal secret, I decided to contest this election in order that if possible I might defeat the man who defeated me in 1935. That was one motivating factor; it was not the whole reason-I should not like people to think that I am as narrow and vicious as that. But the fact is that that gentleman eluded me by accepting a high office. I should like to add that we have been on friendly terms for forty years. Once upon a time I had the pleasure and the profit of acting as his confidential solicitor, but when I became a Conservative member of parliament he dropped me like a hot potato. Let me repeat that I should not like the house to believe that the reason I
have given was the only reason I contested this election. I had an idea-if I may be permitted the personal reference-that perhaps I could render service to Canada at this time. I hope I may.
Another matter is referred to in the speech from the throne. There i3 the very brief announcement:
The report of the royal commission on dominion-provincial relations, which has just been received, will be tabled immediately.
The Prime Minister has made good that statement. I am wondering what is the reaction of this house and the country to that report. I do not suppose that anybody here has read the report, let alone the appendices; but I have studied the recommendations which have been made, and I am impressed by some of them and I am not impressed by others. I alluded a little -while ago to the spending proclivities of our provincial governments, especially those of the small provinces. They seem to be oblivious of the fact that there is only one set of taxpayers in Canada paying to both jurisdictions. The suggestion is made in this report that this government shall take over the financing and the servicing of the provincial debts, and that, as the corollary of that, the dominion shall take over certain important sources of income which the provinces now enjoy. Well, I think that if my right hon friend tries to implement the part of the report dealing with the second matter to which I have alluded, he will have a very great deal of difficulty. My experience, at least from 1930 to 1935-and I say this with great respect to those with whom I dealt-was that the provincial legislatures were willing to take all but to give very little. I suppose that is human nature. But if the government of Canada takes over the servicing of the debts of the provinces, there must be some provision whereby they will not be allowed to go on incurring debt after debt. I do not know what the report has to say in relation to that, but I should like to throw out this warning, that if consideration is to be given to the one constructive suggestion, certainly there is a corollary involved in that principle.
I had intended to say something about the defence of Canada regulations, but the Minister of Justice has forestalled me in nearly everything I had it in mind to say. I have received, as I suppose all members of this house have received, a good many communications and some briefs with respect to the severity of these regulations, and recently, since the war situation has become so acute, I have begun to receive recommendations
26	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
implying that they are not severe enough. Of course, there are both points of view and both will have to bo given consideration.
Having regard to the conditions that prevail in Canada, I wonder whether the Minister of Justice has not now some qualms of conscience at having repealed section 98 of the criminal code. He shakes his head, nevertheless I suggest that while it might not have been necessary in time of peace, it would be a useful adjunct to the laws of the country at the present time. I invite him to consider the reenactment of section 98.
I am glad in a way that the Prime Minister has decided to submit the whole question to a special committee, but I recognize this as an old practice of his, perhaps to evade responsibility. I say that in no harsh or vindictive spirit. My recollection -of the first important project that was brought before this house in the session of 1922, when my right hon. friend was facing parliament for the first time as Prime Minister, is that there came up for consideration the question of railway rates in the west. His government, instead of having a policy on this great and vital question, referred the matter to a committee of the House of Commons and so passed on responsibility. I well remember the part played in that committee by the hon. gentleman who is now sitting in the treasury benches occupying the position of Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Crerar). I remember the trial kite that was put out by the gentleman who was chairman of that special committee as to what the report would be- I refer to Hon. A. K. Maclean-and I believe my memory is accurate in that regard. It was stated that the committee was prepared to accept the draft report that had been made by the chairman and the present Minister of Mines and Resources, then representing Marquette. He put a pistol to the head of the Prime Minister and there was a right about face on the question. I have a long memory and I can recall that exactly. I remember being told the whole situation by a supporter of the government of that day, a gentleman who is not now on earth but whom the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ralston) knew very well in his lifetime. That gentleman said that never again would that sort of thing happen.
I hope that these references to committees are not made by the executive for the purpose of sidestepping responsibility. The government is responsible to the people and should have a policy.
The defence of Canada regulations are based, I take it, upon those in vogue in England, although I suppose they are not the exact counterpart. In fact, I have heard the

criticism that these regulations are very much more severe than those in England. Well, I think it is necessary in war time that some power should be vested in the executive to control subversive elements in the country. I am all for law and order. Whatever I may have been in my younger days, as I grow older and more mature I am all for law and order. I am for law and order in Canada in war time and I believe the government must have some power at its elbow.
I have been reading the life of Abraham Lincoln by Carl Sandburg, " Lincoln-the War Years," and I recall a criticism which was made of Lincoln and his government because of the virtual suspension of habeas corpus, and the unconstitutionality of the executive action at that time of travail in the life of our neighbouring republic. Subsequently, if I remember rightly, his act was declared ultra vires by a chief justice who had been a member of his own administration. What a situation! So far as I am concerned the Prime Minister and his government must have power by executive action to deal with any emergent situation that may arise from time to time while the country is at war, but I hope they will exercise that power with the utmost judicial discretion and will play no favourites. That is all I have to say in that regard.
I desire to devote some attention to the war effort of this administration. The Prime Minister and hon. gentlemen opposite may not agree with what I have to say, but as I stated in the very opening remarks 1 addressed to the house, this is a time for clear thinking and straight talking. May I refer to the situation in Canada prior to September, 1939. Perhaps I should go back a little farther than that, because during the election I heard in my own constituency a criticism of the government of Mr. Bennett from 1930 to 1935 on the ground that in those years it had not done anything with respect to the question of national defence or empire defence. I do not think it was a big issue in the election, but reference has been made to the question and I think I ought to justify the position that was taken at that time.
In the years from 1930 to 1935 Canada was in the throes of an economic revolution unparalleled in the history of the world. We were faced with declining revenues and with the necessity of imposing taxation upon the people, and I ask you, Mr. Speaker, and the membership of this house how any government under those circumstances would have been justified in imposing new taxation upon the people of Canada for national or empire defence in the light of the situation as it was

The Address-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
then in Europe. I think I have only to ask the question to have the answer. No government would have been justified in 1933, when this country was in the depths of the economic *depression, in asking parliament to impose new taxation on the people of Canada for national defence. If we had asked the people for any substantial sum of money for this purpose, what an uproar of indignation would have arisen from hon. gentlemen opposite, led by the Prime Minister himself! I have no doubt about that at all. I heard it on many occasions. My mind goes back to the time in 1922-hon. members know that as we get older we tend to become reminiscent; I hope I am not transgressing too much- when Hon. George P. Graham was Minister of Militia; the hon. member for Quebec South (Mr. Power)-my friend from Quebec South, if he will permit me to call him so-was a member of this house and a supporter of the government, and he led a rebellion against the estimates of the militia department of that day. The Conservative party representation in this house at that time endeavoured to help the minister to put his estimates through, and, as I recall it, they were very modest estimates. I remember that the minister had to withdraw' his estimates and bring them back greatly reduced in amount. If that was so in 1922 or 1923, when the country was blessed with the beneficent Liberal rule of my right hon. friend, and was returning to prosperity after the war years, what would he have said in 1933 if we had asked for any substantial amount for national defence? The roof would have been the limit.


Grote Stirling: It would not have been the limit; there would have been no limit.


Richard Burpee Hanson: So I am justifying my position with respect to not having asked the people of Canada for any large sum for national defence at that time. I believe, though-I am not sure about this; I have not looked it up-we did make a start in 1934 and 1935 with respect to the establishment of a government munitions plant in the province of Quebec. I remember that that was opposed by the right hon. gentleman, and if my memory serves me aright, immediately on being returned to power he suspended all operations with respect to that well-conceived plan which had been worked out by the Department of National Defence for the purpose of making munitions under the government of this country. I never heard any great criticism of that at the time, but I have heard a substantial amount of criticism since. Of course we are always wiser in the light of after-events.
From 1935 conditions materially changed with respect to the whole question-of national defence. Who ever heard of Hitler in 1933? But you heard of him in 1934 or thereabouts, when he was made chancellor of the German reich. From then one thing evolved into another, and the head of the aggressor was raised in Europe. Still I am free to admit that none of us at that time expected that by 1939 we should be plunged into a tragic war. We all stood aghast at what he did to Austria, and when the rape of Czechoslovakia took place I felt sure that a madman was loose in Europe. After Munich-and I am making no criticism of Munich, let that be distinctly understood: if ever a man laboured and struggled to preserve the peace of the world it was the Right Hon. Neville Chamberlain. He deserves the sympathy of every one of us, and history will accord to him a very high place among the statesmen of the British empire. If hon. members are interested in reading about the struggle which he made, may I commend to them a book which I have recently written-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Richard Burpee Hanson: -which I have recently read. I am glad I do not write books. There is a saying-I think it is in the Bible: "Oh, that mine adversary had written a book!" Some people will refer to that very feelingly; perhaps the Prime Minister himself will remember that he wrote a book-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am glad I did.


Richard Burpee Hanson: -which I do not believe many people read to-day. I am bound to tell him that I never read it; I started to, but, I could not finish it.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That is a reflection on my hon. friend himself.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That may be true; I know I am stupid most of the time, but I confess that I never could get interested in the book. However, this is a digression. If any hon. member is interested in following the efforts of Mr. Chamberlain to preserve the peace of Europe and the world I commend to him the book of Sir Nevile Henderson, entitled "The Failure of a Mission." It is I think the first record that has been given to the public of the efforts of one of the greatest statesmen we have ever had in England; and because Mr. Chamberlain failed to achieve his puipose is no reason why he should be condemned. May I say further how much I admire him for what he did in the recent past, since this crisis came on, in unselfishly giving up his position at the head of the state when he found he could not command that
28	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
overwhelming confidence of the House of Commons in Great Britain which he thought he ought to have.
Between 1937 and 1939 I submit that this government had ample warning of what was taking place in Europe. I am told-I cannot vouch for the truth of this because I have not access to the proof-that everything that was done by the government was done with absolutely no reference to what might take place in Europe, that the question of overseas operations was taboo.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I do not wish to interrupt my hon. friend, but I think I should take issue with him immediately on any statement that-


Richard Burpee Hanson: The right hon. gentleman will have plenty of time to reply.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: But when my friend makes a statement, and says he has no authority for the statement he makes, it is part of my duty to see that a statement which is incorrect is immediately denied; I say the statement just made is wholly incorrect.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Of course I know that the right hon. gentleman will take the opportunity to deny it, but I state that it is my information; and more than that, as proof of the truth of the position which I am trying to formulate, my understanding of the debates of this parliament is that on every vote for national defence that was passed from 1935 to 1939 it was emphasized that the money was for the defence of Canada and the defence of Canada only. That, I submit, is some proof of the truth of the position I am trying to define to-day.
Now may I ask where was Canada's first line of defence during all the trying period before September, 1939? Was it in Canada or was it over there where to-day they are striving with the beasts of Ephesus to preserve our liberty? We have never had more than one line of defence; our first and only line has been the British navy, and we ought to thank God reverently that we have such a defence

to which, however, we do not contribute a single dollar or a single man. It is only in times of stress such as we are going through now that we recognize the truth of these matters. As was stated on Friday last by the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair), in normal times we take for granted the privileges of a British subject, and it is only in a period of trial and stress such as that in which we are now living that we realize what are the privileges

of a British subject and comprehend that during all these years the British government has been providing our first line of defence. Why, Canada could not defend herself against Siam! Make no mistake about that. Why all this talk about the defence of Canada? Why should we not be honest with ourselves and with the people of this country and say that our defence is the common defence of the British empire and our gallant allies? That is the only defence worth anything at this time, when our liberties and our very civilization are at stake, but we have done nothing to assist.
Where was the security of Canada ever menaced? Was it to the south? Well, for more than a hundred years, ever since the Rush-Bagot treaty, there has not been a single fort, a single gun or a single ship along the whole international boundary. That is a matter of mutual congratulation to the people of this dominion and the people of the republic to our south. We are not and never have been menaced by those friendly neighbours. On the contrary in the city of Kingston, on July 1, 1938, in the presence of the Prime Minister of this country, the president of the great republic to the south offered to take us under that country's wing and to defend us if we were ever attacked by an enemy from without. This afternoon I have no intention of saying one word repelling the goodwill of the president of the United States; it would be not only inappropriate but wholly inexpedient that I or anyone else should do so at this time, because I greatly appreciate the friendliness and goodwill of that country not only towards us but towards our mother country and our allies, and I am hopeful that it may become more than goodwill. But what they may do over there in that connection is their own business, and theirs alone. I wonder, however, if any self-respecting Canadian within the sound of my voice or anywhere in this country wants to see Canada dependent at any time for her national safety upon the government of the United States. Surely if we are a nation our self-respect will demand something more of ourselves than that. I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet, but if the day ever comes when we have to shelter ourselves behind the armed forces of the Stars and Stripes, that day we will haul down the Union Jack in Canada and it will never go up again.
No, I do not think we have any enemy to our south. Then what enemy have we to the west? Well, perhaps we have a potential enemy there. I do not want to say very much about that, but I believe that potential enemy is so busily engaged in digesting its gains in

The Address-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
China that it really is not a potential enemy of this country at all. Certainly we have nothing to fear from the north. Therefore our only enemy must be in the east, among the dictators of Europe; and if that be so it is not only common sense that instead of spending money on the construction of emplacements, embankments and forts in Canada we should endeavour to the utmost to further the oause of our mother country and our allies in the terrible conflict which is now raging? That is the view I take; that, I think, is the sensible thing. That is what I, as a self-respecting Canadian, believe this country should have done.
The speech from the throne contains certain statements with reference to collaboration with the mother country. I intend to refer to this point a little later, but before I forget I should like to invite the Prime Minister to lay before the house, if it is in writing, the evidence to show that this government has collaborated with the British government. I believe the people of Canada are asking what was the degree of collaboration, if any, requested by the British government, and what was the degree of cooperation given by this government both prior to and since the outbreak of the war. I quite appreciate that there may be confidential communications which the Prime Minister cannot lay before this house, but I do suggest to him that the people of Canada will not be satisfied with anything less than substantial evidence of what the situation is, and accordingly I invite him to table that evidence.
The most striking evidence of what I fear is lack of collaboration is to be found in the matter of air defence. If my information and my reading of the evidence are correct, through the Prime Minister this country refused to collaborate with the mother country in 1937 and 1938 with respect to air training in Canada. As I understand the Prime Minister's position, as pointed out in a speech made in the house on July 1, 1938, the reason assigned was that it would be a violation or an infringement of the sovereignty of Canada.
I have before me the text of the Prime Minister's statement. It is, however, well known in the house and I shall not spread it on the record. It might have been-I do not agree that it was-academically and theoretically a sound position for the right hon. gentleman to take at that time. But, from a practical point of view, and having regard to what has since occurred, what a position for Canada to take! In effect we were saying to the mother country, "Although you lack space, of which we have an abundance in Canada, we cannot allow you at your
own expense to come out here and train men for aviation because, forsooth, it would be a violation of the sovereignty of the country." I hope I have not overstated the position.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I must say my hon. friend has completely misstated it.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I do not think so. I shall read what the right hon. gentleman said, as reported at page 4527 of Hansard of 1938:
May I say a word with respect to the idea of having the imperial air force set up flying schools in Canada to train their pilots; in short, a military station put down in Canada, owned, maintained and operated by the imperial government for imperial purposes.
In those sentences the Prime Minister is setting out the premise of the position. Then he says:
I must say that long ago Canadian governments finally settled the constitutional principle that in Canadian territory there could be no military establishments unless they were owned, maintained and controlled by the Canadian government responsible to the Canadian parliament and people. In the end the imperial naval stations and army garrisons were withdrawn and Canadian authority took over.
I remember when that was done, and I do not think the question of sovereignty was the primary principle in accordance with which the British government gave up stations at Halifax and elsewhere in Canada. I think it was because the Canadian government were willing to take over and save the British government some money. I well remember when the Leinster regiment left Halifax. I was a boy going to school in those days, and my recollection is that it was not a question of sovereignty, at all; rather, it was a question of expediency, a question of dollars and cents or of pounds, shillings and pence.
Then the Prime Minister goes on to say:
A reversal of that principle and that historical process at this date is something the Canadian people would not for a moment entertain.
Well, I wonder if that would be true to-day? If the British government wanted to train men in Canada to-day I wonder if the Canadian people would show any resentment.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Would my hon. friend put the case fairly? There has never been a refusal to allow men to train in Canada. The government was prepared to place facilities at their disposal.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The Prime Minister is drawing a fine distinction. However, I am coming to that. From a practical point of view what is the difference? The difference is that on the one hand there would be a theoretical violation of sovereignty
30	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
and on the other there would be great advantage to the mother country. But my right hon. friend stood on his dignity, and urged the question of Canadian sovereignty. Nero fiddled while Borne burned!


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I do not wish to interrupt my hon. friend, and if he would prefer I shall leave my explanation until later. However, he has asked a direct question, namely whether or not at this moment Canada would raise any objection to carrjbng out a proposal such as was made at that time by the British government. In answer I would ask my hon. friend to reflect upon what the position would be in Canada to-day had we in Canada an air force under the ministry in Great Britain, instead of under our own ministry as we now have it.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am
afraid we shall have to agree to disagree on the subject. I have no doubt that arrangements should have been made in 193S, even if a breach of the sovereignty of Canada was involved. We would have been that much farther ahead in repelling the invasion of the hun in the air. But instead of making that headway we have lost two or three precious years; that is the indictment of the people of Canada against this government. If the Prime Minister does not believe me I would recommend that he read the leading editorials which have appeared in the last three or four days in Canada's great national newspapers, irrespective of party. They speak more eloquently, more logically and more vividly than I can.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: But not more vividly than they did on the day of the election.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Oh, I know the Prime Minister takes great pride in the result of the election. I wonder if the Canadian people would vote to-day as they did on March 26. I doubt it very much, and I would tell the Prime Minister that to-day, so far as public opinion in Canada is concerned, his back is to the wall. He may not realize it, but that is so. I have no doubt that to-day the Canadian people lack much of that confidence in the administration which they had on March 26. I say that lack of confidence arises entirely out of the ineptness and complacency of the Prime Minister and his administration. I understand the point of view of the Prime Minister respecting the constitutional principle, but he ought to realize that public opinion in Canada values results much more highly than constitutional principles.

It was a recognition by the Prime Minister of that particular fact which prompted an announcement made in the dying days of the session of 1938 by the then Minister of National Defence to the effect that Canada herself would undertake the policy of air training. Unfortunately, in the light of subsequent events, very little if any money was. voted for the purpose indicated, and nothing was done until war broke out.
Am I right in assuming it was intended that very little should be done? I have heard it stated, and I believe with some truth, that until the moment of the great German push of only a few days ago the contribution made by this government was to be a limited liability contribution. I have not before me extracts from speeches by different members of the administration, but I think one of the ministers was undoubtedly voicing the views of himself and his colleagues when he stated the theory that there were three points of view in Canada. There were those who were out to do their utmost; and at the very outset may I place nwself with that group. Then there was a second group which did not want to do anything. The third group, with which the hon. gentleman in question associated himself, was the one which held the view that we should do a moderate amount, and should follow a middle-of-the-road course. I hope I am not misstating the idea which the hon. gentleman was endeavouring to set forth. I have no doubt that this point of view was one held by the administration, having regard to the personnel of their supporters in this country. I am making no reflection upon anyone. At the moment I am not criticizing those who may differ with me. This is a free democratic country and they are just as much entitled to their opinions as I am to mine. However, I hope their opinions will not prevail because I sense the danger that lurks behind any attempt at the application of these principles at this time. I am wondering if the member of the administration who adopted the middle-of-the-road course voiced the view of the administration. While that may have been the voice of the people of Canada during the early stages of the war, I venture to suggest that in the light of fast-changing events it is not their attitude to-day. I rather think the young gentleman, the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair), voiced the real feelings of the people of this country with regard to what we should be doing.
The declaration of war was made in September, 1939. May I say at once that in having parliament make that declaration of war I think the Prime Minister conformed exactly

The Address-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
to what should have been done in the circumstances. But let me ask him this question: What was the state of preparedness of Canada then? Let me go a little further and ask: What plan had the national defence council ready for the government in the event of war in Europe-and Canada voluntarily undertaking to participate? What plan of action, if any, had the government? I am advised that the national defence council had planned for four divisions, two for overseas service and *two for home defence. I understand that the Prime Minister himself cancelled those plans.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Where does
my hon. friend get his information?


Richard Burpee Hanson: I quite
anticipated that question.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: May I tell
him at once that I cancelled no plans at all.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I quite
anticipated a denial on the part of the Prime Minister.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I should think you would.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Under
parliamentary procedure I suppose I have to accept his word, but I give my solemn word on my honour to this house that I have some evidence that four divisions were planned for by the national defence council of Canada, two for overseas and two for home service, and either the Prime Minister, the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Rogers), or members of his government stepped up and cancelled those plans.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: As a former Minister of National Defence may I say that that statement is absolutely and totally incorrect.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I have
to accept the minister's statement, and I suppose I have to accept the Prime Minister's statement.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Will my hon.
friend tell us when the plans were made?


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am not
subject to cross-examination. I am informed they were ready a year before war broke out -I shall not use the word "know" because I do not know personally. How could I? But I have every reason to believe that they were ready a year before war broke out. What is the situation? Six months after the declaration of war we have one division at Aldershot still under training. They have been there six months and they are still under training. Not one of them is ready yet to participate in what is going on in the western lines.
My right hon. friend made a number of speeches during the election campaign, and I should like to refer to the one he made over the radio on February 21, I believe from Ottawa. He referred to the landing of the first, second and third contingents, the first having landed on December 17 under the command of General McNaughton. May I pause here to pay a tribute to the government for having appointed him to lead the first division. I have great confidence in General McNaughton, and so have the Canadian public. As evidence of my wanting to be fair, let me say that they could not have made a better appointment. The Canadian people applauded the appointment of General McNaughton. This is what the Prime Minister said in the course of that broadcast:
All three contingents made the crossing safely and exactly according to a schedule worked out months in advance. All left Canada fully clothed and fully equipped.
With respect to clothing that statement is probably true. I think by and large they probably all had enough on their bodies to cover them from the cold, but I wonder how many cases of pneumonia there were at Aider-shot, England, after the first contingent got there, as a result of the fact that the men did not have sufficient warm clothing?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Has my hon. friend any
information?


Richard Burpee Hanson: No. I
have not. How could I? What is the good of asking me that or trying to cross-examine me? I am asking the people who ought to know. I am asking for information. The Canadian public want information. If my hon. friend has that information, let him give it. My information is that a very large number had pneumonia at Aldershot because of a lack of sufficient warm clothing.


Norman McLeod Rogers: That matter was dealt with, I think quite adequately, during the course of the campaign. Official statements were made on the authority of the director general of medical services that there was only the average incidence of colds or pneumonia.


Richard Burpee Hanson: If my hon. friend wants to make a speech he should do so at a later time.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I intend to do so.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I know that a boy from my constituency in New Brunswick who is at Aldershot got pneumonia because the issue of underclothing made to him last winter was cotton and not woollen. More than that, in the first months there certainly was a shortage of socks among the
32	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Hanson ( York-Sunbury)
boys. I know of people in my city who bought socks for the soldiers. I am not going to condemn the government because there was not a sufficient supply of this, that or the other thing in the first days of enlistment. We all know that uniforms were not ready, but the government got the uniforms ready as quickly as they could. I am not going to make any great point about that.


Norman McLeod Rogers: But my hon. friend is making a point.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am saying that the statement that they were fully equipped is not fully true, but was probably approximately correct. The Prime Minister went on to say that they were fully equipped. I know that during the election a controversy arose over this question of military equipment and for a time allegations and recriminations passed on the public platform between the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Rogers) and the then leader of the opposition in connection -with the question of deficient equipment. I am going to call as a witness in my behalf the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ralston). He is an old soldier. He is a man who has a sense of responsibility in connection with the position he now occupies. He made a speech on behalf of the Minister of National Defence in the city of Kingston, on March 8. On this very question of equipment, weeks after the Prime Minister had made, on February 21, the declaration to which I have alluded, that all had left Canada fully equipped, what did the Minister of Finance say at Kingston? I am not going to quote his very words; they are a matter of record; but this is how I epitomize what he said, endeavouring to do so honestly and faithfully. He said: " The division went overseas without motor equipment." Surely in this age motor equipment is necessary, and without that equipment no one can truthfully say that they were fully equipped.


Mr. RALSTON:: Does my hon. friend think it is quite fair for him to paraphrase the statement-to call a witness and put his own words into the mouth of the witness? Would he mind reading the statement?


Richard Burpee Hanson: The Minister of Finance is an old lawyer-well, I will say an experienced counsel; for that sounds more dignified. I think I can produce the words of the minister at Kingston. At all events, this is my understanding of what he said, and he can deny it if he likes.
He said, first, " The division went overseas without motor transport. It is hoped to have carriers ready and sent to England in time to go with the division to France."

Two: Bren gun carriers. Where have we heard about that before? " The Bren gun carriers will be supplied to the division by the British government, Canada making replacements later on." And he did not tell us when that would be.


Mr. BROOKS:: After the war is over.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Three:
"Chassis for field ambulances were sent over with the troops, and the United Kingdom is putting on bodies to make them uniform in design with the British ambulances." Four: "In the matter of artillery, the division was supplied with 18-pounder guns." Nobody in the -world is using 18-pounder guns to-day. None of the units in England is using them.


Norman McLeod Rogers: There are 18-pounder guns at the front in France to-day, and ammunition for 18-pounder guns is being made in the United Kingdom and Canada to-day.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Well, all
right; I am not a military man; but my information is that they should be equipped with 25-pounder guns; and the Minister of Finance said this: "In the matter of artillery, the division was supplied with 18-pounder guns, but these will be replaced later by the more modern 25-pounder guns."


Norman McLeod Rogers: Quite so. That does not
exclude the other statement.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I think I
am right in what I was about to say. The Minister of National Defence is just a little bit too quick, I suggest, in rising in his place and protesting.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Mr. Speaker, I am just going to say this: I am interested in maintaining accuracy and in preventing misinformation.


Richard Burpee Hanson: My understanding is that 18-pounder guns are obsolete. I may be wrong, but I should like to have a better witness on that point than the Minister of National Defence himself. At the moment I am summoning to my aid his colleague the Minister of Finance.
Five: "The division took with it Lewis machine guns, fifty to a battalion, but these are to be replaced later on by the more modern Bren guns." Obsolete equipment again 1


James Layton Ralston: Oh no, no. Lewis guns are not obsolete.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Well,
pretty nearly so. I believe they are being discarded as fast as they can be replaced by Bren guns.

The Address-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)


James Layton Ralston: I thought the hon. gentleman was not a military man.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Six: "Antitank rifles and anti-tank guns were not available for the division. They are being supplied in Britain." Seven: "Wireless equipment was not available. Some will be supplied here, some in England."
What about rifles? I understand that this division was equipped with reconditioned rifles, and that they will be discarded just as soon as new rifles can be produced.
What about gas masks? A disturbing suggestion has been made to me. I put it in the form of an inquiry. I understand that immediately before or after the beginning of the war the department arranged for the manufacture of 250,000 gas masks based on the theory that Germany would be using the same kind of gas in this war as she used in the last, but that information has come that this type of gas mask will not be useful for the purpose for which it is intended, and the whole supply has had to be scrapped except such as can be used for demonstration purposes. I do not vouch for the truth of this statement, but I ask the government to give attention to it; I have the right to put it before them.


Norman McLeod Rogers: If my hon. friend will
permit me, does he want that statement to go out in its present form?


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am asking a question. I have the right to do so, and the minister has no right to interrupt me.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I will answer the question, if my hon. friend will permit me. Is it a question?


Richard Burpee Hanson: Yes, it is.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Well, I will answer it. The statement is incorrect.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am asking the minister to give consideration to this matter. He will find that there is a great deal more to it than he is willing to admit at this moment.


Norman McLeod Rogers: The statement is incorrect.


Richard Burpee Hanson: All right. What about recruiting for these suggested divisions or other units, or for any? Surely the administration is not proud of its record on recruiting. Apparently there has been no plan. If there is, it has not been divulged to the public. I say to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of National Defence that there are thousands of young men in Canada who want to enlist, and the major part of the 95820-3
time there is no recruiting station for them to go to, no opportunity to enlist. In New Brunswick opportunities of enlistment have been extremely limited. I should like to page the young lady writer in the Toronto Globe who made a personal investigation and found that, last week, in the great city of Toronto, there were available places for fifty-three men. Apparently the government does not want young men to enlist for the front. I do not believe the Canadian people are satisfied with that attitude. If hon. gentlemen opposite doubt what I have said, let them read the leading articles in the great public newspapers of this country. The writers are, surely, pretty well informed; they do not rush into print with statements for which there is no foundation.
I say this, on my responsibility as a member of this house, that the people of Canada are alarmed at the lack of plan, the lack of preparation, the lack of action on the part of the administration. It seems to have taken serious reverses to the allied arms in an important theatre of war to shock the Canadian people into a realization that Canada is at war at all, and it has taken the same series of reverses to shock this government into action. Because the Canadian people are shocked they are now demanding that the inertness-shall I say complacency?-of this administration with respect .to Canada's war effort shall be immediately ended. Britain and her gallant allies are fighting for their very existence, for our existence, for the liberty and the Christian civilization of us all, and Canada is not at their side. Is not that a sad thing, that at this time in our national history Canada is not there?
Let us end all this. Let us put into action the forces of the whole nation in men, in treasure, and all our resources. Let us pull our full weight in this great enterprise. I tell the Prime Minister and the government that no halfway measure will satisfy either our self-respect or the great mass of public opinion in this country which is calling for action.
I call upon the Prime Minister, when he replies this afternoon, to tell the nation what the government has done and what it proposes to do, and if that is not enough the people of the country will rise up in righteous indignation and demand a complete change. This happened in England and it can happen in Canada. The Canadian people will demand, over and above everything else, intelligent and informed leadership, intelligent and immediate action. If the Prime Minister will not give this, then somebody else will.

34	COMMONS
The Address

Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
In the speech from the throne the Prime Minister has put certain words into the mouth of His Excellency the Administrator. I quote:
You have been summoned to the first session of a new parliament at a time of the greatest conflict in the history of mankind. Upon the outcome of the struggle will depend the maintenance of civilized society and the inheritance of human freedom for our own and future generations. *
Those words are true, but later on these words appear:
The organization and prosecution of Canada s war effort have commanded the unremitting attention of my ministers.
I have no doubt they have been busy letting contracts.
The constant consultation and complete eo-oneration maintained with the governments of the United Kingdom and France have been materially strengthened by the recent visit to those countries of my Minister of National Defence.
Then it goes on to make this statement:
While the present session of parliament will necessarily be mainly concerned with Canada s war effort, and the measures essential to the achievement of ultimate victory, my ministers are of oninion that, despite what to-day is being witnessed of concentrated warfare, it is desirable, as far as may be possible, to plan for the days that will follow the cessation of hostilities.
These paragraphs read together presuppose that the government has been doing the utmost in its power to further the effort of the mother country and her gallant allies. If so, all I can say is that my right bon. friend and his government have most skilfully concealed from the Canadian people the sum total of their effort, because the country to-day-and no one is more sensitive to public opinion than the Prime Minister and his colleagues-is giving every evidence of its belief that this state of affairs does not exist.
I wish to put upon Hansard certain specific questions which I hope the Prime Minister or some of his colleagues will answer:
1.	Is the empire training plan being rushed with all speed?
2.	When shall we be sending trained men overseas under this plan-a year hence? If so, it will be too late.
3.	How far have we advanced with the second division? I understand that the Prime Minister to-day, according to the public press, is going to announce a third division. Well, we have not got the second division ready yet. How far have we advanced with the second division?
4.	What provision have we made to reinforce the first division? What is being done about recruiting and enlistment? Why is so

little being done about enlistment? Is manpower no longer required? On the economic front, have we mobilized to the utmost our plant and industrial power?
These are some of the thoughts that are crowding through my mind, and I believe they are in the minds of the Canadian people. Our industrialists in Canada are patriotic and are anxious to do their part, but they cannot get a chance. At the Chateau Laurier the lobbies are lined with men from the United States trying to get orders, and I have seen a good Canadian there, a man at the head of one of the biggest plants in Canada, who told me he had found it absolutely impossible to get an order for war equipment. I will not mention either his name or the name of his company. If I did so, the name would be recognized as that of one of the biggest industrialists in Canada, and he would have little chance of getting anything, and he fears this too if his name were mentioned.


Clarence Decatur Howe: For what reason?


Richard Burpee Hanson: For the same reason that he is not getting any now.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps my hon. friend, having gone so far, will mention the name of the firm?
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury)': No, I shall not; I have not his permission. In fact, I have the reverse. I have had a long conversation with him and I know what I am talking about.


Mr. GLADSTONE:: What would he like to manufacture?


Richard Burpee Hanson: Aeroplanes. I will not say more. He is manufacturing aeroplanes for the British government. I am not going to weary the house, but I might ask this question: What about personnel? What about those among the personnel of the last war, members of the Canadian expeditionary force, who wish to serve? I know many of them. Many of them came to see me before I left for Ottawa and asked me to find out how they can get into the army again. They were men who were officers in the last war and who are capable of commanding units. How can they get into the army again? I made it my business to inquire at one of the departments. I do not know whether I was violating any rule laid down in this house since I was last a member, but I had the temerity to go to one of the higher officials in the department, and he told me that officers are being recruited and selected from the non-permanent militia. They are splendid men, I have no doubt, men who are keen to serve and of course I do know that some men are being selected from the old Canadian expeditionary

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
force. But why not more, say twenty-five per cent? Do experience and mature judgment mean nothing?
These are some of the things I am thinking about. There may be a good answer. I do not think any government which has in its ranks the Minister of Finance and the Minister of National Defence would have any prejudice against members of the Canadian expeditionary force; in fact, one would suppose the opposite to be the truth. I wish to do them justice. But why are not more of these men being taken on? They are asking this question, and we too must have the courage to ask it. The empire training scheme must be brought to the maximum of speed. We must have an intensified scheme of recruiting for reinforcement of our overseas division, and we must mobilize our industrial equipment.
Mr. Speaker, I apologize to this house for having detained it so long. During the past few days and over the weekend our hearts have been heavy with anxiety. We know that the first big push, the first big battle, is on. It is not ended yet. The forces of barbarism are stronger than we had any conception of. But I am glad to think the battle is not yet lost. At this moment there is no indication that the momentum of the enemy push is slowing up, not to speak of being stopped. But I have supreme confidence in the ability of the British and allied arms to withstand the shock. Stability will be established. But do not imagine that this is the end. Rather it is but the beginning of new and more severe aggressive action on the part of the enemy. The next drive may be the invasion of England herself, the first in ten centuries; and when that happens, then, my friends, this war will be that much nearer to us, and the event will carry with it to us an increasing anxiety and a correspondingly increasing obligation. Shall we rise to the occasion with our supreme effort? We must. We shall not falter. I was heartened yesterday in listening to the speech of Mr. Churchill. He is a man of stout heart. As I listened to him I recalled that England has been in many wars. She has won and lost many battles, but I am proud to think that England has always won the last battle. It is our hope and trust that she will do so in this war also.
This party which I have the honour to represent for the time being is prepared to help to the utmost. I cannot make that statement too strong. But we want to know and to be shown what is going on. The government must demonstrate to the people of Canada that the trust reposed in the government has not been betrayed, that the mandate given will be carried out to the utmost.
I am not thinking in terms of party; I am thinking in terms of Canadianism.
95826-3 i


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, my hon.
friend the leader of the opposition (Mr. Hanson) in concluding his remarks referred to the extremely grave situation which all free countries are facing, we in Canada in common with those great and brave countries, Britain and France and other nations formerly neutral, that have suffered so severely in the course of recent months. On Friday last my hon. friend asked me a question, to which I replied. The question related to 'the situation as it was at the time. When I had replied, indicating how very critical it was, my hon. friend said that he wished to assure me at once that he and his party desired to give all the cooperation they possibly could to the government, to support them in any action which they might be ready to take, and to assist in every way in the face of a common peril. My hon. friend concluded his remarks this afternoon in much the same strain. I had rather expected, I should perhaps say I had rather hoped, that in rising to reply to him to-day on the first day of the debate on the address, my remarks might be wholly congratulatory on his attitude and in the nature of renewed thanks on the part of the government to him and those associated with him for the cooperation which they had offered and which we believed they were prepared to give in full measure. I do wish to thank my hon. friend for what he has said in regard to the cooperation that is intended. I wish also to congratulate him on some of the remarks he made this afternoon. I am pleased indeed to find that in the discharge of the new duties that have fallen upon him he is full of the old vigour which he displayed in previous years and is now in a position where he may be able to contribute more and more to the public life of this country, as he has just said was his motive in wishing to be returned to parliament. I am sure all hon. members hope he may have that opportunity for many years to come. But I had expected that the offer of cooperation which my hon. friend gave would not be followed quite so quickly by a return to the political battles that were fought prior to and during the last general election. I did hope, in the light of the solemnity of this hour, that when he rose to speak he would say that all had better forget the battles that had taken place-


Mr. HARRIS (Danforth):: He said that.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: -accept the verdict the Canadian people pronounced so emphatically at the last general election, and from now on act, as far as it might be possible so to do, as of one mind in this House of Commons, giving to each other all the assistance we possibly can.

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
May I say I had fully expected my hon. friend would make a very brief speech this afternoon, that he would come immediately to the point, which is the one of chief concern in the mind of the Canadian people, and to which he referred as such, namely that the country is anxious to know, respecting Canada's war effort, what the government has done, what it is doing and what it proposes to do. That I think is the one question which the people of Canada are asking, and to which they are entitled to have an early and complete reply. They know in large part but they do not know all. Of necessity we have been obliged bo wait until parliament met to make a comprehensive statement. Here alone questions respecting matters of national importance can be answered with authority as they arise. However, I am not going to take exception, beyond what I have just said, to the attitude of my hon. friend. I will only say that if the situation was grave on Friday last, it is if anything graver to-day. I hope, in the light of that knowledge, hon. members may not find it necessary to go back and forth over and over ground that was traversed time and again in the recent campaign, but will devote themselves primarily to a consideration of what at this moment, and from this time on, may be of greatest service in meeting the present situation.
I had thought that I would be able to give to the house before six o'clock this evening a statement with respect to what the government has done, what it is doing and what it proposes to do, that would immediately give to the people of our country that sense of security with respect to the government's actions and intentions which all of them wish to have and are entitled to have. Owing to the length of the speech which my hon. friend has made, it is not now possible for me to make that statement before six o'clock. I suppose my hon. friend will expect, and the house may expect, that I should first of all deal with some of the matters he has brought up in the course of his discussion, and that I should also comment on the different paragraphs in the speech from the throne to which he has referred. If I take up a short time prior to six o'clock in reviewing the ground he has run over, instead of immediately bringing forward the statement I have here prepared, it will be in order that I may not be open to the charge of having omitted reference to anything that has been said, but, instead, to endeavour to cover, however briefly, points which my hon. friend has raised.
First of all may I say to him with respect to his opening remarks as to the anxiety that exists in the minds of himself and others con-

cerning the situation overseas, that this anxiety is not confined to any man, to any party, to any group; it is an anxiety which not only extends over this entire country, but is deeply felt in all parts of the world, particularly in those parts which hitherto have regarded themselves as free. I hope no hon. member on either side of the house will assume that any other member, no matter in what quarter of the house he may be seated, is any less ianxious, any less sincere, any less loyal with respect to the part which this country should take in the present crisis than he himself may be.	.
My hon. friend has spoken of this war as a righteous war, a war in which there can be no question as to the justice of our cause. With that I think we are all in agreement. He has referred in appreciative terms to the speeches delivered on Friday last by the mover and the seconder of the address. I should like to thank him for what he has said of and to these newly elected, young members. The hon. gentleman referred to the speech of the seconder of the address as being a courageous and brave speech. It was courageous and brave, but I think my hon. friend rather spoiled the effect of his remark when he said that the courageous part of the speech which he quoted was received with applause only by members of his group and not by other parties in this house. May I say to him and to the seconder that with every word used by the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair), we on this side are in complete agreement.
At the beginning of this new parliament, Mr. Speaker, I should like to say how much we welcome to the membership of this house so many young men, most of them returned for the first time. As the leader of the opposition has said, they are the ones who will have to deal with the problems of the future, and the future they face would appear to be more difficult than any period heretofore faced by the members of any previous parliament of this country. It is fortunate for them and for Canada that in their earlier years, before becoming members of this house, so many of them gave earnest study and thoughtful consideration to the problems of our country. I doubt if we could have had a better example of the good effect of the many clubs which have been formed in Canada for the purpose of directing the time and attention of their members to a study of political problems than that which was evidenced by the speeches made by the mover and the seconder of the address. The hon. members who moved and seconded the address have given careful study to political problems for many years. They have accustomed themselves to public speaking, and have come

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
into parliament not unacquainted with public affairs but already trained in thought and with judgment matured with respect to many of the great questions of the day.
I should like to express to the mover of the address, the hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. Lapointe), my very warm congratulations upon the exceptionally admirable speech which he delivered. Like the leader of the opposition, I was impressed by the degree of confidence with which he spoke-and this is equally true of the seconder of the address- and the ability of each to hold the unbroken attention of the house. Few if any maiden speeches have been more suited to better the occasion than the speeches to which we listened on Friday last. I can hardly say whether my pleasure as I listened to the hon. member for Lotbiniere was greater at his very obvious achievement, than was my pleasure in having the honour of sitting at the side of his distinguished father and sharing the pride he must have felt as he listened to one of his own family address this House of Commons of which he has been a member for so many years. As the leader of the opposition has said, there has been but one previous occasion on which father and son have sat in the same parliament as members of this house. My hon. friend referred to the gentleman who, as head of the Conservative party, held a very distinguished place. I should like to mention the great distinction which belongs to the right hon. the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe, Quebec East) who to-day in point of membership is the oldest member of this house, and who in the affairs of Canada has played a part second to none in furthering the unity of our country. It must be a source of deep pride to him, as it is to all of us, that he has been privileged to hear his son speak words which must have brought to him the assurance that all he has so faithfully struggled and fought for in the course of his parliamentary and public life in the interests of the Canadian people is, God willing, certain to be carried on through years to come by the one who bears his name and who, I believe, will share his fame.
May I also congratulate most warmly the seconder of the address. His words were evidence of the careful training he has had, in part, at Princeton university and, in part, at Oxford university. May I say to him that he has given to parliament at this time of grave crisis in the world's affairs an assurance of the service which from this time on may be expected from him in the public life of our country.
The leader of the opposition took exception to the reference in the speech from the throne
to the advisability of making an immediate study of post-war problems. I have been in parliament for some little time, and I think I know something of the way in which criticism is apt to shape itself. I am afraid that if there had been no reference of the kind in the throne speech, the first word we would have heard from my hon. friend would have been that it had altogether omitted one of the most important matters to be considered at this time, namely preparing as soon as possible to meet not only those great problems which will arise when the war is over but also those problems which are arising already in consequence of the war. I hope hon. members will feel that one of their supreme duties is to make a study of those very questions as speedily and as thoroughly as possible. Surely no one imagines that Canada's war effort will suffer in the least because a study of other questions is also undertaken. In this particular .the government is doing what it has sought to do all along, to look forward continually to the situations that are likely to arise in the future.
My hon. friend mentioned the visit to Canada of Their Majesties the King and Queen. He drew attention to the fact that the present speech from the throne does not contain any special reference to that visit. If my hon. friend had been in the house at the time he would have found in the speech from the throne at the opening of the session of 1939, in terms which I am sure he would be the first to appreciate, a reference to the intended visit of their majesties. These were the words:
The announcement that Their Majesty's King George VI and Queen Elizabeth have graciously decided to visit Canada in the months of May and June has been received with rejoicing throughout the dominion. The honour of welcoming their king and queen, in person, on their own soil, is a privilege which will be shared with enthusiasm and pride by all His Majesty's Canadian subjects. The visit will be the first paid by the reigning sovereign to any of his self-governing dominions. It will be the first time a British king and queen have been in North America. It is deeply gratifying that their majesties' tour will embrace all the provinces of Canada.
Then follows a reference to the intended visit of their majesties to the United States. In the speech from the throne made at the conclusion of that session there was again a reference to the visit of their majesties, which placed on record one of the most memorable features of the entire visit, namely the meeting of His Majesty the King with the members of the two houses of parliament. It was in the following words:
In bringing to a close a session in which, for the first time, the king has been present in person in the parliament of Canada, I desire

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
to express the gratification of my government at the universal and heartfelt rejoicing of a united people who are being honoured by the visit of their sovereign. ... It was a source of satisfaction to my government that his majesty was able to give the royal assent in person to the bill respecting the Canada-United States trade agreement.
In addition to these references to their majesties visit which appears in previous speeches from the throne there will be found repeated references in Hansard by myself and others to that memorable occasion. It is a pleasing coincidence that it was just a year ago this very weekend Their Majesties the King and Queen were in this capital city. If I recollect correctly, it was just a year ago to-night the members of both houses of parliament had the great honour of having the king and queen as their guests at a parliamentary dinner. I agree with my hon. friend when he says that the visit of the king and queen to Canada was one of the happiest events in the whole of our history, happy in the rejoicing it occasioned in all parts of the dominion and, above all, happy in that it served to reveal the affectionate regard in which their majesties are held by their Canadian subjects and the loyalty of the Canadian people to the crown. Further, it helped to reveal the unity of the Canadian people under the crown.
My hon. friend has been good enough to speak in kindly terms of such part as I may have had in extending on behalf of the Canadian people an invitation to their majesties to visit Canada. In doing that, I was but taking advantage of one of the high privileges which belongs to the responsible position I now hold and which I had been privileged to hold in some previous years. I believe it was in 1923 or 1926, when I was attending an imperial conference, that, through His Majesty King George V, I extended an invitation to have the Duke and Duchess of York visit Canada at an early opportunity. I now recall that that invitation was extended shortly after the occasion of their marriage. On a later occasion while in England on other business I repeated the invitation, and at the time of the coronation, when the responsibility was that of their majesties themselves, I pointed out how delighted the Canadian people would be should their majesties find it possible to visit our dominion. At that time I received from the king the assurance that the first opportunity their majesties might have to leave England on an extended tour would in all probability be given over to a visit to our country. When Lord Tweedsmuir subsequently went to England for a brief stay, His Excellency carried with him from the government a renewal of the invitation, the

acceptance of which was definitely given for the following year. As I have stated previously, no words of mine could begin to express all that the royal visit meant at the time or what it continues to mean at this time, when it is the desire of members of the British commonwealth of nations to show their united strength under the British crown.
My hon. friend has referred to the loss our country sustained in the passing of Lord Tweedsmuir. At different times I have publicly expressed the sense of that loss, as I believe it was felt by all our people. I would add only this, that I believe no sovereign ever entrusted a great mission to a more faithful servant and that no prime minister ever had a more helpful counsellor or a truer friend than I had in the years it was my privilege to share with His Excellency in the affairs of the public life of our country.
May I add that with the leader of the opposition I am pleased to join in expressing the great pleasure it has given the people of Canada to know that Lord Athlone and the Princess Alice will shortly be in our midst. Their close relationship to the royal family will still further serve to keep fresh in our minds many memories which will always be cherished of the visit of the king and queen. With a knowledge of the part played by Lord Athlone in the years during which he was Governor General of South Africa I think we may regard ourselves as very fortunate that one who has so intimate a knowledge of constitutional matters and has had such a wide experience in public administration is to be the successor of our late Governor General.
My hon. friend has spoken about the general election. I had intended at this time to omit altogether any reference to that subject. Anything I now have to say in that connection will be exceedingly brief, because I have no desire to revive past political controversies. What I would like to say however is that, irrespective of party, we have reason to feel a definite pride in the strength of our democratic institutions when we reflect that in a time of war it was possible for Canada to carry through a general election, and in so doing to preserve inviolate the right of the people, within stated periods of time, to select anew their representatives in the parliament of the country. By many during the campaign, and to some degree this afternoon by the leader of the opposition, I have been censured for having brought about the dissolution of parliament at the time it was done. I ask hon. members this question:	In the light of
what has since occurred, is there a single hon. member who does not feel that it is a very fortunate thing that at this time of conc.en-

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
trated warfare we have a new parliament, assembled here with an emphatic mandate from the country to carry on Canada's war effort to the utmost of our might and power? Can any one imagine in what condition this country would be if we had continued with the old parliament, a parliament which at the. very opening of its last session, despite the existence of war, began its duties in a spirit of party controversy? What would have been the condition to-day if partisan discussion had been continued in parliament for months, and the election been longer delayed? Imagine the confusion we would have if a general election were taking place at this time!
When I asked for dissolution I said it was the duty of a prime minister -to take all circumstances into consideration and to have regard fo-r what was likely to happen, as well as for all that had happened. I shall not repeat the immediate reasons which brought on the election, but I would remind hon. members that I said I thought it was advisable that the election should be over before concentrated warfare began in Europe. I said it would be advisable to have the election over before the great offensive which I believed would pretty certainly come in the Spring. I pointed out that our soldiers overseas should have the opportunity of casting their ballots if possible before going to the front, and that those in Canada should be permitted to vote before going overseas.
A prime minister at all -times must shoulder heavy responsibility and that responsibility is particularly heavy in a time of war. He has a very special responsibility with respect to a dissolution of parliament. He has to advise as to what is most in the interests of the nation. If he fails so to do, he must bear the consequences of that failure. If I had the whole matter to do over again, in -the light of what has since happened, I would, if anything do it more readily than I did the last time. I know my hon. friends opposite were disappointed. My hon. friend said that when he heard the radio announcement he felt he would like to have assassinated me. I have no doubt he felt that way, and I think there were a large number in his party who felt the same way. But I was not thinking of him or of the Conservative party at the time when I advised dissolution. I was thinking of what was most in the interests of Canada at a time of war, and what the people of this country would expect. All circumstances considered, I think I have been pretty well justified in that action by the verdict which the people of Canada have given with respect to it.
My hon. friend has spoken about unemployment insurance and has said that he thinks
the time difficult for us to carry through such a measure at the present session. He said that we ought to know, or at least he would like to inquire as to what would be the probable response of the provinces with respect to this proposal. He mentioned that for many years we have been seeking to get through an unemployment insurance measure, but may I remind my hon. friend that the present administration or rather a Liberal administration many years ago introduced an unemployment insurance act. It was a Liberal administration that put that act upon the statutes and it has been there ever since. It was a Liberal administration that increased the scope of the act as originally passed.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That was the Old Age Pensions Act.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The Old Age Pensions Act.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury). That is a horse of another colour.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: We placed the Old Age Pensions Act upon the statutes. I beg my hon. friend's pardon. What I had in mind was social legislation generally. The Old Age Pensions Act was the first step in meeting the situation which arises from unemployment. Elderly people are the first to suffer lack of employment. What we as a party have been seeking ever since is authority to enact a federal measure which would make unemployment insurance applicable to the whole dominion. It has been felt, and rightly I think, that until we had reason to believe that the provinces generally were prepared to give that authority to this federal parliament, the government would not be right in proceeding with such a measure.
I	am sure the members of the house will be pleased to know that the government has received the assurance of practically all the provinces that they will be prepared to support the administration in seeking an amendment to the British North America Act which will enable us forthwith to introduce an unemployment insurance act in this house. I am perhaps expressing the matter in too technical terms when I say that they approve an -amendment to the British North America Act. What the provinces generally have approved is the enactment of the federal government of a national unemployment insurance scheme. This assurance has come from the provinces of Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia. I have a letter received this week from the Premier of Alberta, the only province whose name I have not mentioned. It expresses the view that the

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
government of Alberta would like to have the report of the dominion-provincial relations commission or a copy of the bill itself before expressing a finial opinion. However, there is not in Premier Aberhart's letter any statement which would lead one to believe that if such a measure were introduced in this house, exception would be taken to it by the members from that particular province.
May I say that the government feels that with the backing of all the provinces I have mentioned-the letters will be tabled later on-we are justified in taking this step at this time. We feel moreover that it is desirable to take the earliest possible opportunity to introduce -the measure now that assurance has been given so generally by the provinces. A -time of war, when there is much in the way of employment in heavy industry, offers perhaps the best of all opportunities to begin a measure of this kind. Contributions will come in more readily at such a time. Then, if unemployment comes, as it may once the war is over, there will be upon the statutes a law under which men will be able to obtain their allowances.
My hon. friend has spoken of the defence of Canada regulations and has said that he hoped this would not be a case of merely sending the matter to a committee. He hoped that something more would be done in reference to the question than just putting it to one side. I think he said that the government ought to have a policy in connection with a matter of that kind. The policy, I may say, is already there, it is laid down in the regulations. This afternoon the Minister of Justice explained what the policy was. I may add that during the course of the campaign the government was asked repeatedly to refer the defence of Canada regulations to a committee of parliament. An undertaking to that effect was given. I have answered many communications which have been received complaining of the regulations in some particulars with the assurance that if the present administration were in office when parliament met w'e would see that the defence of Canada regulations were referred to a committee of the house so that hon. members might have a chance of expressing their views and opinions with respect thereto and of making to the house such recommendations as they might deem advisable.
I see I have -come to the part of the address of my hon. friend where he began to speak more particularly of the war effort of the government. Also I notice it is just six o'clock. If I have passed over other points which the leader of the opposition raised, I hope he will forgive me for so doing. This evening after

recess I khall begin immediately to answer what I believe to be the questions which are of most concern not only to my hon. friend but -to other hon. members of this house, and to the people of Canada, namely, what the government's war effort has been, what it is at the present time, and what we intend it to -be.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: As I intimated this afternoon before adjournment, I intend to speak as briefly as possible on any matter other than that of Canada's effort in the present war. This is no time in which to review at length the state of the world. Swiftly moving events of the gravest importance to the future not only of this country but of the whole human family speak for themselves with compelling eloquence. No speech of mine could add aught to what already is all -too well known. It is no time either for self-justification, or vilification, or for ancient controversies. I realize to the full, as -other hon. members also realize, that the temper of the government, the house and the people and the crisis of the hour demand action and not argument, deeds and not words.
The character of the enemies of the human race against whom we and our allies are arrayed has been unmasked in all its barbarity and violence.
Within a period of eight -months the tyrants of Germany have become the masters of Poland, Denmark, a great part of Norway, Holland, and the chief cities of Belgium. By weight of men and equipment they have brought devastation ito the weak and the unoffending. Within the last few days their armed forces have made a deep incursion on the soil of France, and the German Reich is now preparing new attacks upon Britain from the lands which nazi brutality has violated. Words of passion and indignation will effect nothing. Knowing what the enemy has been and is doing, we must consider what we are doing and what we can do to meet him.
My purpose, therefore, to-night is to review as concisely as possible what Canada has done and is doing, and to indicate what further action the government has taken or proposes to take to meet the danger which threatens our allies and ourselves.
Some of the measures which have been taken and will1 be taken cannot, for reasons

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
which will be obvious, be divulged at all at this Jiime. Some must necessarily remain but partially indicated. Within the limits imposed by military necessity there will be no secrecy.
The greatest crisis in the history of the British commonwealth is not the occasion for partisan congratulations or for partisan criticism. We are concerned not with the past but with the present and the uncertain clouded future. The task which is ours is a task for all Canada, not for any section or group of Canadians. It needs and will need the utmost vigour and whole-hearted assistance on the part of each and every one of us.
It has not been a simple matter for this country to move from an economy of peace to an economy of war, just as it has not been easy for the democracies of Europe who once hoped for peace, to make preparations against an autocracy that has consistently hoped for war and planned it.
The record of the war effort of this country and an outline of the plans which we have initiated and proposed to initiate will be unfolded. Vainglorious justification is as foreign to the spirit of this solemn hour, as is carping and hysterical criticism. All I ask is that, as this house surveys the government's record and the government's plans, the record and the plans be placed in their proper perspective and examined and assessed as a whole.
The world has greatly changed since 1914. Canada has changed with it. Our national status has changed. Our political responsibility has changed. Our financial position has changed. Our industrial capacity has changed. The problems of local defence and overseas activity have been revolutionized by the new range, effectiveness and destructive power of aircraft, submarines, mechanized weapons and military equipment. The machine of war more than ever dominates the man at war. Military power can no longer be resolved in terms of the number of men enlisted.
The final result of all these factors of change, the rise of air power and the elimination of distance, cannot yet, of course, be accurately determined. They have remarkably increased the necessary emphasis upon home defence. They have made clearer than ever the tremendous importance of our eastern Atlantic ports for the convoying of military and other supplies to Britain and France.
They have been responsible for the great significance it has been necessary to attach to air development-not only in connection with our own Royal Canadian Air Force, but also in regard to the commonwealth air training plan, in which we have such a vital part and place.
When you examine the expenditures made, and learn the appropriations proposed, in connection with the Royal Canadian Navy and the air force, you will be more than ever impressed by the differences between the waging of war in 1914 and the waging of war in 1940.
The world, perhaps, and Canada with it, has been slow to appreciate the extent and th" meaning of these changes.
When we consider, also, the difference in the alignment of forces in this war, the possibilities of the spread of conflict in all directions of the compass, and our national duties for defence and cooperation with our allies not only on our eastern shores but in the Pacific as well, you will have some idea of the manner in which Canadian defence problems have been enlarged and intensified.
I shall proceed now, Mr. Speaker, to a brief review of what has been done and planned to date. I shall give the bare, plain facts in brief outline. Full details will be supplied by my colleagues as the session continues.
A country's war effort, while by no means wholly dependent upon its financial capacity, is nevertheless definitely limited by and subject to financial considerations of which too full and careful an account cannot be taken. Appropriations for and expenditures on war account are at least one index of its nature and extent. I shall begin, this review, therefore, with a brief financial statement and a mention of some of the financial considerations of which the government has been obliged to take account.
First of all may I say that our financial situation is radically different from our situation in 1914. Then we were able to borrow money outside of Canada, both in the United Kingdom and in the United States. To-day we are prohibited by the neutrality legislation of the United States from access to their security markets. To-day not only are we unable to borrow in the United Kingdom, but one of the most important paris of our war effort has been, and will continue to be, our ability to repatriate our securities. It has been and will be our duty to provide Britain with a proportion of the dollar exchange she requires in order that she may purchase certain essential agricultural and industrial supplies on this continent.
The actual money which has been paid out of the treasury on war account in the first eight months of the present war has been more than double the amount paid out in the first eight months of the last war. On the 19th of February, the Minister of Finance made public his estimate that, for the fiscal year of



The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
1940-41, we shall require for war expenditure alone, at least $500,000,000. The developments that are taking place and the additional activities and commitments which are proposed, and to which I shall refer in a few moments, have necessitated the revision of this estimate to at least $700,000,000.
In the happening of certain other events and in the making of further commitments, to which no reference can be made at the present time, the figure of $700,000,000 will be subject to a further revision upwards. In other words, our present estimate is that we shall be spending nearly two million dollars a day on Canada's war effort in the present fiscal year. Let it be clearly understood that that represents war expenditure only. For all purposes -war expenditure, plus the ordinary expenditure for the public services of Canada-the estimate will be over one billion dollars in the present fiscal year. I am just told by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ralston) that the figure is not merely over one billion dollars, it is over 1100 million dollars. In other words, for all purposes, we shall be spending from now on an average of more than three million dollars a day. In the fiscal year of 1915-16, the total war expenditure on all accounts was $166,000,000.
The reasons for the increased costs brought upon us by the growing necessity of the situation I have already referred to. In the last war there was no Canadian air force, nor air training plan. In this year we estimate for naval expenditure alone more than $100,000,000. In the corresponding period of the last war, the estimate was S3,000,000. Our estimated naval expenditure in this first year, therefore, is over thirty times what it was in the similar period for the last war. The estimated naval expenditures for the present fiscal year are more than three times the total naval expenditure for the whole of the last war.
The needs of modern war, also, have almost doubled the cost per man of maintaining a division in the field.
In connection with supply, the total contracts let to the 15th day of May, amounted to $275,000,000. Of these amounts, $200,000,000 have been placed on behalf of the government of Canada, and $75,000,000 on behalf of the allied governments. With the exception of amounts totalling about $50,000,000, all contracts have been let in Canada.
Twenty shipyards are engaged in the production of 90 vessels of war. Production is well in advance of the scheduled time. There are under construction 82 aerodromes, 175 construction projects, including coastal fortifications, submarine defences and hangars.

There are on order 9,000 motor vehicles, at a cost of $14,000,000, 3,000 of which have already been delivered overseas.
War munitions are being manufactured at a cost of $80,000,000.
One large explosive plant is under construction. A second is in the course of organization.
Industry is working at full speed to meet the future requirements of clothing, boots and personal equipment. The production of small arms munitions is being expanded as rapidly as equipment can be installed.
The Department of Munitions and Supply, with the assistance of the war-time prices and trade board, has taken every available step to protect sources of outside supply, and ensure against a shortage of raw materials. In addition to this, constant study is given to the possibilities of the increased use of Canadian materials in the production of supplies for ourselves and our allies.
I now propose to give the house particulars of the present position in relation to the Canadian navy, the Canadian active service force and the militia, the Royal Canadian Air Force and the air training plan. I do not need to remind the house that modern warfare demands extensive and intensive training, that modern military and naval equipment cannot be built in the space of a few weeks, however strong may be the manufacturing and industrial resources on which this construction depends.
As at May 10, 1940, the personnel of the Royal Canadian Navy consisted of 952 officers, 5,662 ratings. These numbers include 125 Canadian officers and 100 ratings who are serving in the British navy. That personnel is being increased by recruitment, and will be increased as rapidly as ships come into service. There is a provision in the estimates for the current fiscal year for the increase in our navy personnel to a total of 1,450 officers and 10,000 ratings by March 31, 1941. There will be, of course, a progressive increase from this time to that.
In addition to our 7 destroyers, we have in commission 15 minesweepers, 6 anti-submarine vessels, 15 fishermen's reserve vessels, and 51 other auxiliary vessels. The conversion of 3 high speed merchant ships to light cruisers will be completed shortly. A number of other vessels have been acquired and are now being armed for patrol duty. There are under construction 90 additional vessels, which include 54 patrol vessels and 18 minesweepers.
The Royal Canadian Navy, apart from its patrol duties on our own coasts, is assisting actively in the coastal defence of Newfoundland, and is cooperating with the British and French navies in the Caribbean area. It is

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
also taking an active and important share in the convoy duty so essential if the military supplies and foodstuffs required by the allies are to cross the ocean in security.
I have already referred to the estimate of over $100,000,000 for the Royal Canadian Navy in the current fiscal year.
I now give you the essential facts with reference to the Royal Canadian Air Force. The figures which I shall quote are separate and distinct from the developments and projects of the commonwealth air training plan.
As at May 10 of the year, we had 1,389 officers, 10,926 airmen, or 12,315 of all ranks. Their disposition is divided between army cooperation, home defence, and the Royal Air Force contribution to the Canadian share of the instructional staff of the air training plan. In cooperation with the army, we have one squadron overseas; we have a second squadron completing its training in Canada. Provisions have been made for the continuous training of reinforcements for both squadrons in our army cooperation school. For home defence, we have 9 squadrons in our present establishment, and will have 12 squadrons when our establishment is completed.
In the Canadian active service force, the personnel as at the 10th of May, 1940, was as follows: The first division is overseas, and its strength has been enlarged by the necessary ancillary troops. The number of troops in the first division and its ancillaries is 23,438. At Canadian military headquarters there are 240 officers and men. The total of men overseas is therefore 23,678.
We have in training for overseas service a second division with its ancillary troops amounting to 24,645. We have under mobilization other troops under the following headings:
Depots and training centres	 16,282
Troops engaged in coastal defence
and anti-aircraft work	 9,036
Troops engaged in guarding vulnerable points	 1,665
Other troops in Canada	 6,223
The total personnel in the Canadian active service force as of May 10 is 81,529.
In addition to the active service force the non-permanent active militia has been organized into eleven territorial regiments for the purpose of providing reenforcements for the Canadian active service force units overseas. Apart from troops overseas and troops engaged in home defence our troops are assisting in the defence of strategic areas in Newfoundland, and further assignments of duties are contemplated in the Atlantic area.
In the three services there were as of May 10 more than 100,000 men on active 95829-4J
service. In addition organization has been provided for the reenforcement of the Canadian active service force and for the recruitment as rapidly as ships can be put into commission of the personnel of the Royal Canadian Navy. Recruitment of the Royal Canadian Air Force is intimately associated with the British commonwealth air training plan to which I shall now refer.
The British commonwealth air 'training plan is not an exclusively Canadian undertaking. As the name implies, it is a joint plan in which the four governments, those of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, are all concerned. The plan originated with the British government. The preliminary work on the scheme was done by the United Kingdom air ministry. Canada cannot alter the plan at her own exclusive discretion, nor without regard for the essential faotors of the adequate training of men to meet the demands of modem aerial warfare.
Neither the commonwealth air training plan nor any other air training plan can turn out trained pilots, observers and gunners immediately after its inception. The immediate requirements of the United Kingdom air force were and still are being met by the training establishments in the United Kingdom, which were in full operation at the outbreak of war. The joint training plan was established for the purpose of maintaining the progressive supply of trained pilots and airmen, and increasing it steadily until the allied air force had attained decisive superiority over the enemy in the air. It was felt that the plan had to be orderly and free from confusion. It is worked out so that all stages of training are inter-related, and the training itself is on a progressively increasing scale. It is impossible to make arbitrary changes in the plan without disrupting its efficiency, and without consultation with the other members of the commonwealth partnership on which it is based.
1	can illustrate the magnitude of the plan in no better way than by giving the house a list of the number of establishments required for its full operation. They are:
4 training commands, situated respectively at Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg and Regina.
2	manning depots.
20 Royal Canadian Air Force recruiting centres.
3	initial training schools.
26 elementary flying training schools.
16 service flying training schools.
10 air observers' schools.
10 bombing and gunnery schools.
2 air navigation schools.
4	wireless schools.
4 repair depots.
4 equipment depots.'

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
There are also several other important units, such as a technical training school, an air armament school, a central flying school, and so forth. In other words, there will be a total of 110 separate formations and units in existence when the plan is operating at full capacity.
To illustrate the progress which has already been made, I should like to place on Hansard a list of the units which have so far been established. They are:
Training command headquarters, Toronto.
Air armament school, Trenton.
Central flying school, Trenton.
Air navigation school, Trenton.
Service flying training school, Camp Borden.
Equipment and accounting training school, St. Thomas.
Manning depot, Toronto.
Technical training school, St. Thomas.
Initial training school, Toronto.
Equipment depot, Ottawa, now being moved to Toronto.
Equipment depot, Winnipeg.
Wireless school, Montreal.
Training command headquarters, Montreal.
School of aeronautical engineering, Montreal.
Repair depot, Trenton.
School of administration, Trenton.
Training command headquarters, Winnipeg.
Manning depot, Brandon.
Aircraft inspectors' school. Toronto.
Training command headquarters, Regina.
Twenty recruiting centres throughout the country.
New units are being established almost every week according to the program fixed in the plan itself.
It was estimated at the time the agreement was reached between the four governments that the total cost of the plan for the three years agreed upon would be about six hundred millions, of which the estimated Canadian share is three hundred and fifty millions.
Apart from pupils, about forty thousand officers, airmen and civilians will be employed when it is fully developed. Many thousands of pilots, air observers and air gunners will be trained each year on a progressively increasing scale.
I am aware that a growing feeling of impatience has become manifest in certain sections of the country with reference to what is believed to be the si w progress made by the British commonwealth air training plan and the fact that its contribution is not one of immediate effectiveness at this critical hour. We recognize that these sentiments spring from a very natural desire to carry at this moment a greater share of the load which is being carried by the mother country and our allies across the seas. But we do believe that they are perhaps coloured by lack of understanding of the magnitude of this undertaking, and particularly of the objectives which it is called upon to fulfil. If such a mis-

understanding exists it is probably due to the fact that the public has not gained a full appreciation of the size of this project, the greatest individual effort which this dominion has ever made.
It seems to me important that I should recall to you that the British commonwealth air training plan, as I have mentioned, was based upon a request made to the governments of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, on September 26, by the government of the United Kingdom. In other words, this plan was not that of Australia, New Zealand or Canada, but was one worked out in the United Kingdom, and was proposed by them to be carried out in Canada, to provide an ever-increasing flow of trained pilots, air observers and air gunners to supplement the supply of Royal Air Force personnel available for manning additional aircraft when these were obtained through the expansi n of her aircraft and equipment program and her purchases of these from abroad. It is, I am sure, superfluous for me to say that the alternative, of sending a lesser number of airmen overseas at an earlier date, rather than greatly increased numbers at a later date, was discussed by the governments concerned, but the United Kingdom government felt very definitely that in view of her aircraft manufacturing schedules the present arrangements were those best calculated to serve her purposes.
I might say to hon. members that I have in my hand at the moment a copy of the summary of the memorandum of agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, relating to the training of pilots and aircraft crews in Canada and their subsequent service. One of the terms of the agreement as to costs and expenses is as follows:
The share of the cost of the scheme to be borne by the government of the United Kingdom will take the form of contributions m kind, to be delivered at such times and in such numbers as may be required for the efficient carrying out of the scheme.
I draw attention to that particular clause in the agreement because there seems to be the impression in Canada that under the agreement this country was to supply the aircraft, engines and so on needed for the carrying out of the scheme.


Richard Burpee Hanson: May I ask
if that agreement has been made public?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes, it was
made public the night it was signed, December 17; or rather I have just been informed that a summary was made public.

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King


Richard Burpee Hanson: May I ask if it has been, tabled? We do not seem to have it.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I recall the negotiations very clearly. This being an agreement between the different governments, at the time it was thought inadvisable to have the agreement in full made public. The essential features were set forth in a summary, which was then published. In regard to tabling a copy of the agreement itself, I would need to get the consent of the different governments concerned.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I think that is quite all right, but I should like to see it if possible.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I will see that my hon. friend gets a copy, in any event, but before giving it to the public at large I would wish to get the consent to which I have referred. What I particularly desire to point out is that under the agreement the Canadian government undertook the administration of the scheme; it undertook to make provision for all the buildings and the like. There was also an undertaking as to the actual cost in cash, the proportion to be paid by the different countries, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. By far the greatest proportion of that cost was assumed by Canada. Great Britain's contribution-because this is a scheme which includes all four countries-did not take the form of money; it took the form I have just mentioned, a contribution in kind to be delivered at such times and in such numbers as may be required for the efficient carrying out of the scheme.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I suppose that would mean equipment? '


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It means aircraft; yes.
Following upon the events of recent weeks, only a few days ago we asked the United Kingdom government whether that government would wish to see the schedules of the joint air training plan modified. The United Kingdom has stated in reply that at the present time the efficient prosecution of the war can best be achieved by adhering to the plans laid down for the air training scheme and by accelerating them to the utmost where practicable. After consultation with the British Air Mission it was agreed that the way to accelerate the plan would be the adoption of measures to expedite the purchase and manufacture of equipment, the preparation of aerodromes, hangars and buildings in advance of the schedule requirements. In accordance with this view certain special powers to act on its
own authority have been conferred on the Department of Munitions and Supply for this purpose. I think I am right in saying-and the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) will correct me if I am not-that as far as the construction of buildings and the like under Canada's obligation is concerned, already we are ahead of what the schedule requires. The minister assures me that I am correct.
The house will remember that the technical administration of the plan is committed to the Royal Canadian Air Force, and I cannot stress too strongly the admirable way in which Air Vice-Marshs' Croil and his staff have carried out their heavy responsibilities. The government felt that it would be greatly aided in having the benefit of men with experience in business organization to supervise the administration, under the minister. From early in the war we have had the advantage of the services of Colonel K. S. Maclachlan, a prominent business executive, acting as deputy minister for navy and air; and under Colonel Maclachlan's regime the plan has proceeded at full pace in accordance with the program specified at its inception, which was in accordance with the timing as worked out by the United Kingdom air staff.
It was felt, however, as the plan developed, that in view of the great magnitude of the undertaking and of the many problems which it involved, a special deputy minister for air should be appointed whose chief responsibility would be to further the execution of the British commonwealth air training plan, and that this work should be undertaken by one whose energies and powers of organization were beyond question, who would concentrate his entire activities on the air side of our war effort. I was glad to be able to announce on April 11 that Mr. James S. Duncan, another outstanding business executive, had placed his time at the disposal of the government for a period. Since the day of his appointment Mr. Duncan has been applying himself to this momentous task with tireless energy and a realistic approach to its many problems. I believe that Mr. Duncan would be the first to say that he is receiving and has received the fullest cooperation of the government and of the officials of the departments concerned in the important work which he is doing; and I am glad to be able to announce that, in close cooperation with the Royal Canadian Air Force, the Minister of National Defence and the' government as a whole, certain plans are in hand which, while respecting the United Kingdom's desire to leave intact the British commonwealth air training plan will, within

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
the limitations of the present situation, envisage the speeding up of Canada's air contribution to the allied cause.
In order that Canada's contribution in this branch of our war effort may be made as complete and as expeditious as possible, the government has decided to ask parliament to make provision for the appointment of an additional minister of the crown to be known as Minister of National Defence for Air, who will give his undivided time and attention to air activities and in particular to a close supervision of the commonwealth air training plan.


Mr. HOMUTH:: Why wait until now?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I will answer
that question. The government's final decision in this matter has awaited the return to Canada from the United Kingdom of the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Rogers), who has given the creation of a special ministry for air his full approval. I may say to my hon. friend that while the Minister of National Defence was in England he engaged in interviews with the heads of the various branches of the department of defence, and naturally the government awaited his return before taking a step which would involve any part of the work of his own department.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Is he getting some engines for the machines we already have?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: If my hon.
friend is as interested in Canada's war effort as a whole as I believe the rest of the house is, he will refrain from interrupting until I have completed what I have to say. I might just ask my hon. friend if his interruption was intended to be a helpful one or to be an embarrassment.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: It was intended to be
helpful.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Was it?


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Quite.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Then my hon. friend will be quite prepared, I am sure, to wait until later for an answer from the minister himself.
I do not propose to-day to refer to the organization of agriculture, the war-time prices and trade board and the large number of collateral enterprises and committees which have been insituted by the government in its preparation of the economy of Canada for the war needs of ourselves and our allies. Suffice it to say that the government's record on the economic front is not less impressive than that on the military front, and not less import-

ant. At the moment it is primarily as to the military effort that the country desires to be informed.
The dynamic forces which have changed the war situation in Europe within recent days; the unprecedented threat to the allied powers and ourselves, must be met at once by immediate action. Production must be accelerated to its limit. Training must be intensified. But however imperative the need, once we have determined-as we have-to meet actual and threatened events to the utmost of our strength and capacity, we must see to it that what is done shall be efficient, persistent and designed to guarantee that action which we believe will contribute most to the defence and triumph of the allied cause. The government proposes that there shall be devoted to the Department of Munitions and Supply the sole, exclusive and full-time services of a minister of the crown. His responsibility will be to correlate production activities, and to speed up in every manner possible the output of essential military and other material. For this purpose there will be conferred upon the Department of Munitions and Supply certain special powers which would not be accorded in normal times, to enable it to expedite the provision of equipment of materials of war for the armed forces.
Hon. members will notice that in developing Canada's war effort the government has proceeded step by step. With respect to the Department of Munitions and Supply it will be recalled that that department took over the work of the war supply board. The war supply board, in turn, had taken over what was formerly the defence purchasing board which had been formed before the war commenced. The development has been from the purchasing board to the war supply board, and then came the provision for a Department of Munitions and Supply. As hon. members know, since it was brought into being by proclamation, the department has been in charge of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Howe). The Minister of Transport has not only a full knowledge of the transportation problems in the economy of this countrybut from the beginning had exercised supervision over the work of the war supply board. The minister and the government felt that there would be an advantage for a time at least in having the two departments administered by the one minister, in view of the correlation of their activities. He has since said, and we agree with him, that the time has now come when the time of one minister should be given exclusively to the work of a Department of Munitions and Supply. In this connection may

___________ The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
I pause for a moment to say how exceptionally fortunate the government regards itself in being able to secure the most valuable services of Mr. Wallace Campbell of Windsor, who devoted his time and energy, to the utmost of his strength and ability, to the work of the war supply board during the time he was at its head. Mr. Campbell has generously undertaken to continue an association, in an advisory capacity, in connection with war supplies and the Department of Munitions and Supply is taking advantage of his expert knowledge to gain such counsel and advice from him as is further needed at the present time.
The government has reiterated to the government of the United Kingdom its confidence in the productive capacity of Canadian plants as an alternative source of supply, relatively free from the danger of any enemy action. Canadian manufacturers have expressed their readiness to undertake to the limit of their capacity the production of all such supplies as can be manufactured in this country. The government has undertaken to assist in the organization of the fullest use of the resources of Canadian industry, as and when the British government indicates its wishes.
This afternoon my hon. friend referred to the fact that some productive plants were not working at the present time at full capacity. He seemed to feel that there had been some lag in the placing of orders. My hon. friend, and I assume other hon. members in the house, will understand that orders are being placed by Canada for requirements needed by Canada itself, and that orders come from the United Kingdom for supplies desired by the United Kingdom. United Kingdom supplies are ordered not from Canada alone but from all parts of the world, and the placing of orders in Canada by the British Government has been a matter which has required very careful consideration on their part. No doubt there are many orders which some interested parties in Canada would like to have seen placed prior to this time; but in these matters, as in all else, the situation has been governed by what has been considered possible and advisable on the part of the government of the United Kingdom.
To turn to another phase of the matter, the government has taken all possible steps to prevent sabotage and subversive activity, by propaganda or otherwise, against the allied cause. Our efficient Royal Canadian Mounted Police and other branches of the government concerned are fully aware of the situation, and have taken action wherever warranted. I wish, however, in this connection, to make two appeals. I appeal to all citizens of foreign extraction to remember that they are living
m a land which is fighting to maintain the freedom which they now enjoy, and the possibilities of international goodwill which enabled them to settle in our midst. I appeal, also, to all members of the public to refrain from persecution and panic action against harmless and law-abiding people who share our life and in most instances our common citizenship.
In view of the critical turn of events in Europe within the last few days, and in the light of information obtained by the Minister of National Defence on his recent visit to England, the government has decided to take the following additional measures to strengthen our armed forces, and to enlarge our contribution to the allied cause. These decisions, and those which I have already mentioned, are being translated into action. They are all in addition to the work which has been done and planned in the military, naval and air spheres of action, and on the economic front.
We have decided to advance the date of the dispatch overseas of the second division of the Canadian active service force.
We have decided to advance the date of the dispatch of such further reinforcements of the first division as have not already proceeded overseas.
We have decided to push forward the recruiting of reinforcements for the second division of the Canadian active service force, which will follow that division overseas at the earliest possible date.
There will be formed a Canadian corps in the field in accordance with arrangements which have been discussed with the British War Office.
Besides the two divisions and their ancillary units, the corps will include the necessary additional corps troops and will involve the dispatch overseas of several thousand men beyond those which I have already mentioned.
We shall undertake the raising of a third division, to be available for such service as may be required in Canada or overseas.
We have assigned, at the request of the United Kingdom government, certain naval and military formations to active duty in the Caribbean and North Atlantic areas.
There will be dispatched overseas, as soon as possible, No. 112 army cooperation squadron to act as a reserve for No. 110 cooperation squadron now overseas.
As already mentioned, we shall adopt every feasible method of accelerating the output of pilots and air crews from Canada for service in the field, at the earliest possible date.
Steps have been taken in order to advance beyond the agreed and predetermined schedule the preparation of aerodromes and hangars and the like.

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
Mr. Speaker, this reviews in brief some of the details of the action the government has taken to meet the critical needs of the hour. The national interest prevents my disclosing some further details in connection with these items or from referring to other developments the government has already begun.
May I pause here for a moment to say to hon. members that I am sure^ the review I have already made will be sufficient to indicate the force of what I am about to say. With a world situation such as our own and other countries must face to-day, it is necessary for the government to take account not only of the happenings of the immediate moment but of possible happenings during the period through which this war may run. The situation is vastly different from what it has been heretofore. As I said in my remarks at the outset, during the last war we had Japan as an ally, we had Russia as an ally, we had Italy as an ally and we had practically no problem on the Pacific coast. For some considerable time the United States also was an active ally and, as I have said, there was no problem to be considered in connection with the Pacific ocean.
In connection with the Atlantic coast there was very little to be considered. At that time the British navy undertook the protection of our Atlantic coast and we were actually being protected by the British navy in our immediate coastal waters. Our navy was a tiny affair, I believe of two ships, the Rainbow and the Niobe. These ships were taken over by the British navy and became part of that navy. In this war our navy is a unit which is serving actively on the Atlantic coast and it is rendering most valuable assistance to the British navy itself.
We know the developments in the war up to date, but we do not know what they are going to be to-morrow. We do not know what they are going to be a week or a month or a year hence. We have, therefore, to consider not only what we can do in the way of cooperation overseas but also the possible happenings with respect to Canada itself. This is one of the things that I hope hon. members will keep in mind. We have to see around all the sides of this situation and view it in relation not only to the Canada that we knew in the last war but to the Canada that is a nation to-day.
One hardly dares to suggest the thought, but should our enemy triumph in this particular struggle it is not France, it is not England, it is not Holland, it is not Belgium, it is not Norway, it is not Poland and it is not Czechoslovakia that they would seek 
as a prize of war; what the enemy are looking for is great new areas of development. That is what underlies this struggle for world domination and we cannot afford to ignore at this time every conceivable possibility with relation to each part of the British commonwealth of nations.	_
The urgent appropriations with which this house will be called upon to deal, the various measures to be introduced by the government, many of which are on the order paper, will command the earnest attention of each one of us. I appeal to all members to avoid time-wasting procedure and to purge the order paper of items which cannot by any stretch of the imagination be considered a contribution to the solution of our problems. Above all, I know I shall not ask in vain that the time of hard pressed ministers of the crown and of hard working civil servants should not be diverted from their many tasks to deal with matters which are not essential.
It is the opinion of the government that the circumstances of the hour require that the urgent matter of the prosecution of the war and of Canada's part therein calls for the most immediate and thorough discussion. We do not desire to remove and do not propose to curtail unduly any of the privileges of hon. members, but the government believes that in the present emergency government business should have the right of way over the debate on the address. It is therefore suggested that the debate on the address be shortenend by arrangement between the whips. If such an arrangement is not found to be possible, I may propose that the debate be adjourned.
In making statements of that kind I shall have to ask hon. members to realize that they are not made with any view of enabling the government to avoid criticism or to take away from any hon. member a privilege which should be his, but rather because something is known of how exceedingly grave the situation is at this very time. I believe that all lion, members will feel as I do, that the more quickly we can begin consideration of the bill of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ralston) which has to do with war appropriations, and which measure will enable the fullest discussion of everything pertaining to the war and the war effort of Canada, the better it will be in all respects and the more action of that kind will be approved by the country. So I am going to suggest that a step of that kind be taken and I hope that the house will give its approval.
As I have said, it appears to my colleagues and myself that all matters pertaining to the war can be more appropriately discussed dur-

The Address-Mr. Mackenzie King
already taken to assist the cause to which we
ing the consideration of the resolution providing the moneys required to support Canada's war effort. This resolution is already on the order paper and might, if the house were agreeable, be proceeded with to-morrow or on Wednesday. In view of the crisis, however, the government will be obliged to proceed with the war appropriations not later than Wednesday, and will take such steps to that end as may be necessary under the rules.
I propose to discuss procedure with my hon. friend opposite and with other hon. gentlemen who are leading groups in this house. _ The procedure which I believe to be best designed to meet the dominant needs of the critical situation is as follows.
There should be a general debate on the resolution. We can then refer the appropriation bill to a committee or committees of the House of Commons in order that there may be disclosed to the members of those committees information which would not probably be in the public interest to place on the pages of Hansard or to broadcast in debate to the House of Commons. I propose to ascertain the views of the leaders of the house with respect to these committees. It may be that a separate committee surveying the work of each of the fighting services would be preferable to one dealing with defence matters generally. It is I am sure unnecessary for me to advance the hope and the desire, for I am sure that hon. members share both, that the personnel of these committees be selected with the utmost care.
I should like to emphasize that the setting up of these committees will not preclude in any way any member from debating any subject to which he may desire to call the attention of the house and the country, and I give my assurance to hon. members that the constitution of such committees will not be used as a pretext for concealing any information which it is in the public interest to disclose. While officers of the department and of the service will attend the committees when required, it would be a great disservice to the country at this time if members were to keep officers from their regular important public duties unless it is absolutely necessary.
I have sought to pass in brief review the main facts in connection with the war effort of this country. Everything that we have done has been done with the full approval of our allies and after complete consultation with them. We 'have done, and planned to do, the things which they have deemed most essential to the triumph of their cause and ours. I have told you what can now be told of the prompt and additional measures we have
have pledged our honour. As circumstances permit, more will be disclosed.
I need scarcely say that hysteria and panic will add nothing but confusion to the performance of a task that is long and difficult. Munitions and implements of war cannot be forged overnight. The duration and intensity of war have alike to be taken into account. Similarly, the sailors, soldiers and airmen required to meet fresh situations as they arise in all quarters of the globe cannot all^ be trained at once. No one is more conscious than my colleagues and I of the necessity of vigour of action, patience of heart, and steadfastness of soul. We have acted and shall continue to act to the limit of our wisdom and knowledge and power.
I know that the government can rely upon the support of all sides of this house as long as it does all that is humanly possible to carry out its duty to the people of Canada. To assist us we shall need and, I believe, we shall receive the unwavering resolution and the full cooperation of every true man and woman in this country. If this war is lost, and tyranny triumphs, our world with its gift of freedom, and its promise of happiness for all men and women, will be lost in utter darkness. No sacrifice is too great to prevent that calamity.
The gallant youth of this country will soon be marching through the fires which have been devouring nations as well as armies overseas. They will be true to the imperishable traditions of their fathers. Everything that we can do, every help that we can give, every contribution that we can make, every comfort, great or small, that we must surrender, is as a grain of sand compared with the treasure which they offer on the altar of humanity.
Those of us who have heard the calm, brave words of Prime Minister Churchill and Prime Minister Reynaud do not doubt that the two great races from which this land derives its sinew and its strength will keep the tom flag flying on the battlements of freedom. They have faced, and we have faced with them, perils almost as great, situations almost as grave, in the days that have gone. We, and they, have remained unshaken and triumphant. It is my faith that we shall remain unshaken and triumphant again. The end of the war will find the people of Canada, where the beginning of the war found us; standing, united at the side of Britain and of France.
Mr. Speaker, I should like if I might be permitted, before the house adjourns this evening, to read a message which I sent this

The AddresSi-Mr. Coldwell
morning to the Prime Minister of Great Britain with reference to the speech which he made last evening, and I shall give that to the house at the conclusion of these proceedings.


Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to participate in this first debate of a new and what may be a fateful parliament, I do so with considerable regret that the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth), our leader, is unable to speak for the group with which we are associated. I know that hon. members on all sides of the house sincerely hope that he will be restored to health in a short time.
We wish to congratulate you, Mr. Speaker, upon your election to the high and ancient office which we are sure you will occupy with that dignity and impartiality which we appreciated in your predecessor.
To the mover and the seconder of the resolution we extend our congratulations, particularly to the hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. Lapointe), whose distinguished father must have been proud of his son's maiden speech in this House of Commons.
We are meeting to-day under the shadow of a great crisis. I want to say at once to the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) that we of this group are prepared to facilitate in every particular the business of this house. Like the labour parties of Great Britain and other parts of the British commonwealth, the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation is essentially a peace party. We hate war with a passionate hatred because all history teaches us that, in the words of the Prime Minister spoken in this house in March of last year, war settles nothing. We know that the men' who bleed and die will leave behind them only mourners who, when the conflict ceases, will pay for the struggle in tears and in treasure. Because of this, when we believed there was yet^ time, we advocated national and international policies which we are convinced would have promoted peace and prevented war.
We watched with growing misgivings the march of fascism and the rising menace of the nazi movement in Germany. We said that those who were encouraging these movements would bring mankind to the very brink of disaster. Nearly three years ago Mr. Heaps, then Cooperative Commonwealth Federation member for Winnipeg North, moved in this house a resolution asking our government to approach the President of the United States with a suggestion that he consider the advisability of calling a world conference in an endeavour to secure a peaceful settlement of international disputes. Subsequently, when the sky darkened still more, we urged our own 
government to initiate the calling of the League of Nations assembly to stop the threatened crisis. Whenever opportunities arose, we tried to focus attention on the international situation and the growing danger to Canada. We have made mistakes, as any body of people dealing with difficult situations are bound to do; but we have always held that freedom is the foundation of life and of human happiness.
We have watched the suppression of liberty in other countries. One by one and often together, freedom of thought, freedom of association, freedom of religion, freedom of speech have disappeared as dictatorships have become more powerful. We dreaded war because we knew that when it came our basic freedom would be endangered in our own dominion. Nor were we wrong in that assumption, for the defence of Canada regulations have in our opinion gone beyond the point warranted by an outbreak of war. We readily admit that when a nation is at war, actions against the safety of the state must be prevented or punished as the case may be, but we insist that every man shall have the right to plead guilty or not guilty before a competent authority in open court. Under section 21 of the defence regulations it is possible for this basic right of British citizenship to be taken away.
For a second time within a generation we are called upon to make the sacrifices demanded by war. At the outset of the struggle, the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation group in this house presented a statement expressing its attitude in the crisis. We said then, and we believe now, that the preservation of national unity and security must be kept in mind as cardinal principles underlying all we do. We said then, and we believe now, that Canada's best assistance can be rendered to the allied cause by organizing our economic resources efficiently, and granting to the allies every material aid without profit to this nation or to any individual within it. We believe that such aid may become even more important if British and French industrial centres are subjected to violent air attack, for it is obvious now that the machines of war are more necessary to ultimate victory than the provision of large contingents of infantry. It is in the field of mechanized warfare that the allied cause is said to be deficient.
It is in this field that Canada can and must render her greatest assistance.
I suppose too that recent events, the power and range of the aeroplane, the organization of. so-called fifth columns and so on, have brought home to many a Canadian the urgent need of coastal and home defence in a nation which comprises such enormous territory and

The Address;-Mr. Coldwell
whose coast lines extend for thousands of miles in length as do Canada's. Thus the proper organization of our industry and the defence of Canada and adjacent allied territory will tax our resources of man-power to the utmost.	_
Nearly all members of this house were in agreement during the election campaign that conscription of man-power for overseas service would split this country into pieces and take us out of the war as an effective allied force. Hence we believe that any policy which would even raise a demand for conscription for overseas service would cause internal divisions which would have almost as disastrous an effect as the actual adoption of that policy by parliament would have. In the last house the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) and the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe) made statements which reassured our people on this point. This is a new parliament and the government contains new ministers. So I urge the Prime Minister or the Minister of Justice to give the same assurances to this house as they gave to its predecessor. For the reasons I have given, in September we did not approve the sending of an expeditionary force overseas. The government intimated that while it sought appropriations for the defence of Canada in and beyond Canada, it had not then been decided whether an expeditionary force would be sen{. Within two weeks after the prorogation of parliament the announcement was made that an expeditionary force was being organized for overseas service. In our opinion decisions of such gravity, as well as commitments for the expenditure of millions and millions of dollars such as we have heard of to-night, should be made by parliament. None of the private members knows the extent to which we are involved by the enormous commitments that have been made since parliament sat in September. We are prepared to support the struggle against aggression and for the preservation of democratic institutions, but we insist that democratic institutions shall be respected and safeguarded in our own country. In two weeks it will be a full twelve months since parliament met in regular session. Ever since the outbreak of war we have been governed by decree, and the actions of the government still remain shrouded largely in secrecy. In democratic countries, as Mr. Winston Churchill said in that address of his on January 27 last, "Public men are proud to be the servants of the people. They would scorn to be their masters." The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation believes that this parliament, representing the people, must demand that its supremacy be restored. At no time during this crisis should parliament recess for more than two or three months. A
standing committee representative of all parties should be set up for the continuous scrutiny of every phase of our war effort and our war expenditures and for consultative purposes.
During the past few weeks we have viewed with increasing alarm the onward sweep of German aggression. Again and again men and women have asked how all this could have been accomplished by a people who less than ten years ago were almost entirely without armaments. The answer is to be found I think in the fact that the nazi dictatorship has planned its every activity for a diabolical purpose, while we continued to muddle along without any plan other than the hope that something might turn up. The challenge to the democratic nations lies not only in the military field but in the realm of economic effort. If it is possible to plan a nation's economy for a diabolical purpose, it is equally possible and certainly necessary to plan it for the welfare and protection of its people.
At the moment we bend our efforts towards bringing the war to a successful conclusion. Already economic controls and directions which the government refused to consider in times of peace have been instituted because of our war effort. I was struck last September when a government which could not find money to provide more adequate prices for farm produce or appropriations for public works and human welfare could suddenly find millions for the purposes of war. This fact was noted by the people of the country, and when the war ends Canadians will not go back again to riding the rods, to unemployment and to misery, without grave danger of civil disturbance and social dislocation. That is why we welcome the appointment of a committee now to consider plans to be put into effect when the war ends. I hope it is not going to be just the usual way of disposing of a difficult problem, as reference to a committee so often has proved to be. Such a committee should be required to make definite plans and request definite appropriations now to meet the needs of this country when the war ends.
The end of the last war found this country unprepared for the problems it created. The demobilized soldiers and war workers suffered intensely from the misery caused by unemployment and want. In contrast, the rich who had bought war bonds enjoyed a steady and permanently secure income. This must not happen again. We believe that the obligation to the soldier and his dependents should be as binding, yes, more binding, than our obligation to the bondholder. We urged that the soldiers' security should be secured
The Address;-Mr. Coldwell

by a bond or government insurance policy designed to provide adequate maintenance for himself, his family and dependants as long as he or they may require it through adverse circumstances. This has not been done. On the contrary, complaints have reached me that agents of profit-making private insurance companies are permitted to canvass troops in training for life insurance policies that will lapse if the men are demobilized and become unemployed. I intend to ask some questions regarding this matter at the proper time.
We welcome the promise that a bill for unemployment insurance will be introduced. We trust that it will secure the support of all the provinces and be sufficiently comprehensive to meet our present and post-war needs. But more than this will be needed to provide for those who will not be within the scope of that measure. We need to plan definitely and intelligently for present domestic needs and for post-war problems. I can assure the house that the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation will lend every assistance it can in these matters also.
The plight of agriculture has been a sorry one for the 'past ten years. Last Saturday wheat prices crashed again, and the government, which condemned pegged prices in former years, was forced to step in last Saturday and peg the price of wheat at 70 cents for No. 1 northern at Fort William. At the outbreak of the war we urged that the speculative markets for wheat and other produce should be closed and that proper parity prices should be established and marketing undertaken by appropriate marketing boards Dn which the producers should be properly represented. The low-pegged price of wheat and the relatively low prices of other farm produce, together with the rising price of farm machinery, clothing and other commodities, spell ruin to the prairie provinces. In these and other parts of the country dairy products, hogs, tobacco, fruit have suffered falling prices. No real guidance has been given to the farmer; no planning undertaken, no attempt made to establish parity prices for these primary products. No other country at war has let such matters drift as we have done. We cannot conduct the war successfully, we cannot cope with the problems of peace, if we allow our basic peace-time industry to suffer virtual bankruptcy.
Some will say that we cannot consider such matters now. But in no small measure our ability to wage war, to finance it, and to prepare for post-war problems depends upon our internal domestic situation. A glance at the Sirois report will indicate the dangerous condition to which our great basic industry 
and the rural population have been reduced. Recommendations in that report will be fully discussed later in the session, but at the very first opportunity I wish to protest against conditions existing in many parts of Canada. Other members will undoubtedly present some concrete evidence of the deplorable conditions under which many of our people in urban and rural Canada now live.
When the government announced a few weeks ago that federal grants for relief had been drastically cut, many municipalities were faced with either virtual bankruptcy or the neglect of the poor and suffering. I was in Biggar in my constituency when the relief inspector met the municipal council and announced to them that they must finance relief themselves. By dint of curtailing essential road repairs and social services the council had managed to set aside a small emergency or reserve fund of about S3,000. They were told that because they had this small sum they could expect no aid from the provincial or the federal government. I saw the case histories and statements of relief applicants who had suffered years of privation and were now to be refused assistance because the council had lost outside help. Fifty other municipalities in Saskatchewan were similarly dealt with.
The Sirois report clearly shows the financial inability of the province to carry the burden, and by an arbitrary ruling the governments refuse to assist in doing so. This parliament therefore must accept some responsibility for these conditions. Indeed, the Sirois report shows that trade, tariff and other policies of successive federal governments are responsible in no small measure for the plight of farmers, fishermen and Canadian workers. We believe that intelligent economic planning would enable us to provide an adequate standard of living for the great mass of the Canadian people. This our present and prewar economy failed to do.
I was startled when on my way back from Saskatchewan after the election I read in the Toronto Star the results of the routine physical examination of 299 Montreal children at the Iverly community centre. Only five were found to be physically fit. Twenty-one of the group, ranging in age from seven to fifteen, were referred to hospital for immediate treatment. One-half were underweight, while four out of every five had a temperature above normal. Four per cent had serious ear conditions; sixty per cent had serious dental conditions; thirty per cent had infected throats; four per cent had a heart condition; eight per cent had chest conditions and were sent to be X-rayed, and twenty-nine per cent

The Address-,-Mr. Coldwell
had other serious physical defects. Miss Esther M. Beith of the Child Welfare Association said that approximately sixty per cent of the children came from homes where the parents were on relief, while the others came from homes in the low income brackets. It is all very well to say that nothing else matters but the successful prosecution of the war. The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation will cooperate to bring the war to a successful conclusion, but it intends at the same time to urge that we wage unremitting war on poverty and insecurity within Canada.
Such conditions existed in peace time under successive Liberal and Conservative governments who never ceased to boast of our great resources and our mounting national wealth. We believe that our greatest resources are the men, women and children who comprise our population. To-day we pick up the newspaper and read of the huge sums being made by corporations engaged in mining and war industries. The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation demands that war profiteering must cease. Last year we enacted a measure to limit the profits on war contracts let without tender to five per cent. This was set aside by order in council on August 26 last, and abandoned in the Munitions and Supply Department Act adopted by parliament in September. The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation believes that the only effective way to eliminate war profiteering is to nationalize all war industry. This too would prevent the export of essential war 'material to potential enemies and indirect shipment to enemy countries. Ever since the war began we have continued to export nickel, copper and scrapiron to aggressors and perhaps even indirectly to enemy countries. Recently we read that the largest copper mine in the constituency of the seconder of the address in reply, the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair), the Granby mine, had renewed its contract to sell to Japan all its output of copper for the next three years. Right up to the outbreak of war Canadian supplies were going to Germany. We boasted of our expanding trade in such commodities, and now we see them returning to our kith and kin in more menacing form.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: May I be allowed to
correct the hon. member? The output from the Britannia mine in my riding, which is the largest copper mine in the British empire, does not go to Japan.


Major James William Coldwell: The mine I referred to is the Granby mine which I thought was in the hon. gentleman's constituency. The Granby mine made the contract to which I have referred, and of course that contract was made with the approval of the government of
Canada. I said these commodities may be coming back to-day to our kith and kin in a more menacing form. I wonder whether the tanks which are ravaging France to-day were made in part at least from scrapiron and nickel shipped from Canadian ports last summer. To-day the copper which we export to Japan mangles the bodies of Chinese patriots. To-morrow it may return in another form to the Pacific coast of the United States or of Canada. Each year we of this little group have urged the stopping of the export of such supplies to aggressor nations. In peace time the government made excuses which many Canadians appeared to accept. In war time, and in the'present state of the world, surely no excuses ought to be accepted.
We hear, too, as we have heard to-night, that huge sums of money are to be borrowed. A year ago interest rates were low because there was no demand for money. To-day we float loans at 3i per cent, an attractive rate of interest on gilt-edged Dominion of Canada securities. In our opinion the burden of interest, if the war lasts long, will be intolerable. Men are asked to give their lives. Surely a nation has the right to demand that accumulators of great wealth, both personal and corporate, should give their surplus money without interest. In this manner something approaching equality of sacrifice might be achieved. This becomes all the more necessary when we realize that we have undertaken to finance not only Canada's own war effort but also British purchases in Canada, through the repatriation of Canadian securities. There must be no profitable patriotism in this great struggle. The Canadian people have the right to demand that these matters be dealt with by this parliament in a manner befitting the economic and social needs of war and of peace. If honest attempts are made to do so, then the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, together with all other loyal Canadian citizens, will cooperate to stop aggression; but if the government fails to grapple with these problems, the war will not be brought to a successful conclusion though our fighting forces win overwhelming victory abroad.
Let me say again that our group will do everything possible to facilitate the business of this session. We believe that an alert opposition is essential to the efficient functioning of democratic government. We do not know when this war will end. We believe that victory will crown the allied cause, but the end of the present war will create problems more challenging than any we have ever known. It is certain, that whatever the outcome the world will never be the same again. In my opinion the balance of the lives of
The Address.-Mr. Coldwell

5>i
all members of this parliament will be spent in one of the greatest periods of reconstruction on a world wide scale that mankind has ever seen. That reconstruction will demand more intelligent planning and control than so far many of us have seriously considered. Now we plan for war; to-morrow we .must plan for a lasting and enduring peace. How that enduring peace may be secured is a problem we must approach while war still rages. One thing is certain; enduring peace cannot be secured through the domination of one people by another or, in the narrower field of human relationships, through the domination of one man by another. Peace, when it comes, must guarantee that the way of life of one nation will not be menaced by another nation. This involves the elimina-' tion of exploitation both at home and abroad. While each nation must be free to work out its own destiny, it must be prepared to recognize the rights of racial and religious minorities within its own borders. This will involve, too, the renunciation of war as an instrument of national purpose, and hence some form of collective security must be devised. International disarmament must be a principal war aim, in order that there can be a transfer of disciplinary power to an international authority. In short, our aim must be social and international justice at home and abroad. To such an effort the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation will lend its utmost support and give its assistance now and in the days to come.
We join with all members of the house in hoping that the day will speedily arrive when the present conflict will end and the democratic peoples of the world once more will be able to live in peace and friendship one with another, and to banish from the world for all time the economic and social causes which have led to modern, recurrent wars.


Mr. J. H. BLACK MORE (Lethbridge):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in this first debate at this most sombre moment,
I feel greatly depressed, but at the same time, while this is perhaps one of the darkest hours through which the British race has ever passed,
I believe that if we behave as we should and put our house in order, the God who has seen us through the perilous times of the past will come to our aid and guide us safely through this dreadful time.
Since we last convened in this chamber several events have occurred. Our late governor general, Lord Tweedsmuir, has been called to that nobler work beyond, for which his rich and varied earth life so abundantly prepared him. As a public man he was ever discreet and proper, yet colourful; quiet and 
unobtrusive, yet noticeable; unaffectedly gracious and amiably dignified, whether distinguished in viceroyal regalia, attired in formal dress, or adorned w'ith the arrogant costume of an Indian chief. At his death we were shocked; his loss Canada spontaneously mourned.
Since last we met, the world's war effort has intensified appallingly. Our enemy has given yet further proof of his strength, skill, organizing ability, courage and determination.
The Alberta people have returned the Aber-hart social credit government. While to introduce this fact at this stage may seem incongruous, yet we of this group believe that this event is of tremendous significance to the future of Canada and perhaps even to the winning of this war. That occurrence has two meanings. The first is that an effectively substantial portion of the Alberta voters have confidence in the Aberhart administration, which stands for social credit. The second is that those voters believe that the principles of social credit are sound and that those principles, if introduced into the Canadian economy, would serve as a basis for an abundant life. Furthermore, inasmuch as the election was fought during the war, with the clouds of adversity, anxiety and fearfulness impending over us, the vote had a significance with respect to the war.
An election has swept the Liberal party into power, first, to win a war-and without conscription-and, second, to preserve Canadian unity. I mention these two facts because already, once on the floor of the house and several times in the corridors I have heard men attempt to interpret the Liberal victory in another manner, and to make it appear that notwithstanding the fact that the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) laid down these two aims as the issue, yet the Liberal victory had another meaning. It is suggested, for example, that the people believed in past Liberal policies or that the people particularly believed in the Liberals as a party, or that the people had turned their backs on various kinds of reform, monetary and otherwise.
I believe any attempt to interpret the victory of the Liberal party in any such manner is a tendency towards delusion of the worst kind. Therefore I say it must be refrained from, if we are going to face the problems which confront us in the way the Prime Minister has urged we should face them. Let us have the facts at all times, and let us face them in a realistic manner.
Canada is still in a great deal of confusion.
I find that the leaders are confused. For instance it was reported in the press that the president of our Bank of Canada not very

The Address-Mr. Blackmore
long ago made a speech in which he urged the people to tighten their belts. At the same time we have been told by several agencies throughout the dominion that it is a dangerous thing for us to increase our production too far, in certain commodities. I refer particularly to wheat.
Having been urged to increase our production in respect of other commodities, such as pork, we have found, within a few months, that we are in danger of having an oversupply. Strange indeed for war time!
To 'tighten the belt is to indicate that we are to cease to use commodities. To tell us to cease to produce commodities is to tell us something diametrically opposed to the advice to tighten our belts. The result is that confusion worse confounded aboundeth throughout the land. To-day in Canada we have a surplus of grain and apparently a surplus of bacon. We have a surplus of apples, butter, tobacco and other commodities, and we have a great deal of unused capacity in our factories, mines, farms and forests. Yet we are told to tighten our belts. We have in Canada a wage scale which is a disgrace, and a condition which will stand as an everlasting condemnation of the generation which permitted that wage scale to develop in a land of abundance like this. Not only will the Liberals be condemned by future generations, but I say that every statesman of every brand who has had any control in this country since the turn of the present century will have like condemnation.
Yet we are told to tighten our belts. If we tighten our belts, how will industry sell! If industry cannot sell, how will it employ men? If industries cannot sell and cannot employ men, how can we possibly increase our production and thereby increase our real wealth? If we cannot increase our production and our real wealth, how can we pay our taxes? Further, how can we possibly build up a reserve of goods and goods producing power against a time when perhaps those who are now producing the wheat and other commodities needed by the world will be in such a position that they will no longer be able to produce so freely, and when consequently there may develop a tremendous demand upon our productive power to provide the very food and raiment which the soldiers will need in the conduct of the war?
These facts have to be faced by any group of intelligent men who are planning the policies which the country is going to follow to win the war. In the light of these considerations I ask how we can possibly get sense out of the admonition to tighten our belts. May I hasten to say I am not averse to saving,
economizing and all that sort of thing; I was raised on that. Nevertheless we have gone into a different kind of age in which, apparently, something different from saving is demanded. Canada must make the maximum war effort; all hon. members agree on that. The only difference of opinion among us is as to how we shall bring about Canada's maximum war effort.
This country has great potentialities. She could be the determining factor in the war; and to the degree to which we manage or mismanage our country we may be saving or destroying the hopes of the British race, with all that that destruction implies. We have the resources; we have the industrial equipment; we have the railroads, and other means of transportation. At the present time we have man-power which to an astounding extent is unused. Undoubtedly our potentialities are great.
Everyone agrees that there is the gravest danger to the empire. I think there is no necessity to labour the importance of the British empire in the world. I am a firm believer in the British empire, the British commonwealth of nations, and I believe most hon. members hold similar views. I am a believer in the principle that nations have a mission to perform, and I do not believe that the British empire's mission has been achieved. I believe it still has things to do greater than any which it yet has done.
Regardless of whether or not defeat in this conflict would mean the destruction of the British empire, there is great significance to Canada, as Canada, in the conflict. As I see it, our nation has before it three pathways, any one of which she may choose to follow. She may choose to become more and more an integral part of the British empire, in which event she will become more and more British. Or she may elect to become independent and suffer a precarious existence, remembering for all generations the fate of that Holland, that Denmark and that Norway about which we heard so abundantly from our friends, the members of the Canadian Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, during the last four years, when those countries were referred to as the modern nations which had continued for a hundred years to be independent and neutral and had never had need of armaments. Or Canada may turn to the United States with the object of becoming an integral part of the great north American union under the leadership of the United States.
I am not going to comment upon the desirability or lack of desirability of any one of these three courses. However, I prefer the
The Address-Mr. Blackmore

first one, that of becoming more and more British. Not that I mean that we shall lose our sovereignty in any sense of the term, but rather that we shall continue giving loving adoration and spontaneous homage to Britain's king and queen and to the common ideals of the British people, ready to stand or fall with them. I have indicated the significance of this conflict to Canada.
How are we going to make our greatest contribution to the empire? I fancy that there has been no disagreement with me up to the present time, but I feel that probably there will not be as much agreement with what I am going to say from now on. Before I commence to give my message I should like to read a few lines from the remarks made the other day by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), lines which I am glad he uttered and which I -am sure he uttered designedly. On page five of Hansard of May 16 I read these words:
In parliament, particularly in most critical times like the present, everyone can make some contribution to the needs of the day, and indeed will be expected to do so fearlessly and to the best of his ability. To a great extent an opposition can help a government in shaping the policies which may be best for the administration of public affairs.
I read another excerpt as follows:
We will not expect to be exempted from criticism. Indeed one of the great functions of an opposition is that it may help to safeguard tlie proceedings of a government and that by its constructive criticism may prevent what might otherwise be in the nature of hasty or ill-conceived action, or what some might feel to be a lack of sufficient action.
Encouraged by those words I am going to attempt to offer my solution. In a general way Canadians seem to be much nearer the solution which this group commenced to advocate four years and a half ago. I think they are much nearer that solution in their concepts to-day than they were. They have been forced nearer to it and I think Canadians will be well advised if they do not wait until they are shoved into it. And before I proceed to outline my proposals I should like to talk in a strain in which a good many people are talking just now. We are told that we are to have a prayer Sunday throughout the British empire on May 26, which is next Sunday. I do not know how many members of this house solemnly believe in prayer-I do. I do not know how many of them solemnly and devoutly believe in a God who directs this world-I do. I do not know how many believe implicitly in the Bible

I do. I crave the indulgence of the house for a few moments while I speak in a religious vein.

If we are to engage in an empire-wide prayer for victory less than a week from to-day, I think it behooves us to put our minds in tune with religious concepts and thinking. We are being told in many -places to-day that we must repent, but I am not so sure that there are many of us who know definitely just of wha-t we should repent. I am going to suggest one or two things in our national life of which it probably behooves us to repent. I think everyone in this chamber has heard over and over again this statement which should sound familiar to Liberals particularly: "Usury once in control will wreck any nation." Let us turn our attention for a moment or two to the question of usury. I doubt if anyone in this house is unaware that the scriptures solemnly and expressly forbid usury and forbid interest.


Mr. REID:: It is not against interest.


Ronald Stewart Moore: I should like to read just one passage from the scriptures. Having been browsing through the pages of the scriptures during the last few months I should like to read one passage from the several which I found. I do not know whether I am in order in reading a passage of scripture to the house; I have never tried to do it before, but I am going to venture it now at the risk of displeasure. Ezekiel, chapter 22, from verse 12, reads:
12.	In thee have they taken gifts to shed blood; thou hast taken usury and increase, and thou hast greedily gained of thy neighbours by extortion, and hast forgotten me, saith the Lord God.
13.	Behold, therefore I have smitten mine hand at thy dishonest gain which thou hast made, and at thy blood which hath been in the midst of thee.
14.	Can thine heart endure, or can thine hands be strong, in the days that I shall deal with thee? I the Lord have spoken it, and will do it.
If such a passage of scripture was not designed to apply to such times as these, then my power to think logically must be most deficient. I repeat these words:
Can thine heart endure, or can thine hands be strong, in the days that I shall deal with thee ?
Some people say, "How can we get along without interest?" Since I came into this house in 1935, except for the members of the group with which I am associated and two or three members of the Liberal party, I have never heard one member rise in his place in this house and tell us how we can ge-t along without interest. I have foundl very little patience manifested by members of this house when I have tried to show how we might get along without interest.

The Address-Mr. Blackmore


Thomas Reid: I wonder whether the hon.
member would answer one question.


Ronald Stewart Moore: I would much rather that the hon. member would raise his question after I have finished my speech.


Thomas Reid: But I want to dispute the
hon. member's statement that the Bible is against interest.


Ronald Stewart Moore: Will the hon. member dispute this passage-


Thomas Reid: I am disputing that the Bible
is against interest, as the hon. member puts it.


Ronald Stewart Moore: Will the hon. member dispute this passage I have just read? If he wants to discuss the Bible with me, I will retire to my room with him after my speech, and I think he will come out a repentant man.


Thomas Reid: Let me tell the hon. member
that I will take him up.


Ronald Stewart Moore: We are going to have an enjoyable time and a profitable one.


Thomas Reid: Anyway, the hon. member
win.


Ronald Stewart Moore: Yes, and I am sure
that my hon. friend will, too.
Now, we are steeped in interest. We pay interest on every move we make with money. At the present time, no matter how much the country may need it, or for what purpose, it is impossible to get money into circulation without interest. What behaviour as a nation!
In another respect we are to be condemned. We have accumulated debts. Anyone who has read the first five books of the Old Testament will remember how solemnly and with what care the Creator commands against the accumulation of debts, especially beyond fifty years. We have gone on allowing debts to accumulate for hundreds of years, and now the total has become so great that it is crushing us so that we cannot even conduct a war successfully.
In the Bible the Lord continually condemns the people of Israel for their stiff-neckedness. I maintain that a good many of us have been altogether too stiff-necked in refusing to listen to any possibility of a change. We have allowed poverty to grow to such an extent that it is destroying the very foundations of our nation. It is destroying our children, and discouraging those who would bring children into the world. Verily in that matter "there is no health in us." Surely the time has come to repent and to find out how all this has come about.
What must we in Canada do in order to make this country successful in war? Besides
moral rearmament-the thing I have been discussing, for we must rearm ourselves morally by repentance-we must see to it that we remove suffering from this land. We must make Canada a land to love, a land that men will rejoice to fight for. Certainly one hesitates to put into words what ought to be said regarding conditions in this country at the present time. We must give aged people something like a chance. Imagine a man who has spent seventy years building up this country, condemned to live on |20 a month, to pay his rent and light and water, any doctor bills he may have, and then live! Think of the meagre allowance we give our mothers! Consider the way in which we deal with relief recipients! Think of the way in which we deal with our returned men! How, under conditions like these, can we expect the morale of a country to be strong?
Again, we must check the trend to autocracy. The hon. member for Rosefcown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) has commented on that matter. I believe that the defence of Canada regulations are simply a reflection of this tendency. It is one thing to say that we need stern regulations; it is another to prove that we need sterner regulations than England has. Why should we have section 21 when England has withdrawn that? Why should we have such sections as 27, 39, 39A, 62 and 63? V hv should it be necessary in Canada to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act when Britain has not done so? Tell me who is the autocratic-sovereign who has demanded of Canada thn t she should abolish the habeas corpus which we won hundreds of years ago? In those days our fathers wrenched that right from King John. Who is the modern King John against whom our generation should arise? He is not Hitler, or Mussolini, or Stalin, but his methods surprisingly resemble the methods of these three gentlemen. It is time that we revised these objectionable statutes. They are not at all in keeping with the general way of life of a democracy, and how can people who are aware that such laws are in force in this country, go forth with any kind of enthusiastic belief that they are fighting for democracy?
We must also rearm Canada physically. Some reference to that was made by the Prime Minister. In order to rearm physically, the first thing that we must do is to make sure that we have in our country a price structure which renders it possible for our producers to produce and live. I am going to read to hon. members some figures which will indicate what has happened to the western farmer since 1914. The Prime Minister reviewed not long ago some of the disadvantages under which we labour in comparison with the conditions at
The Address-Mr. Blackmore

the beginning of the last war. Here are some prices which the western farmer is required to pay, as reported from the Searle index:
Article	Price Price
in 1914 in 1938
Cream separators (500 lbs). $ 37.50
Post maul 16 lbs	85
Barb wire 4 point, per roll..	2.30
14-h.p. engine, each	 39.50
Wagon, complete	 100.50
Teaming harness, per set..	34.50
Wire nails, per 100 lbs. ..	3.20
Crow bars, each	75
Logging chain	 1.50
Oil lantern, each	70
Grindstone, each	 5.00
Sheepskin coat, each	 5.00
Wool socks, per doz. pair. .	3.75
Underwear, Wolsey, per suit	3.75
Shirt, grey flannel	75
Work boots, per pair	 2.50
Gang plough	 89.50
Seed drill, Double D	 143.00
Mower	 89.50
Bob sleds, 2J steel shoe.. ..	24.40
Taxes, per quarter section..	20.00

In the light of figures like these and many similar ones, I ask, how can men suppose the western farmer can produce, especially when he is getting lower prices for his products and is in doubt whether he will be able to sell his products at all? It is absolutely necessary for us at this time, if we are going to secure maximum production in this country, to see that there shall be such a price structure as will make maximum production possible. How this is to be done I am not going to take the time on this occasion to tell, except just to indicate this, that it would be impossible to accomplish it merely by legislation. This government last year set a seventy-cent-a-bushel price for wheat. It was going to do that by a subsidy or bonus. A subsidy or bonus must be used not only to ensure a price to the producer but to cut down the price to the consumer. People will ask, where is the money to come from? That is the problem which confronts us to-day.
May I ask once again the question which I was pleased to hear the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar ask to-night. How do the members of this house suppose that the dictators succeeded in building up in seven years the colossal armaments which they have built up, starting from away below scratch in 1933? I am sorry the leader of the opposition (Mr. Hanson) has just left his seat, because I was going to ask him how it was that Canada was unable to afford any money for the construction of armaments all through the period from 1930 to 1935, while the dictators at the head of absolutely prostrate nations, ruined and bankrupt in every way, were able to build up such terrific armaments that they are to-day the dread of

the world. Will some one tell me where those dictators got the money? They must have a way of getting it. I am not saying that their way was the right one, but it seems to me that they did have some way, which is different from the one we had.
If we are to have maximum production in this country we must also have maximum consumption. People are not talking at all about how to get the people of Canada to consume more; our authorities are rather off on a tangent, in the direction started by the governor of the Bank of Canada when he told us that we must consume less. I say, Mr. Speaker, that we must learn to consume more. How are we going to do it? That is another problem, but I think it would be a profitable occupation for an intelligent committee of this house to study it for several months. Certainly it must be done and I am sure it can be done, especially in a country such as ours, where we must increase consumption. I believe we might be wise to consider possibly the bonusing of Canadian-made goods. Out in Alberta, where we are struggling with a great variety of handicaps thrown around us, and determinedly and meticulously kept there, we have contrived to give a bonus on Alberta-made goods, and the results, according to figures we have, are simply astonishing even to us who expected much. If this parliament could contrive to bonus Canadian-made goods so that our people could get them more cheaply, we would overcome a great many of the difficulties which now harass us.
There is another matter which I think we should consider and which the bonusing of Canadian-made goods brings to mind. We are to-day labouring under the grievous disadvantage of a high adverse exchange rate against our dollar. We are buying vast quantities of war supplies from the United States and are paying that adverse exchange. Surely no Canadian believes that, this is a sound state of affaire. Is there no way by which we can overcome it? In the first place, we should contrive to buy fewer goods from the United States and to buy more Canadian goods. I know the stock argument will be raised: If we do not buy their goods, how can they buy from us? But if they continue to manufacture armaments and we continue to need them as we have done during the past few months, we shall have no trouble in buying plenty of goods in the United States. But what we need to do is to refrain from buying such of their goods as we can get along without.
There is another point. Even though we have already taken measures to restrict the outflow of capital of Canada into the United

The Address-Mrs. Nielsen
States, I believe that we are still allowing too much of our capital 'to be exported. We are buying too much life insurance from United States companies for example.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but his time has expired.
Mrs. DO RISE W. NIELSEN (North Battle-ford) :	Mr. Speaker, in rising for the first
time to speak in this house I wish to express my regrets that the Rev. W. G. Brown is not sitting here beside me this evening, because, having known him, I feel sure that his voice would have been raised throughout this session in the interests of the people of Canada.
I find myself in the unique position of being the only woman member of this house, and I deeply regret it. It is a sad reflection upon us as a nation when, while over fifty per cent of our voters are women, we can have only one representative of our sex in this house. Mrs. Black and Miss Agnes Macphail have contributed greatly in the past in the work of this house and I very much regret that they are not sitting on these benches this evening. All through the ages we women unfortunately have been regarded more or less las the property of men. Because of that position we have been expected to be but the shadows of men, to reflect their ideas and to echo their sentiments. It is only within the last few years that we have become persons in our own right. And we have at last the courage to search our own hearts and to find there that we have ideas and ideals peculiar to ourselves. To fail to give expression to these ideas is to deny our' womanhood.
To-day the one great question of war overshadows everything else; until now it has received more attention in this house than anything else. From a woman's point of view I should like to say this, that war does not always mean -the same things to women as it does to men. To me war means broken homes, widowhood, fatherless children, destruction, agony and death. I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, what have women to do with death? Our purpose in the world is to give life and to protect it. At this time, particularly in this crisis, I feel that the women of this nation must keep a sane and level outlook, and they must remember that in a time of crisis their great duty is to guard and to protect life.
Through these last years two great calamities have reduced the people of the west, some of whom I have the honour to represent in this house, to the point of destitution. The economic depression and drought have brought to our people in the west insecurity, fear of the future, heartbreak and hopelessness.
Possibly it has often been said in this house that the west has not received from this government the attention and the consideration that it should have received. I wish to stress that most emphatically. The farmers, if they had received the consideration of this government in past years, if they had received a just and fair price for their products, would have been only too willing to struggle on to be self-supporting. The farmers of the west are wonderful people; they have virility and vitality in the highest degree, yet to-day you find them despondent and hopeless, fearing to look into the future, because they dread the years ahead. This government, having in the past failed to solve the great problem of the west, failed to give our farmers a price which would enable them to be self-supporting, and failed to find employment for our youth, threw out relief as a sop to desperate people.
I am not an advocate of relief; there has never been anything more demoralizing to our people in the west than relief, there has never been anything more calculated to destroy their morale, take away their selfrespect and sap their energy than this relief. Yet to-day and in the months ahead, if the basic problem of agriculture is not tackled by this house so that these farmers of the west can be once again self-supporting, then relief must be continued and it must be increased if the people of the west are to survive. I feel myself very much qualified to speak upon this question of relief, because for three years I have lived upon relief. I had to feed a family of five-listen carefully-upon SI 1.25 a month.


An hon. MEMBER:: A dirty shame!


Mrs. NIELSEN:: And I have often wished I had the wisdom and the ability of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ralston) to help me balance my budget. Indeed, it is a task. If this government in the days ahead cuts down the standard of living of the people in the west by reducing their relief, it condemns them to slow and agonizing death, both physical and mental. It has already been agreed by those who are best qualified to study these problems that even before the coming of drought and depression the farmers of the west were not having a square deal or getting a decent living. Professor Britnell of Saskatchewan university has stated in one of his books that the people of the west have through these last years suffered unduly. I should like to quote from his book as follows:
Direct relief became necessary if starvation was to be averted, though the standard of living was often actually lower for the very large marginal group that managed to avoid relief, or for those who were just to be pushed

The Address-Mrs. Nielsen
on to relief, than for the actual relief recipients, though relief schedules have not been extravagant.
Indeed I, who have had to live upon relief, know that they were in no way extravagant. I would say to you, my friends-and I call you my friends because I cannot believe that hon. members on the government benches are men of stone; you are men of flesh and blood; you are made of the same texture as these people who are struggling in the west to earn for themselves a livelihood, to provide a home for their children; you are made of the same stuff as they-I cannot believe that you have not in your hearts that human compassion for your feliow men in times of such distress. There is another kind of hunger. Robert Service, the poet of the north, calls it " hunger which is not of the belly kind." I speak of that need which the people of the west have for culture which is their natural right as citizens of this great country. They are living to-day under conditions which make it impossible for them to avail themselves of those things which they should have. Again I quote from Professor Britnell. He said:
There's no music, no books, no contact with cultured, leisured world. One can't even window-shop. Dirty, tawdry little village stores 

and even they are miles away. There is only an aching, bewildered body whose strength wanes and waxes and wanes again.	Above
all, beyond all, there is the loneliness. It is an everpresent, all-pervading thing that both agonizes and numbs the soul. Or have farm women souls? Gorgeous sunrises flare and flame, painting the eastern sky with their glow, reflected in the west. We glance at it numbly as we stumble out. It means the beginning of *-another day.
I will not tell you any more about these things. Possibly you have heard them expressed many, many times. This is not hunger for food but hunger of the mind.
I wish I could take you to our little schools. In the children of the west we have a vast reservoir of genius which as a nation we should be training and developing for the benefit of the world in the future. What as a nation are we doing for those children? To-day some of our little schools are even closed because we cannot afford to put teachers in them. Among those children of the west we may have girls and boys with the fingers of surgeons or the minds of scientists, who, if they were trained, might give of their knowledge to the benefit of the whole world, and who might help make the name of Canada famous among the nations of the world. To-day, however, if their mothers and fathers are unable to buy their textbooks and send them to high schools, those girls 
and boys go to work scrubbing floors and picking stones in the fields. Frustration is everywhere.
I want to bring these things to you, my friends, and once again advisedly I call you my friends because you cannot be insensible; you cannot be unaware of the need for us as a nation to guard our youth and all the virility that is theirs. There is also another matter in the west which affects us as a nation. Owing to our lower standards of living during these last few years another problem is coming to the front; that is, the question of the health of our people. In the west we have isolated districts in some of which the people may have to go twenty or thirty miles to get a doctor. In my travels through that north country I have come upon instances which may appear to you almost unbelievable. I have known cases where a father or mother, with a desperately sick child at home, has had to travel twenty miles or more in sub-zero weather, not to fetch a doctor but like a whipped dog to beg of a relief officer in an endeavour to obtain a permit to get a doctor to look after that child. These things are a reflection upon us as a nation. 1 have said many times that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and as a nation we are only as great and as fine as the most humble of our people. When some of our people are living under such conditions as I have mentioned, then we definitely are not a great nation.
Since I have been in this city I have admired the great memorial to the soldiers who gave their lives in the last war. From an artistic point of view it is a wonderful monument, which has impressed me very greatly. It is a monument of stone, a monument to commemorate death and the dead. In Saskatchewan we have living monuments to the last war. There I have seen returned men who, like driftwood cast up after the whirlwind and the whirlpool of the last war subsided, are now left on those desolate homesteads, uncared for and unnoticed. Since I have been in this city I have thought that I should like to bring some of those men here, in all their rags and tatters, and stand them around your great monument, to form a living testimony to the ingratitude of Canada.
This is undoubtedly a time of great crisis. Already the people of the west have realized that during this period they are going to be asked to make sacrifices, and they are beginning to ask themselves how they, who are so near the edge of destitution, can make yet another sacrifice. In their minds they are beginning to doubt many things; suspicions are beginning to arise. They believe, and I

The Address-Mr. Church
think rightly, that the last government failed to give them economic freedom; to-day they are beginning to realize that they no longer have civil liberties or freedom, and, as I say, this is raising great doubt in their minds. We have been told that the defence of Canada regulations are to be enforced to defend the Canadian people from subversive elements. The people of the west are beginning to realize *that there is one subversive element in Canada for which those regulations do not provide. They know it to be the greatest of all subversive influences. It is poverty, and it has been at work among them for many years. Realizing these things the people of the west are beginning to question many things in their own minds.
In times of crisis, Mr. Speaker, as at all times, life must go on. Life is greater than death; it prevails and goes on into the future. Every day children are born. Eveiy day people must eat. Every spring the seed must be sown, and every fall the harvest must be gathered in. In a time of crisis such as this we are sometimes prone to forget that life continues and must continue, else there is nothing in the future toward which we may look. I would say most emphatically that the time to consider the life of the people of Canada is not when the war is finished but now. Life must be protected now in this country. Although death stalks throughout the world and knocks at the door of every nation, life goes on. In this time of crisis I feel that as a woman, and particularly as the only woman in this house, even though mine is the only voice raised-and I sincerely hope it will not be-yet I must raise it in defence of and for the protection of life, the life of the Canadian people, because the people of Canada must have life and they must have it more abundantly.


Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Broadview):: Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to detain the house for more than ten or fifteen minutes, but I believe the people of Ontario, together with the people of all Canada, believe that we have reached the darkest hour in the history of this empire, and we want a real war government. After all is said and done, leaving party politics out of it, we know in our hearts that in this war Canada has not done her duty to the mother country. Constantly for the past five years I have been drawing the attention of the Canadian people to the situation of the British empire and Canada, urging rearmament and cooperation and coordination with Britain.
On March 21 of last year, on a motion to go into supply, I read a list of commitments made by the government of Great Britain to several countries in Europe; I pointed out that automatically those commitments meant that within a few months there would be a war, and that when Britain is at war, Canada is at war, and I asked, Whither Canada?
After Munich what was done? What did Canada do? I say Canada did nothing; it refused to face the situation or take the question of defence seriously. The government of the day had supported the pacifist and peace societies' movements, both in and out of the house. I say that in the country there have been three agencies which have been responsible for the people of Canada being, prior to the war, the worst informed of any of the overseas dominions in regard to defence and foreign affairs. One of those agencies has been the government of the day. It was responsible for declaring what the war policy would be and refused to give the people the real facts. Another agency was the press. While there have been some exceptions, I must say that in my opinion the press did not do its duty in the past four years in educating the public or in bringing to the attention of our people questions of defence. Owing to a lack of leadership we have not taken the question of defence seriously. From a few weeks before the beginning of the war the press has done its work well and patriotically. Another agency has been the radio. I say that down to the hour of the declaration of war the radio supported the pacifists and led our people to believe that there would not be a war.
What have we in the speech from the throne? It is a meaningless thing. It has left undone those things which it ought to have done, and it is significant not because of what is in it but because of what is left out of it. What is the government's war policy to-day on this secret, limited liability war? Nobody knows. How about man-power? I say the pai'ty in power has sidestepped the whole question of man-power; both before and after Munich it has refused to face the facts. It has not taken the people of Canada into its; confidence. We hear that to-day Germany has from 180 to 220 divisions, most of which are on the western front. No line of fortifications can last forever. A time will come, in fact I believe it has now come, when the allies will be waging an offensive because attack is the best defence. That was done in the days of Hannibal. No fortifications can last forever, and in that connection we are reminded of the operations of the Japanese against the Chinese at Port Arthur.
In spite of all this the government of the day has done little or nothing to support voluntary recruiting or to establish manpower, which is the most important thing in
The Address-Mr. Church

the war. Under methods of voluntary recruiting this country could have had 600,000 men in uniform by this time. What has been the policy of the government with respect to recruiting? So far as they are concerned this would seem to be a limited liability war. They have been conducting a secret war, and even from the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) one cannot obtain any information. In season and out of season for five years in urging rearmament, I have tried to find out what has been done, and have tried to have papers produced.
What has been the government's policy with regard to recruiting? It has been one of on again, off again, on again, until to-day it is as hard to get into the army as it is to get into the Rideau club, and I believe there is a long waiting list at that club. Many men gave up their jobs and went to the recruiting offices to enlist, only to find that one division is overseas, that another will not be ready until next fall, and that they are not wanted.
As I said on March 21 last it takes a year and a half or two years to train a man and to get the necessary equipment and modern mechanized power. Two years ago in the House of Commons I suggested that the government should have a survey made of large and small industrial plants, to be ready for war and rearmament, so that if the occasion arose we would have at hand a proper survey of those plants to start work. Did the government- adopt my suggestion? I asked not one but five or six ministers on the front benches if they would tell us anything about that report. We know now that right down to the hour of the declaration of war no survey was made. At the last, when I kept urging the government for action of that kind, it did send out some letters, but down to the hour of war nothing had been done for a survey of man-power, economic power, industrial power or food power.
I had hoped that in the speech from the throne something would have been said about the glorious efforts of the soldiers of France and about the mother country which has protected our shores. I should have thought there would be some reference in the speech from the throne to the Christian church and to Christian religion generally, because we know that Christianity is part of the law of England, and has been from time immemorial. I thought there would have been some expression of appreciation for the efforts of France, the nation towards which the eyes of the whole civilized world are now turned. In that land which is suffering terrible privation, trial and suffering, and which for the second time in less than a generation has been the scene of vicious

fighting, we have an example of the most sublime patriotism.
I had thought, too, that some tribute would have been paid to the mother country* for what it has done for the people of Canada. Had it not been for Great Britain every town in Canada on the American seaboard would be blacked out, because all the liberty and freedom we have in this dominion we owe to the mother country. I say some tribute should have been paid to M,r. Chamberlain and to his successor. One of the most outstanding events in all history has been the inspiring leadership which in the past two years has been given by Mr. Chamberlain before and after Munich.
We must remember the views which have been expressed by pacifists in and out of the house. Canada has been one of the prime movers in pacifism, and urged Britain to scrap the finest army, navy and air force the world had ever seen. We cannot get that back in a day or a generation. That is what caused the war. We did nothing while Germany rearmed on loans from the allies.
Another cause of the war was the lack of action during the Ethiopian crisis in 1937. At that time I brought before the house an empire training scheme. There were many young men in the city from which I come who were anxious to give service at that time, but who had to go overseas in cattle boats at their own expense and who have won decorations. They went to England and enlisted in the Royal Air Force because they could not enlist in Canada.
If we had that air force to-day, the force which Canada rejected-and I have the papers to show that I brought this matter before the house for at least three years-we would not have had a war at all. During the first great war 18,000 air mechanics and pilots were trained in Toronto. The plants which operated at that time could have begun operations again two or three years ago. Had they been in operation they would have been able to give the necessary equipment to the mother country.
The record of the British government in eight months has been a glorious one, particularly so when compared with that of the government of Canada. I can say truthfully that I am heartily ashamed of what has been done in Canada in connection with the present war. Two years ago I asked the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) if, in view of the mistakes made during the first great war and the submarine menace, he would establish food reservoirs in England. Did he do that? No, he did not. When we see what Britain has done we can thank God for four things: First, geography; second, the glorious Royal

The Address-Mr. Church
Navy; third, the glorious French army, which has protected civilization from the 200 German divisions, and, fourth, the Royal Air Force.
I can say that the action of the British government, that of the Royal Navy in its campaign at sea, that of the Royal Air Force, which has taken command of the air by acts of unparalleled heroism, the close economic alliance made immediately with France and the mobilization of man-power, are activities which have been carried out in a magnificent fashion.
The government in England has had to face the gigantic and difficult problem of defence of the civil population. It has had to consider the organization of supply groups, the suppression of profiteering and a process of equitable distribution of food stuffs. Is it any wonder the whole world has been thrilled by the efforts of the mother country and has pointed to it with pride?
I put forward the constructive idea that Canada should find a way of making possible the impossible. In other words, where there are no barracks or implements of war we should do as we did before, namely, take other public buildings. If men have no uniforms, let them train without uniforms. If they have no rifles, machine guns or other modem implements of warfare, then they should do as has been done in France and Great Britain, namely, use dummies until the real weapons can be obtained. Instead of allowing these men to drift around with nothing to do, they should be given the proper training immediately. Toronto is the main recruiting district, and the other day I was given to understand that 169 men in the Royal Air Force were to be ready as pilots next fall. Some of these men are at the Eglinton barracks and I have seen a few of them working on a city dump on Lawrence avenue. I do not know what they were doing there, they were probably moving refuse stuff from the Eglinton barracks to the dump, but they are getting tired of doing work like this, because many have left good jobs. The same thing applies to the infantry units in Toronto. The men want to get overseas and not have inaction. This is not the way to fight Hitler. The government will have to wake up. We shall never beat Hitler and win this war if we leave it to Canada. The war would be lost before we got into it at the rate we are going now. It will take one or two years before Canada is ready to give any help to the mother country in trained men or aircraft.
We do not know whether this country is going to be invaded. I do not know and you do not know. None of us knows to whom this country will belong at the end of the year. We should bestir ourselves. We have
not done our part. We have not done what we should have done. Because of the secret policy of the government, because of the limited liability war the government have been waging, the people of Canada have not taken defence seriously. The people of Canada have been kept in the dark with such ideas as collective security, pacifism, the league, the Monroe doctrine, and pan-Americanism. The Prime Minister visited Hitler and the day before the war sent back a cable to him: Use your influence for peace; do your duty to secure peace. We have been relying on Washington for our defence. Did not the Prime Minister tell the House of Commons that there would never be an expeditionary force and that the danger to Canada was minor in degree and secondary in origin?
The political executive of Canada have fallen down badly since the war started and the people now have no confidence in them. The people of Canada have not the confidence they should have. They do not believe that Canada has done all she ought to have done.
I believe a mistake was made in the past year in not giving the people of Canada the full faots on defence and foreign affairs. Since the last great war we have not taken the matter of a defence policy at all seriously. There will be other opportunities to make remarks, but I did not want this opportunity to pass without something being said by a representative of the main recruiting district at Toronto.
There should be a shake-up in No. 2 military district. Men from all over Canada have been brought in there to command that district who are not doing their duty. They do not understand the needs of Toronto. Is it any wonder that voluntary recruiting has fallen down? There should be Toronto men at the head of that district, as was the case in the past. I received a letter from the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Rogers) on October 14 to the effect that all members should take part in this effort. We have never been invited by the heads of that military district to attend a single public parade to see this federal work in Toronto. The members of parliament from the Toronto district have been ignored, probably because they are Conservatives. I do not want any invitations myself or urge this because my stand on defence and foreign affairs in this house during the past five years has been a non-party stand. I have urged that we should cooperate and coordinate with the British empire.
The minister has never visited or inspected No. 2 district. He can visit England, which was probably necessary, but under the terms
The Address-Mr. Church

of the Militia Act and Army Act he should visit the military districts rather than have some spokesman speak for him.
In conclusion, let me say that the way this government has carried on voluntary recruiting has been a mistake. First, they exempted large bodies of people, and then they exempted other bodies of people in the provinces. By their inaction and policy they are going to make conscription a live issue in this country before many more months have passed because Canada may be invaded. They will have to face the country on the question of man-power and munitions, on the question of food and on the way this war has been conducted. So far as I am concerned there will have to be a redress of grievances all along the line before supply is voted.
Motion (Mr. Lapointe, Lotbiniere) agreed to.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That the said address be engrossed and presented to His Excellency the Administrator by such members of this house as are of the honourable the privy council.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That sums not exceeding $700,000,000 be granted to his majesty towards defraying any expenses that may be incurred by or under the authority of the governor in council during the year ending 31st March, 1941, for-
(a)	the security, defence, peace, order and welfare of Canada;
(b)	the conduct of naval, military and air operations in or beyond Canada;
(c)	promoting the continuance of trade, industry and business communications, whether by means of insurance or indemnity against war risk or in any other manner whatsoever; and
(d)	the carrying out of any measures deemed necessary or advisable by the governor in council in consequence of the existence of a state of war.
With provision also empowering the governor in council to raise by way of loan under the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, 1931, such sum or sums of money, not exceeding in the whole the sum of $700,000,000, as may be required for the purpose of defraying the aforesaid expenses, the principal and interest of any such loan to be a charge upon and payable out of the consolidated revenue fund.
He said:	I am asking that the amount of
$700,000,000 be inserted in this motion which appears on page 18 of the routine proceedings. I desire to say also that His Excellency the

Administrator, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That the governor in council be authorized to raise by way of loan under the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, 1931, an amount not to exceed in the whole the sum of seven hundred and fifty million dollars for paying or redeeming the whole or any portion of loans or obligations of Canada and also for purchasing unmatured securities cf Canada and for public works and general purposes.
He said: His Excellency the Administrator, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Richard Burpee Hanson: I want it to be understood that the accepting of this resolution is to be subject to the reservations stated by the Prime Minister in his speech.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Certainly.


Mr. POULIOT:: Before it is adopted, I am under the impression that this motion has been mentioned, and we are on the same motion for the second time.


Grote Stirling: The first one is on page 18. This is on page 17.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend The Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act, 1934, to provide inter alia that proposals for a composition, extension of time or scheme of arrangement may be made under the said act by farmers in Manitoba.
He said: His Excellency the Administrator, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.

War-Development on Western Front

[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister, for the Minister of Transport) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it^ is expedient to amend the Trans-Canada Air Lines Act, 1937, to extend for one year the initial period described in the said act.
He said: His Excellency the Administrator, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I made mention of a telegram which I sent this morning to the right hon. the Prime Minister of Great Britain, and I thought it might be desirable to have it on the records of the house to-day. With the permission of hon. members I will read it:
Ottawa, May 20, 1940.
Along with my fellow Canadians I have heard your speech to the people of the commonwealth with feelings deeply stirred, and with profound admiration and pride.
This afternoon our new parliament will begin its consideration of Canada's war organization. The members of the House of Commons which assembled on Thursday last, are fully conscious of the grave responsibilities involved in the mandate which they have received from the Canadian people. I am making a statement before our House of Commons renewing the government's pledge to put forth its utmost effort in the organization of the resources and power of this country for the successful prosecution of the war. In this effort I know that the government will have the wholehearted support of the parliament and the people of Canada.
In these grave and clouded hours I want to renew to you, to the government and people of the United Kingdom the assurances that have already been given to you and to your predecessor in office of the full cooperation of our dominion in the struggle against the forces of evil which have been unleashed in the world. We shall muster the utmost strength of this country so that we may make our full contribution to the triumph of right which must and will prevail.



COMMONWEALTH AIR TRAINING


William Lyon Mackenzie King: May I table the summary
of a memorandum of agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand relating to the training of pilots and aircraft crews in Canada and their subsequent service. I table this memorandum in both English and French. The memorandum was handed to the press, I learned, early in January. It is the summary of the agreement which was agreed to at the time. The agreement itself has some clauses in it which do not appear in this summary.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The right hon. gentleman was going to give me personally a copy of the agreement. What I have is the summary.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It is a copy of this that I meant, but I shall be pleased to show my hon. friend a copy of the agreement.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King the house adjourned at 11.10 p.m.
Tuesday, May 21, 1940