November 6, 1919

CON

George Green Foster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. THOMAS FOSTER:

Through the employer. If an employer had ten, fifteen or twenty-five aliens in his employ, or whatever the number might be, the employer would collect the tax levied by the Government and hand over every month a cheque for the amount that he had collected.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN THE REPORT OP THE SPECIAL, COMMITTEE.
Permalink
UNION

Robert James Manion

Unionist

Mr. MANION:

Would the hon. member limit that tax to enemy aliens, or would he have it apply to all aliens?

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN THE REPORT OP THE SPECIAL, COMMITTEE.
Permalink
CON

George Green Foster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. THOMAS FOSTER:

I would apply it to all aliens who I would consider had a right to contribute to the State.

When I make these statements I am mindful of the financial condition of our country; I am mindful of our large debt. But I am mindful also of the great resources of this country. We are carrying a debt of some two billions, and we shall soon be adding to it another billion. But as against that we have the resources of Canada. We know that millions can be made out of the resources of this country if the Government is alive, alert, up-to-date and progressive and develops them. The resources are here; the wealth is in the 'country; it is simply a matter of the Government becoming resuscitated, adopting a vigorous policy and spending large amounts in the development of these great natural resources.

I do not see any reason, therefore, why this matter should not stand in abeyance, possibly until after the session, and have this committee, or another committee to 'be appointed, go into the matter further with a view to seeing what amounts can toe raised through the development of our various resources in order to meet to some *extent the demands of the Great War Veterans for a further gratuity.

At one o'clock the House took recess.

The House resumed at three o'clock.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN THE REPORT OP THE SPECIAL, COMMITTEE.
Permalink

MEMBER INTRODUCED.


John Wilfred Kennedy, Esquire, member-elect for the electoral district of Glengarry and Stormont, introduced by Mr. J. F. Reid and Mr. F. L. Davis.


COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.

UNION

William Findlay Maclean

Unionist

Mir. WILLIAM FINDLAY MACLEAN (York South):

Mr. Speaker, I wish to confine myself in the few remarks that I may make, to my own opinions on this subject. I have read with a good deal of interest and care the report made to the House in regard to this question of the re-establishment of the returned soldier. In the first place, I think it is one of the best parliamentary reports that I have seen-and I have seen many of them-and I wish to compliment the hon. gentlemen who drew it up for the logical way in which they have presented their case, for the consideration which they have given to the matter before them, and for the painstaking manner in which they have applied themselves to the consideration of the evidence on the question. Yet when I say that, I must also add that it has all the marks of a report of the chairman and directors of an incorporated company to their shareholders. With all the ability in it and with apparently the desire on their part to be just in their report and in their recommendations to the House, their report seems to lack the one human element of consideration and the fullest recognition of the services of those men who fought the battle of this nation and of humanity, and who did their full share in achieving the triumph of democracy. There is not that human touch, that human recognition that, to my mind, ought to be in a report of this kind. It is methodical; it is far reaching; it can be justified; it is logical; but it is not quite the parliamentary recognition that

ought to be shown, and to-day is the testing day of the recognition by Parliament of the sons of this nation who took part in this war, who risked their very lives, and many of whom made the supreme sacrifice. It happens to toe my fortune-and it is only by accident-that I come from a riding that represents the growing portion of the metropolitan city of Toronto. For nearly thirty years now I have been identified with that riding. That riding, so far as I can gather, has sent more of its sons to the front, and has sustained more disasters than probably any other constituency in this country. I do not say this in any spirit of boastfulness. In the suburban section of the city of Toronto and in the township of York you can go from one little mission church to another, and you will see in each an honour roll of those whom they have sent to the front and of those who will never come back. In each one of those churches you can see at least 100 names on that honour roll and often more than thirty or forty names of those who have given up their lives for the noble cause they went overseas to uphold. That riding has another characteristic, and it is its intensely British character. I have been at public school gatherings in that section where I have seen the master ask the children to stand up in two divisions, He would say to them: "Will all the children who are not Canadian-born citizens stand up?" They would stand up, and then he would ask those children who were native-born to stand up, and those who were born outside of Canada were in the majority. You would hardly find that in any other school in the country, but you find it in many of the schools in that section. The constituency that I represent has made great sacrifices, and I am trying to voice the views not only of the people of South York, but of the people of the city of Toronto and vicinity in regard to this question. I recall the first winter after the war and the distress that followed it-and I saw a good deal of that-and the beginning of recruiting. I went to recruiting meeting after recruiting meeting, and I spoke on the platform, as many other hon. gentlemen did in their ridings. We asked the young men to join up, and I was at meetings where the presiding officer had a bell, and as each boy came up he rang the bell. I was at meetings in that locality where over 100 boys came forward in one night within an hour and a half and registered to go to the front.

I also recall that in the last election I appealed to the people to support LTnion Government and their policy in regard to

the war, and especially for support, as we all appealed for support, for the boys who were at the front. I appealed time after time to the voters of that constituency and especially bo the women, who had then been enfranchised, and to the relatives of those who were at the front to give me their confidence, and I never hesitated to say that when the boys came back I hoped and trusted that- Parliament would recognize the sacrifices that they made, and I prophesied that the recognition would be four-fold when the time came. I never hesitated to say this to the people, and it was an easy thing to win the election there on such an appeal. Some of us in that district had not 5,000, or 6,000, but 8,000, 10,000, or even 16,000 majority. So, coming from a portion of the country like that and going in and out amongst all those people and having made those promises that I made and that I heard other people and the newspapers make, I say .that we are 'bound to show perhaps more generosity than justice, but it is only a matter of justice that we should give some kind of recognition, some kind of help, maybe, in this period of reconstruction which has come to our returned men as it has come to all of us. While I do not condemn the report in any way, I do not want to see the merits of the report^and it has many merits in it-ignored or not recognized. I think in some way there ought to be a little more recognition of the claims of the men, especially as those claims have been set out by the Great War Veterans' Association and their representatives here.

I want to speak of another case in my experience. I went to a leading firm in Toronto, which firm sent many of its employees to the front, a firm which paid their wages all the time they were at the front and looked after their families. This firm employs many women dependent on men who went to the front, and I asked that great firm what their experience was of the men when they came back. I said: " What do you do for them?" "Well," they replied, " every man has his position, and every man has the same pay that he had before he went to the war." I said: " How do they discharge their duties?" They said: " Some come back, and they pick up their work and carry on; many another man does not quite pick up his work; he will work a few hours to-day, and then he will go home and he will come back to-morrow; and some of them do not seem quite as if they will ever be able bo take up their work; but we let them stop there and gradually they are getting better and more used to their work, and

we say nothing." Many who have come home are not the same men they were before they went to the war. We should try to reestablish them and build them up, and that is only the right thing to do. I come in contact with those men every day of my life; I go in and out amongst them, and I have heard their complaints.

Many of them are far from being fit. They are anxious to be re-established, and while they do not ask for charity, they certainly desire to be placed on a satisfactory basis in civil life; and, in my view at all events, they should undoubtedly be treated with generosity. I therefore trust that the House will take a somewhat broader and more patriotic view of the question and that Parliament will show a generosity commensurate with the noble and stupendous part which our soldiers have played in 'the interests of civilization. What the Canadian soldiers have accomplished in the defence of humanity and democracy is one of the greatest and most brilliant achievements in history. Their achievement is pre-eminent and will go down in history as one of the chief factors in protecting the world from the menace of a mighty foe. So that when we are called upon to deal with the position of the returned soldiers it is incumbent upon us even to let our generosity be exuberant to the point of overflowing. It is perhaps true that the men are being exploited to some degree, and I have seen them at times worked up to a considerable feeling of indignation in regard to their treatment, more particularly in comparison with the preferred treatment in -this country of aliens and profiteers. I have heard that statement made, and there was some reference made in the House this morning to that fact. But even if some of the soldiers do cherish sentiment^ like this, I say that we shall never make any grievous mistake if we err on the side of generosity and a due recognition of what our brave men have done in behalf of the cause oif Canada and humanity at large.

Now, the question is asked, where is the money to come from? Every business man and every member of the House, Mr. Speaker, in approaching a question of that kind must begin with the consideration of ways and means, and the solution of the two great problems that confront us, namely re-establishment of the soldiers and reconstruction, is absolutely dependent on that question. I compliment the committee on the exhaustive resume they have given of the financial condition of the

country, and their suggestion that every care and prudence must be exercised in administering our finances. Still, Mr. Speaker, there are new sources of revenue that have not yet been tapped in this country, and I listened with much interest to the suggestion of my hon. friend from East York (Mr. Foster) in regard to new forms of taxation that might be instituted, the confiscation of unjust profits, taxes on land and taxes on some of the resources of the country. I believe that Parliament at its next session will have to go into the whole matter of our finances and devise new sources of income in order that we may be able to discharge our commitments, which are many and growing. While I have no very great suggestions to make now, in the closing days of this session, I am convinced that Parliament will have to revise the whole fiscal policy of the country from the bottom upwards and find a greater income to meet our obligations, and probably at another session I may be imprudent enough to attempt to proffer suggestions in this^ direction. At the present moment, however, I do see sources of income that could be tapped to pay a portion of our debt and re-establish our men. I shall make no personal references to-day, but in the early days of the war I stated that Canada had the richest store of metal resources to be found in any country on earth. It possesses the richest band of mineral wealth in that thirty-mile range in the Sudbury country, trich in nickel, in gold, in silver, in platinum, in paladium and in fact in all the key metals. In some way we have let outsiders develop and control that great source o.f wealth, and I have contended before in this House, and I contend now, that one immense source of income available for discharging our national debt and our obligations to our soldiers* can be taken advantage of if the Government will in some way take over or superintend the development of those mines and take a portion of the wealth so produced. Instead of Canadians developing that mineral Eldorado, we have allowed foreigners to come In and exploit it. We do not know to-day, nor has any disclosure ever been made to the people of Canada, as to the extent of the mineral and metal riohness of these mines. We do not know how mucfh platinum has been taken out of them and reduced and refined in the United States and in Great Britain, but my belief is that millions upon millions in money of the platinum that went into the war came from Canada, not to mention millions in silver and gold, and especially

in nickel. Now, nickel is the key industry of the world, and the world is going to be reconstructed largely with nickel steel. We have nickel in this country that can supply the world. Indeed, I think we have a monopoly of nickel and some other metals, and if we hut realize how valuable they are and controlled them, as the nation should control them, there would be an enormous source of revenue for our requirements. The British authorities have declared that hereafter these key industries must be held in trust for the Empire, and if we take over these immense nickel resources in the Sudbury country and see that there is a fair distribution of the output as between those who put their money into these mines, our revenue will be largely increased. The same thing applies to many other of our natural resources. We have allowed our water powers and timber limits and other of our natural resources to pass from our control, and immense profits have been made out of them.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
UNION

James Alexander Calder (Minister of Immigration and Colonization)

Unionist

Mr. J. A. CALDER:

The hon. gentleman is referring to natural resources belonging to the province of Ontario. What jurisdiction have we to control those resources?

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
UNION

William Findlay Maclean

Unionist

Mr. W. F. MACLEAN:

On the ground of national protection and safety, the Dominion of Canada has supreme right to exercise some degree of control over these. I admit the provincial jurisdiction to which the hon. minister refers, but through this Parliament I am talking to a nation on a great national issue, and the nation can come forward and control these things. This Government has been requested by the Imperial Government to join with them in passing a non-ferrous law but. we have not yet done so. The reason advanced by the British Government was that it had discovered that in some way the control of the country's metals, indispensable to the defence of the Empire, had passed out of our hands. There is a way in which we can deal with the nickel industry. We can put an export duty on all of it that goes out of this country, but as I have said we have allowed this great wealth in nickel to leave Canada. The United States Government, in taxing profits, not long ago discovered in New Jersey a refinery' for what is known as matte. This matte, which is the raw form of the first reduction of nickel ore, was seized, and in a few days the United States Goveriiment had a check for three and a half million dollars which should have come to Canada. Nobody knows how much one firm in

England has made out of nickel ore that w

I am not going into a discussion with my hon. friend the Chairman of the Committee (Mr. Calder), to whose careful attention we largely owe this excellent report, as Jto new sources of revenue. But, there are sources of revenue which can be called on in a condition of affairs like the present. We have to find a way for availing ourselves of these sources if we are to undertake the duty of the reconstruction of the country and the re-establishment of onr soldiers.

At the present time we are going farther into debt; we are not getting out of debt. We are putting out one loan after another, we will have to put out another and after that probably another and another. It comes down to a question of ways and means. While it may be said at present that we have not the ways and means, we have to find them.

I was very much impressed by the excellent speech by the hon. member for West Peterborough (Mr. Burnham) and particularly with his proposal for a soldier bond loan. I believe the patriotic people of Canada will subscribe to a bond loan for the purpose of discharging our dues to the soldiers and providing for their re-establishment. I believe it would be a most popular appeal to the people to say that we were going to raise money on a soldier's bond to pay them off.

What will be the commitment? I have talked to some of the representatives of the veterans and the reasonable ones that I have seen come down to probably a $200,000,000 proposal. I want to say to this House and the country that in view of the present condition of affairs greatest and the best settlement of that debt of ours to the soldiers will he a quick clean up. We will get a quick discharge of the debt and it may be for a comparatively small sum. Let us try and get it closed up. It will not pay the debt but we may get a receipt for a $200,000,000 expenditure now and next year that will close up this claim. Otherwise Parliament will be approached year after year just as the American Government was assailed for thirty years after the civil war in regard to pension claims. It cost them an enormous sum. These claims will be coming up and if the Veterans come forward, as I understand they have come forward, with a second proposal, which I believe they will produce if the committee asks for it, we will get the thing closed up and then we will be able to give our attention to the reconstruction of the country at large.

While I do not wish to be taken as in any way discrediting this report, and while I give every credit to the committee who drafted it, I think they ought to find a way, if it be possible, to re-consider it in some directions in an effort to meet the views not only of the men but of the people of the country at large. I know that we are all here as trustees not for the soldiers only but for all the people. Perhaps it is an easy thing for me to talk as I have talked here to-day, because more soldiers happen to be resident in the riding I represent than in some other ridings. I think I am speaking fairly for the community that I represent, and that they will not be dissatisfied with Parliament if it tries to make a quick clean up of this question by giving a more generous vote this session. The committee has already increased the amount, as was pointed out a few moments ago. If they would make that vote a little more generous this session, make it rather an addition to the gratuity with perhaps a concluding vote next session

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
?

An hon. MEMBER:

Oh, oh.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
UNION

William Findlay Maclean

Unionist

Mr. W. F. MACLEAN:

My hon. friend may laugh, but it has to be cleaned up. It is not being cleaned up now, and we will have here a recurrence of the demand just as they have had a recurrence of the demand for pensions in the United States thirty years after the Civil War. Let us try and get a discharge. I believe that the whole people of Canada will approve of Parliament looking at this question in a broad and generous way, rather than as trustees exercising a trust. There is something more than trusteeship; there is la patrie recon-naissante, the recognition of the country for valiant service well rendered. I do not know how to express it, but the debt has got to be discharged, or else, as one hon. gentleman said this morning, we are not made of the same kind of stuff as those sons of ours who went to the front and fought for us. That is the underlying thought in the minds of the Canadian people. We have to be generous with these men even if it may be said that we are extravagant.

I do ask the House to acquit me of any charge of popularity hunting because I have

stood up to-day and made the suggestions that I have made. This is not the end of it for me. I have already engaged myself to go to a dozen meetings in South York and explain to the rural branches of the veterans the attitude of Parliament. Perhaps I may not come back; I do not care what they do to me so long as I satisfy my conscience that I have acted justly and generously. They may think that I have been wrong or that I have not treated them fairly- they will have their opportunity of looking after me at the elections which may come to-morrow or next year, and if they do not want me they can choose some one else who they may think will better represent them. I am trying to speak for all the people of South York and perhaps for a large section of the metropolitan district of Toronto. When I do that I do it without any "safety first" movement on my part, or without doing anything unfair to my fellow members. I know what a trying question this is to every one of them. I do it as one who would like to see us get rid of this question and get rid of it by a generous recognition of the men while at the same time- not increasing to any extent the debt of the country.

Let us find new sources of revenue to tap, and there are new sources that are available, and that is a point I commend to the consideration of the Government. If they do that, they will find a way out of the difficulty and will find the people backing them up in taking a more generous view of the re-establi'shment of the soldiers of Canada who were at the front.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
L LIB

Willis Keith Baldwin

Laurier Liberal

Mr. W. K. BALDWIN (Stanstead):

It has been my good fortune to meet a good many returned soldiers who have been at the great war, and, generally speaking, I have found them very fair-minded men. I have, in nearly every instance, found them to be all that one could expect. There are very few but take a broad national view of their own condition and the conditions of this country. They say that more than fifty per cent of the returned men are in no imperative need of money at present and that with respect to fifty per cent of the balance the same thing is true. But there is an element-^foreign-born, so to speak, not Canadian-born-that are agitating for this flat rate gratuity of $2,000. Now we have got to deal with this matter in a businesslike way. We had the statement yesterday from the Minister of Immigration and Colonization (Mr. Calder) that this country is greatly burdened with debt, and that it is almost impossible to

grant a cash graltuity to these soldiers. The hon. gentleman (Mr. W. F. Maclean) who has just spoken, tells us of the national resources of Canada and he also tells us that we must get rid of this question. Well, it appears to me that we are going the wrong way about it. Every prudent man in this House knows that it is the lot of the young men to work and to lay by something for a rainy day and for old age; they should not spend at once everything they can get hold of. If our young men do not become thrifty this country will never emerge from the slough of despond in which we are at present labouring. It has been urged that we should resort to lotteries and Sunday theatres and derive money from these sources in order to help the returned soldier. Such things would be analogous to the bullfights and the cock-fights peculiar to Spain and Mexico. Spain reverted to its senses some years ago and Mopped the practice. Mexico has not changed its national pastime. It indulges in bull-fights and cockfights on holidays and on Sundays, varied occasionally by the people fighting each other. Surely we do not want in this country of abundance to let the devil rule until Hell shall reign triumphant.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
L LIB

Ernest Lapointe

Laurier Liberal

Mr. ERNEST LAPOINTE:

Hear, hear.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
L LIB

Willis Keith Baldwin

Laurier Liberal

Mr. BALDWIN:

Such a procedure is wholly repugnant and wholly impossible. We also hear free traders talk of raising the tariff in order to secure the necessary additional revenue. Last night in this House a free trader advocated putting on more Customs duty for this purpose. It occurs to me, as I have already said,, that the young and vigorous among our population should look out for old age. When the wisdom of a thing is demonstrated beyond the possibility of a doubt, why not adopt it. The great United States has adopted the principle of insurance for its soldiers, and in the case of every one of its soldiers who went abroad to fight in the great war a portion of his pay was set aside to meet the insurance premiums. On returning to their country they were given the privilege of taking insurance from among some four or five different systems. The Government is very insistent that they should do that; in fact, they are sending men around to search out the soldiers and get them to adopt the plan. Now this is a policy which seeks to induce the young soldiers to set aside some portion of their earnings for the coming rainy day. Already the United States have built up a big reserve in this insurance department consisting of many

million dollars and the returned soldier is adopting the course urged upon him. The payments are as low as $15 per thousand and $10,000 is the maximum they are asked to insure for. Why is not this country pursuing the same policy? It has had two years to ponder over the matter and we might just as well have followed the example of the United States. Had we done so we should now have a reserve lying in the Government's treasury to pay off the insurance risk as these soldiers die.

In this country we -possess a great domain. We have no surplus funds available and yet we have very great interest payments coming due. In regard to the Victory Loan we notice it is difficult to get people to subscribe to it. I am not speaking advisedly, but it would appear from the Canadian press that the organizers of that loan are having a job to get subscribers.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
UNION

William Findlay Maclean

Unionist

Mr. W. F. MACLEAN:

The loan will amount to double the amount we are asking. [DOT]

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
L LIB

Willis Keith Baldwin

Laurier Liberal

Mr. BALDWIN:

I should be very glad indeed if that should prove to be the case. Personally, I subscribed very much more than my circumstances warrant. I repeat that we have an enormous public domain. Take our great northern territory which is somewhat analogous to Alaska. The United States are developing Alaska and this -country i-s yielding billions more money than were paid in millions foT it. If Alaska is so wonderfully rich in natural resources, our own northern territory, which is only divided from it by an imaginary line, must be equally rich. Now we all admit that the returned soldier -should be reimbursed and well reimbursed for the sacrifices he has made in helping him and his dependents. Why not, even if we have to go beyond the -surveyed territory, allot a portion of land to each soldier who is willing to go? Let him take a -certain acreage of land and become the pioner and colonizer in that new country which we are desirous of -settling to-day. Too many of our population are segregated in the cities and towns of this land. What we want is to get more people on to the unoccupied lands and we should permit the returned soldier to locate in that country if he wishes to do so. If he goes beyond the surveyed regions into territory that is unsurveyed, make him a grant of land and let him select it for himself. If he should tumble on a fine water power or strike a mineral deposit, 'do not take it away from him. If he had the grit and the gumption

to grubstake and develop it, possibly living in a dugout or shack while doing so, let him reap the advantage of what he may discover. I would favour that system of rewarding the soldier but as for making a cash grant it is beyond our capacity. There is no question, but the appalling stupendous debt of this country is discouraging-I feel it is discouraging not only to the community at large but Parliament also. New taxation is threatened and we have heard one hon. gentleman advocating a tax on farm lands. That may be wdll enough for him, but the farmers, very probably within a very short time, will show this House what they think about such a proposition. While I am in perfect sympathy with the soldier and recognize that any one who has suffered physically or mentally should be fairly dealt with, there i= this to be borne in mind.

Let us remember that there are more branches than agriculture. If a man is inclined to become a fisherman, let us help him; if he has ambition to engage in scientific research, let us help him. Let us do everything we can for the returned soldier. Every intelligent soldier knows that we are unable to give a further cash grant. He knows that it would put a great burden upon this country if we attempted to secure the necessary money for a further cash grant, for we would have to go into the foreign money market with our dollar only worth ninety-five cents. We should first get our dollar recognized as worth one hundred cents in the American money market, and if every mother's son will work hard and long we as patriotic Canadians will soon show the world that -our great national debt is a mere bagatelle. This question can only be grasped if it is gone into in a businesslike way, and we must so approach it, and in a spirit of patriotism so guard our great heritage that our soldiers will be thankful for what we have done.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
UNION

William Foster Cockshutt

Unionist

Mr. W. F. OOCKSHUTT (Brantford):

Mr. Speaker, I recognize this as being a serious and a somewhat dangerous question for a public man to express his opinions upon, but I do not feel that I would be doing -my duty to my constituency or to my country if I failed to make a few remarks upon what I deem to be this very important question now before the House. The report of the committee, as has been said already by the member for York (Mr. W. F. Maclean) is a very excellent document in many respects. I had strong sympathy with the committee in the work they undertook, and reading the names of the

gentlemen composing that committee they inspired me /with confidence that they would try to arrive at conclusions that would he safe and sound and in the interests of the soldiers and the country. I hope, however, I will not be considered unbind or ungenerous if I say that I am nob in full accord with the findings of the committee. Of course, as the father of three soldier sons who have served at the front I may he accused of desiring to see them obtain some further advantage at the cost of the country. If any hon. member holds such an opinion, Mr. Speaker, I hope he will disabuse his mind at once, as I would be quite content, and these young men are quite content, not to ask for a single further dollar from the country, although I may say that those boys are not in the same condition as they were when they went overseas, the result of their combined service of eleven years partly at the front. I only make that personal explanation, Mr. Speaker, in order that I may not be accused of speaking from any particular angle or with a desire to arrive at any other than a just conclusion in regard to this subject.

The committee have gone into the matter very fully, having summoned evidence from a good many quarters. I have not had time to read the evidence, nor have I fully read the report as I should have done. But the minister (Mr. Calder) gave an excellent analysis of it yesterday and I endeavoured to follow him as closely as possible. Judging it as best I can from the standpoint of the business man and the layman, Mr. Speaker, I am rather forced to the conclusion that the committee has given too much attention to proving the financial inability of the country rather than to showing the duty of the country to the soldier and to his dependents. That, I think, is a serious defect in the report. I do not believe that we have raised the last dollar that can be raised. If I did so believe I would not have voted for a good many of the projects that I have supported in this House.

The war just concluded was the greatest war of all the ages, and the problems it has left behind are just as great as those which confronted us during its progress, and we have to treat those problems on as noble and generous a scale in these early days of peace as in the trying days of war. Canada took one of the leading parts in the great war. On every platform we have boasted of the splendid qualities of our soldiers, and when the war was concluded there was no better fighting unit in Europe

than our Canadian army corps. Our soldiers then having established our prowess on the battle-field, I trust that we who remained at home are going to be equally capable in grappling with the questions that have come to us by reason of the war. I am not quite sure yet, Mr. Speaker, that we have reached the full measure of our selfdenial. I am not sure that we have denied ourselves many of the luxuries of life that we from day to day enjoy, and as a man who condemns himself just as much as I condemn any of my fellow members, I say that if it is necessary in the opinion of our volunteer army that went overseas that Canada has not been generous enough to them, I trust that we will yet show our soldiers that if we err in any direction we are going to err on over rather than on under payment to them. It is true that the sacrifices our soldiers made cannot be rewarded by dollars and cents. Every man knows that. The trials that they endured on the battle-fields, sleeping in mud and water and fighting night and day, were such as no money can ever adequately reward; but we must remember that it was only by their noble generous spirit that they came through triumphant at last, and, Mr. Speaker, if we are going to " carry on " in a manner worthy of their magnificent efforts we must dig down and entrench ourselves, so to speak, in the resources of this country in such a way that those men who have come back may not suffer any disadvantage in re-establishing themselves in civil life.

I have not been bothered in any degree by the five thousand soldiers in my constituency, and I have only had about one telegram and one interview with eight or ten of these men. Whether they know my views and that I am not easily moved, I cannot tell, but they have not endeavoured in any way to influence me in the course which I shall take in this debate. Therefore I feel free to express my views as a citizen and as a man who is in full sympathy with our soldiers. I have boasted on many a platform that the treatment that Canada has handed out to her soldiers is the finest that has been accorded by any country in the world. I think that is true now, but it is not quite as true as I thought it was in one or two respects. I am told that Aus-ralia has exceeded us in payments to her troops for tfleir services overseas.

I understand that that is the case to-day, though I believe it was not the case when the war began. But whether that is the case or not, it will not have the effect of

influencing my desire to meet the views of the men. I say, therefore, to the committee-and I say it without any desire to criticise adversely what they have done -that I regret that they have not viewed the question from, a little more generous angle than seems to be indicated by the report.

The programme laid down in the report will entail an expenditure of .about $50,000,000, in addition to what we have already spent or voted. I have looked over the figures and have endeavoured to study them. Of course, it is not easy to understand all that has been done. The minister, in his long and very exhaustive report yesterday of the work of the committee, set forth in detail a great deal of what has been spent and a great deal of what has been done. I think that in all about $350,000,000 to $400,000,000 is what we have spent. As I have said, this was the biggest war of all the ages. More men were engaged in it than were ever engaged in any previous war, and the problem which faces us following the conclusion of the war is correspondingly large. Some gentlemen have taken into consideration in this regard such wars as the Fenian raid, the South African war, and the like. These, important in themselves, were a mere bagatelle compared with the great conflict which recently ended. We must learn to think generously, in proportion to the vast enterprises in which we have been engaged. This war was the vastest enterprise in which the world ever engaged, and it is unreasonable to expect that within this generation all the liabilities incurred as a result of the war can be discharged. This war, after all, was not only for the present generation; it was for all generations for all time; it was for the security of humanity and civilization in the generations to come. It is unreasonable, Mr. Speaker, to suggest that the whole of the load which has come upon us as a result of this immense struggle should be wiped out by this generation. I do not think it is possible; I do not believe it is desirable. It is but just that posterity should pay some of the cost of this great war. This generation has lost what is far more precious than money; it has

lost much of its best flesh and

blood, which cannot be replaced within many years. That, of itself, is a great loss [DOT]to this generation. Moreover, our resources have been more or less depleted, and we have piled up a debt of about two thousand millions. But that is not a crushing load for a country with the resources of Canada. That is not going to weigh us

down forever. With wise management; with a proper development of our resources; with a continuance of the busy industry of the intelligent citizens of our country, we can wipe out that debt at an early day if we find it necessary to do so. But as I have said, I do not think that is necessary, nor do I think it wise to attempt it at this time.

I do not want to go into the details of this question, I simply want to make a few suggestions. To my hon. friends opposite I suggest that this is too serious a question to be made the basis of an effort to make political capital. The quiet way in which our friends on the other side have conducted themselves to-day shows *conclusively that they are of that view, and I am glad that that is the case. Moreover, Mr. Speaker, this is not a time for personalities. I hope that the debate will from now on be free from anything of that kind. We may have strong views on a question of this kind, but there is no reason why the House should lose its sense of dignity, or why hon. members should indulge in personalities. If anybody has a criticism to make of any of my remarks I hope he will make it; I shall be prepared to receive it. In expressing our views upon a question of this kind we should all strive to consider the matter seriously and earnestly; we should use only those words, which we think will throw some light or some information upon the question at issue.

I have said that I regard the proposal of the committee as insufficient. They propose a programme involving, in round figures, an expenditure of $50,000,000. I will set off with a proposal that they multiply that by six and lay out a programme involving an expenditure of from $250,000,000 to $300,000,000, which is less than half the amount involved in some of the extreme calculations which have been made.

I want to say right here of our soldier body that they are intelligent, wise, sound men as a -whole, although a few agitators have crept into the ranks who do not desire or do not try to lead their fellowmen in the right direction. I hope our soldiers will see to it that they follow only those who have the true interests of the soldier at heart, and that they be not led by agitators or by any who seek to serve political or other purposes not really conducive to the best interests of the soldier. The soldier body has so good a record in the war that ft would ibe a pity for them to spoil that record now, by allowing themselves to be

unwisely led or by acting injudiciously. So far they have conducted themselves like men, and I believe that if we do our part they will continue to do theirs.

Many of these men, Mr. Speaker, feel that they have grievances against the Government. Rightly or wrongly, they are impressed with that view, and it is our duty to look into this thing in a sympathetic way and try to solve the problem in the honest way that the soldier would have it solved rather than err on the side of being ungenerous. I would rather be guilty of paying five dollars too much to a soldier than of keeping one dollar from him; and it is from that point of view that I approach this question.

I recommend, therefore, that either now or at no distant date we lay out a programme that we think is fair and, which has due regard to the soldiers' own requests. I do not think it is too -much to say that the soldiers should have a good deal to say about this. They are the ones most concerned; they and their families

4 p.m. are the ones who have suffered most, and they are in many respects the 'best people to judge of what they require to put them on their feet again. I would, therefore, listen very closely to the statement of the requirements of the Soldiers as placed before the committee by the war veterans themselves. I think that they have some good, sound leaders. I had not the pleasure of hearing very many of them, but I believe that some good, sound advice was given to the committee by some of the soldiers' representatives. I would set out, therefore, with the idea of trying to meet the soldiers' views as far as possible, and having in mind the suggestion that it is better to err in the direction of over-generosity than in the direction of being penurious. I know that the committee have acted in the very hest of good faith; and I know that they have tried to be ultra-just to the country and to safeguard the interests of the people as a whole. I know that that has been in their minds from start to finish, and I do not for a moment criticise them,. But I believe that a programme involving $250,000,000 or $300,000,000 would, not stagger the country or cause any very great ripjple of excitement from coast to coast.

Having decided that we can face a programme involving from $250,000,000 to $300,000,000, I would, in the light of the request of the soldiers themselves, proceed to ascertain what that amount could best be devoted to. I have jotted down two or three

things that I think might receive further consideration.

First, the widow and dependents. I would do a little better for them than anything that has already been done, generous as it may appear. The cost of living is high. The difficulties are great in maintaining a household, even if one has plenty of money, and the ones who have not very much money have a big problem on their hands in endeavouring to supply the needs of a family in these days.

Then, the aged mother should have very great consideration. I am not sure, but I do not think that she has received the consideration at the hands of the House and of the country that she should have received. And this should apply not merely to the aged mother; it should apply to the dependent mother, even if she is not very old, whose son has died for his country. Surely it is not too much to give her what will keep her fairly comfortably during the rest of her life, which will not, at best, be very long.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
UNION

Richard Clive Cooper

Unionist

Mr. COOPER:

She is pensioned.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
UNION

William Foster Cockshutt

Unionist

Mr. OOCKSHUTT:

Yes, she is pensioned; but I am asking for a little more in both those respects, for the widow and dependents and for the aged mother. Then I ask more lor the man who is totally disabled. I have in mind two or three cases of men in my city who, although they are considered to be fairly generously treated, are, I know, not getting what they should get. One has tuberculosis, and the other has undergone about twenty-five operations. He has had the side of his face shot all away, and he is a patched up man who has gone through untold agony with heroic fortitude. I just mention those two cases in order that the House may appreciate the remarks I made a moment ago, that you cannot overpay, yes, that you cannot pay at all as they should be paid, the services of men who have suffered in that way. t It is in that light that I would approach the subject of the totally disabled. I do not think they are getting enough, nor that their families are receiving sufficient consideration.

The widow of the soldier who was killed overseas should receive the gratuity that the soldier would have received if he had come home in a more or less disabled condition. I do not think that is being done. Then I believe that all the soldiers who themselves are in many cases relieving the wants of others, because I am informed that in our own War Veterans' Association in

Brantford several thousand dollars have been banded out by the veterans themselves to chums whom they knew to be suffering, should not be allowed to do that work. We should do it from the coffers of the country, and I believe all those and more can be taken care of. Therefore, I should like to see this committee or some other committee undertake in the future a programme of a more generous nature than the one outlined, although this one may do as a temporary expedient. I am not going, at the present time, to say that I am going to vote against it; until I see

something that is better, I reserve an open mind upon that. Some hon. members will say: Well, how are you going to get the funds for all this? For once I am going to astonish the House by agreeing with the hon. member for Peterborough West (Mr. Burnham). A soldier loan will be *the solution of the whole question, if I do not miss my guess. If this committee will formulate a programme something like the one I have outlined-and it is a very imperfect one and can be embellished and made much better than the few suggestions I have given-and if they will tell the Minister of Finance that they want $250,000,000 or $300,000,000 to carry out that programme and ask him to put a soldier loan before the country, I venture to say that not one-half the canvassing will be required to get that amount that is being required to secure the present loan, and that is being taken up very well. I believe there will be, on the part of the people of this country, a rush that will astonish this Government or any other Government that goes before the people for such a loan. There is deep down in the hearts of our citizens a feeling that the best we can do is not enough to pay the debt we owe to the splendid men who have been over there, and who have laid down their lives for King and country. In that way you would have $250,000,000 or $300,000,000 as a soldier fund. I would not, I am free to say, pay that out all at once. Let the loan be on the same terms on which the ordinary loans are floated, and if it be not necessary to pay out the whole amount, if the loan is subscribed or over-subscribed, let whatever is not immediately required be kept as a nest egg, because the point so far as I see it is this: Even if you do all that is suggested to-day; yes, if you give the $2,000 of a gratuity to every man, you have not finally got rid of this question. This question is going to be more or less with us as long as this generation lives, and no one must run away with the idea that we

are going to settle it all at one gulp, because that cannot be done. Many may disagree with me, but I think I have 'been in as close touch with the soldier and what is the problem for some of them as most men have. Many a soldier who has come home, feeling thankful to God that he has got back safe and sound, as he says, quite well, and who has taken his discharge, has wakened up a few weeks or a few months afterwards to the fact that he is not the same man as he thought he was. In other words, some disability or some wound that he has had overseas has recurred. I know of cases where men got their discharge and thought they were all right, and in a few months they were all wrong again. The country owes those men a debt, and after all that those men have endured, which was almost more than flesh and blood can endure, they are not the same. Every one knows that if he puts forth frantic efforts to carry through a certain great work, the excitement and vim that he puts into it carries him through for the moment but a few hours afterwards when he begins to rest he finds he is a done-out man, and that is what has happened to many of our returned soldiers. Under these circumstances, I say that this question is going to be with us for a long time to come, and I am propounding mow to the chairman and members of the committee a policy which I hope they will take into their kindly consideration. I am putting it forward in the most generous and kindly spirit that I can. I have made these few suggestions on the spur of the moment so to speak, but they have had some consideration from me in times past, and perhaps they will be found to be of some little value in indicating the manner in which, we should approach this question.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink
UNION

James Alexander Calder (Minister of Immigration and Colonization)

Unionist

Mr. CALDER:

The hon. member (Mr. Cockshutt), during the course of his remarks, has deal with the possibility of raising, say $250,000,000 or $300,000,000 by way of a special soldier bond issue. He has not touched the other side of the question. We must not forget the fact that if that money is raised, the interest on it must be paid in future, and I should like to get his views as to the manner in which the country is going to raise that annual interest. If I may be permitted just for a moment, I showed yesterday that the annual expenditures of Canada prior to the war amounted to $127,000,000; that those have grown this year to $270,00,000; that we have at the present time commitments

which will in all probability approximate $700,000,000, commitments for which the money must be borrowed, the present Victory Loan of $300,000,000 being part of that; that the interest on that $700,000,000 will be in the neighbourhood of $38,000,000 which, if added to the $270,000,000, makes over $300,000,000. . If we issue a further loan of $300,000,000-, making a total of $1,000,000,000 within this year, we shall -have a further annual interest charge of -somewhere in the neighbourhood of $15,000,000. Assuming that what the hon. gentleman says is true, namely, that you could go out and actually get this $250,000,000 or $300,000,000, we must not overlook the fact that that annual interest charge must be met and must be raised by taxation.

I for one would be glad to get the hon. gentleman's views as to how we are to secure that annual amount of money that would be absolutely necessary to take care of the interest charge.

Mr. 'COCKSHUTT: The minister has made quite a speech, and I am not sure that I followed it all. I have had a good deal to do with this Government in the last fifteen years, and I have seen them pay off a great .many loans by floating other loans.

I do not suppose that we can obviate the same course in the present case. We certainly cannot do it out of current revenue, and I think I made it abundantly clear that it was unfair to ask this generation even to try to pay off the obligations we are under.

Topic:   THE SUGAR SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   COMMITTEE ON SOLDIERS' CIVIL RE-ESTABLISHMENT.
Sub-subtopic:   DEBATE ON CONCURRENCE IN REPORT OP THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
Permalink

November 6, 1919