September 11, 1939

LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of National Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

I agree that that is so. But under the War Measures Act there is no provision that any of the orders or regulations need be published; it is just left to the government to give publicity to those which it is considered in the public interest to publish. I suggest that the same thing be done under this bill.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
CON

Charles Hazlitt Cahan

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CAHAN:

I notice that under the War Measures bill and under the previous War Measures Act notice in the Canada Gazette was not necessary. But the minister will remember, if he had to do with the regulations made under the War Measures Act, that as a matter of fact such regulations were published in separate blue books and made known to all those in Canada who were likely to need notice of them.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of National Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

Yes, that is true.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
CON

Charles Hazlitt Cahan

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CAHAN:

Some such course should be followed.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of National Revenue)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

We would follow the same practice. I think it could well be left to the executive, instead of being made compulsory.

Motion (Mr. Howe) agreed to.

Bill reported.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Walter Edward Foster (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

When shall the bill be read a third time?

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Now.

Mr. ILSLEY moved the third reading of the bill.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
CON

Thomas Langton Church

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Broadview):

I wish to say just a few words. I made a few remarks on section 6 but found that two other matters I wanted to bring up could not be spoken to under that section and could be brought up only on the third reading of the bill.

Recently I have noticed a large crowd of young men outside the Toronto armouries every day. Many of them have come to see me and other hon. members. There is some misunderstanding as to what these young men are enlisting for. When they go to the commanding officer there is some question as to whether they are signing on just for a month or for a year or for home defence or for overseas service. In my opinion there is no such thing as home defence; as I have said during the last two or three years, our main line of defence is in France and Britain; if they fall there is no such thing as defending the shores of Canada, for it will be all over if Britain fails. If voluntary recruiting is not

War Appropriation Bill

to be absolutely killed in this country, something must be done and done quickly owing to the lack of support. The government have taken a very important stand on man power without any adequate survey. For the last three years I have asked in this house for a national survey of man power, food resources, industrial power, economic power, and nothing has been done. I asked the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) to set up storage reservoirs in England, but I was a voice crying in the wilderness during the past two years calling for rearmament, and I then predicted that this great disaster was coming.

I want to know what instructions have been sent out by the militia department for recruiting all over Canada and to whom and for what. We have waited long enough to see some allies of ours on the North American continent who are not visible to-night. We were told by some hon. members on my left that all we had to do was to let these allies defend our shores, and rely on Pan-Americanism only while it is of tremendous importance to have America with us. Yet their isolation policy disappoints us, and the time has gone by for all their peace pacts, agreements, and any more things of that kind. That very policy during the past two years of appeasement to the United States prevented this country from becoming properly armed during that period, so that to-day we have almost to act the part of Lazarus to beg a few crumbs from the table of rich Uncle Sam, in the form of a few aeroplanes, machine guns and so on. This is going to be a long drawn out battle, and under the present system I can tell the government that it will be hard for. us to get men. If you want to kill voluntary recruiting you are going the right way about it, by not acting and getting on with the job. Last March and a year ago last March I called attention to the fact that Mr. Hore-Belisha, the British minister of war, and Right Hon. Mr. Brown, the British minister of labour, had addressed a great gathering of young people in the market place of the city of York. At that time this statement was made: Employment is waiting for you in the army. If you take it you will get food and clothing; free housing; pocket money; instruction and physical education; you can learn a trade, if you have not already mastered one, at a vocation centre-

They could on an apprenticeship system of national service learn a trade and vocation, qualify as a mechanic or air pilot, and get deferred pay on a national service plan. I wanted one for Canada adapted to us. Why did we not tell our young men two years ago that if they joined the army they would receive this sort of treatment in Canada, and that after five years they would have a trade?

If we had done that we would have had the mechanics and pilots we need so badly to-day. Last February the Toronto board of education sent a deputation to Ottawa urging the government to take over a course in aviation and aid it in the technical school for the purpose of training members of the air force, but nothing was done. I then also urged that something should be done in regard to sending young men from Canada to England and aid them to enlist there to serve with the Royal Air Force, but again nothing was done. I have many letters, which I could show the government or anyone else, indicating that some of these young recruits, instead of loafing round the corners doing nothing, have even gone to England on cattle boats in order to enlist in the Royal Air Force during the past two years and are pilots to-day.

_ I do not intend to take up more of the time of the house, but I do believe the young people of this country who want to enlist should know once and for all for what term they must enlist, and whether they are to enlist for home defence or for service elsewhere. A great many of these young people do not want to enlist for home defence; they say, as I say, that there is no such thing. If Britain and France fail over there on the Rhine and in their campaign, it is all over with us so far as the defence of this country goes. I believe our young men should be told what their pay is to be, the length of service, what clothing they will receive and if they will be paid any pension. And it ^hquld be put down in black and white so that'We shall not have a repetition of what happened during the last war, when men went overseas, leaving their homes and families, and came back to find themselves out of employment and getting no help from the government or pensions. No doubt what the Prime Minister has said is quite correct; I do not know, because all the papers have not been laid on the table. I believe a large part of this $100,000,000 should be spent along certain lines, and that not a dollar should be spent except on the advice of and in conjunction, cooperation and coordination with the mother country. Otherwise it will be wasted. Something must be done also about the dreadful submarine menace. How are we going to send any food overseas if there are submarines waiting to destroy the ships? During the last war Great Britain had to look after only the Atlantic ocean; now she has to look after seven oceans with fewer ships, and for every four ships that went out, one did not come back and she had to ration food drastically.

When Mr. Chamberlain introduced the military training bill in England, he let those

War Appropriation Bill

concerned know on what terms they were enlisting. That bill was introduced on May 4, just a week after the policy was announced, and at that time Mr. Chamberlain said only two hundred thousand men would be available for training this year. With the millions of men the dictators have, England could get only two hundred thousand men this year under the military training bill. Then, during the course of his remarks, he said that if the scheme ran for three years, eight hundred thousand men were hoped for. So it will be seen how much she needs our men overseas. It will take us a year or a year and a half to train and equip our men and to produce any munitions. At the present time the men are without proper boots and clothing. I saw the conditions that existed at one or two camps; some of the regiments had no boots, equipment or clothing, and it will take months to get the necessary supplies. So I say the sooner we make up our minds that something must be done, the better it will be. No one objects to the expenditure of this money, but we want the government to get on with the job. Above all, we want them to clarify their policy all along the line and let these young men know for what period they are enlisting and whether they are joining for home defence or for other service. I believe this country has been aroused as never before. We do not know what may happen at any time. If Britain and France fail, what use will all this money be for home defence here, whether it is good, bad or indifferent? Security is far better than opulence. For two or three months last session certain members of the house discussed social credit. They were quite within their rights in so doing, but there will be no social credit or any other kind of credit if we have no security from these dictators, and the time should have been spent on defence and security. What do the dictators care about social credit or other credit so far as this country is concerned?

Last spring, and a year ago last spring, I urged upon the government that we should have a proper national survey made, but up to this moment nothing has been done. The women's organizations of the country are asking for some leadership. Some of them are opening offices, even without authority, just waiting for the government to act, and have a really national survey at once. What have they done? The government said they were going to survey the industrial plants of this country. When I brought up the matter on February 12 last, what was the policy of the government in regard to surveying industry in Canada, as was done in the days of the last war? They had no policy. It is true that when the matter was brought up, they later wrote about 700 letters to plants,

but sent no one to make a survey, and five or six business men wrote me to say that their plants had never been surveyed. Now this money has been voted, and I hope the government will get on with the job. I am not asking these questions in a spirit of criticism; I have asked them before, but I am getting tired waiting for an answer. In the interests of voluntary recruiting I ask the government to-night to let the commanding officers of the various military districts know all about these enlistments, as well as all the other information for which I have asked.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
CON

Robert James Manion (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. R. J. MANION (Leader of the Opposition):

The hon. gentleman (Mr. Church) who has just taken his seat has asked a very fair question, which was also asked this afternoon by the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Green). I believe this house deserves an answer to such a question. The minister has been in his seat on both occasions, but apparently he intends to ignore these two speakers. I believe an answer should be given.

While I am on my feet I should like to say that throughout this country I have heard a great deal of discussion about this very matter. I have heard it argued by men, many of whom should be very familiar with the question. I have heard some outstanding men say' that those who are now enlisting are promised that they are enlisting only for home defence. I have heard others, perhaps better informed, claim that when these men enlist, according to their attestation they can be sent overseas if the time should come when an expeditionary force should be sent. I do not wish to be placed in the position of arguing that an expeditionary force should be sent if England does not want one. At the same time, however, it is obvious that it will take time to train men; and if men are being taken into the forces at the present time, the position of these men should be made clear not only to the men themselves but also to the country generally. I hope the minister when he rises will give a definite answer in this regard, in order to clear up a doubt which exists in the minds of so many people across this country.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Ian Alistair Mackenzie (Minister of National Defence)

Liberal

Hon. IAN MACKENZIE (Minister of National Defence):

Mr. Speaker, I shall try to be as brief as possible. First of all, action was taken by the government, under section 63 of the Militia Act, under which the minister himself was granted authority to call out men for service within Canada. In the next instance action was taken by the government, when it was decided to call parliament, under section 64 of the Militia Act, placing the militia on active service within Canada.

War Appropriation Bill

The terms of section 64 of the Militia Act are very explicit, in that these troops may be placed on active service either within or without Canada, for the defence of Canada. At the present time, sir, the troops called out are in three categories: In the first place, there are those who are defending the vulnerable points within Canada; in the second place, there are those who are defending our coastal areas on both coasts and, in the third place, there is a mobile reserve for active service in the meantime within Canada. But if in the light of developments in the future the government policy should be that of sending an expeditionary force overseas, that reserve force would be the nucleus of the force so to be sent.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
CON

Charles Hazlitt Cahan

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CAHAN:

Under the present act, an active force can be sent overseas for one year only.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Ian Alistair Mackenzie (Minister of National Defence)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):

The terms of service in the field at the present time are for one year under section 68 unless the man volunteers to serve for the duration of the war.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
CON

Alfred Johnson Brooks

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BROOKS:

Would these men be reenlisted for overseas, or would their present status be for both at home and overseas?

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Ian Alistair Mackenzie (Minister of National Defence)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):

That

would be a matter which would be decided later on. I think they may be reenlisted for overseas service.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
CON

Robert James Manion (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MANION:

Perhaps I have been a little dense, but there is one point on which I am not quite clear. Do I understand the minister to say that at the present time the men who are being enlisted and who have been for some time past are being enlisted under section 64?

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Ian Alistair Mackenzie (Minister of National Defence)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):

Yes, that is correct-all under section 64. The minister had only limited authority under section 63, but once we decided that parliament was to meet, then under the provisions under section 64 all authority was taken by the governor in council, and not by the minister as such.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
CON

Thomas Langton Church

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CHURCH:

Why don't you train and equip an expeditionai-y force here at once?

Motion (Mr. Ilsley) agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink

CANADIAN PATRIOTIC FUND

PROVISION FOR ASSISTANCE TO DEPENDENTS OF OFFICERS AND MEN ON ACTIVE SERVICE


Hon. C. G. POWER (Minister of Pensions and National Health) moved the second reading of Bill No. 2, to incorporate the Canadian Patriotic Fund.


September 11, 1939