Mr. Martin (Essex East):
Mr. Chairman, we are discussing further methods by which we can meet the current financial difficulties of the United Nations organization which the Prime Minister referred to last fall, speaking
Supply-External Affairs in Toronto, when he said that it was the government's intention at the next general assembly, presumably that of next September, to move a resolution condemning the Soviet union for its colonial policy, its subjugation of former nations, of people who formerly enjoyed the advantages of a free society. I think the house generally will agree with the observations made by the Prime Minister on that occasion, as indeed we had, in the condemnation levelled against the Soviet union's colonial policy and its practice of a new type of imperialism, as set out in the speech he made to the general assembly in the autumn of 1960.
I think it should be noted that what the Prime Minister said on that occasion in the United Nations, and what he said last fall regarding Canadian intentions for the assembly in the fall of 1962, did not break new ground.
I would not wish anyone to misunderstand what I am saying. I think it was well that the Prime Minister of Canada spoke the mind of the Canadian people and expressed the views of those in this house with regard to this matter. In a matter of such importance, I think it equally important to remember, however, that the Leader of the Opposition in particular, the prime minister in the former government as well, and others, too, took opportunity from time to time at the United Nations to use the procedures there available to condemn the Soviet union for its policy of subjugation, for its denial of the normal processes open to people in a free society. I think it is well that we recall some of the words that were used by Canadian spokesmen in the general assembly as well as in this house.
The Prime Minister said that at the next general assembly the Canadian government would cause to be placed before the general assembly a resolution condemning the Soviet union for its colonial policy. At that time I expressed the view that, commendable as was the Prime Minister's statement, it was regrettable that we should have waited until the next general assembly. He spoke in the month of November. The general assembly was still in session. There was actually before the assembly at that time a resolution that did not embody the precise terms of the Prime Minister's intention but to it could have been an annexed amendment, expressing Canada's view of the regressive step taken by the Soviet union towards the subjugated nations of Europe.
I expressed the view that the government of Canada through the Prime Minister ought
to give instructions to the Canadian delegation to see to it that we expressed condemnation right there and then in the general assembly, at a time when the Soviet union was attacking Britain as well as other countries for its colonial policy, overlooking of course the progress that has been made notably by Britain in this regard. However, that step was not taken. I am not rising to oppose the intention to do that kind of thing at the next general assembly. However, what the Prime Minister said was not new. There are many people in this country-and some of them are represented by distinguished members in this house-whose friends and relatives, many of whom are now dead, have become the victims of Soviet imperialism and colonialism. For instance, I have before me some observations made by the Leader of the Opposition in the general assembly of 1949 when, among other things, addressing himself to Mr. Vyshinsky, the spokesman for the Soviet union, he said this on December 1:
If Mr. Vyshinsky really wishes to do something about the preservation of peace, he should try to persuade his government to pay some attention to the fear in the world of this new imperialism; to the concern which is deep and widespread about the methods which it adopts to spread its influence, and the threats to peace which are inherent in those methods.
Then he went on to say this:
Within the USSR sphere ol influence-the new Soviet empire-have been included many peoples who previously had their own free governments: Finns, Estonians, Ukrainians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles, Rumanians.
He expressed the same view in more general terms on September 26, 1949, in the same general assembly. Then on September 27, 1950, speaking on a resolution having to do with the war in Korea the Leader of the Opposition said as follows:
This war in Korea is but the continuation by armed and open aggression of the policies which communist imperialism has been pursuing by other means. It is part of the theory of communism that the disruptions and dislocations of a post-war period give to the communist minority its best chance to seize power by force and maintain it by the terror and repression of a police state. Systematically the forces of communist imperialism, in these last years, have been trying out their theories in the four corners of the world.
Then again in 1956, he spoke in the general assembly. On November 4, 1956, he said this:
This is a sad-
Subtopic: DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Sub-subtopic: $ 70,500