But the occasion is seized to move
an amendment to Supply, designed to place some restraint, whatever
it may be, upon the hands of the Dominion's representatives going
to a conference of the Prime Ministers of the Empire. I venture
to suggest that not only has no such thing been done with reference
to other conferences of a similar kind that have been held in
years gone by dating back some twenty years, but no such step
has been taken preliminary to the taking part in such conference
of representatives of other Dominions of this Empire. Why is such
a step inadvisable? I answer first of all, and I think, if I went
no further, the answer would appeal to the House as conclusive-
because such action is out of harmony with the whole principle
of conference. A conference is held in order that conditions present
in the various Dominions represented there may be disclosed and
fully made known before the representatives of all, in order that
facts that may not be known to others and that are known to some,
the importance and the proportions of which may not be fully understood
in certain parts of the Dominion, but are understood in others,
may be stated and measured in order that the views that are held
in some portions of the Dominion as being of great consequence
and in others as being of less importance, may all be brought
together and the whole situation canvassed, and such conclusions
reached as seem to be possible to the whole and for me advantage
of all. That is a definition that I modestly advance as expressive
of the very nature of conference itself. Such being the purpose
and the object of conference, we are taking, in my judgment, a
false step if Parliament takes any action designed to map out
the course which the representatives of this country should take
as to specific subjects which will be under discussion and review.
Let me follow this out a little further. Suppose the action which
we are asked to take this afternoon, and which we are requested,
I fear with some satire, to assume is in no way intended to embarrass
the Government, but rather to be of assistance to the Government
in this great task- suppose the action we are asked to take this
afternoon is to become a practice to be followed by the other
Dominions, and that it is to be pursued not only as to the special
subjects enumerated in the amendment, but as to other subjects
(because if we are right in directing as to one we are right in
directing as to another); suppose that is to be followed to its
logical conclusion, in Australia, in New Zealand, in South Africa,
in Newfoundland, in India in Great Britain, and that the delegates
go to the conference directed by their governments along certain
lines, or along all lines, then why do they go there at all? What
is the conference for? Has not the conference been blasted at
the hour of its conception? Indeed, the step we are asked to take
this afternoon is the first step towards making the consultative
and conference principle of no value at all in the promotion of
the common interests of the Empire.
The hon. leader of the Opposition
asks me not to accept his amendment as a motion of want of confidence
in the Government. Well, if the hon. member has confidence in
the Government, and especially in the Prime Minister as regards
this conference, I do not know why the motion is advanced. But
next, a motion in amendment to Supply is, prima facie, a motion
of want of confidence. I was interested some days ago in hearing
the result of the researches of the hon. member for Shelburne
and Queen's (Mr. Fielding) in an effort to persuade Parliament
that a motion to adopt the old reciprocity pact of 1911, in amendment
to Supply, was in no way intended as a want of confidence motion.
He had succeeded in digging up actually two amendments to Supply
since Confederation that, had not been taken as motions of want
of confidence in the Government - two in fifty-four years. Consequently,
it does not need to be argued to be impressed that a motion in
amendment to Supply, prima facie- is a motion of want of confidence.
But much more is it so when coming from the leader of the Opposition,
it seeks to place manacles on the hands of a representative of
this country going to attend a Conference of Prime Ministers of
the Empire. But aside entirely from the question of whether it
is or not, surely it is not the part of wisdom for this House
to start upon a course which, if followed, will destroy the only
line that we can, take as separate dominions in association with
Great Britain to promote our common concerns, and make possible
our continuance as an Empire on the basis on which we now stand.
While I am on my feet I will have
something to say, because I could not do so later, as to how this
conference comes to be called, and the subject matters that will
there be reviewed, I shall as well attempt to distinguish it from
other conferences that are in some respects similar. As I do so,
I will make reference to the questions put to me by the leader
of the Opposition who has just sat down.
In the Imperial Conference in 1917-I
am pretty sure it was the Imperial Conference and not the Imperial
War Cabinet -a resolution was adopted to this effect; that the
subject of any necessary readjustment of the constitutional relations
of the various Dominions to each other and to the Mother Land
was a subject of such importance and complexity that its consideration
should be deferred to some special conference to be held succeeding
the war, and that whatever was done should be in full recognition
of the autonomous powers of the Dominions, should in no way be
any subtraction from any of those powers, and further, should
recognize the rights of the Dominions to an adequate voice in
determining those features and principles of foreign policy in
which the whole Empire is concerned.
Perhaps, before I go further, I should
endeavour to distinguish the various conferences that have been
held, so that the House will not be in doubt as to what has constituted
the one class and what the other.
The Imperial Conference is the first.
That has been held periodically since before the commencement
of this century. In 1907 a resolution was adopted by that conference,
Resolution No. 1, providing that that conference should be called
regularly every four years. That is a conference of representative
ministers of the various parts of the Empire and of Great Britain.
The president of the conference is the Prime Minister of Great
Britain, but the conference is called at the instance of the Secretary
for the Colonies, and the mechanism, the secretariat of the conference,
is under the latter's supervision. As a matter of fact, he usually
presides, in his capacity of vicechairman of the conference.
The subject matter that has been discussed from time to time at
the Imperial Conference has had to do with the concerns of the
Empire as an empire, concerns in which each portion was interested,
concerns which might possibly be referred to as domestic concerns
of the British Empire. It had not to do with questions of foreign
policy.
During the war there developed what
was known as the Imperial War Cabinet, a name to which some exception
might be taken on the ground that it indicates really more than
the assembly actually was. Exception, by the way, was taken to
the name on the part of the late leader of the Opposition, Sir
Wilfrid Laurier, who was of opinion that "council" would
be a more appropriate term than cabinet. The Imperial War Cabinet
developed during the war. It was a meeting of the ministers of
the British Government, such as were selected, and of the ministers
of the other governments of the Empire, and therefore as regards
composition was virtually the same as the Imperial Conference
itself. Its chairman was the Prime Minister of Great Britain.
The Secretary for the Colonies had no special relation thereto.
It was called by the Prime Minister of Great Britain, and the
subject matter that was taken up and reviewed by the War Cabinet
differed essentially from the subject matter that came before
the Imperial Conferences. The War Cabinet had to do with matters
of high policy, with matters affecting foreign affairs and particularly
with matters related to the united prosecution of the war on the
part of all branches of the Empire. So much for that. I should
say that one subject relating to foreign affairs was taken up
earlier in which Canada had a hearing namely the renewal of the
Japanese Alliance in 1911. In respect of this the representative
of Canada, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, had a voice. But that voice was
expressed, not at a meeting of the Imperial Conference, but at
a meeting of the Committee on Imperial Defence, which was quite
another body. In passing, I may say that provision was made by
the Imperial War Cabinet whereby any of the British Dominions
might have a minister of its Government present at all sessions
of that Cabinet, between its plenary sessions, dealing with war
matters. But inasmuch as that privilege was never taken advantage
of, there is no need to do more than refer to it now. At the Peace
Conference at Paris the ministers from the various Dominions-I
believe the prime ministers of all were there-considered that
it would be necessary for them to meet in order to make certain
arrangements and have certain discussions which, in their judgment,
would be essential before the Constitutional Conference, contemplated
by the resolution of the Imperial Conference of 1917, to which
I have alluded, should be held. Though an attempt was made then
to fix a meeting place and decide upon a time, no success was
achieved, and it was only last October that, in a confidential
message received from the Prime Minister of Great Britain, it
was suggested that, as other prime ministers could conveniently
be present in June, Canada should be represented by its prime
minister at a conference to be held in Great Britain in that month