CLAUSE 1.—(Confirmation of scheduled agreements.) (Hansard, 8 July 1930)

Mr. MANDEB
This is a very important Bill, and I hope it will not be allowed to go through without some explanation or comment from the Government benches. As one who is half a Canadian, I hope that I may be allowed to say to the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs that I hope the time will soon come when it will not be necessary for the great Dominion of Canada to come to this House in order to pass an 386 Act which concerns their own internal affairs. The position of Dominion status really cannot have been properly realised so long as Canada cannot govern without the consent of this House. I hope that India may notice that she is not the only Dominion that has to come to this House to get legislation carried out for the alteration of her laws. I hope that the Secretary of State will be able to give some indication as to what steps are being taken to prevent legislation of this kind for a Dominion being brought before this House. I hope that he will be able to indicate that something is proposed to be done, either as a result of the Imperial Conference, or otherwise, which will enable Canada to administer her own affairs, just as Australia and South Africa and, I think, other Dominions can do.

§ The CHAIRMAN
I thought that the hon. Member was going to move something in relation to Clause 1.

§ Mr. BUCHANAN
The kernel of the Bill rests in Clause 1. Perhaps the Secretary of State will be able to give us a short explanation of the Clause. I hope that his experience of his office so far as Clause 1 is concerned will be much happier than wag his experience in his last job.

§ The SECRETARY of STATE for DOMINION AFFAIRS (Mr. J. H. Thomas)
The hon. Member for East Wolverhampton (Mr. Mander) has said that he is half a Canadian. The part that was Canadian ought to have prompted him not to have said what he did.

§ Mr. MANDER
Why?

§ Mr. THOMAS
Because if you were half a Canadian you must know the significance of what you were saying. It is easy to make a mere statement that you hope the time will come when there will be no such Bill as this introduced. You cannot say that with any knowledge of the real Canadian position. I will state the position in a few sentences. The North America Bill is a Bill which is essential for the joint authority of the Empire, and it specially preserves the Provincial Legislatures. It is as much in the interests of their protection as anything else. The North America Bill provides that certain powers now exercised 387 by the Central Parliament can only be altered by agreement between the Provinces and the Central Parliament in what is called a Petition to His Majesty. The Petition to His Majesty takes the form of merely confirming in this House the Royal Assent. That is all that is contained in this Bill, nothing more and nothing less. The object in asking that this Bill shall go speedily through the House is to make it perfectly clear that no one in this House desires to interfere with the internal affairs of Canada.
The hon. Member who made those observations must know that an election is taking place in Canada, and nothing is more dangerous, and there is nothing we should avoid more, than doing or saying anything calculated to interfere with Canada's internal affairs. I hope that the Committee will clearly understand that this is not a Bill for taking an objection to. It is merely a Bill in accordance with the North American Act, enabling the date of one of the Provinces to be celebrated on 15th July by the transfer from the central authority of certain rights now enjoyed and exercised by the central authority, which, from the date of this sanction will be utilised by the Provinces. It is a unanimous Bill. I hope that it will be treated as an agreed Bill.

§ Mr. E. BROWN
I do not think the speech of the right hon. Gentleman was necessary on account of the words of my hon. Friend. He has rather misled the Committee on the matter. He said that this Bill merely confirms an arrangement made. Surely it is not so? It does not merely confirm the arrangement of the four Provincial Governments established since the Act of 1867, but makes valid that agreement. When this Bill passes unanimously in this House, as no doubt it will do, it not merely confirms but it makes valid that agreement.

§ Mr. THOMAS
I made it perfectly clear that it was an agreement between the Provincial Parliaments and the central authority. This Bill does make it valid; it transfers back to these people the authority that the central authority now exercises.

§ Mr. BROWN
It is a distinction between the Provinces which were in the 388 Canadian Confederation in 1867, and those that became Provinces afterwards. One of the distinctions is that those before 1867 bad control of their lands, forests and minerals. There is an agreement in Canada that this should be done. [Interruption.] Surely hon. Members who profess such great devotion to the Empire will let me say a word in favour of the Bill? If a Minister attacks a friend of mine, surely I am allowed to point out his error? It is obvious that the Dominion itself cannot be judge between its own case and the case of its Province, if there should be a difference. In this case there is no difference. We must give our sanction in their use of this Bill, as it is to be passed by 15th July in order to give Manitoba a chance to celebrate its anniversary in due time, and to be in possession of the rights confirmed by this Measure. I am sure the whole Committee will wish the right hon. Gentleman not only to get the Measure passed, but to send from the House as a whole a message wishing the Province not merely a glorious anniversary, but a great success in the working of the new arrangement under which they and the other three Provinces are placed in a position of equal status in the Dominion of Canada.

§ Mr. MANDER
In view of the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby (Mr. Thomas), I should like to say that I raised a point of great interest and I had no intention of making any criticism of the Bill. [HON. MEMBERS: "Divide, divide!"] The right hon. Gentleman has made an attack upon me, and I am quite in order in replying to it. I think the right hon. Gentleman misconstrued what I said. I referred only to Canada. The right hon. Gentleman ought 389 not to ask us to pass a Bill of this kind sub silentio. I raised only points of general interest and did so in no hostile spirit.

§ Mr. THOMAS
I am sorry that the hon. Member thought that I made an attack upon him, because I had no such intention.