§ 50. Mr. Douglasasked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been been directed to the statement by the Prime Minister of Canada regarding lack of recognition of the part played by Canadian troops in the Sicilian operations; and whether he has any statement to make on this matter?
§ The Prime MinisterAs I understand it, the point of the Canadian Prime Minister's remarks to which my hon. Friend refers, was that in the initial draft communiqué prepared by Allied Headquarters in North Africa for issue as soon as news of the landing in Sicily could be released reference was made only to "Allied" Forces. On seeing this draft the Canadian authorities asked that at the earliest possible date reference should be made to the fact that Canadian Forces were taking part in the landing. Despite some possible security objections, this was at once agreed to by General Eisenhower, and the initial communiqué when issued referred to United Kingdom, United States and Canadian Forces. Owing to the greater distance of London from Ottawa and the six hours difference in time between them, information to this effect reached Ottawa 690 from Washington sooner than from London. But this was not due to any slothfulness or want of appreciation on the part of any British authority.
Since then, as I think the House will agree, the fullest tribute has been paid in all public statements here and elsewhere to the valiant and successful part which the Canadian 1st Division is taking in this great enterprise. Our, hearts also go out to the rest of the powerful Canadian Army in this country, who have for more than three years guarded the centre of the Empire from invasion. I may add that I have had a very agreeable interchange of telegrams with Mr. Mackenzie King on this matter, and the misunderstanding, for which nobody is to blame, can now be regarded as cleared away.
§ Mr. A. BevanAs these difficulties have occurred from time to time and as they are exceedingly hard to overcome, would it not be much better for arrangements to be made for the military communiqués from the front to refer to "Allied" Forces only, and to allow the very efficient war correspondents to convey to their own people the existence and the prowess of particular units?
§ The Prime MinisterIt was exactly that point to which the Canadian Government objected. They objected to the expression Allied "Forces and wished for the individual mention of their own contingents—a very reasonable wish—and it was immediately granted.
§ Mr. BevanAs on many occasions there are troops of different Dominions employed in the same operation, if the consistent use of the term "Allied" troops were followed in the communiqués from headquarters, is it not probable that ill-feeling would not subsequently arise?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that the use of the expression "Allied" Forces is perfectly justifiable in many cases, just as the expression "United Kingdom" is justifiable, but that does not mean that the name of Wales should be entirely suppressed.
§ Sir William DavisonIs my right hon. Friend also aware of a recent inspection of the Canadian Forces in Sicily by General Montgomery, who after inviting them to remove their tin hats said he had never seen a finer looking body of men and he was very proud indeed to have them in the 8th Army?