Debates of March 19th, 1998

The House resumed from December 11, 1997 consideration of the motion.

Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion

[Jean Dubé, Progressive Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to speak to the motion by the hon. member for Kamloops calling on the government to extend veterans benefits to Canadians who served in the Spanish civil war, the surviving members of the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion, also known as the Mac-Paps.

This is a motion which on the surface has some merits. It is one which many people have mixed feelings about. However, my first difficulty is a tendency to revisit history and try to apply retroactive judgments about who fought on the right side and who fought on the wrong side.

At the time Canada was not at war with Spain. We had laws prohibiting our citizens from fighting in this foreign war. This matter has been debated in the House before. In 1980 a motion similar to the motion presented by the member for Kamloops was presented by Bob Rae, the then member of Parliament for Broadview—Greenwood. The issue was also debated and discussed in great lengths in 1986 at the standing committee on veterans affairs.

The committee concluded that the losses incurred by the battalion are indeed to be mourned and the qualities, endurance and courage shown by the battalion are to be admired. These were brave individuals fighting for a cause they believed in and we should definitely not fault them for that.

The standing committee concluded, however, that these Canadians, the Mac-Paps, cannot be considered in the same light as Canadians who served in the wars in which Canada was involved as a nation. The committee also concluded that there can be no thought of treating them in the same manner by making them eligible for benefits under the veterans legislation.

Those men who went to Spain and waged war on the fascists are to be commended for their efforts. One can applaud their bravery in the face of a better manned and better equipped enemy. Spain has publicly thanked these men who joined the international brigade. However, the indisputable fact is that they were soldiers of conscience. They went on their own to fight the fascist aggression.

At the time of the Spanish civil war, Canada chose to be neutral and did not recognize the war. Canada was not at war. The Canadians who participated in the Spanish civil war did so on an individual basis. They let their conscience be their guide. These men went to Spain in defiance of the laws of Canada at the time. They fought on behalf of their own conscience, not on behalf of the people of the Government of Canada.

We recognize the sincerity behind this motion. This debate allows us the opportunity to once again say to these men that they are not criminals and what they did was what they honestly felt was right. No one can fault them for that.

They were courageous individuals. However, this House cannot say that the laws are wrong. We as a country did not support this war. We salute their bravery but simply cannot agree that men who fought in a war not sanctioned by Canada are entitled to benefits which are reserved for people who answered their own nation's call to arms.

We should think for a few moments about what it would mean internationally if this House recognized officially the fight of these volunteers.

Whether we want it or not, we would be approving the actions of other people who may want to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. The government would create an extremely dangerous precedent by recognizing officially these volunteers as Canadian soldiers.

Where would we stop? How could we justify giving benefits to all Canadians who fight in other countries for what they consider to be just cause? I would not in any way want to encourage Canadians to feel that they would receive sanctions to take part in, let us say for the sake of argument, the conflicts and violence that are occurring in Ireland or Israel for that matter.

We believe it is appropriate that we recognize their valour and ensure their memory as a part of history. However, we do not feel that it is right to bestow the status of Canadian war veteran to members who were not part of the official Canadian force.

We in our party support the rule of law and do not view it as appropriate to advocate a position which would in effect legitimize that which was illegal at the time. This would set an untenable precedent.

[George Proud, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Motion No. 75 put forward by the hon. member for Kamloops.

Veterans status is a unique honour and it confers special privileges to those who have served Canada. In recognition of the sacrifices they made a grateful nation has provided benefits to help provide for their war related needs. I consider it an honour to play a role as parliamentary secretary in the government's approach on veterans issues.

This motion, as it is written now, would give veteran status and benefits only to those Canadians who fought for one side in the Spanish civil war. Let me remind my hon. colleague that Canadians fought on both sides in the civil war.

Canadians answered the call to serve their country during two world wars, the Korean War, and in several peacekeeping operations.

However, as the member mentioned, some Canadians served under different flags, during other conflicts, notably with the opposing factions during the Spanish civil war.

About 1,300 Canadians volunteered for the international brigade to fight against Franco. Incidentally, in the first hour of debate of this motion, the member for Chateauguay indicated that 52 countries participated in the civil war. I do not know where the member got that figure. But of the 1,300 Canadians who participated, some fought in the Mackenzie-Papineau battalion, the Mac-Paps, others in the Abraham Lincoln battalion, the British battalion and other units. They suffered heavy causalities. Only 646 returned to Canada.

Let me make it very clear about the government's view of their efforts. No one will deny that these Canadians fought bravely. No one will deny that they believed deeply in the cause for which they fought. They were not fighting for Canada. They were fighting in direct contravention of Canadian policy and Canadian law.

I remind this House that Canada had a policy of neutrality in the civil war that divided Spain. It was a sound policy. If the hon. member for Kamloops believes that Canada should have weighed in on one side or the other of the Spanish civil war, I ask him to look back to the political realities of those times.

In 1937 J.S. Woodsworth, one of the founders of the CCF, which we all know is the precursor of the New Democratic Party, presented a motion to this House advocating strict neutrality in all European conflicts. To enforce Canada's neutrality, this House passed the Foreign Enlistment Act in 1937. It continues in force to this day. It prohibits Canadians from joining the armed forces of, or otherwise supporting, a foreign state which is waging war against another foreign state which is on friendly terms with Canada.

The government has authority to make regulations to apply this act to civil war. That is what it did with respect to Spain in 1937. On July 31 of that year it became a crime to fight on either side of the Spanish civil war.

Although in previous speeches some members mentioned that these Canadians were subject to job discrimination and surveillance by the RCMP, to the best of my knowledge no veteran of the Spanish civil war has ever been prosecuted under this law.

It is important to remember that these men disregarded the law and by adopting this motion we would in effect reward them for doing so. I would ask hon. members to consider what kind of precedent this would set. What kind of example does it make for young people today? Are we saying that it is permissible to violate the law rather than work through democratic processes to change it?

Are we going to set a precedent granting the status of veteran not only to those who served Canada when their country called them, but also to those who served under a foreign flag in a conflict in which Canada had remained neutral? What message would we be sending to Canadian veterans? This would stain the honour granted those who answered their country's call and who fought for Canada.

Moreover, I wonder if the member for Kamloops has contacted the Royal Canadian Legion to obtain its views. I have a letter addressed to the Minister of Veterans Affairs from the president of the Royal Canadian Legion, Dominion Command:

Dear Minister:

[The member for Kamloops] recently presented a private member's motion recommending the government consider the advisability of giving the members of the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion and other Canadians who fought with Spanish Republican forces in the Spanish civil war the status of veterans under federal legislation.

The Royal Canadian Legion does not support the granting of veterans status to those who fought in the Spanish civil war. It was an offence under Canadian law at the time to fight on any side during that war. The Legion supports the rule of law and does not view it as appropriate to advocate a position at this late date which would in effect legitimize that which was illegal at the time. This could set an untenable precedent.

Yours sincerely,

Joseph Kobolak

Dominion President.

In fact, adopting this motion would open the floodgates to other groups such as Canadian veterans of the Vietnam war who, contrary to what the member for Chateauguay said in his speech, do not qualify under our legislation for Canadian veteran status.

This is an emotional issue. It deals with elderly Canadians who in their youth were governed by their conscience to risk their lives in one of the most brutal conflicts of the century. They fought like heroes and left many of their comrades behind in the cemeteries of Spain.

As I said earlier, no one is denying their courage and their commitment to their cause. Although the motion does not specifically call for it, the member for Kamloops mentioned that we should look at the possibility of setting this issue before a committee. As the member for the Progressive Conservative Party said, this issue has been raised in this House many times, the most recent being in 1986-87 when the standing committee on veterans affairs, chaired by a former member from Malpeque in my home province, studied the issue in great detail. After very careful research, deliberation and consideration that committee decided against recommending veteran status to Spanish civil war veterans.

I do not think this House in responding today to the motion from the hon. member for Kamloops should overturn the considered judgment of the committee that took several months to look into the issue in great detail.

I ask my colleagues to vote against the motion. In so doing I remind the House of the words of the report that the committee tabled on the issue. I think those words speak eloquently of the Canadians who fought in the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion. Many were killed, the report says. Many endured great hardship and displayed great courage. We mourn the loss and admire the qualities these men displayed. They acted out of conscience and this merits respect whether one agrees with them or not. May their twilight years be spent with the comfort of their own beliefs in the cause they served.

However, Canadian veteran status and veterans benefits are reserved for those who fought for Canada. That is how the law should remain. That is why I am voting against this motion and I urge my honourable colleagues to do the same.

[Louise Hardy, NDP, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this motion is to have this House investigate ways of granting some form of recognition to a noble group of Canadians, the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion. They are a unit of 1,300 volunteer soldiers who banded together to go abroad and fight the suppression of democracy, the fascist powers of Europe.

These were Canadians who had the wisdom and the foresight to see the real dangers of fascism well before governments around the world. In return for this wisdom and foresight and willingness to stand up to fascism, these volunteers were subsequently made criminals by our own government through the Foreign Enlistment Act.

We are at a time when our government is making apology after apology. The Japanese were apologized to, as should have been done. At that time the laws were not good. People were just obeying the laws by putting Japanese Canadian citizens in internment camps and taking their property.

The minister of aboriginal affairs has just apologized to First Nations people. I went to school with a man who at the age of four along with his brother were scooped up off the hillside by a truck that came to town and were taken to a residential school, not to return home for eight years. They were just obeying the law. No question, they did not do anything wrong but it was wrong. It was wrong then and it is wrong now and the government had the foresight to recognize this and apologize for it.

We have here people who fought for our country who were right then and they are right now. We recognize that what they did was right and it was a just cause. It made a difference in the history of this decade, the freedoms of peoples and we will not recognize their efforts. As a country we will not even look at a way to recognize it.

The Spanish civil war was in many ways a dress rehearsal for the second world war and there was therefore an early test of the resolve of the free world to make a stand against the forces that were there to crush democracy. That is putting it very mildly. As we all know, it was the death of millions of minority groups around the world.

The Mac-Paps fighting alongside other international brigades distinguished themselves in a number of major battles against Franco's phalange, the Italian Black Shirt divisions and the German Condor Legion of the Luftwaffe. Among those Canadians was Dr. Norman Bethune. The casualty rate was staggering but even worse was the fact that those who survived were not allowed to enlist and fight for their country so were doubly denied any chance to be seen as veterans.

There are only 40 of these people alive. I do not think it would be setting a dangerous precedent to recognize what they have done. The government has already shown that it has the courage to recognize where we went wrong in the past. We went wrong here and we should have the courage to apologize and recognize as a country what these people did for our country. It is not about money, it is about recognition of Canadian citizens and their efforts to make sure this country remains free.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval West, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege today of participating in the debate on Motion M-75 tabled by my NDP colleague, the hon. member for Kamloops.

I rise today to speak in support of Canada recognizing the loyalty and sacrifice of members of the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion. I call today on the good will and generosity of my fellow citizens.

Three years before World War II, the Spanish civil war broke out pitting brothers against brothers, sisters against sisters. Franco and his army won the war and the fascist dictatorship lasted 40 years, in fact until the dictator died in 1976.

This conflict was not merely a civil war for the repercussions went far beyond. Claude Bowers, the American ambassador to Spain between 1936 and 1939, said at the time: “History will declare that the six months intervening between the fascist victory in Spain and the invasion of Poland were a mere armistice in one war, the second world war”.

In my view the Spanish civil became the powder keg that ignited the second world war just as an infamous assassination in Sarajevo laid the groundwork for World War I.

The Spanish republican government, democratically elected and therefore legitimate, appealed to the international community for help.

In spite of the stated neutrality of their governments, volunteers came from Argentina, Cuba, Poland, Sweden, the U.S.S.R., Great Britain, the United States, France and other countries.

Brave antifascist citizens of Italy and Germany risked their lives and that of their families to help the cause of a democratic country that Franco would transform into a dictatorship for 40 years. In Canada, close to 1,250 men and women with names like Maurice Constant, Peter Johnston, Hugo Koski and William Dent, to name but four, left their homeland for the battlefields of Spain.

These Canadians, most of whom were of European descent, had suffered from the consequences of the first world war. However, the vast majority of them were not soldiers and had never even handled a firearm. Most were blue collar workers, journeymen, students, citizens of Canada at a time when our country was still suffering from the severe economic depression of the 1920s and 1930s.

Norman Bethune was one of these brave Canadians. As head of an innovative battlefield blood transfusion service, Bethune witnessed the horrors and became rapidly conscious of the stakes of war. He is often quoted as having said “The time to stop fascism is now and the place to stop it is Spain”.

Another brave Canadian was Maurice Constant, then staff lieutenant for the 15th International Brigade and now emeritus professor at the University of Waterloo. Constant recalls living through the Great Depression. He said “People of my generation had the same feelings as young people now; the feeling of helplessness. There were no jobs to go to. We students thought the political-economic system was a failure”.

The Great Depression had a profound impact on Canadians. Therefore, it is logical to say that, for the brave soldiers of the Mackenzie-Papineau battalion, participating in the war was a way to escape marginalization, a way to relate to some absolute, to make it through the ideological undertow toward the certainty that the fight against European fascism was honourable and necessary.

Let us not forget—and this is fundamental—that General Franco overthrew an established democracy. In 1986, when he testified before the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs, Walter Dent, secretary for the Mac-Paps battalion, said “General Franco decided to overthrow the government. Therefore, what is at issue is not kind of people that were fighting fascism. We were fighting to protect the country's democratic institutions. This must be pointed out very clearly, so that there can be no doubt whatsoever”.

In 1980 during a debate very similar to this one Bob Rae, then a federal member of Parliament, stated when speaking of the Mac-Paps that they were anti-fascist before it was fashionably popular to be so.

The presence and popularity of pro-fascist sentiments in the Canadian population and institutions led to the birth in 1936 of Canadian legislation which partially reflected the state of mind of a certain fascist electorate.

The Foreign Enlistment Act of 1936 made it illegal for volunteers to fight against fascism in Spain because, at the time, Canada was playing it safe and professed neutrality on the international scene.

Is it not in the Canadian nature to want to preserve democracy? Is altruism not a Canadian trait? Is it not typically Canadian to fight for peace, order and good government?

Why are we still talking about the Spanish civil war in Canada today? For the simple reason that some of our fellow Canadian citizens have not reached closure on this matter.

Religious, political and philosophical beliefs aside, these brave Canadians had the vision and courage to recognize that Franco's army not only posed a threat to Spain but also jeopardized the foundation of democratic nations in Europe and the balance in their relations with Canada.

Who are the veterans of the MacKenzie-Papineau battalion today? Following their heart-wrenching defeat, about 650 veterans returned to Canada. They were greeted as heroes in Toronto, where a crowd of over 10,000 had gathered to meet them. Groups such as the friends of the MacKenzie-Papineau battalion organized fundraising events to help survivors and the families of those fallen comrades. But soon the plight of the Mac-Paps was engulfed by the overriding priorities of World War II.

Today, there are fewer than 35 members of the battalion still alive, most of them in their 90s. They could however benefit from the federal government's financial support, because they were never recognized as veterans by our government.

These Canadian citizens are brave men and women who survived harsh fighting in the Spanish Civil War. These men and women, motivated by their love of freedom, engaged Franco's nationalist forces in Spain without the support of their government.

These once defiant individuals have lived for over 60 years as model Canadians. They came home to Canada and they went back

Youth and idealism do not excuse illegal acts. However, knowing what we know today, would it not be possible for us to find it in our hearts to forgive and honour those valuable members of our society.

Why cannot Canada at long last recognize these people's courage. Other nations have embraced their Spanish war veterans. France has given them veteran's status and has given them dignity, respect and a place of honour among its citizens.

After 60 years, the Spanish government invited the civil war veterans over and granted them honourary Spanish citizenship.

Here in Canada in the province of Ontario, after many years of government inaction, the veterans of the MacKenzie-Papineau battalion were finally honoured in 1995 with a Canadian monument. On the lawns behind the Ontario legislature at Queen's Park lies a plaque affixed to a stone from the battlefields of Gandesa in Spain.

During the unveiling ceremony on June 4, 1995, the consul general of Spain spoke eloquently of adolescents braving the world to stand on the side of the poor. He spoke of courage and innocence.

Would it not be possible for members of the House to speak that same language and come together in acknowledging the courage and innocence of the men and women of the MacKenzie-Papineau battalion?

I know that the Hon. Minister of Veterans Affairs does not support the request made by the Mac-Paps. Neither does the Royal Canadian Legion. The Legion is a national treasure with more than 500,000 members. I had the honour to meet these men and women on several occasions at the Legion's branch in my riding of Laval West. They all know how much respect and admiration I have for them, because we talk about it often whenever we meet.

Recently, the Canadian Legion made the following statement about Canada “We believe in a united Canada, where all Canadians are equal before the law and where the rights and freedoms of every Canadian are nurtured and safeguarded”.

I wholeheartedly agree with this important statement. Respecting the law is fundamental in any democracy but in a democracy we also have the right to question, criticize and re-evaluate our laws.

Canadian law is dynamic and must always reflect what Canadian society thinks. I understand their views, but I would have expected more generosity from men and women who, although they did not fight with the Mac-Paps, did fight for the ideals we all share.

[The Deputy Speaker]

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but her time has run out.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this is a rather extraordinary day as we wind down in anticipation of the convention being held nearby. Considering that we do have time, could I seek unanimous consent to allow the member to complete her presentation?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval West, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member. Let us reflect together on an important question. If democracy had won in Spain, would there have been a second world war? The answer is no. These soldiers—and yes, they were soldiers—fought for freedom and democracy ahead of time.

It must be noted that we are discussing a situation where monetary compensation is not the only solution these veterans want.

To the survivors, psychological and emotional redress is even more important. I think that discussing this amounts to questioning the democratic and egalitarian foundations of our citizenship, to questioning our solidarity.

In conclusion, I would like to share with you an interesting discovery. In the course of my research on this matter, I found a photograph taken in June 1937 on the battlefield in Jarama, Spain. The photograph showed a handmade sign that said, and I quote:

“To our fallen comrades, our victory is your vengeance. June 1937”.

Today as in 1937, a positive conclusion to this matter would give that victory to the survivors and to those who fell on the battlefield. I am very proud of their courage.

They had the courage to stand up and be counted.

I support this motion.

[Jocelyne Girard-Bujold, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to address Motion M-75, moved by the New Democrat member for Kamloops.

The motion reads as follows:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government should consider the advisability of giving to the members of the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion and other Canadians who fought with Spanish Republican forces in the Spanish Civil War between 1936 and 1939, the status of veterans under the federal legislation and making them eligible for veterans' pensions and benefits.

Let me say from the outset that some of my colleagues are using all sorts of excuses not to support this motion, including the financial impact and the fear of setting a precedent. I remind them that, if the motion is adopted, it will not be binding.

Indeed, the motion merely asks that a committee consider the advisability of recognizing the contribution made by Canadian soldiers in the Spanish Civil War to protect democracy. The committee will be free to make whatever recommendations it deems advisable.

In a letter dated November 20, 1997 and addressed to the hon. member for Kamloops, the Minister of Veterans Affairs wrote the following, concerning the 1987 review made by the veterans affairs committee on the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion “I agree with the committee's conclusions that we should deplore the losses suffered by the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion, and that we should admire the endurance and the courage displayed by the battalion”.

If the minister was sincere when he wrote these lines, he should support the motion. The Canadians who participated in the Spanish Civil War left their homeland for a far away country, where they were going to risk their lives, along with other volunteers from all over the world. These people were united by the same cause, namely the defence of democracy and the right of people to freely choose their government through an election.

These men and women were not adventurers. They left their families, their work and their country to join an under equipped army that was fighting seasoned troops fully supported by the fascist governments of Germany and Italy.

Over 40,000 volunteers from 52 countries answered the call of a democratic Spain. These volunteers were not equipped, fed or housed adequately, and almost half of them were killed, while many others were injured.

These volunteers were fighting to protect Spain's democratic institutions. The word “antifascist” was written on their pay slips. It is important to remember that the Spanish government which fascist generals were trying to overthrow was an elected, democratic and liberal government.

The international brigades fought under the command of the legitimate Spanish government's army. The Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion was part of the 15th brigade, which also included a British, an American and a Spanish battalion.

The Canadian battalion, named in honour of the two leaders of the 1837 rebellions in Upper and Lower Canada, was formed on July 1, 1937 at Albacete, Spain. It was made up of some 1,200 volunteers and distinguished itself particularly in four campaigns: the attack on Fuentes on the River Ebre in the fall of 1937; the defence of the city of Teruel during the winter of 1937-38; the spring retreat of 1938; and finally, the push beyond the River Ebre in the summer of 1938, which was to be the last great offensive of the republican forces.

In September 1938, the soldiers of the international brigades were withdrawn from the front lines and repatriated. Only half the Canadian volunteers came back. The other half had been either killed, reported missing or captured, with the exception of a few who remained in Europe.

When they returned home, some of the Spanish War veterans were given a heroes' welcome. Money was raised to help them out and to provide the casualties with medical care. Within a few months, however, their sacrifice and heroism was forgotten. Canada soon declared war on the Axis and called for the nation to mobilize against the fascists.

Of the fifty or so countries whose men and women took part in the Spanish Civil War within the international brigades, only two, Canada and the United States, did not confer war veteran status on these volunteers.

Today, about forty of the Canadian international brigade volunteers are still alive, although very advanced in years. Passage of the motion by the member for Kamloops would not cost the federal government much, but it would have great symbolic importance. It would recognize the some 1,200 Canadians who volunteered to defend democracy and to prevent the birth of a fascist regime in Spain on the eve of the second world war.

The democratic and patriotic ideals that inspired their struggle and their heroic sacrifice also inspired the Canadians who, later, fought fascism during the second world war.

Walter Dent explained that a number of the former volunteers on the international brigades contributed directly during the second world war through their experience. One of them became the chief instructor of the armoured tank corps in Alberta. Another taught officers how to read and draw maps.

The principal organizer of the British Home Guard was the former commander of the English battalion in Spain. The chief instructor of the secret war, who wrote a manual that was used by the American and British armies, was Bert Levy, a former brigade member, who was an American of Canadian origin. A number of parachuters dropped behind enemy lines were Spanish war veterans.

Proof that these volunteers were first and foremost believers in democracy lies in the fact that many of them returned to the countries of eastern Europe after the war and continue to defend democracy. They were punished and persecuted by the totalitarian regimes.

In 1980, the councils of seven Canadian cities passed resolutions asking the federal government to recognize the volunteers in the Mackenzie-Papineau battalion. They are Calgary, North York, Ottawa, Thunder Bay, Toronto, Winnipeg and Vancouver.

In 1995, all parties in the Spanish Parliament voted in favour of making all survivors of international brigades honourary Spanish citizens. Citizenship award ceremonies were held in November 1996, and 12 of the 40 Canadian veterans of international brigades took part.

Spain provided a small commemorative plaque in memory of the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion, which was installed on the grounds of the Ontario legislature by the National Historic Sites and Monuments Board in 1995.

The inscription on the plaque is to the effect that Spain will not forget those Canadians who fought and gave their lives on behalf of democracy. It is finally time for Canada as well to pay tribute to these heroic individuals who volunteered their services to defend democracy. That is why the Bloc Quebecois will be voting in favour of this motion.

[Carmen Provenzano, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to discuss private member's Motion No. 75.

I congratulate the hon. member for Kamloops on his efforts in bringing this important matter before the House. He like many hon. members understands that Canadian veterans of the Spanish civil war have not received the recognition they deserve.

Many of those brave men fought and died in defence of a democratically elected government. A great many of the 1,300 Canadians who went to fight for republican Spain between 1936 and 1939 did not live to see their Canadian homeland again.

Members of the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion were the first Canadians to take up arms against the fascist forces of Hitler and Mussolini. It appears in hindsight that they knew what others only suspected, that 1930s Europe was being pushed closer and closer to a full scale war by the spread of fascism in general and Nazism in particular.

However, having said all this, I feel obligated to oppose Motion No. 75. My reasons for this are simple and straightforward. The Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion was not a recognized unit of the Canadian Armed Forces. Its soldiers were not authorized members of a Canadian fighting force. The Mac-Paps, as they came to be known, fought in Spain against the express wishes of the Canadian government which took a neutral position early in the Spanish civil war along with Britain, France and the United States.

I therefore find unacceptable the hon. member's assertion that we should retroactively make the Mackenzie-Papineau veterans members of the Canadian Armed Forces. I am not alone in holding this position. Previous committees and subcommittees of the House of Commons have expressed similar views. So too has the Royal Canadian Legion.

It is not that I do not value the sentiments of the hon. member for Kamloops. On the contrary, I welcome any and all dialogue concerning ways this country can recognize Canadian veterans of the Spanish civil war. However, in Motion No. 75 there seems to be a leap in logic.

The hon. member will know that in addition to the many Canadians who fought on the republican side in Spain, a handful of Canadians also took up arms in the name of Dictator Franco. Would the hon. member for Kamloops suggest that these men as well who fought to re-establish fascism in Spain should be recognized as veterans? Would the hon. member say that these men and their widows should receive veterans benefits? I think not.

I think the hon. member realizes that what he is asking for is both illogical and untenable. Canadians have at times chosen to go off on their own and fight in various wars, conflicts and uprisings. This is true today and it will, no doubt, continue to be true in the future.

Some Canadians volunteer their military services for money, others do so out of ideological conviction, but never have Canadian mercenaries and freedom fighters asked to be designated veterans, nor will they unless the hon. member's motion is granted.

This is not to pass judgment on the role of the Mac-Paps in the Spanish civil war. It is simply to say that we cannot and should not rewrite history.

My colleague, the hon. member for Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, brought to the attention of the House last hour the similar findings of the standing committee on veterans affairs.

That committee stated a decade ago that its decision not to grant veteran status to the Mac-Paps was “without regard to the rights or wrongs of the actions of those Canadians who are veterans of the Spanish civil war”.

This cuts right to the heart of the matter. The member for Kamloops is proposing that the political correctness of the Mac-Paps cause should qualify them for veteran status.

Similarly, the member for Chateauguay questioned why Canadians who served in a politically incorrect war like Vietnam should be considered veterans when the Mac-Paps are not.

What both members seem to forget is that Canada recognizes as its veterans only those who serve Canada or its allies in a war in which Canada was a combatant.

The Mac-Paps did not meet this criterion in 1936 and they do not meet it now. However valiant they may have been in their defence of Spanish democracy, the members of the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion fought as civilians in the eyes of the Canadian government.

It matters not that they are now only few in number or that it would not involve significant sums of money should this motion succeed. In my mind there is nothing that would justify changing this situation 60 years after the fact.

There are, however, compelling reasons to honour the Mac-Paps in other ways. The member for Kamloops mentioned in his speech that a memorial was erected recently at Queen's Park and that similar plans are under way in Vancouver.

It is my belief that many members of this House would be more than happy to support some kind of federal initiative that would not only preserve but promote the proud history of the Mac-Paps. I will not endorse the politically motivated revision of history that is called for in Motion No. 75.

In closing, I oppose the motion before the House but would like to commend the hon. member for Kamloops for his efforts to increase public awareness of Canadian involvement in the Spanish civil war.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I too am pleased to rise to speak on Motion No. 75. I wish to commend my hon. colleague from Kamloops for having brought this motion before the House even though I disagree with it in principle and will vote against it.

I think history is important. It is important for us to not dismiss issues such as this and the question of the legitimate status as veterans for those who fought in the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion.

I will take a slightly different perspective from that which prevailed in this debate. It has been suggested that those 1,300 Canadians who entered into the Spanish civil war of their own volition did so out of a commitment to democracy and out of a desire to fight and defeat fascism.

I have no doubt that they felt so motivated, that they felt called and they felt the courage of their convictions in engaging in this war. Nor do I deny that many of these veterans acted heroically in the action they faced. The fact that so many of them died is one of the tragedies of war which we all mourn.

Several people who have spoken to this motion have rendered a simplistic and incomplete picture of the history of 1937 and the Spanish civil war. They have painted the contribution of the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion and the Republican forces in the Spanish civil war as being, without question, beyond repute and on the side of the angels. They have suggested that the forces they were fighting were merely an extension of the unquestionably evil forces of fascism which were then gaining force in Nazi Germany.

I think it is important for us to recognize that when this House and this Parliament gave passage to the Foreign Enlistment Act in in 1937 it understood the greater complexity of the situation as it then unfolded in Spain, as did the Canadians who left to fight in Spain on behalf of the Phalangist cause.

No argument can be made that there was a unanimous view in this country about which side in this very complex and messy war had the moral upper hand.

I believe it was the hon. member for Laval West who said that the Foreign Enlistment Act, which prohibited Canadians from enlisting in a foreign war which was not recognized by this country, was passed in part under pressure from a fascist constituency in the Canadian electorate. I really think that does a disservice to Canadians, now and at the time. It does a disservice to our history. It is based on a gross misunderstanding of the reasons for this enactment.

The reality is the Spanish civil war was not a battle between good and evil. The Spanish civil war was a complex war between, on the one hand Republican forces which included communists, Stalinists, Trotskyites, anarchists and, admittedly, democrats. It was a strange and tempestuous coalition which itself came to blows internally. In fact, some of the most brutal actions in the Spanish civil war, as any historian will say, were within the republican movement itself, as the communists and Stalinists, fed by the tyrannical designs of the Russian Stalinists, attempted to seize control of the Republican movement and were largely successful in so doing.

On the other side, it was not simply a uni-dimensional coalition of fascists supported and motivated by Adolf Hitler. Indeed the German and Italian fascists supported elements of the Phalangist cause, but there were democrats, monarchists, catholics and others who opposed the Republican cause because they saw it as an encroachment of a foreign tyrannical political movement, communism, and its threatened imposition on Spain.

The reasons different people were motivated to take different sides in this war are complex. We do a great disservice to history and to those Canadians who fought on both sides of this war to suggest that it was as simple as has been presented here.

In fact, we have heard from many speakers about the atrocities committed by the Franco forces in the Spanish civil war, and understandably so. One can make no moral apology for the evil that was done in that respect.

However, it is important to enter into the record some historical consideration of the kinds of terrible evils perpetrated by the Republican cause which was supported by the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion. I do not suggest for one moment that the Canadian combatants in that war were engaged in these kinds of atrocities, but the fact is they fought alongside Stalinists and Trotskyites and anarchists and others who were motivated as much by a kind of anti-Christian and anti-catholic hatred as by a desire to establish democracy in Spain.

The eminent historian Hugh Thomas in his book the Spanish Civil War published in 1961, somebody regarded as generally a pro-Republican historian, detailed in his book the kinds of atrocities committed by the Republicans during the war. Among other things, he says that of the 86,000 people killed under the Republic, 7,900 were clergy or religious, 12 were Bishops, 283 were nuns, 5,200 were priests, 2,500 were monks and 250 were novices. These were not people killed as innocents in the war. These were religious people, not direct combatants in the war, who were sough out and killed by Republican forces.

He reports that nuns were raped and murdered in Pozuelo de Alarcon near Madrid. He reports of parish priests being seized by leftist militia men, scourged, tied to wooden beams, given vinegar to drink, crowned with thorns and then shot. He reports a crucifix was forced down the throat of a mother of two Jesuits. He reports that 800 faithful Christians were thrown down a mine shaft. He reports that in Cernera rosary beads were forced into monks' ears until their ears ruptured. The historical record shows priests having been castrated and their castrated organs being forced into their mouths. He reports priests who were burned alive.

These are all documented incidents. Faithful Christians were burned alive after digging their own graves. Others were burned or had their eyes gouged out. Churches and convents were indiscriminately sacked and burned. There were 150 churches totally destroyed and nearly 2,000 more than half destroyed.

That is just one small historical review of the record of the wonderful Republicans in the Spanish civil war.

I submit that in considering this bill and in considering the history of the passage of the Foreign Enlistment Act, which this motion essentially seeks to undo retroactively, we must be mindful of the historical complexities of the time and must not allow ourselves to be the victims of the kind of historical revisionism which suggests that one side in this combat was all sweetness and light. That is not what the record shows.

Because Parliament still recognizes the Foreign Enlistment Act some have argued that we cannot and should not extend veterans benefits to the remaining surviving Mac-Pap veterans. I would argue that if people engage in civil disobedience, as these people knowingly did, they agree to accept the consequences.

John Stuart Mill, the great political philosopher, says in his magnum opus On Liberty that those who engage in civil disobedience do so while accepting the sanctions the state imposes for such civil disobedience. Those who engaged in the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion knew full well at the time and with conscious deliberation decided to act with civil disobedience.

I suggest that 60 years later we cannot undo a decision they made at that time. I call on my colleagues to oppose this motion.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the order paper.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[Jean Dubé, Progressive Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, on February 6, I brought to the attention of the House the fact that courts in the Restigouche region were overloaded.

Let me give a brief historical overview of this issue. In 1992, the number of judges sitting in Campbellton dropped from two to one. A few months later, the only judge serving the region was transferred to the judicial district of Fredericton.

While waiting for a replacement, the region of Campbellton was without a permanent judge for about three months. The ensuing backlog would probably not have been insurmountable, except that the court registered an increase in the volume of cases, including family law cases.

The judge who is currently sitting is making superhuman efforts to hear as many cases as possible, but it is now obvious that his valiant efforts are not enough to ensure quick processing of the cases. Not a single small claims case has been heard for a year now, and some civil cases will not be heard before 1999.

Some members may think this is a provincial matter. Normally, I would agree. However, there have been a number of developments in which politics clearly impeded the judicial process.

The new chief justice in New Brunswick did everything within his power to find a solution to the court's backlog. Now, the bar association in Restigouche, the crown attorney's office, the chief justice of New Brunswick and the New Brunswick bar association all agree on the solution: Campbellton needs an additional judge. The two levels of government are the only ones dragging their feet.

When I raised the issue in the House, the solicitor general—the Minister of Justice was not present—said that the federal government was aware of the situation. If so, what is it waiting for to act?

We were told by the federal Department of Justice that nothing can be done until a written request is received from the provincial government.

Meanwhile, the New Brunswick justice department tells us that the request was made and that they are waiting for a reply from the federal government.

It is my hope that the provincial and federal governments will quit passing the buck on this and will finally accept their responsibilities, so that access to justice will no longer be jeopardized in the region.

The government's inaction impacts very heavily on the human level. Mothers can wait up to eight or nine months for a support order to allow them to feed their children properly.

Since small claims court cases have not been heard for a year, business owners really have no recourse when they have been wronged. I have also heard of accident victims who have had to go on welfare while waiting for their cases to come up.

This situation cannot continue. The people feel there is no longer any justice for them, and it would seem, unfortunately, that they are right.

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I would first reassure the member that the Minister of Justice shares his concerns on the delays in the legal proceedings. However, as the hon. member mentioned, the matter is a provincial responsibility.

That said, the Province of New Brunswick will determine the number of judges appointed to superior and provincial courts. The Minister of Justice simply appoints judges in the event of vacancies in the province. Currently, all positions on the court of Queen's bench in New Brunswick are filled.

The issue here is one of ensuring the effective allocation of existing judicial resources. The level of judicial service in any part of the province is the shared responsibility of the provincial attorney general and of the chief justice of the court of Queen's bench.

It is not a political problem as the member would like us to believe. The minister has heard from the attorney general of New Brunswick and is in discussions with the New Brunswick minister on this issue. There are ongoing discussions.

It is also important to clarify that the minister supports all initiatives that will take place to the access to justice and to reduce delays in legal proceedings.

Today in fact, the minister also announced a federal initiative to promote the unification of family courts. At the request of a number of provinces, new judges may be appointed to simplify access to the justice system on family matters.

These initiatives testify to the importance the government places on the right of all Canadians to have access to the justice system. The minister shares the hon. member's concerns on the situation faced by the residents of Campbellton, and I can assure him that the matter will be raised with her New Brunswick counterpart.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, tonight I have the opportunity to say a few words about the state of health care in our country.

I notice with interest that at the Liberal convention coming up in a few hours there are a number of resolutions pointing out the concern of delegates from across the country attending the Liberal convention regarding the state of health care in Canada. They are pointing out that in their judgment some cases are actually at a crisis level. I think the Minister of Health actually used that word in a couple of comments in the last little while.

Overall it is fair to say that the Liberal government does not take health care seriously. Canada is now 17th among the 28 industrialized nations of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development in public spending on health care. Between 1986 and 1997 the public portion of Canada's health tab declined from 77% to 70%. By 1999 it is expected to drop to only 60%.

Today private spending in Canada's universal public system exceeds the total of federal health care dollars. I might add that only 20% of Canada's health care funding now comes from the federal government.

Since 1986 Ottawa has slashed a total of $36 billion from health care according to Dr. Fuller of the Health Sciences Association of British Columbia.

I also want to mention that medicare's complete privatization appears to be the goal of at least two provincial governments these days, the governments of Alberta and Ontario.

I read with interest just a few days ago how impressed the B.C. Reform member for North Vancouver was at the service he received in a Florida hospital while he was on vacation. He said “It really put to shame what happens in Canada. I do not think there is any harm in having some competition. I know it is widely supported in my riding and there should be some competition to get efficiency into the system”.

As a result of these fiscal and ideological pressures on our system, privatization is well under way across the country. In Manitoba people with means to do so are hiring their own nurses to care for them in hospital. The fact they have to do this is a reflection of the crisis in our health care system.

Last week apparently with the blessing of the Alberta government, the Royal Bank of Canada and the Alberta Medical Association reached an agreement that will see patients able to charge uninsured medical services on their credit cards or debit cards right at the doctor's office.

I could go on at some length. I think it is fair to say that if there was a poll conducted across the country, Canadians everywhere would consider that we are in a crisis.

In conclusion, I simply want to say that health care in Canada has become a $75 billion marketplace. United States based international corporations armed with free trade agreements threaten to dominate the provision of services shortly with the support of some provincial governments, most large employers and a large section of organized medicine.

For profit companies are benefiting from government participation in joint ventures, lucrative contracts with ministries of health, outsourcing arrangements with hospitals, generous tax breaks for venture capital investors, access to medicare payments and direct grant allocations.

One could go on and on. I can summarize by simply saying our health care system is in serious trouble. Medicare is being challenged from coast to coast. It is time that the federal government took this issue more seriously than it is at the moment.

[John Harvard, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, the question has arisen as to when Canadians can expect the federal government to come forward with a financial commitment for home care.

Home care is already an integral part of our health care system. It is not an add-on or a new idea. It is an essential component of the care that many Canadians receive on a regular basis. What is new is how home and community care can be used within the system in this era of modern technology and the potential of home care to meet needs created in the system by the extensive restructuring and reform seen in most jurisdictions.

The time has come to examine home care programs in all jurisdictions and, as members might expect, that task will not be a simple one. While we are committed to taking steps toward the future, delegates at the recent national conference on home care have made it clear that the task is large and complex. Delegates urge all levels of government to work together on the development of a national home care approach.

We recognize the need to develop a national approach to home and community care for Canadians, an approach that will ensure Canadians that wherever they go across the country, they can receive the care they need. Recognizing that there is a need and knowing in detail how to meet that need are two different matters.

To develop a national approach of this calibre, we must work together in partnership with provincial and territorial governments, with care providers across all parts of the health system and with Canadians in all walks of life. We need the results of pilot and evaluation studies that are being sponsored by the health transition fund and other research studies that have been undertaken to inform our discussions.

At this point an immediate new financial commitment in respect of home and community care is not appropriate, but I can say that the government will be there to fulfil its responsibility with a contribution in an appropriate amount when we see the size and the shape of the solution—

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Waterloo—Wellington.

[Lynn Myers, Liberal, Waterloo—Wellington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as the former chairman of the Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Commission, I have a strong and keen interest in the generation of electricity in the province of Ontario. I have a particular interest in the use of nuclear power and the generation of that electricity.

Ongoing concerns have been expressed in relation to the use of nuclear power in Ontario. The safety of the system has been repeatedly questioned. I am not here to debate whether or not to use nuclear power. Rather, I think it is important to ensure that residents of Ontario have faith and confidence in Ontario Hydro. This includes the use of nuclear power.

Accordingly, I was dismayed recently when the Atomic Energy Control Board was reported to have said that Ontario Hydro's failure to show detailed plans on how it will improve slipping nuclear safety was “entirely unacceptable”. It would appear that there are ongoing concerns on the part of the Atomic Energy Control Board regarding missed promises and commitments by Ontario Hydro in this regard. This is unacceptable to residents of Ontario.

In any event, people in Ontario need to know and be reassured that everything is being done to ensure a safe and secure system in the generation of electrical power in Ontario. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources to give that assurance today to both this House and to the people of Ontario.

[John Harvard, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, the Atomic Energy Control Board is responsible for regulating all nuclear facilities and activities in Canada. Its role is focused strictly on health, safety and environmental protection. It is not mandated to interfere in the business practices of its licensees unless those practices have safety implications.

The problem with Ontario Hydro is one of management and operational performance, not public safety. Public safety and environmental protection are the Government of Canada's highest priorities. Safety has never been compromised. We have very high nuclear safety standards and strong enforcement of those standards through the AECB which played a key role in getting Ontario Hydro to take aggressive corrective action.

Technology is not the problem. The Candu technology is one of the best, if not the best in the world, as demonstrated by the excellent safety and operating performance record of Candus around the world. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, AECL, has taken a proactive role in assuring its customers that this is an internal management problem at Ontario Hydro and that its Candu technology is sound and robust.

As you are well aware, the Atomic Energy Control Board has concluded that Ontario Hydro nuclear generating stations continue to be operated safely under the conditions of its licences and for the duration of the licences. This conclusion is consistent with the findings of Ontario Hydro's own investigation and with the report of the Ontario Select Committee on Ontario Hydro Nuclear Affairs.

The public may be assured that the AECB will continue to monitor the situation very closely. The AECB has inspectors on site to monitor operations and to ensure that anything of safety significance is dealt with immediately. If there is any evidence to cause any source of concern, the control board will not hesitate to impose restrictions as it always has.

The new Nuclear Safety and Control Act and its supporting regulations which are expected to come into force in late 1998 will provide the board with modern regulatory tools to enhance its regulatory capabilities. The government's intention is to ensure that Canada continues to have a strong independent nuclear regulator which focuses on the safety of people and environmental protection.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Order, please. The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until Monday, March 23, 1998 at 11 a.m., pursuant to a special order.

(The House adjourned at 6.46 p.m.)