Mr. Speaker, the motion of the hon. member for Brampton—Springdale reads:
That, in the opinion of the House, the government should officially apologize to the Indo-Canadian community and to the individuals impacted in the 1914 Komagata Maru incident, in which passengers were prevented from landing in Canada.
The motion that she has presented reflects our 2008 societal values as a nation. Canada is a multicultural nation that is proud to have the privilege of benefiting from diverse backgrounds and heritages. We value the many cultures that make up the fabric of our society.
Today's motion also serves as a comment on the societal values of 1908. That is exactly one hundred years ago. Then, as now, MPs in government reflected the values of their time in words and in their actions. It is important to look back a hundred years to understand how this incident ever came about.
In 1908, during the tenure of prime minister Sir Wilfrid Laurier, a government regulation amended Canada's Immigration Act to include a continuous journey clause. The clause prohibited immigrants from India and Asia from landing in Canada if they did not come by a continuous journey from India. This was intentional, because it was well known that there was no way for a person travelling from India to Canada to make a continuous journey, but it was reflective of Canadian society's views as expressed by MPs in 1908.
Liberal prime minister Sir Wilfrid Laurier said on March 24, 1908:
The situation with regard to the Hindus at the present time can be easily explained. The regulations of the Department of the Interior provide that all undesirables, idiots, insane or incapables for instance, can be and ought to be excluded. But it was found that certain parties were coming in not from the country of their origin but from other countries, and therefore they could not be sent back to the country of their origin.
Laurier said:
Therefore, the Minister of the Interior, in order to have the machinery under his hand to send back to the country of origin any man who did not come up to our regulations, physically, mentally or otherwise, passed a regulation whereby no one would be admitted unless he came through a ticket from the country of his origin.
It was interesting that Conservative Robert Borden asked:
Does it make any difference how long the immigrant has been in the country from which he comes? For instance, if a German has resided for three or four years in England before coming to Canada, would you refuse him admission on that account?
Laurier answered:
This question has not been looked into and I think it not likely to arise. If a German were coming from Great Britain after being there some years, I do not know what we should do as the situation has never arisen; but we are looking to what actually has arisen. Steamship companies, in their anxiety to bring people here, might take them all over the globe, and we should not be able to send the undesirables to their countries of their nationalities. Therefore, to make sure we pass regulations whereby no one would be permitted to land unless he came from the country of his origin, the Hindus who have been deported or excluded come under that regulation. The regulation is not directed against the Hindus or any other nationality, but it is a regulation that applies to all nationalities and was deemed essential in order to control the character of immigrants who were admitted to this country.
It was not only the prime minister. Liberal Mr. MacPherson on April 8, 1908 also said:
I think the object of the amendment brought in by the minister is quite plain.
Mr. Sam Hughes, identified as a liberal Conservative, said:
To exclude Hindus, that is all.
Mr. MacPherson of the Liberals said:
Yes, to exclude Hindus and all kinds of Asiatics, and all kinds of undesirable people.
In 1914 the Komagata Maru incident occurred. On May 23, 1914, 376 east Indians, 22 of whom were returning Canadian residents, arrived in Vancouver harbour on board the Japanese steamer, the Komagata Maru. The steamer met with a very hostile reception. For weeks the vessel lay in harbour, its human cargo deprived of food and water by Canadian authorities who thought to weaken their resolve.
Finally, on June 20, 1914, in the face of impending starvation, a passengers committee agreed to the Canadian government's demand that a test case go before an immigration board of inquiry.
A week later, the case of Munshi Singh, a young Sikh farmer, was heard, and he was ruled inadmissible on the grounds that he had violated three orders in council, in particular the continuous journey regulation.
When the B.C. Court of Appeal upheld the decision, the way was paved for the passengers to be deported. This happened exactly two months after the arrival of the doomed ship in the Vancouver harbour.
With the local citizenry cheering on the docks, a Canadian gunship escorted the Komagata Maru to international waters. Unfortunately, upon their return to India, 20 passengers were killed by British soldiers after being shot during a riot.
The only thing that changed from the time that Laurier brought in this act in 1908 and 1914 was the increased tension in Europe brought on by an arms race among major powers that exhibited a challenge to the British Empire. In 1914 some Canadians felt that that added incidental justification for the continuation of the continuous journey clause.
Laurier, having been prime minister in 1908 when the clause came into being, felt compelled to say something again in 1914. His remarks were, “The question” of why other British subjects also do not want the people of the Komagata Maru to immigrate to their counties “is not altogether a racial one: the basis of the objection is not wholly antipathy to the yellow races”.
Laurier said, “When members of the Asiatic races go to South Africa, to the Straits Settlements, to British Columbia, to California, to Australia, or anywhere, the moment they come into contact with white labour and white working men, there is conflict. The reason is altogether an economic one. These men of Asiatic races have been accustomed for ages to a standard of civilization entirely different from ours. They live more cheaply than we do; they accept a lower rate of wage. That is the commencement of trouble. So long as this is so, you will have the same trouble wherever Asiatics come into contact with men of the Caucasian race”.
What I find really astounding is that this was the former prime minister of Canada in this chamber using these words. He went on to say, “These men have been taught by a certain school of politics that they are the equals of British subjects; unfortunately, they are brought face to face with the hard facts only when it is too late”.
Laurier said, “In my humble judgment, while the Government will do well to keep them out, the best method is to resort, not to law, but, if possible, to diplomacy. Let arrangements be made with the Government of India whereby they will do as the Japanese Government have done: try to keep their own people home. They may say: The white people come to our country; why should not the people of our country go to yours? That is logical, but, unfortunately, this is a matter in which such logic will not count; and we shall have trouble until the remedy which I venture humbly to submit is applied by this Government”.
Thankfully, our society has evolved, but it has taken a long time. Although Canadian values have evolved, we note that during the second world war our nation faced a similar historic failure. On May 13, 1939, the S.S. St. Louis departed from Hamburg, Germany with 937 Jewish refugees aboard.
Canada again faced a dark moment in its history when, a month later, the Liberal prime minister, Mackenzie King, stated he was “emphatically opposed to the admission of the St. Louis passengers”.
Unbelievably, previous to that, the prime minister of Canada had stated, “The admission of refugees perhaps posed a greater menace to Canada in 1938 than did Hitler”. This is really quite amazing stuff.
I do not think I have to take any lessons from the Liberals on this issue. I am proud to say that successive Conservative governments have boldly addressed historic wrongs of our great nation.
On September 22, 1988, prime minister Brian Mulroney formally announced the Japanese redress to right the wrongs committed against Japanese Canadians during World War II.
On June 22, 2006, our current Prime Minister formally announced the Chinese head tax redress with ex gratia symbolic payments of $20,000.
On the specific issue of the Komagata Maru incident, our Prime Minister stated in his speech in August 2006:
We haven't always lived up to our own highest ideals. The events of 1914 serve as a particularly stark example of this.
Our government is working very diligently at this point on community and national historic recognition programs. We are going to be bringing them forward very quickly.
Let me say again, while the Liberals talk, the Conservatives take action.