Mr. Chairman Mr. Job will move the following
resolution. Mr. Secretary, will you read it please?
[The Secretary read the motion]
Whereas it is the duty of this National
Convention to ascertain all important facts
bearing upon the financial and economic
position of this country, and upon all possible
and suitable forms of government to be laid
before the people
Be it therefore resolved that it is essential
that this Convention take immediate steps to
ascertain
1. What steps, if any, can be taken for establishing improved economic or fiscal relationships
between the United States of America
and Newfoundland particularly bearing in
mind the present occupation of certain Newfoundland territory by the said United States
of America and the fact that free entry is
accorded to the United States for its importations into Newfoundland;
2. What financial and fiscal relationships
could be expected between the Government
of the United Kingdom and Newfoundland
(1) Under a continuation of Commission
government in its present form,
(2) Under a revised form of Commission
go-vernment with elected representatives
thereon,
(3) Under responsible government in approximately its previous form,
(4) Under any other suitable form of
government.
3. What would be a fair and equitable basis
for federal union of the Dominion of Canada
and Newfoundland, or what other fiscal,
political or economic arrangements may be
possible.
Be it further resolved that His Excellency
the Governor in Commission be informed
that this National Convention desires to appoint a committee of its members to confer
with His Excellency the Governor in Commission on ways and means of determining
the matters hereinbefore enumerated, and
that in the event of His Excellency the Governor in Commission being agreeable to
conferring with such a committee, the Chairman
of this Convention in consultation with the
Steering Committee shall thereupon select a
delegation of members of this Convention
which, with the Chairman of the Convention,
shall constitute the committee referred to in
this resolution and which shall report to this
Convention the results of their conferences
before being in any way committed to the
despatch of any delegation outside of Newfoundland.
Mr. Job Mr. Chairman, my intention was at one
time to ask for this motion to be deferred for
another day, because the members have only just
got the copy of the resolution placed on their
desks, but I thought that the same purpose would
be served if I introduced the resolution and perhaps got a seconder, and then the
matter might be
laid over until tomorrow for debate.
In moving this resolution I feel that there is no
need to take up the time of the Convention with
a very lengthy explanation. The motion is self-
explanatory and in my opinion non-controversial. If it is adopted it will enable the
Convention
to start the machinery at once for securing certain
282 NATIONAL CONVENTION February 1947
information which, in my opinion, is essential
before we can intelligently recommend any form
of future government.
You will notice that section 1 deals with the
very important question of improved, or perhaps
I should say stable, fiscal relationships with the
United States of America. I propose in connection with this subject, to issue soon
a short
pamphlet
[1] making clear what is in my mind for
the information of members, or of anyone else
interested in the question.
Section 2 deals with a point that has been
raised once or twice as to whether, under certain
circumstances, we can or can not expect any
continuation of assistance from Great Britain,
and it also leaves open for discussion general
questions of finance and exchange between the
United Kingdom and Newfoundland.
Section 3 is the section that may be commented upon controversially, but which I hope
will be accepted in the spirit in which it is offered.
In my opinion we were elected to this Convention
to deal in a fair and broad way with our problems,
and to make recommendations for their solution.
It may be that some think that the confederation
issue would be better left alone altogether, and
that it is not our business even to discuss it, but
in view of the ruling of our late respected Chairman, Mr. Justice Fox, concurred in
by Professor
Wheare, and I think I am right in saying by our
present Chairman, that confederation with
Canada is one of the issues open for debate, we
would in my opinion be wrong in not facing this
fact now, and making some preparations for its
discussion at a future date. The inclusion of the
confederation issue in this resolution is made
only so that our deliberations and recommendations can come to an end as soon as possible.
I
think that a discussion of the pros and cons of
confederation or of any other form of government
at the present juncture would be a great mistake,
but I cannot agree that we would be unwise in
seeking to gather now certain details which must
have a bearing on the forms of government which
it is clear to me we must debate if we are to
accomplish the duties for which we were elected.
However, the gathering of such information is the
sole object of the resolution, which in its present
form provides for reporting back to the whole
Convention prior to the despatch of any delega
tion.
I would like to add that it is my firm belief that
confederation with Canada would not be a satisfactory solution to our problems, but
it is also
evident to me that a considerable number of the
people who have elected this Convention will
expect a fair and free discussion of the subject.
The main point I want to stress is that this is in no
way a resolution favouring confederation or any
other form of government, and that I have worded
it as broadly as possible in the hope that it will be
accepted as a non-controversial motion. There is
only one other remark I would like to make, and
that is that this whole resolution has been drafted
by myself without any influence from any other
member of the Convention.
Mr. Higgins I should like to second the motion,
and to say that I agree entirely with the reasoning
of Mr. Job in introducing the resolution.
Mr. Smallwood Mr. Chairman, I would like to
say that I support the motion, that I agree with all
three sections in it, and that I think the Convention would be well advised to send
a committee
of its members to the Commission of Government, and seek their advice as to the proper
steps
for the Convention to take in securing the
answers to these three questions.
Mr. Hollett Mr. Chairman, this is a very important resolution, and one which I think we should
study very carefully and think about before we
vote. The first section of the resolution ... involves quite a lot. In the first place,
I would say
"what steps, if any, are to be taken for the establishing of improved economic or
fiscal relationships" is a matter which is wholly and solely for
the government of the day, or for the business
people of the time. I can find nothing in the
Newfoundland Act, or the Convention Act,
which authorises us to set ourselves up as a body
to deal with other nations.... I wonder what attitude the Commission of Government
would
take if we attempted to interfere in their prerogative, which they undoubtedly possess
as the
government of the day. It is surely their duty, and
theirs only, to approach the United States with
regard to concessions in tariff and other matters.
On that point alone I think we are sticking our
noses into something which at the moment is
February 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 283
none of our business whatsoever. Why should we
not go and endeavour to interview the governments of a dozen countries who take our
products? If we are going to deal with the United
States, why not with Portugal, Spain, Italy,
Greece and the West Indies? ....
The second part of that section — "Bearing in
mind ... free entry etc... — we have gone into
this before, and I think we all agreed that we did
not give any territory of ours to the United States,
therefore in what way can we use that as a bargaining power in order to get our fish
into the
USA duty free or with concessions? That part of
our territory which has been stolen from us and
given away, was taken from us by Great Britain.
If we look for concessions on account of that, we
must look to Great Britain, who sliced it off this
little island and gave it away. I can imagine the
answer any delegation would get if we approached the United States saying, "Look here,
you have got some of our territory, what are you
going to do about it?" That's a signed and sealed
bargain, by which Great Britain gave away for 99
years, which means forever, those bases, and for
which they got 40 or 50 old destroyers. That I
think is something which we have to think about
in dealing with that particular section...
[Mr. Hollett read Section 2]
In other words we are expected to communicate with the Commission of Government, and
in
conjunction with them set up a committee to say,
"Well now, if we have responsible government,
what will you do for us?"; "If we continue your
puppet government as it is, or slightly reformed,
what will you do to help us?"; or, "If we take
some other form of Government, what is your
attitude then?" I think that's the most ridiculous
section of the lot. In other words we have to
decide what form of Government we will recommend to the people. Can you conceive of
the
Commission of Government sitting down and
talking to asses who would ask them questions of
that sort?
Then we come to clause three. A nice little
parcel tied up with a neat little string. The same
parcel which we had several months ago, and
which we spent a week or ten days arguing about,
nicely disguised and designed to fool people,
there is no question about it. Mind you, I have no
objection to our knowing the terms under which
We might go into union with Canada, but I am
reminded of the fact, when I think of it, that the
Ottawa government is unable to come to terms
with the various provinces at the present time....
In spite of that we consider sending a delegation
to Ottawa to find out the terms. I admit that is not
the exact wording, but that is the point of the
section....
I am not very strongly against this motion. It
commits us to very little except that it asks us to
approach the Commission of Government. I
don't know if they will receive us. There is nothing to get us into serious trouble
at the moment,
but it is a pity that we can't get on with the job
for which we were sent here and then, according
to our own poor judgement, make up our minds
as to whether we are self-supporting. Major
Cashin told us yesterday that we were self-supporting since 1941, but we have not
decided that
in our wisdom. I think we ought to get to work
and finish our business, and find out just where
we are, and let the government talk fiscal matters
with the United States, and with Canada for that
matter.
Mr. Job May I make a few remarks of explanation?
Mr. Chairman Anything that you have said you
may explain, Mr. Job, if it has been misinterpreted. In addition you have your right
of reply
at the end of the debate.
Mr. Job I don't want a long debate, but there is
nothing in this resolution calling for an approach
to any foreign government at all. You said we
might as well approach Spain or Italy or Greece
or the United States, but this motion is not for
approaching the United States, but our own
government, for information which I think it is
necessary for us to have in doing this job here.
There is nothing in this resolution which calls for
the sending of a delegation anywhere outside of
Newfoundland.
Mr. Fogwill Mr. Chairman, the last paragraph
of the resolution, I wish to move an amendment
to delete the words from line six "the Chairman
of this Convention in consultation with the Steering Committee shall thereupon select
a delegation of members of this Convention", and insert
these words: "the Convention shall elect from
amongst its members a delegation which, with
the Chairman of the Convention, shall constitute
284 NATIONAL CONVENTION February 1947
the Committee referred to in this Resolution
etc."
Mr. Job There is one point I would like to make,
if I may intervene for a moment. The rules provide that the Chairman shall appoint
all committees....
Mr. McCarthy Would this be a committee or a
delegation? The resolution reads "delegation".
Mr. Chairman It is referred to as a "delegation"
in one place and a "committee" in another place.
Mr. Chairman You can by a two-thirds
majority motion, of which I think notice will have
to be given.
Mr. Chairman There has been an amendment
moved which has not been seconded, and of
which I have not the exact words. I have no desire
to restrict the right of any member, but I must
have that in writing before I can submit it to the
body.
[The Chairman left the Chair for ten minutes]
Mr. Chairman Mr. Fogwill, have you your
proposed amendment in writing now?
Mr. Fogwill Yes, sir. The amendment to the
resolution is as follows: to delete the words from
line six "the Chairman of this Convention in
consultation with the Steering Committee shall
thereupon select a delegation of members of this
Convention", and insert these words: "elected by
the National Convention from its own members".
Mr. Job I have no objection to that change. I
think it is quite proper and probably democratic
if the Convention should elect its own committees. The only reason I put it in was
that the rules
provided for it.
Mr. Chairman It has been moved by Mr. Fog-
will and seconded by Mr. Bailey that the resolution be amended....
Mr. Cashin Mr. Chairman, speaking to the
resolution, I am somewhat of the same mind as
my friend Mr. Hollett. l have no particular objection to a committee of the Convention
interviewing the Commission of Government with regard
to any matter, but with all due respect to Mr. Job
and Mr. Higgins, I think that in many cases we
are going to askthem things which we as sensible
people should not ask. For instance, "What steps,
if any, can be taken for establishing improved
economic or fiscal relationships between the
United States of America and Newfoundland....?" Surely to goodness, every member of
this Convention knows that the only step
which can be taken is that the government itself
get in touch with the United States government
and ask them these questions. They won't tell us
to appoint a delegation to go to Washington,
because I think it's been proved that we have no
power to do that.
And then the second part, "What financial and
fiscal relationships could be expected between
the Government of the United Kingdom and
Newfoundland etc." First when this Convention met there was a ten year programme placed
on the table of the house, which is now being
carried out. That $59 million program, of which
in this fiscal year so far about $8-9 million have
been spent, they have been carrying it out and
have never asked us whether they would or not.
The government has power to go to the United
States and talk paper, mines or anything else. I
would also like to point out that, at the present
time, the fishing interests of Gloucester are putting on a campaign looking for increased
tariff
protection for their fish. In my opinion we have
no power, it is up to the government to do that,
and they would be falling down on their job if
they are not trying to do it. Now, I would be
perfectly willing to support this part of the question: "What steps, if any, are you
taking", is the
government taking. But what steps can be taken,
or what steps are the government trying to take?
They should be taking some. The British government should be taking some steps in
our interests,
but are they doing that? They know what can be
done if they will only do it.
The next thing: "What would be a fair and
equitable basis for federal union....!" We are asking them to tell us what they think
is fair. It's
our job to decide what is fair, not theirs, and
furthermore, Mr. Chairman, we had this matter
up some three or four months ago and there was
an amendment moved by Mr. Penney and passed
in this House, whereby this confederation issue
was to be left over until such time as our reports
were finished. I think Mr. Penney will agree that
that was the idea of his amendment, and now we
find it in here. I have no objection to a delegation
February 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 285
going down and talking to the Commission of
Government in the next three months, but I want
them to go down somewhat sensibly; to ask them
what can be done is a lot of foolishness. As a
former minister of the Crown I have to state that
that looks silly to me.
Mr. Chairman I would like to point out to the
Convention before the debate goes any further,
that this amendment can only be put with the
consent of the whole House, because it is, in my
opinion, contrary to the rules. Is there any further
discussion.
Mr. Hollett Mr. Chairman, may I ask under
what particular rule the amendment is a contradiction?
Mr. Chairman Yes, Mr. Hollett. Rule 42 says,
"The Chairman of the Convention shall appoint
all committees."
Mr. Hollett Did not that refer to committees in
connection with the working of this Convention?
It should not apply to the idea of appointing a
committee to go elsewhere....
Mr. Chairman The rule says "all committees".
Nevertheless, that can be overridden by the Convention.
[After some debate, and with the consent of the Convention, the Chairman put Mr. Fogwill's
amendment to the vote. It was carried. The Convention then debated and passed Mr.
Job's motion as amended (30-7), and adjourned. There followed an informal session]
