NAVAL POLICY
of the
Liberal Conservative Party,
as set forth by
R. L. BORDEN
in the House of Commons on
November 24th, 1910.
Mr. Speaker, we on this side of other side of the House. We will retract
the House have been rather peculiarly no part of our policy because Nationalist
situated in one way. It has pleased the or Liberal agrees or disagrees with it.
Nationalists in the province of Quebec, as We will stand by it as we laid it down
has already been pointed out in the last year, and we will not be swerved
course of this debate, to declare that the from it by any taunt, whether of Na-
Conservative party in Canada is in alli- tionalist or Liberal, that we are in alli-
ance with Sir Wilfrid Laurier on this ance with some other party.
naval question. I do not think that the I come now for a moment to the motion
Prime Minister himself was of that mind of my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier
during the last session; I do not believe (Mr. Monk). That motion was in these
that he has changed his opinion since. words:
I have had the good or bad fortune, That the said motion be amended, iy
according to the point of view that may adding to the proposed Address to Hi t-
sresent itself to any one, to be dernoolced Excellency the Governor General the fol-
beyond measure by Nationaliet speakers lowing paragraph at the end thereof:
on every platform where they have spoken The House regrets that the speech from
in the province of Quebec. I do not com- the Throne gives no indication whatever
plain of that; I have taken my stand on of the intention of the government to
this question, and as a public man I am consult the people on its naval policy and
open to criticism and open to denuncia- the general question of the contribution
tion at the instance of any man who does of Canada to imperial armaments.
not happen to agree with me. I share the
honour of being so denounced with about Conservative Attitude in Session of 1910.
80 Conservative members of parliament,
and also with a number of gentlemen on I have already explained in speaking
the other side of the House. upon this subject this session, the nature
of our proposals when the government 's
No Alliance With Nationalists. measure was brought down last year. We
It has also pleased Liberal speakers and then proposed a resolution which I read
the Liberal press of this country to de- in this ITouse only the day before yester-
clare that the Conservative party is in day, and need not read again. We de-
alliance with the Nationalists, and if you clared by that resolution that the pro-
work that out to its logical conclusion posals of the government were dangerous,
then there cannot be any difference of useless and expensive; we declared that
opinien whatever on this naval question before any permanent policy of this char-
in Canada, because we are in alliance acter involving large and unknown future
with the government party thereon and we expenditures was entered upon, it should
are also in alliance with the Nationalist be more carefully considered and thought
party, and there is absolutely no difference out, and should be submitted to the peo-
of opinion. Well we are not in alliance ple of Canada for their mandate. We also
with the government on this question. said that in the meantime and under the
Our policy differs from theirs, but if any conditions which in our apprehension at
proposals which the government bring that time confronted this empire, we
down to parliament are in accordance ought to bring immediate and effective
writh the policy which we have announced aid to the mother country and to the em-
and for which we stand this year as last pire as a whole. That, in brief, was our
year, then we will support those proposals. position of last year. So far as the mo-
We are not in alliance with the National- tion of my hon. friend is concerned, it
ists, and we have been denounced by deals with one aspect of that case. Et
them even more strongly than we have does not, it is true, deal with every aspect
been denounced by hon. gentlemen on the of the case.