April 25, 1904

CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT BIEL.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

1 would like to undertake, either, to control ^ action of the bon. member for Line01' ^jni Niagara. But perhaps we may indue later on to reconsider bis purpose.

Order allowed to stand.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT BIEL.
Permalink

CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT-


On the Order being called for : 4 Resuming adjourned debate on th® P1 g) A® motion of Mr. Lancaster that Bill Of ' no"' Act to amend the Criminal Code, l"11-" read the second time. , „ [DOT] i- tbe


LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT-
Permalink
CON

Edward Arthur Lancaster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LANCASTER.

The Minister of Justice said he was going to deal with this matter in a general Bill that he was going to bring down, and he could see no objection to taking the two up at the same time.

Order allowed to stand.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT-
Permalink

SUPPLY.


House in Committee of Supply. Customs-salaries and contingent expenses of the several ports in the various provinces and in the Northwest Territories, including pay for overtime of officers, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $1,184,865.


CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

Will the hon. gentleman explain in the first place the increase of $25,000.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I suppose the hon. gentleman has had some estimate presented to him by his department naming the ports where the staff requires to be increased, showing the additional number of officers Which will be required at each port. Perhaps it would he well to let the House have that information.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
LIB
?

Mr. R.@

l. BORDEN. I do not exactly father from the remarks made by my hon. 00

friend whether this, after all, is due to the increase in the personnel of the staff or whether it is proposed to utilize the increased vote for the purpose of increasing the salaries of the staff as it exists at the present time. My hon. friend seems to be a little too indefinite about that. We ought to know whether this is required for additions to the staff or whether it is required for the purpose of increasing the remuneration of the present staff. It seems to me that my hon. friend ought to be able to show, how much, if any, is for additions to the staff, and how much is for increases in the salaries of the existing officers, because it does not seem to he proper that we should vote money for one purpose which may be devoted by the hon. gentleman to another purpose. That would be regarded by an ordinary business corporation as a very loose way of presenting such a matter to the shareholders and it seems to me that my hon. friend is not quite explicit. If there are any salaries to he increased should he not have a statement here to present to the committee showing the increases that are to be made, and if there are to be any additions to the staff, should he not be prepared, when he asks for $25,000 additional, to say what additions are to be made, where they are to be made, and for what purpose? We did not get very much from my hon. friend except a rather indefinite reference to the increases in the staff and then some equally indefinite references to increases in the salaries of the staff. For which is this ? Is it for both ? If so, how much for one and how much for the other ? If increases in salaries, how much are they and why are they to be given ? If increases in the personnel of the staff, where are they to be made, and what is the justification for making them ?

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
LIB

William Paterson (Minister of Customs)

Liberal

Mr. PATERSON.

I thought I explained that. This is the amount estimated to be required to provide for the extra business that it may be found necessary to provide for at the outside ports and leave a margin that will permit us to increase, if they are found to be deserving, the salaries of some of the officers in the service. The hon. gentleman asks for some particulars. I will be gl;id to give him all the information I can, but it is impossible to give him the details that he asks for. He will see that it is impossible. These moneys are to be expended during 1904-5, extending a year beyond now. We may find that, during the course of the financial year for which these estimates are taken, circumstances arise under which, perhaps, we have to appoint officers that we had not thought would be required. Business has suddenly developed at some new port. Some place, not yet a port, lias presented claims to the department for the convenience of the public and in the interest of the public it is desirable to establish a port. Then we have to

COMMONS [DOT]

appoint an officer for that place. This must be so with the business increasing so rapidly, and it is evident that there cannot be given the particulars that the hon. gentleman asks for now. It would be impossible to work the department in that way. It is therefore for the committee to consider, whether, in view of the increasing revenue, and the increasing work of the Customs Department, it is an excessive sum to place at the discretion of the department in order to provide for the expenditure that may be found necessary during the twelve months of the next fiscal year.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

The difficulty I have with the hon. gentleman's position is that he does not place the committee in a position to judge, for itself. Suppose my hon. friend asked the committee for $250,000, instead of for $25,000, the committee would have just as much justification for voting that amount as for voting the $25,000, because, it would have to rest on something that is in the mind of my hon. friend and his ' officers, and which is not before the committee. The committee has no information about it. The committee, I am sure, is disposed to give to the hon. gentleman a sufficient appropriation to carry on the busing of the country, and to properly deal with the increasing business. The criticism I am making is that my hon. friend does not come with any sufficient information beyond a very general statement that this money will be required and his appeal to the committee for an increase would be just as valid if he said $250,000 instead of $25,000. The committee would be just as much justified in voting that as in voting him $25,000. The fact is that we have no real information before the committee that would justify it in voting either one or the other of these sums. I would have supposed that my hon. friend would have received a report from his subordinate officers aud that report would have set out certain facts to be presented to the committee upon which the committee would be justified in voting an additional sum over and above the amount which was found necessary last year. "Would my hon. friend tell me how much was expended last year under this vote ?

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
LIB

William Paterson (Minister of Customs)

Liberal

Mr. PATERSON.

I presume the estimate of last year was very close. It has to run to the first of July, and it is expected that by that time it will have been virtually [DOT]expended. In reference to my hon. friend saying that you might gs well ask fo" $250,000 as for $25,000, if he gives it a moment's consideration, he will see that that would not follow at all.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I was paying my hon. friend a compliment, when I said he would have just as much justification in one case as in the other, because, my hon. friend would have said that it was necessary. I meant to put it in this way, that

my hon. friend's word is just as good fm $250,000 as for $25,000.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Permalink
LIB
LIB

April 25, 1904