March 2, 1915

CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

The point of order of the hon. member is not very well taken. Throughout this debate hon. members have very largely indulged in a violation of the rule of debate by the way in which they have referred to other hon. members. The use of the personal pronouns, " he," "you " and " they " is not permissible according to the rule of debate. The proper form of address is " the hon. member for " the constituency which he represents, or " the hon. minister of " the portfolio that he holds, or something of that nature.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

That is not

the point of order.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

There was no proper

point of order made.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

The point of order raised 'by my hon. friend (Mr. Pugsley) was that the hon. member for East Lambton (Mr. Armstrong) had stated that my hon. friend beside me had exhibited spite against the Minister of Public Works i that he had imputed motives.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

The hon. member, if I understood him correctly, denied the statement, and did not raise a point of order.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

If you take

into consideration the word " spite," a point of order was raised.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

While I was on my feet to make my statement in regard to the point of order, I thought it well, because of the frequency with which the rule of debate has been violated during this debate, to call attention to that violation.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
CON

Joseph Elijah Armstrong

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ARMSTRONG:

Mr. Speaker, I shall endeavour to carry, out your wishes in regard to following the rules of debate.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
LIB

Michael Clark

Liberal

Mr. MICHAEL CLARK:

Mr. Speaker,

would you give us the rule regarding the use of the personal pronoun? I have always understood that we must in every case address the Chair. That would, of course, preclude the use of the personal pronoun.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

Hon. members must

address the Chair; but in referring to other hon. members they are not permitted to use the personal pronoun.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
CON

Joseph Elijah Armstrong

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ARMSTRONG:

I was calling attention to the fact that the ex-Minister of Public Works had criticised unfairly the present Minister of Public Works in the administration of his department. I am justified in making that statement, because time and again the ex-Minister of Public Works has called attention to matters pertaining to the Public Works Department, which he said were most extravagantly managed and were unreasonably and unfairly dealt with. He took up at least half an hour of the time of this House in referring to different revotes that the present Minister of Public Works had put in the Estimates. Let me call the attention of the hon. member for St. John to the fact that in the year 1908, a copy of the Estimates for which I have under my hand, instead of a revote of $3,150,000, the amount of the revote put in the Estimates by the present Minister of Public Works, my hon. friend

had a revote of $3,544,000. It was quite right for the ex-Minister of Public Works to have a revote amounting fn $3,544,000, but it was a terrible thing for the present Minister of Public Works to have a revote of $3,150,000. Let me call the attention of the hon. member to some of the revotes.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Joseph Elijah Armstrong

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ARMSTRONG:

I do not care to take up the time of the House in looking up the expenditure. I do not see what bearing that has upon the question.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
LIB

William Pugsley

Liberal

Mr. PUGSLEY:

That is the year in

which we curtailed our expenditure, and very properly curtailed it.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
CON

Joseph Elijah Armstrong

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ARMSTRONG:

Yes, but the revotes appeared in the Estimates just the same, and this Government is also curtailing its Estimates. Let me give a few of the amounts. The revote for public buildings in Nova Scotia amounted to $143,000; in Prince Edward Island, to $5,000; in New Brunswick, to $11,000; in Quebec, to $314,700; in Ontario, to $386,500; in Manitoba, to $219,000; in Saskatchewan and Alberta, to $117,000,' and in British Columbia, $93,000. If we consider public works and harbours, we find that in Nova Scotia the revotes amounted to $225,000; in Prince Edward Island, to $34,000; in New Brunswick, to $124,000; in Quebec, to $418,000; in Ontario, to $748,000; in Manitoba, to $17,000; in Saskatchewan and Alberta, to $31,000; in British Columbia, to $14,500. The revote in the Public Works Department for dredging amounted to $720,000; for roads and bridges to $20,000, and for miscellaneous,^ $75,000. This makes a total of $3,544,950. It was all right for the ex-Minister of Public Works in 1908 to have a revote appearing in the Estimates for the department under his administration for that large amount of money; but it was a most serious state of affairs for the present Minister of Public Works, under the trying circumstances which we have to face at the present time, to have a revote of only $3,150,000.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Joseph Elijah Armstrong

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ARMSTRONG:

I feel that the hon. gentleman has been interrupting me quite enough and interfering with my remarks. I allowed the hon. gentleman to proceed with his discussion without interruption, and I do not feel-

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order. If tlie lion, member rises to make an absolute correction or denial of a statement, he has a right to do so. '

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
LIB

William Pugsley

Liberal

Mr. PUGSLEY:

1 do not think my hon. friend would intentionally put a misinterpretation upon what I said. I was not complaining of the revotes. What I was doing was this: I was showing that the large

amount of revotes showed that there was no urgency for the works in respect of which the revotes appeared. The same was true in 1908.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink
CON

Joseph Elijah Armstrong

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ARMSTRONG:

There surely is as

much urgency to-day as there was in 1908. The hon. gentleman took up at least half an hour in dealing with this question. It seems to me that hon. gentlemen opposite are quibbling over little things. If they have any definite proposition to offer, let them present it to the House. They want to realize the fact that this Government is facing a tremendous crisis in the affairs of Canada. Our boys are marching to the front; some of them are on the firing line to-day, in the trenches and on the hillsides of France, assisting in the defence of their King and country. This Parliament should do everything possible to assist this Government in the position they occupy.

The ex-Minister of Public Works called attention to the Militia Estimates and complained because they were $7,000,000 less than they were last year. He realizes the fact that our boys are, as I have said, in the firing line; that therefore no camp or annual drill will be necessary, and that $1,900,000 for ordnance and stores and arms should not appear in the Estimates for the present year. He also appreciates the fact that, as far as public works are concerned, the Minister of Finance and a number of other hon. members have already stated that this Government do nbt intend'to carry on public works that were about to be started or were under consideration.

Topic:   THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   PROPOSED WAR TAXATION.
Permalink

March 2, 1915