June 1, 1921

L LIB

Joseph Arthur Calixte √Čthier

Laurier Liberal

Mr. ETHIER:

I was a member of the

special committee appointed to consider Bill No. 122. We discussed the Bill; we amended it, and a report has been laid on the table of the House. If it is the intention of the Government to incorporate this resolution in that Bill which has been reported as amended by that special committee, this resolution has not been laid before that special committee for discussion, so that it is quite a different matter. The Committee of the Whole, in examining Bill No. 122 on second reading, as Order of the Day No. 29, will have to deal with a resolution which was not discussed by this special committee and with which the report of the special committee does not deal at all. Therefore there might be confusion. We are inr irpor-

ating in Bill No. 122, the conclusions of Select Committees on 'Soldiers' Civil Reestablishment, Pensions, Insurance, etc., which conclusions the special committee appointed to consider Bill No. 122 have no cognizance of.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
UNION

Robert Laird Borden

Unionist

Sir ROBERT BORDEN:

I do not see that there is any occasion for confusion. Bill No. 122 was referred to a special committee and that committee has reported the Bill. That Bill stands now for consideration by the Committee of the Whole House. It is perfectly Competent for any hon. member, a member of the Government or totherwise, to move an amendment to that Bill. It so happens that the amendments now suggested require notice, and, I suppose, the assent of the Governor General. That course has 'been taken, simply because it is required by the rules of the House. It is perfectly competent for the committee to deal with the whole question, and as the Prime Minister pointed out, it is not desirable to have two separate Bills each dealing with proposed amendments to the Civil Service Act.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
UNI L

William Stevens Fielding

Unionist (Liberal)

Mr. FIELDING:

It is a pity that we did not take up Bill No. 122 and1 then, in consideration of that Bill in committee, 'these amendments could have been very properly moved. The present procedure is, I think, confusing. It ought, however, to be fairly understood by those members who may not want to support the Civil Service Bill proper that, in assenting to this resolution, they reserve the right to oppose the main Bill. The procedure is a little confusing, but the result will be the same.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

What would be the effect of having this amendment read:

Resolved, that the provisions of the Civil Service Act, 1918, be amended-

And so forth? It would mean two amendments to one Act, but it would avoid a confusion which, I think, would be most unfortunate and unfair. 'The procedure that I suggest will get matters through just as quickly. I should like to avoid, if possible, confusing the issue as between anything that is being done on the recommendation of the committee that dealt with the soldiers and Bill No. 122, which is objectionable from so many points of view.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
UNION

Arthur Meighen (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Unionist

Mr. MEIGHEN:

I do not see where the confusion comes in. There are many Bills to some clauses of which hon. members

are opposed and other clauses which they support. Evidently this is to be one of those Bills. If you are going to pass an amendment to the Civil Service Act, and then, following right on that, another Bill amending the Civil Service Act, that is a very unusual and undesirable course to take. The confusion would then be permanent; the amendments of this session would be in two Bills, and that confusion would go on down; whereas by combining the amendments in one Bill there is no need for confusion at all. We are all surely able to distinguish between the original Bill and this amendment. The rules of Parliament give ample opportunity for any hon. member to put himself on record, both by speech and vote, as in favour of part and against the rest. That does not confuse matters at all.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

Bill No. 122 as it stands now, has two sections and, if both of them are not objectionable, one certainly is.

While we on this side in opposing Bill No. 122 may not, in the minds of many members in this House, appear to be opposing the suggestions from the Committee on Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment, if they are incorporated in Bill No. 122, the country will get that impression.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
UNION

Arthur Meighen (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Unionist

Mr. MEIGHEN:

Move an amendment.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I think the whole trouble arises from the irregularity in the way in which the Government is proceeding.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
UNION

Arthur Meighen (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Unionist

Mr. MEIGHEN:

The Government are

proceeding in the regular way. If we had known beforehand what amendments would be necessary we could have brought ir, one Bill with the amendments but of course, we could not know" that until the Special Committee on Pensions, Insurance, and Reestablishment had dealt with the matter. Hon. gentlemen are in the same position now; they can oppose some clauses, and support others. If the hon. gentleman's plan were followed generally, it wou.d mean that if certain clauses of a Bill were objectionable, and others were not, the Government in order to make everything clear should make two Bills of it, or perhaps three or four.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

Surely it is

not regular to amend a Bill that is net before the House?

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
UNION

Arthur Meighen (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Unionist

Mr. MEIGHEN:

It will be. Then you can move to amend.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
L LIB

Rodolphe Lemieux

Laurier Liberal

Mr. LEMIEUX:

I appeal to my right hon. friend not to confuse the issue; I do not say that he is doing it intentionally. I, for one, am opposed to the other Bill. I think it means a return to patronage. I shall not discuss that now, as it is not before the committee; I shall, however, oppose it and vote against it in committee. But this is another question altogether that has been dealt with by a Special Committee of the House. We have seen in the same session two or three Bills, amending one particular Act. I do not see why, when we have two principles absolutely distinct bearing on the same subject matter, we should include them both in one Bill. It only confuses matters. There is no difficulty in introducing two Bills based upon resolutions passed by two different committees dealing with two different subjects. The one is a reversion to patronage, in my humble judgment, although my right hon. friend may net share my view; I am opposed to that Bill. The other is simply doing justice to the returned soldier; I am in favour of that, and shall vote for it. We should not deal with the two together, as it will only confuse the issue.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
L LIB

Charles Murphy

Laurier Liberal

Mr. MURPHY:

May I put the matter before the right hon. gentleman in a way that seems to be slightly different from that in which it has hitherto been discussed. If we had Bill No. 122 before us in the regular way, it would, I submit, be quite in order for the right hon. gentleman, or for that matter, for any member of the House, to propose as amendments to that Bill the sections that are set out in the resolution that is now before the committee.. In view of the substantial agreement upon the principle involved, but the very general disagreement as to the order of procedure, may I suggest to the right hon. gentleman that the object that all seem to have in view might be obtained if this order were discharged, and the resolution as it is now before the committee were moved as an amendment when Bill No. 122 is under discussion.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
UNION

Arthur Meighen (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Unionist

Mr. MEIGHEN:

That is just what we would do, only for the reason stated by the right hon. member for King's (Sir Robert Borden). The law calls on us to have a resolution passed before we can deal with the Bill. We would not be allowed in Committee of the Whole to move this

resolution as an amendment, because it involves the expenditure of money.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
L LIB

Charles Murphy

Laurier Liberal

Mr. MURPHY:

I have looked at it since the hon. member for King's (Sir Robert Borden) spoke, but it is not clear to me that it does involve the expenditure of money.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
UNION

Arthur Meighen (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Unionist

Mr. MEIGHEN:

In that case there

would be no need for the resolution at all. The officers of the House must have come to the conclusion that there was need of this resolution.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
L LIB

Charles Murphy

Laurier Liberal

Mr. MURPHY:

Frankly, it looks to me like a mistake.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
UNI L

William Stevens Fielding

Unionist (Liberal)

Mr. FIELDING:

I think it is a confusion of the matter to deal with it in this way. I do not think it has been brought forward in the usual way. More than that the Special Committee on Pensions would hardly make a report recommending a money Bill in this way. I do not think the resolution calls for an expenditure of money. It is a matter of detail.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink
UNION

Arthur Meighen (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Unionist

Mr. MEIGHEN:

It would be just the same, of course, afterwards. What we can do is to pass the resolution in case it does turn out to be necessary. If it is not necessary, we will let it lie there, and in committee on the Bill we will move its provisions by way of amendment to Bill 122. That Bill will not be introduced, in that case, just as it is.

Resolution reported and concurred in.

On the motion of Mr. Meighen the resolution was referred to Committee of the Whole to be considered in connection with Bill No. 122, to amend the Civil Service Act.

Topic:   CIVIL' SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   RECOMMENDATIONS OP PENSIONS COMMITTEE
Permalink

RETURNED SOLDIERS' INSURANCE

June 1, 1921