April 10, 1923

CON

William Garland McQuarrie

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. McQUARRIE:

It seems to me that the members who have to spend the greater part of their time in their rooms, the ones who come from a distance, are given the worst rooms in the building. I think those who require to remain in Ottawa over the week end, and who have to be in their rooms so much, should have the best rooms in the building, whereas, as a matter of fact, we get

the worst rooms, and the members from Ontario and Quebec, some of whom are not in their rooms very much, have the good ones. I think there might reasonably be some different arrangement made.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
LIB

Andrew Ross McMaster

Liberal

Mr. McMASTER:

Before the item carries, I should like to call the attention of the minister to the inadequate provision for the friends of private members on the government side in the gallery. Wfe have very little provision made for the friends and relatives of the private members in the galleries, and a great deal more space than I think is necessary is devoted to those members of the other House who occasionally look in upon our labours. More space is also devoted to the Speaker's gallery than necessary. I think the private members' gallery should be extended 20 or 30 feet to the north, and the Speaker's gallery and the Senate gallery cut down somewhat. There is really not enough room for the private members' families in the members' gallery. I did not complain of our position when we were on the opposition side. At that time we bore with equanimity, courage and fortitude all these things and made no complaints. We had a large gallery, where those who admired us might sit and watch us in the successful effort we made to obtain power and assume the reins of government. But now that we have obtained the sunny side of power, we find that those who like to look at us and listen to our debates are cramped, confined and cabined in very small space. This is a matter of real importance to private members on this side of the House. I have dealt with it in a light way in order that I may receive the attention of the House, but it is a serious question and the present arrangement is unfair to the private members on this side of the House.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink

Item agreed to. Ottawa, new departmental building, $500,000.


?

Mr. BEL AND@

I beg to move that the item No. 141, "Ottawa, new departmental building, $500,000" be struck out.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
CON

Arthur Meighen (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MEIGHEN:

The minister might explain how the government Came to make that blunder.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
PRO

John Warwick King

Progressive

Mr. KING (Kootenay):

No blunder was

made. The matter of the new departmental building was carefully and seriously considered by the government. Anyone who is familiar with the manner in which the various departments of the government are scattered about the city of Ottawa, and anyone who has business with the various departments will realise

Supply-Public Works

that it is desirable that some of these departments, at least, should be housed in a better condition than they are to-day. It was, however, finally decided that it was not opportune this year to undertake a construction of that character, although, through inadvertence, the item appeared in the estimates. No mistake was made.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
CON

Arthur Meighen (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MEIGHEN:

I do not quite get the reasoning. The government decided to build the building because it was far better to have the various departments housed in a government building, and the government decided that they would not do that this year. And no mistake was made. In which decision was no mistake made? In the decision to build, or in the decision not to build?

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
PRO

John Warwick King

Progressive

Mr. KING (Kootenay):

I think my explanation was quite satisfactory.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
LIB

William Stevens Fielding (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. FIELDING:

I think I shall have to take the responsibility of striking this out. The construction of this building was proposed at one stage by the Department of Public Works, and after further discussion it was decided that the item should be stricken out. My right hon. friend (Mr. Meighen) knows the difficulties that arise in the clerical work of preparing the estimates, and in this work the clerks neglected to pay attention to this item. I am responsible for this. If there is a blunder, I am the guilty man.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink

Amendment agreed to. Ottawa, addition to Dominion Archives building, $150,000.


CON

Arthur Meighen (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MEIGHEN:

This is an entirely new item, and we should have an explanation of it.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
PRO

John Warwick King

Progressive

Mr. KING (Kootenay):

I am very glad to give an explanation. The matter of further building for housing the archives is important and urgent, and if members will make themselves familiar with conditions that exist today, they will realise the necessity. In fact, in 1912, the government of that day considered that it was necessary to construct an addition to the Archives building in order that public records might be stored with safety. A commission was appointed which reported on the plan and the form of addition that should be made, and an estimate of $50,000 was then placed in the Estimates. I think this was repeated in 1915. Since the years 1914 and 1915, many valuable records have been and are in the possession of the government and of the people of Canada, and there should be no tendency on the part of the government to neglect the proper storage or housing of these valuable records. It is the intention of the

government to make an addition to the present Archives building.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
CON

Hugh Guthrie

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GUTHRIE:

I think there was a plan or a scheme for the extension of the Archives building, on a system of additional units to be constructed every few years. Is this appropriation to construct one of these units, or is it for a new building?

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
PRO

John Warwick King

Progressive

Mr. KING (Kootenay):

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink

Item agreed to. Ottawa Printing bureau-new building, $500,000.


LIB

Henri Sévérin Béland (Minister of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment; Minister presiding over the Department of Health)

Liberal

Mr. BELAND:

I beg to move that this item of $500,000 for Ottawa Printing bureau, new building, be reduced by the sum of $350,-

000.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
PRO

John Warwick King

Progressive

Mr. KING (Kootenay):

When the matter was originally considered by the government, an amount of $500,000 was placed in the estimates as the sum that would be required and that could be expended during the coming year. At that time, it was thought that investigations and information necessary to be secured in order that proper plans and a proper building might be developed could be secured in time for plans and arrangements to be made for construction. There have, however, been unavoidable delays; we have not been able to proceed as rapidly as we would like, and I, in consultation with the architect, have been advised that a sum of $150,000 will be sufficient for this year's expenditure in the matter of constructing a new Printing bureau.

As regards the necessity for a new Printing bureau, the present building was constructed some thirty-six years ago. It does not lend itself to the proper installation and equipment of what would be considered as an up-to-date Printing bureau, such as the government would require. Apparently, there has been a necessity for enlargement for printing purposes, because we find that during the last four or five years a very large sum of money has been expended on that building constructed some thirty-six years ago. I believe some $111,000 have been expended since 1919 in additions and changes to the building, in an endeavour to make it adaptable for Printing bureau purposes. In addition to that, the department found it necessary to rent, outside of the present premises, very considerable space, and they find a very considerable expenditure is required in the matter of trucking back and forth

Supply-Public Works

from storehouses and rented space in other portions of the city. We are advised by the Printing bureau officials that a properly constructed bureau with proper equipment would make a very large saving to the people of the country, and after this matter was gone into thoroughly, it was considered good economy by the government to undertake the construction of a new Printing bureau, it also being intended to utilize the present building for departmental purposes. It will be possible, probably, to utilize this building, after it is vacated by the printing establishment, for the Statistical branch, a very large branch of the service that, I am informed, is to-day housed in some temporary buildings on Vittoria street. The matter has been carefully considered, and it is the intention of the government to proceed with the construction of a proper printing establishment.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
CON

Henry Lumley Drayton

Conservative (1867-1942)

Sir HENRY DRAYTON:

Can the minister give us some details? He gives us some general information. It is quite true that some money was spent on the building and many rearrangements were made as h result of the report of the Civil Service Commission, which rearrangement resulted in very large savings being made at that plant. At that time, as a result of the reorganization, the staff was largely reduced; it is to-day largely reduced, and large economies have already been effected. Will the government promise further similar resulting economies if this building is put up? What is the real reason for building it? The staff is now considerably smaller than it was before, for hon. gentlemen's predecessors cut down the cost of administration by over half a million.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
LIB

James Murdock (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MURDOCK:

My hon. friend referred to the money that had been expended in making additions to that building during the past few jmars. I think the exact figure is about $195,000.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink
CON

Henry Lumley Drayton

Conservative (1867-1942)

Sir HENRY DRAYTON:

The minister gave $110,000.

Topic:   SUPPLY-DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. HAYES FROM POSTAL SERVICE
Subtopic:   PUBLIC WORKS-OTTAWA PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
Permalink

April 10, 1923