Because the record of the government is too bad. That is as clear as day. There is no danger of it. We have read in some of the papers that we -want to starve the civil service. We are not the government. The government are responsible for the civil service. The government are responsible for carrying on the public works. The government are responsible for everything that happens in the country whether it is good or bad. Why ? When we had good crops it was due to my right hon. friend, and if so why should he not take the responsibility for bad crops or anything that happens ? We have a duty to perform and we will perform that duty. It is to see that no iniquitous law shall be put upon the statute-book of this country. The House has been sitting for five months and hon. gentlemen opposite knew that they had this contentious Bill to bring before parliament. This was known at the commencement of the session. This Bill might have been brought down in December and discussed at that time. We had even to grant the government the courtesy of consenting to a one-eighth Supply Bill. They want an other eighth and we say: Hold on we are not going to do that until we know whether
you are going to carry this nefarious scheme through or not. They say that we are going to starve the public service and stop public works. Whose fault is that ? It is the fault of the government and they will be looked upon as being responsible for it by the people of the country when they understand the whole situation. As far as dissolution is concerned there is no danger. Never would there be a better time to go to the country than the present. The hon. gentlemen opposite are so much afraid of it that they had to appoint one commission to explain another. There was the Cassels Commission appointed to explain the Royal Commission, and when it had explained a very small part of the Royal Commission it adjourned sine die and probably we will never hear anything more about it. There is no danger of dissolution. The right hon. gentleman has only one thing to do and that is to withdraw the obnoxious clauses of this Bill, follow the kind advice given by my hon. friend the leader of the opposition, strike out clauses Nos. 1 and 17 and let us see if we can devise some means of carrying out honest elections in the country.
Subtopic: *J. ROCHE.