Gage Workman MONTGOMERY

MONTGOMERY, Gage Workman, Q.C.

Personal Data

Party
Progressive Conservative
Constituency
Victoria--Carleton (New Brunswick)
Birth Date
May 2, 1898
Deceased Date
June 5, 1963
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gage_Montgomery
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=8db7e861-18f0-4588-865a-0bb29f90f20b&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
barrister, lawyer

Parliamentary Career

May 26, 1952 - June 13, 1953
PC
  Victoria--Carleton (New Brunswick)
August 10, 1953 - April 12, 1957
PC
  Victoria--Carleton (New Brunswick)
June 10, 1957 - February 1, 1958
PC
  Victoria--Carleton (New Brunswick)
March 31, 1958 - April 19, 1962
PC
  Victoria--Carleton (New Brunswick)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 3 of 88)


March 8, 1962

Mr. Montgomery:

I think you could under this bill. I am quite happy to support the law as it stands at the moment unless far better reasons are advanced than those offered by the mover of the bill. I know that the hon. member has brought the bill forward in good faith. I sat on a committee with him and he is quite adept at changing his mind. He told us he started out as a Conservative and that if he had had a chance to vote early enough in his life he might have been a Conservative. However, he then got into other company and by the time he was 21 he had changed his mind. As time has gone on he

Private Bills

has changed his mind on several occasions and now he is apparently ready to throw his old party overboard on account of all their sins. He has repented but I do not know what he is going to do with some of the fellows he has with him on that wagon who have not repented yet.

I think we can assume that there must be some political reason behind this, although I will give the hon. member credit for his sincerity. He seems to have in mind the fact that this government is not doing right by the people. He has forgotten that under his scheme the people who are really represented in parliament would not have very much to say about whether or not they wanted the time to be longer than the five months. I think six months is all right for the issuance of the writ, and a reasonable time thereafter for the election. I am sorry but I must tell the hon. member that if this bill comes to a vote I will be voting against it.

Topic:   HOUSE OF COMMONS ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT RESPECTING HOLDING OF BY-ELECTIONS
Full View Permalink

March 8, 1962

Mr. Montgomery:

There is nothing to prevent it if they petition the government in the right way and make their wishes known. The trouble with some hon. members is that they feel they represent everybody. They do in one sense; but there are a lot of people in their constituencies who apparently do not pay much attention to what they recommend. For 22 years when the party the hon. member supports was in power you fooled the people many times. It is like the old story that when you cry wolf, wolf too often, help is not given.

I do not want to get away from the bill, though it seems so easy to do in view of the circumstances. Under the present law the time within which a writ must be issued is six months. It can be done sooner if the people of the constituency get after their member of parliament. If he is reasonable and can present a good case I venture to say that even an opposition member could secure a byelection.

Topic:   HOUSE OF COMMONS ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT RESPECTING HOLDING OF BY-ELECTIONS
Full View Permalink

March 8, 1962

Mr. Montgomery:

I think the people in a constituency are fairly reasonable.

Topic:   HOUSE OF COMMONS ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT RESPECTING HOLDING OF BY-ELECTIONS
Full View Permalink

March 8, 1962

Mr. G. W. Montgomery (Vicloria-Carlelon):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to say a few words on this bill. I notice that it has two parts to it. The mover wishes to have byelection writs issued within 60 days and byelections held within 90 days after the issuance of the writ. Before I say any more, the last speaker more or less accused members on this side of the house of being ridiculous and talking about things that are not important. I think he has spent more time in this house talking about unimportant things than any other member and I do not think he should accuse us of wasting time if we want to express our opinions on this bill.

Topic:   HOUSE OF COMMONS ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT RESPECTING HOLDING OF BY-ELECTIONS
Full View Permalink

March 8, 1962

Mr. Montgomery:

I am one of those who first entered the House of Commons after a by-election quite a while ago, and I take a different attitude from that of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate with regard to this matter. I will tell him right away that I will not support his bill if it comes to a vote.

It is not particularly the job of members of parliament to decide to limit the wishes of the people in any constituency. The rights of parliament are different from the rights of the people in a constituency. In some constituencies a by-election may be desired soon and in others the people may not want a by-election to be held quickly. That is just as true for one party as for another. As the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate said a while ago in confessing his past sins, it may depend on who is sitting in the chair of authority. In my opinion the people of the constituency should be given lots of scope.

Topic:   HOUSE OF COMMONS ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT RESPECTING HOLDING OF BY-ELECTIONS
Full View Permalink