Matthew Robert BLAKE

BLAKE, Matthew Robert, M.D., M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P.

Personal Data

Party
Unionist
Constituency
Winnipeg North (Manitoba)
Birth Date
January 8, 1876
Deceased Date
November 21, 1937
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Robert_Blake
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=f7523425-47e5-4a50-9f04-74f92ee172e2&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
physician, surgeon

Parliamentary Career

December 17, 1917 - October 4, 1921
UNION
  Winnipeg North (Manitoba)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 12 of 14)


May 11, 1918

Mr. BLAKE:

There are a lot of regulations providing for appointments to the Civil Service, but there seems to be no way of effecting dismissals.

Topic:   CIVIL SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink

May 11, 1918

Mr. BLAKE:

The word "active,'' if inserted in the section, would solve the problem. There is no harm in a man attending a political meeting, but if he goes out and canvasses, or does any work in the election on behalf of any candidate, or takes any part in organizing, he is an active partisan.

Topic:   CIVIL SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink

May 11, 1918

Mr. BLAKE:

It should not be the business of this Government to go about creating appointments which have not been asked for. In this case we have had a request from returned soldiers that one of their members be appointed to this commission, but the Government does not seem disposed to accede to it. I agree that at least one returned soldier should be made a member of that commission. There is no reason why the membership of the commission should not be four as well as three or five. As to the appointment of a woman on the commission, it will be time enough to consider that when the women's organizations take the matter up and press for the appointment.

Topic:   IX, 1018
Full View Permalink

May 10, 1918

Mr. BLAKE:

That is a form of patronage that may well be embodied in this Bill instead of in an Order in Council. I am not taking up the cudgels about Orders in Council; I have endorsed some of them. But this is going out as a Civil Service Bill, and is not a complete reform of patronage.

I have no* doubt that the intention of the Government, as enacted by Order in Council, will be followed out faithfully and to the letter, and that the lowest tenderer will receive the contract in each case. That would, accomplish the strict abolition, of patronage.

Topic:   CIVIL SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink

May 10, 1918

Mr. BLAKE:

There has been a lot of talk about patronage to-night directed at this Bill, but it has not hit at the mairk at all. The patronage which is objected to is not the few appointments made by the member. I have been in control of the patronage in my constituency for four or five years, and I don't think I secured appointments for more than one person each year to post offices and so on, and there never has been a complaint against one of them, although I turned down dozens and dozens of men. That is not what the people are kicking so much about to-day, but rather at the matter of letting contracts to friends at exorbitant prices with the object of having some of the money turned back to the party funds. I do not see anything in this Bill to remedy that state of affairs. That is the big thing the people mean by " patronage," and not the few appointments made here and theie by members. When there is an appointment to be made of a postmaster in some rural constituency, who knows better than the member where that post office should he situated if a new post office is to bb opened up? I think that members*, with the majority they have behind them this year, and the independence which characterizes members in this House, would feel that they could defy their constituency, or

one or two people here and there, and be big enough to locate the offices where they would best serve the community. There is an injustice done here, and under this so-called reform havoc will be wrought in the Civil Service and a great deal of displeasure and more harm caused. I think that, where there is more than one application for a postmaster, at least the opinion of the member should be taken. It is not only a matter of shifting a man into this department or into that. The Bill as constituted is an excellent thing. But where there are more than two applications for a post office, or where there is a vacancy for a postmaster caused by the opening of a new office or by death, I think the member could be consulted first and no harm result. If this Bill is to fulfil the promises* of the Government, something should be put in it to provide that every tender for dredging or any other work or for any supplies should be sealed and left in a designated place until the time comes to open it, and it should be opened in public. In that way we will get away from patronage in the big sense of the word.

Topic:   CIVIL SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink