1918-05-11

APPOINTMENT OF MR. J. P. A.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I have the honour to inform the House that I have directed the Clerk of the House to lay upon the table of the House the report of the Clerk and my recommendation in the matter of the appointment of Mr. J. P. A. Chevassu to the Hansard Division of the Translation Staff of the House of Commons.



REPORT.

[Stage Direction]
Details of remuneration paid in connection with the Victory Loan.

Hon. A. K. Maclean.


Rt. Hon. Sir ROBERT BORDEN (Prime Minister) moved:: That owing to the advanced' period of the session, the following rules relating to Private Bills he suspended for the remainder of the Session, viz.: Rules 28, 28a, 52, 103, and paragraph (a), subsection 3 of rule 89, and that Private Bills reported on Private Bills days by any Select Standing Committee ibe placed on the Orders of the Day of the same day for consideration in Committee of the Whole amongst Private Bills, or if reported on days other than Private Bills days, then immediately after routine proceedings.
He said: This motion is recommended by the Clerk of the Private Bills Committee, and it has been submitted to me by the hon. member for Kingston (Mr. Nickle), who has gone over the rules that are mentioned in the motion, and who is of the opinion that those rules should be suspended in order that Private Bill legislation may be properly advanced.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: I should like to have this motion stand until Monday, so that I may have an opportunity of looking into the matter.	.


Robert Laird Borden: Certainly.
Motion stands.



FIRST READING OF SENATE BILLS.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 89, respecting The Fire Insurance Company of Canada.-Mr. Nesbitt.
Bill No. 90, respecting The Church and Manse Board of the Presbyterian Church in Canada.-Mr. Nickle.
Bill No. 91, for the relief of Francis Newman.-Mr. Lalor.
Bill No. 92, for the relief of Henry Ernest Saxby.-Mr. Fripp.
Bill No. 93, respecting a patent of Jacob David Wolf.-Mr. Fripp.
Bill No. 94, to ineorpor.atfe L'ordre des Dominicans ou freres precheurs au Canada.- Mr. Cbabot.


[Stage Direction]
On the notice of motion:
Resolved, That the Rules of the House be amended by inserting the following rules immediately after Rule 24 :
Censoring the Official Report of the Debates. 24A. The Speaker of the House of Commons, of his own motion, or upon the report of the Chief Censor, may order that any adverse statement, report or opinion, concerning the causes of the present war, or the motives or purposes for which Canada or the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, or any of the allied nations, entered upon or prosecutes the same, which may tend to arouse hostile feeling, create unrest, or unsettle or inflame public opinion, or any unfavourable statement, report or opinion concerning the action of Canada, the said United Kingdom, or any allied nation, In prosecuting the war, or any statement, report or opinion, which may tend to weaken or in any way detract from the united effort of the people of Canada of the prosecution of the war, made by any Member or Members of the House of Commons, shall not be included in or shall be deleted from the official report of the Debates of the House of Commons.
24B. The Speaker of the House of Commons may, in cases where he deems it necessary, order that the printing of the official report of the Debates in the House of Commons be suspended for such time as he may fix in order to afford opportunity for the making by the Chief Censor of a report as provided for in the last-mentioned section, and the determination by the said Speaker as to whether any portion of such report should be excluded or deleted.
Robert Laird Borden: In view of the advanced stage of the session, it is not the intention to proceed with this motion during the present session. It was intended as a corollary to the Order in Council with regard to censorship which has been laid on the table of the House.


Mr. BUREAU:: May I ask the Prime Minister the reason why he is dropping this motion? Is it only in view of the advanced stage of the session, or is it because he now thinks that there is no reason for having given such a notice?


Robert Laird Borden: I explained that it was on account of the advanced stage of the session. It may or may not be necessary to take it up at the next session. I also said that it was a corollary' to the Order in Council with regard to the censorship which was passed a few weeks agio and which was laid .upon the table of the House.


Jacques Bureau: That is very unsatisfactory, as I look upon this motion as an attempt to introduce " club " rule.
Notice of motion dropped.



LIBRARIAN OF PARLIAMENT.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. RODGLPHE LEMIEUX (Maison-meuve):: May I ask itbe Prime Minister if the report published in this morning's Citizen is true, namely, that "Mr. A. D. DeCelles, O.M.G., Librarian of Parliament, is going to be superannuated? Has he been consulted in regard to his superannuation, and is iit true that the Hon. Mr. Sevigny is going to succeed him? Perhaps I might qualify my question by stating that everyone who knows Mr. DeCelles knows that he is in perfect health and is a most excellent official. Further than that, he is an ornament to the Library, because he is one of the great students of Canada.


Robert Laird Borden: I have heard nothing of the matter, except what is contained in. the observations of my toon, friend.	.



CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT.


[Stage Direction]
On the motion of the Hon. Mr. Doherty (Minister of Justice), Bill No. 69, to amend the Criminal Code, was read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
On the Order being called for the second reading of Bill No. 16, to amend the Customs Act and to provide for the temporary control of exports and imports:
Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: On account of the advanced stage of the session, and in

view of the fact that the War Measures Act gives for the time being authority for doing what was sought to be done by this Bill, I beg to move that this Order be discharged.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
-SUSPENSE ACCOUNT.

[Stage Direction]
On the Order being called:
'Bouse again in Committee on a proposed Resolution to provide that the working expenses of the Canadian Government railways and of any railway under the charge and: management or direction of the Minister of Railways andi Canals shall be paid1 out of the receipts and revenues of the said railways, etc. -Hon. Mr. Reid1.
Robert Laird Borden: It is not the intention to proceed with this resolution, and I beg to move that the Order be discharged.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Bid, TO AMEND THE CIVIL, SERVICE ACT
AND TO BRINK} THE OUTSIDE SERVICE UNDER ITS PROVISIONS.
The House again in committee on Bill No. 53, respecting the Civil Service of Canada.-Mr. Boivin in, the Chair (from May 10).
The CHAIRMAN:: When the committee adjourned last night we had completed the general discussion of the Bill and had begun its consideration clause by clause. Section 1 has been adopted.
On section 2-Definitions:


Mr. BEST:: 
John Best: This is a very important Bill, and I think it should not be pressed through the House in the dying hours of the session. I believe it would be in the public interest if the Bill was left over and a committee were appointed to examine it carefully and report at the next session of the House. I firmly .believe that something should be done in, the way of Civil Service reform, but in, my opinion this Bill is altogether too drastic.


Mr. CURRIE:: I think my hon. friend (Mr. Best) was perfectly in order in discussing the action of the Civil Service Federation in reference to this Bill. I say that if the man who wrote this insulting circular to the members of this House got his just deserts he would be brought to the bar of this House. The circular is an insult to every hon. member. Talk about influence! Why, that organization is the influence that is at the bottom of the whole thing. It is a countrywide organization, and is endeavouring to force this Bill through. I think it is time the members of
r

this House took cognizance of its actions. What an insult to insinuate' that me\nbers of this House are influenced by some mysterious agency behind the scenes! The mysterious agency behind the scenes is the influences these civil servants are trying to exert, and the men who wrote that circular are after promotion for themselves; everybody knows that. I think it is high time these men were called to time. The Government .should find out whether or not these men have a right to send such an insulting circular to members of this House.
I think it was perfectly in order for my hon. friend to read the circular.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Would my hon. friend read the whole circular?


John Allister Currie: The hon. gentleman has received a copy as has everyone else.


Mr. COOPER:: Honi soit qui mal y pense.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Read it in full.


John Allister Currie: It is a circular of the Civil Service Federation of Canada. Ae I have your permission, Mr. Chairman, I shall read the circular.


Georges Henri Boivin: I resent the remarks
of the hon. member as to my having called the former speaker to- order. I did not call the hon. member to order because he was discussing the circular. I called him to order because he was discussing the salaries* of postmasters in Canada, which is altogether different.	,


John Allister Currie: I suppose that comes
under another clause and we can take it up when that clause is under discussion. At the top of this circular is "The Civil /Service Federation of Canada." And at the side I find the names of the officers and a list of affiliated .organizations, as follows :
President-Walter Todd, House of Commons, Ottawa ; Vice-Presidents : Maritime Provinces- S. W. Wilkins, St John, N. B.; Quebec-H. McLaughlin, (Montreal; (Manitoba-C. A. Hives, Winnipeg; Saskatchewan-Charles Gardiner, Regina ; Alberta-A. Venables, Calgary ; British Columbia-J. E. Fagan, Vancouver ; Secretary-Treasurer-F. 'Grierson, Finance,. Ottawa, (P. O. Box 4*4) ; Assistant Secretary-Treasurer -I,. D. Burling, (Mines, Ottawa; Organizing Secretary-T. T. Hawkins, P. O. Inspector, Ottawa.
Composed of the Following Affiliated Organizations of Civil Servants.
(Dominion Postal Clerk's Association (35 branches) ; Dominion Customs Association, (20 branches) ; Railway Mail Clerk's Federation, (15 branches).
Local Organizations.
Charlottetown, Quebec, Ottawa, Perth, Sarnia, Sault Ste. Marie, Vancouver, Victoria.
Class Organizations.
Excise:	Sherbrooke, .Stratford, London,
Hamilton; Immigration: Niagara Falls, Winnipeg ; Marine: Halifax; Meat Inspectors: Toronto, (2) ; Militia: Halifax; Naval: Halifax, Esquimau; Public Works: Toronto, Hamilton, Winnipeg.
Then the circular goes on to say:
Dear Sir,	-
The Public .Service, performing alike in peace and war the national business, is surely one of Canada's greatest assets. We are addressing you because you are one of tha directors in Canada's business enterprises and so responsible for the results. We are addressing you at a time when events afford you the opportunity to co-operate in an. Act that will remove a serious handicap to national efficiency and so contribute to the one great aspiration of all Canada's public men,-the winning of the war.
Every one who. wants a little salary always thinks that it must be granted to him an order to win the war.


Wilfrid Laurier: Hear, hear.


John Allister Currie: My right hon. friend knows that.
' Sir WILFRID ,LAURIER: I do.


John Allister Currie: 

The minister in charge of the Bill is here and he can stand up and tell the House whether there ever was any elaborate organization endeavouring to put a stop to this great measure or whether this letter is all bunkum and an attempt to coerce the members of this House into the passing of a measure without due consideration. As one member of the House I do not object to real Civil Service reform but when we have a measure of such vast consequence to the whole country and one by which we. will tie ourselves down to a lot of bureaucrats', it should -be placed before a committee of this House and threshed out for a whole session so that we would know, what we were doing. Nobody really seems to understand what the measure means. I have read this circular and I say unhesitatingly that if I were a minister of the Crown and a man in the Civil Service with whom I had anything to do wrote an. insulting letter like that to me and to members of the House I would suspend him immediately. What right has ,a man who is a servant of this House to address this House in such a contemptuous way?


Mr. G. B. NICHOLSON:: I would like
to say a word1 in reply to that sweeping condemnation of the Civil Service for presuming to represent their position to their employers the members of this House and the representatives of the people. I have in my experience heard similar statements made in regard to other large bodies of employers when their employees wouto presume to represent their case to their employers as the Civil Service have done here. I do not see that it is inconsistent with the good of the public service that civil servants should be organized if they wish to be just the same ;as the servants of any other large employing body. It matters not whether they are in the em-p'oy of a large corporation or of the people of Canada. I question very much whether the hon. member for North Simcoe (Mr. Currie) woulld object if some one came along with a proposition that involved a large organization of capital and that was going to be the employer of a large body of men. Any one who stands up iand indulges in a sweeping condemnation of any group of men for presuming to organize and present their case to their employers is taking just the same position that a great many of the autocratic employers took a generation ago but who have been compelled to get down from that lofty pedestal. The observations made by the hon. gentleman have no reference 'whatever to the merit or genius of this Bill. The Bill is either good
['Mr. Currie.]
or bad according to its details. The object is. to take the Civil Service out of politics and to get rid of the curse of the patronage system, a principle which ought to commend it to every one. There is nothing inconsistent with the good of the public service that the men who are engaged in that service should have an honest desire for promotion. Why should not a man entering the Civil Service have the same right to want to get to the top as the man in the service of a railway company or of any other employer?


John Allister Currie: Why should he not get to the top-the Bill provides that a man in the second class can never get to the top.


George Brecken Nicholson: Simply because some member of Parliament with sufficient pull, -whenever a position is open in the Civil Service that is worth anything, railroads some of his friends into it. That is why they cannot get to the top. The opportunity for promotion does not exist in the Civil Service as it does in any other line of business simply on account of the patronage system. If this Bill is not complete in its details this House can improve it. If we find when we have gone through it that there are some things that are incomplete, we can take it up another year and make the necessary improvements. But, the principle is the right one. The public service ought to be put upon the same ground as any other class of service.


John Allister Currie: Just a moment. I desire to answer the hon. gentleman (Mr. G. B. Nicholson), and I shall do so in a very few words. The gentleman who has sent the circular, Mr. Grierson, sits in the gallery constantly watching the proceedings of the House. He is the secretary, or occupies other official position in the Civil Service Association, and publishes the Civil Service paper, The Civilian. It is a shame-I would not for one moment stand it if I were a minister of the Crown-the abuse that ministers are handed out in every issue of that paper. When a minister tries to exercise any discipline over 'any official in his department he is subjected to a torrent of abuse from the paper published by this man, Mr. Grierson, one of the signatories to this circular. The hon. member (Mr. Nicholson) comes down here full of enthusiasm and thinks he is going to regenerate the whole world through the medium of this Bill. I do not object to a man who is selling his labour belonging to any organization, but I say that it is a danger-a danger to the country-that the official?

of Canada should be allowed to set themselves up in an organization of this kind and make these raids on the treasury. I speak as a public man, not as one who is going around looking for votes, and this organization-the very thing that has destroyed Russia- is alarming. It is a thing that is^ going to create all sorts o>f factions in this service whereby it will be nothing more than a series of disjointed units and broken links. I say that the ministers henceforth should put their foot down on these men who have the audacity to insult the House of Commons with a circular of this kind. This organization has nothing to do with the Federation of Labour, or any of the trades unions that are trying to render a service to the country in these troublesome times. It is only a short time ago since the greatest labour man on the whole of this continent stood upon the floor of this chamber and called upon everybody to perform public service. Can anyhody tell me that public service is linked up in the organization which has expressed its sentiments in this circular? The members of this or-ganizatioh are united for the purpose ot raiding the treasury and bringing pressure to hear upon members of this House and the ministers-especially the ministers- and it has been done to' the extent that a minister, as far as I can see, is only a cipher to register in has department the acts of an organization which is not responsible either to the House or the people of the country. For that reason I think the Acting Minister <_f Finance should make a statement and say whether there has been any organized movement to try and stop this Bill, or whether these men are only indulging in further misrepresentations.


Sir SAM HUGHES:: I did not catch the wording of the circular. Does it give practical reasons why this Bill should be supported, or does it insinuate that the members are not doing their duty?


John Allister Currie: The circular consists of a string of insinuations from start to finish.


Jacques Bureau: They say that to win the war you have got to have such a Bill.


Air. STEVENS:: Paragraph (a) of clause 2 of the Bill defines "Civil Service" as meaning and including:
All classes of officers, clerks and employees- and so forth-
-appointed by the Governor in Council or other competent authority before the first day of
112$
July, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-two or thereafter appointed or employed in a manner provided by the Civil Service Act for the time being, in force.
Is there not a better way in which that definition could be stated? I understand that the Civil Service includes practically all the employees of the Government of Canada. In that case why limit the definition to those employed "in the manner provided by the Civil Service Act for the time being enforced" which I presume is the old Civil Service Act? Why not say that all the employees of the Government come under this Act?
,Sir WILFRID LAURIER: Hear, hear.


Jacques Bureau: And all the officials.


Air.  A. K. MAOLEAN@: I wish to distinguish between the . Civil Service and the Public Service.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER; What is the difference?


Henry Herbert Stevens: That is the point I want to make. Why make such a distinction when, you are going to- abolish patronage and bring all the employees under the Civil Service Commission?


Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:: There are a great number of war commissions operating today in the city of Ottawa whose employees are but temporary, and on the cessation of war these commissions will cease to exist. While the Civil Service Commission should have the right to appoint hereafter all persons employed by these war commissions, it was not deemed desirable to consider such persons as part of the Civil Service.


Mr. MORPHY:: Are the Dominion police part of the Civil Service, and if not, why?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The Alounted Police are not part of the Civil Service.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: I said Dominion Police, not North West Mounted Police.


Samuel Hughes: The press gangs going round the city and country.


Air.  A. K. AIACLEAN@: The Dominion Police, I think, are part of the Civil Service.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Is the minister sure? I am told they are not, and why is it so?


John Allister Currie: I asked the minister a very important question whether any organization had approached the Government with a view to stopping the passage of this Bill?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am very sorry, hut I did not have the opportunity of

answering the question put by my hon. friend from Simeoe- I quite agree with the principle enunciated by the hon. member for Algoma (Mr. Nicholson), but I am inclined to agree with the views expressed by the members for Dufferin and Simeoe as to the impropriety of the Civil Service bombarding members of Parliament in respect to the passage of this Bill. I have been flooded during the past week with telegrams from every part of Canada, and I have taken pains to let the officers of the organized Civil Service know that I resent the manner in which they have approached members of Parliament during the past few days by circular and by telegram. So far as I know there has been no organized effort on the part of anybody to defeat the passage of this Bill. I should like to say in connection with clause 2 that subsections a and to 'are substantially as they now appear in the present Civil Service Act. The only difference in c is that there is an addition to the officers maimed as Deputy Heads, such as the Controller of the Mounted Police, the Superintendent of Insurance, the Dominion Archivist and the assistant to the chairman and secretary to the Commission of Conservation. The purpose of making these officers deputy heads within the Act is that they control their staffs, and therefore it is necessary for the proper working of the Act to define them as deputy heads.


Wilfrid Laurier: What is the exact meaning of clause 2? Subsection (a) defines "Civil Service" as including all classes of officers, clerks and employees. Subsection (c) defines what is meant by "deputy" or "deputy head" and so on.
I want to know whether the deputy is comprised in the Civil Service or not?
Mr. A. K. MAC'LEAN: The deputy ministers are part of the Civil Service hut they are appointed by the Governor in Council.


Wilfrid Laurier: The deputy heads should be part of the Civil Service and they seem to come within the meaning of subsection (a). They are employees of the Government and they are in the Civil Service.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: A deputy minister is an officer-


Wilfrid Laurier: He is an officer and therefore part of the Civil Service.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: He is part of the Civil Service but he is appointed by the Governor in Council.


Wilfrid Laurier: I understand that and I do not disapprove of the appointment of deputy ministers by the Government but he is also a member of the Civil Service, and you make a special provision for him.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Section 41 of the Bill provides:
Except as herein otherwise provided, and except in the case of deputy heads, appointments to positions in the .pulblic service shall he by competitive examination,


Jacques Bureau: That excludes deputy
ministers from the examination, hut not from membership in the 'Civil Service.


Henry Herbert Stevens: In the large or small
post offices, customs offices, and inland revenue offices throughout the country we have some very excellent officers in technical, clerical or official positions. Why should they not have the dignity, if there toe any dignity attached to it, of being in the Civil Service instead of being classified as the Outside Service. I understand the [DOT]object of this Bill is to change present conditions. The Civil Service is practically ilimited to Ottawa and to a few technical positions outside of Ottawa; the rest of the pulblic servants are called the Outside Service. If we are to have real Civil Service reform, men of an equal standing outside *of Ottawa should be in the Civil Service.


Wilfrid Laurier: Hear, hear.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I refer especially- to men on the permanent staff, not those on the temporary staff, employed for a few weeks under rush conditions. My reference is to the permanent officers of the Customs, Post Office, Inland Revenue and such other departments as have permanent -officers throughout the country.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: 
Henry Herbert Stevens: This is practically a temporary Bill?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes,
M,r. TURRIFF: Would it not be better to leave this Bill over until the commission report what they propose by way of amalgamating the outside and- inside services?
I think it would be a good) thing to have that done, and to have the whole service taken out of politics as far as possible and to do away with patronage. It seems to me that the Committee of the Whole is not a good body to deal with this Bill clause by clause. We have not the' time now at the end of the session to discuss it fully. If the Bill is now dealt with I venture to say there is not one member in ten-and I will be one of them-who. will understand what the Bill means when we get through. A committee should) he appointed to deal with it, such as the committee dealing with pensions, which would investigate the matter fully and report during the next session, by which time we will have the report of the Civil Service Commission. The House would then be in a position to deal with it to the satisfaction of both the Civil Service and the country. There is something in the circular sent to mem-bers^-though I do not blame the service very mnch-that I do not like, that is the .suggestion that the winning of the war depends on the passing of this Bill to suit the Civil Service. The Civil Service have no complaint to make in my judgment in connection with the war. Many of those who went to the front have been getting two salaries, and it does not become them to come before Parliament and say that the passage of this Bill is necessary to the winning of
the war. That is only a bit of buncombe.
I move that this matter-be left over until next session, and that a committee be appointed to study the matter before we deal with the Bill.


Rodolphe Lemieux: There has been lots of buncombe about the winning of the war


John Allister Currie: I rose when the hon. gentleman did to second the motion of the hon. member tor Assinibioa.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Is there ,a motion?


Georges Henri Boivin: Will the hon. member please repeat the motion?


Mr. TURRIFF:: I would move that a committee be appointed to consider this Bill and make a report at the next session.


Georges Henri Boivin: I have to rule the
motion out of order, as not being competent to be moved in Committee of the Whole. The only motion that could .be made by the hon. member at this istage would be that the committee rise and report progress, so that the House may deal with the question.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Mr. Chairman,-


Rodolphe Lemieux: Before my hon. friend proceeds, I would like to have an explanation from him. When my hon, friend from Vancouver (Mr. Stevens) concluded his remarks by asking if the Bill was presented as a temporary measure only, I understood the acting minister to nod assent. I desire to know if this is a permanent measure or only a temporary. If it is .a temporary measure, I shall have something to say about it later on.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: When the member for Vancouver used the word " temporary," I assumed that he did- not mean that this Bill when enacted would be but temporary; I assumed he meant it was not to be considered as a complete Bill, and that it would be subject to amendment later.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What amendment?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It will be subject to amendment later as any other Act. It. is not a temporary Bill. We must have a Civil iService Act as we have always had. I admit that the Bill may contain defects which we hope to remedy later. In answer to the member for Assiniboia I want to say that .substantially there are but eight or nine new clanses in this Bill; the whole Bill is substantially as it has been for the last ten years, and theie is no reason why the iHous-e should delay many hours in its passage.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: To win the war.


Mr. OHABOT:: Reference has been made by an horn, member to the effect that the Outside Service was to be dealt with in thi-s Bill, and I would ask whether in the reorganization and reclassification of the Outside Service it is the intention through this^ Bill to place that service on the same footing as the Inside Service as regards appointments, promotion, salaries, and superannuation.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The purpose of the Bill is to apply to the Outside Service the principle carried out in the Inside Service in the matter of appointments. Otherwise the Bill is not applicable to the Outside Service, nor is it possible to make it so until we have the report on the reorganization and classification of the Outside Service which the Civil Service Commission purposes making during the recess.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I am in favour of Civil Service reform, that is, a real reform. If the object of this legislation is to carry out what was contained in the Act of 1908, it is not a great reform, because under that Act the Government could at any moment, by Order in Council, bring the Outside Service under the Civil Service Commission. I am sure that my hon. friend knows how to handle Orders in Council; there has been *a literal manufacture of them by the Government. Why this legislation in the last days of the session, when the Government could, by Order in Council, bring the Outside Service under the Civil Service Commission?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It is true that there was such a section in the old Act, hut it was not workable.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Why?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The Civil Service Act now in force was designed to apply solely to the Inside Service. It is true that the Act gives the power to put the Outside Service under its^ operation, but it is not practicable that this be done. For instance, if an Order in Council was passed putting the Outside Service under the operation of the Civil Service Act, the salaries of the Inside Service would automatically apply to the Outside Service. The section to which my hon. friend refers was carelessly drafted; it had not sufficient consideration at the time it was passed, and it could not possibly be put into operation.


Mr. SEXSMITH:: Is it not a fact that the Outside Service has been brought under the Civil Service Act by Order in Council? 
I received notice from the Government that appointments were to be made by the Civil Service Commission, and that I should have nothing to do with them. Appointments have already been made in my riding in that way.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: This legislation gives statutory effect to the Order in Council.	*


Rodolphe Lemieux: An Order in Council has no statutory effect, then?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It may have the effect of a statute, but there is some doubt about it. In a case of this kind it is better to give statutory effect to the Order in Council.


Jacques Bureau: This is an Act respecting the Civil Service of Canada. Clause 2, paragraph (a), defines "Civil Service" as follows:
"Civil Service" means and includes all classes of officers, clerks and employees in or under the several departments of the Executive Government of Canada and in the office of the Auditor General, etc.
Who is to control the various commissions that have been appointed? I do not see why members of such commissions should not come under the same Act as that which 'applies to the ordinary civil servant who works in a particular department.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: So far as appointments are concerned, they will toe under the Civil Service Commission.


Jacques Bureau: I do not see anything in this Bill that says so. Even if these commissions are only temporary, they should, unless otherwise enacted by the statute creating the commission, come under the provisions of the Civil Service Act. This would prevent the substitution of an Order in Council for Parliament, and would give members of Parliament at least a dim realization that they have a little say in. the *administration of the country's affairs. In the old Civil Service Act, as found in the Revised Statutes, the definition of "Civil Service " is practically the same as the one given here, except that the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta and the Northwest and Yukon Territories were then excluded from its provisions,.- Later, in 1908, the definition was enlarged to include employees in Saskatchewan, Alberta and the Yukon Territory. Between, the two another Act was passed concerning the superannuation and retirement of persons employed in the Civil Service, and in that Act " Civil Service " was

defined as- including all officers,, clerks and employees under the several departments of executive government who were paid a yearly salary and to whom the Civil Service Act applied. Included also were all such officers, clerks and employees of the second or outside division as the Governor in Council might from time to time designate; the permanent officers and servants of the Senate, the House of Commons, and the Library of Parliament; and' so on. The definition given in that Superannuation Act is a great deal broader than that given here. I do not see anything in this Bill ' which says that 'the permanent employees of the House of Commons are included in that definition. As :to the Commission, let us set out in the statute appointing them [DOT]what regulations the members and employees of them shall be subject to. If the Governor in Council appoints a commission let the officers of that commission come under the operation of the Civil Service Act. I am in favour of the principle of this Bill; I think it is right. Since we have heen in opposition we have not been overburdened with the distribution of patronage. That is a great relief, and I thank God fo^ it. Another cloud that I want to disperse, another glory that I want to put into its proper place is the statement that this is a new thing, and that this legislation is being enacted to redeem the pledges made duiing the elections by Union candidates. We heard it said last night in this House that if the Union Government did nothing hut enact this particular legislation, a * monument should be erected to perpetuate the great good they have done to this country. The acting minister (Mr. A. K. Maclean,) has just declared that this is the very Act that was placed in the statute -books in 1906, and that was revised and amended in 1908. Just a few sections, he says, are different.
Mr. A. K. MACLEAN; They are new.


Jacques Bureau: I suppose those sections that are new are the ones that -are to bring the Outside Service into the Inside Service. We shall have an opportunity of discussing that question later on. This is not new legislation; this is old legislation; and, Instead of investing money in a monument, we should invest it for the purpose of paying the salaries of those poor soldiers whose salaries are to be cut off, although they enlisted on the understanding that they were to get their Civil Service salary in addition to their military pay. Let us have no -more
camouflage. With the exception of the heads, let all the other officials and- employees' of commissions appointed by the Governor in Couneil come under this Act.
Mr. A. K. M1ACLEAN: They do.


Jacques Bureau: I fail to see where that
is provided for. If that he_ the case, let ns 'put into the Bill a definition that will include them.
'Mr. A. K. MACLEAN: The hon. member should look -at the definition of "Public .-Service," clause (g), of section 2.


Jacques Bureau: I do not see much that relates to Public Service. Why make a difference between "Public Service" and "Civil Service?" If I were to make any such definition, my definition would -be this: I would clasify, under the head of CPulbLic Service," all men not employed by the Government, but employed by a commission created by virthe of an Act of Parliament, the duties and the scope of jurisdiction of which commission is defined by this Act of Parliament, and which commission is not subject to the Civil Service Act. That is what I would call the Public Service. But all commissions .appointed by the Governor in Council and paid by this country should be under the Civil Service Act. No exception should be made in any case. In the Estimates of 1918-19, 1 find at page 92, item 287, an amount of $600,000 that we are asked to vote for salaries. The item reads:	[DOT]
To provide lor the administration of the Business Profits War Tax Act, 1916. and the Income War Tax Act, 1917: Appointments for the purpose may be made without reference to the provisions of the Civil Service Act, $600,000.
It is things of that sort that we want to guard against. It was said last night b>
the hon. member for North Winnipeg (Mr. Blake) that this did not exactly meet the evils that the people wanted to cure by doing away with patronage. He was absolutely right in his statement, and, for once,
I must say I am with him heart and soul on this particular question. What the people want this Parliament to protect them against is what is commonly called graft. The word may not be parliamentary, but I am going to use it to express my idea. Graft is not caused by the appointment of a clerk at $1,000 or $2,000 a year, but graft is found, in the various contracts that are handed out, in the changes that are made and the extras that are paid on those contracts after they have been signed. The other day I called the attention of the Minister of Public Works to -a case of this

kind which happened in my own riding where, to favour a particular friend, a contract was given at a price lower than that of the lowest tenderer, and then the contractor, expecting to make up the difference by extras, received shamefully large amounts for shamefully small jobs, such as receiving $400 for turning a stone around in a wall. I am, however, getting away from the question. Why should we pass a Civil Service Act, if any minister of the Crown can come into the House with an appropriation to provide for the administration of certain things, and then attach this rider which seems very inoffensive per se, hut in the tail of which is the old venom:
Appointments for the purpose may be made without reference to the provisions of the Civil Service Act.
The Government have changed- the phraseology so that the old members will not understand it. 'The former phraseology was " notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act contained." It is things of that -sort -that we want to take precautions against. If we are going to make the appointments, one thing that the people are complaining about -and from which they want to he protected is, not so much the matter of overpaid civil servants, as the matter of over-crowded offices. If the minister will accept my suggestion, I sha-11-d-raft a little amendment for -the purpose of putting into the definition of " Civil Service," -all commissions or officers employed by commissions- appointed by the Governor -in -Council, .and into the definition o-f " Public -Service," all -commissions whose duties and jurisdiction are established by Parliament. When we create such commissions by Act of Parliament, we can say what officers shall be -appointed and how they shall -be appointed.
Mr. CHiAtBOTi:	My hon. fri-efod from
Three Rivers (Mr. -Bureau) has referred to pre-election promises and also -to the erection of a monument in commemoration of -the passage of this Bill. If I properly understand the -tenor of this Bill, its chief purpose is to abolish political patronage, which has been a curse to this country -and a bane to some of the representatives o-f the people and- to myself in particular.


Jacques Bureau: You have always had
my sincere sympathy.


John Léo Chabot: I think at -all times patronage has been opposed to -the best interests of the Civil Service -and has to -a large extent-, contributed to the defeats of 
many Governments in this country. After 1911, political patronage -in this city w-as -thrust upon me w-ith -a vengeance, and my life in Ottawa from 1911 to 1917 was a regular political hell on earth. If this Bill abolishes political patronage, which I consider at all times, an unsatisfactory and unfair method of making appointments, it will remove a grievance and the people of this country will be thankful and satisfied. Si-nce the passage of the Order in Council abolishing political patronage, my peace of mind hlas been greatly enhanced; a huge lo-ad has been taken off my shoulders, and I feel that my life has become worth living. If this legislation abolishes patronage, it will render the Civil Service more effective and efficient, and it will render to the people of this country a very valuable service.


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: I am sure every member of this House who is acquainted with my hon. friend (Mr. Chabot), would like to relieve him of the difficult position in which he has been placed since 1911. A political hell is about as bad a hell as one could expect. I do not, however, think that many of the members of this House from the various -parts of Canada are persecuted in the same way as the hon. member is. As this is the seat of government, one can readily understand how conditions here would be different from what they would be in other parts of the country. I want to point out that the- abolition of political patronage is not going to he accomplished 'by this legislation.
Patronage, as the people understand it, is not -affected by this Bill at all. I quite agree w-ith my hon. friend from Winnipeg -and the hon- member for Three Rivers that it -is the -expenditure of p-ublic money on public works in this country that is the kind of patronage the people of this country are desirous of abolishing. Patronage in appointments is comparatively a trifling matter, -so insignificant, in fact, that in the part o-f the country from which I co-m-e the people d-o no-t try for Government positions at all. We expect to have very little patronage -of that kind in the inland counties oi Canada. Doe-s th-e Pension Commission come under this Bill?
Mr. A. K. -MACLEAN: Yes, as to its employees.


Donald Sutherland: And the Pensions Commissioners ?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No.


Donald Sutherland: I presume that the powers o-f the Civil Service Commission are very similar to those -exercised by the Pensions 'Oommis-siion, -and if that is the case 1 must record imy opposition to having the Bill gone on with until we have a little more light on the subject. I have -always felt that commissions -can. perform a very useful service in this oo-untry provided they have -a -good imun at the hea)d<, hut if proper jurisdiction as not exercised over them they can be guilty of great -abuses. The defi-ndtionj of the powers of the commission does not, in -my opinion, -go as far -as it should. I -do not think the Government -should delegate to a commission matters for which they themselves ought to be held responsible.
iMr. A. K. MACLEAN: That is- a matter of policy, -and has nothing whatever to d-o with, the 'Civil Service Bill.


Donald Sutherland: As the section defines the scope of the -commission, I think my remarks iare pertinent.


Georges Henri Boivin: If the hon. member will look at -section. 4 he will -see that tlhe duties and powers of the commission are -set forth therein.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: In reply to my hon. ifriemid from Three Rivers-" Public -Service," as -used throughout this Bill means -and includes all officers, clerks or employees in the -service of the Crown or -of Parliament; so no person is omitted. Section 41 provides that -all appointments to -positions in the public service -shall be by competitive examination. There are certain other provisions empowering the commission to provide regulations for .appointments to the -Outside Service where it is not practicable to apply "this Act.


John Allister Currie: I think the hon. member . for South Oxford was quite in order in discussing on this -section, which defines " Commission," the question' whether the other commissions that -are governing half this country should not be included under this Bill. We are here defining " Civil Service " and the hon. member for South Oxford wants to know whether these various commissions are included in that definition.
-Sir SiAM HUGHES: In all countries there has been more or less difficulty in managing the Civil Service. Alexander Pope long ago referred to the matter in these lines:	,
For forms of government let fools contest, Whate'er is best administered, is best.
-Some departments of the Civil Service are administered -splendidly. Again, one branch of a department will be administered splendidly, while another branch will be badly administered; it depends upon the administrator in each case. The Civil Service in Ottawa is very fine in many respects. I deeply sympathize with the two members for Ottawa. I have had considerable experience with them. I can well remember getting a letter from one of these distinguished gentlemen requesting that such and such a person be forthwith appointed. . I passed the letter on without comment, and about a month later received another letter from the- member diemandiilg to know by what authority this particular person had been appointed. It -seems that -a certain fellow wanted to get in the service, and when he went to see the head of a department he wa-s told to get a letter from my good friend the junior member for Ottawa. He wrote a letter of introduction, knowing no more about the fellow, I suppose, than about -a stranger in the street, and the fellow got the job. Later on the other letter came wanting to know how he got appointed. It is true that sort of thing does not occur very often, hut it is an instance of the routine that is gone through. After all, it is the heads of departments who engineer the appointments nine times out of ten, hut the member of Parliament gets the blame; the member, is simply the -cat's-paw in the game. With regard to this circular, I know the two gentlemen who signed it. I was a little annoyed at receiving it. They are good fellows, hut they have -been in the service so long that, like a good many others, they think the period of leisure has arrived for them. Their talk about winning the- war and what the people of Canada want, is piffle. I think these gentlemen should not interfere with members of Parliament. If these gentlemen had furnished ns with some good reason why we should support the Bill, I would have been delighted to do it. But a sloppy thing like that circular is merely annoying.


Jacques Bureau: Let us forget it.


Samuel Hughes: Yes. Is this Bill going to control the appointment of senators? In the last election, a minister of the Crown is supposed to have bought off a candidate by offering him a sen-atorship. This minister was an old hand at the business, as he had done a similar thing before. In another

case, a new hand at the business was concerned. I should like to know if cases of that kind come under this Bill.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The hon. gentleman will have to renew that question .at another time.


Mr. J. READ:: I notice in the editorial column of the Citizen, which, I presume, is a Government organ, the following:
The Government has every reason to he displeased with the report, sent broadcast across the country, that the Civil Service Bill would be postponed till another session. The parties responsible for giving out such misleading information are apparently not anxious to see the Civil Service reformed by the abolition of patronage. Such reports tend to undermine the position of Union government; especially now that the government is undertaking^the responsibility of railway ownership on a national scale, with the Canadian Northern added to the government railway system, it is essential that political patronage should be eliminated.
Paragraph (f) says:
"Outside Service" means and includes the other officers, clerks and employees included in the public service, not being part of the Inside Service.
Then paragraph (g):
"Public Service" means and includes all officers, clerks or employees in the service of the Crown or of Parliament.
That seeems all right, but at page 13 of the Bill you exclude the railway .service. Some ihon. gentlemen, like my hon friend from South Oxford (Mr. Sutherland) fortunately have not been in contact with the Government railway system of the Dominion. They do not have any Government railways running through their parts of the country. But eventually this Government is going to take over the railway systems of Canada, including the Canadian Northern and Grand Trunk Pacific, so that we will have .extensive Government ownership. If Government ownership is going to be thus extended, it is absolutely essential, if this Bill is going to be any benefit in eliminating patronage, that it- be applied to the railway service as well as to any other part of the public service. If you were in my province, where we have one mile of Government railway to every 300 inhabitants and observed the position in regard to patronage, you would *appreciate the importance of what I am trying to tell the committee. In the name of common sense, why should the railway service be eliminated from this Bill? It looks to me very suspicious. If the Government are really in earnest in their desire to give us this reform I am in favour of it.

The reason for my attitude with regard to this measure is that I have seen the system worked out in England. In the Old Country they have almost entirely done away with the curse of patronage as administered by politicians. The system has done more than that. It has enabled a man, upon entering the public service, to know that his salary and his job are going to remain with him as long as he behaves himself and that he is not subject to being fired with a change of Government. The result is that men can afford to take a less wage, and millions and millions of pounds have been saved to the people of Great Britain from the very fact that they have adopted this principle of Civil Service reform. That is what is going to happen here. A great deal of the legislation that is passed now-a-days has particular reference to war times but this measure should be framed to meet the conditions which will exist when the w.ar is over. An hon. gentleman on the other side pointed out that this was a good time for .the Union Government to do something. In the name of common sense, let it do something under this Bill because up to the present it has done nothing beyond putting the country in a state of turmoil. I would strongly urge placing the Government railway system employees under the operation of this Bill.	^ _


Jacques Bureau: I would like to call the attention of the minister to the definition of "Public Service."
"Public Service" means and includes all officers, clerks or employees in the service of the Crown or of Parliament.
Are not all classes of officers, clerks or employees "employed in or under the several departments of the executive government of Canada" employees in the service of the Crown?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Jacques Bureau: Well then "Public Service" includes the whole service of the Dominion?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It includes everybody who is in the employ of the Government, or the Parliament of Canada and only excepts railway and steamship employees and lighthouse keepers, I think.


Jacques Bureau: "Public Service" includes the Civil Service?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Samuel Hughes: It does, not include soldiers?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No.


Jacques Bureau: But it includes every
person in the employ of the Crown. I fail to see any difference.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: 
Jacques Bureau: Let us take that section. You use "Civil Service" and "Public Service," and they mean the same thing?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The words "Public Service" are used throughout the Act. It is the better term and it includes everybody in the service.


Jacques Bureau: Is there an accepted definition for the term public service?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Not other than this.


Jacques Bureau: In the old Act there was a schedule to determine who were civil servants, and in the Superannuation Act they extended the definition to cover all, *whether in the Inside or Outside Serv'ce.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Have the Civil Service
(Federation of Canada, on whose letter paper this circular was written, had this ijfill before them and have they approved of it?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I cannot say
*whether they have approved of it or not. I know they had it before them and that the association made representations to the Government about certain clauses in the Bill.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: What do the Government think of the federation, through their secretary and president, writing a circular to the members containing these words:
We are addressing you because you are one of the directors in Canada's business enterprises and so responsible for the results.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That is addressed to members of Parliament.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Yes.
It would appear from recent items in the press that some influential agency is endeavouring to dissuade the Union Government from proceeding with the Bill for Civil Service Reform by the abolition of patronage in appointments and promotion to the Public Service.
Apparently the Civil Service have no confidence in the Union Government. Does
the minister share the view that the Government should be under suspicion by Mr.. Grierson that the Government has been influenced in some way in regard to the passage of the Bill? Why should not members of Parliament have the same right and opportunity of seeing a Bill of this kind in advance, that is offered to the Civil Service? The Bill is sprung here one morning, and a day is given for general discussion, before the members of the House have even been able to read the measure.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The Bill has been on the file of the bon, gentlemen for at least two weeks, and probably three or four weeks.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Quite true, the Bill has been on the members' files and the fact of the minister saying that it is on the files would indicate he thinks that every member should have read it. There is another Bill on the files, the Bill to amend and consolidate the -Railway Act, and I presume the minister would say because it is on the files that it should be read, digested and understood by the members of the House who, by tbeir multifarious duties morning, afternoon and night, with committee work and correspondence, have no time to read either Civil Service Bills or Railway Bills of voluminous nature and fulfil th-eir ordinary duties. I am beginning to feel that there is a nigger in the fence with regard to this Bill when the secretary of the -Civil Service association, or the federated union, can dare to use language warning the members of the House that they are directors of the country's business and that they are responsible. If that responsibility is to be attached to me I am going to- side with those who have already requested either that a committee be formed to look into this subject and bring forward a Bill next session, or that we take all the time necessary to go into every clause of this Bill so that we may know when its consideration is concluded what " Civil Service " means.
' I have an item which I think I should bring up here with regard to appointments. I am entirely in favour of the principle of this Bill, and I am anxious to get rid of every vestige of patronage. When I was first elected to Parliament I went to the local committees and asked them to take the patronage -away from me, because I did not want it. The cry was then raised, "You will be responsible, you will have to take it yourself." Well I have had no trouble, and the matter has not bothered me. The only trouble I have had has -arisen since I came, here lately, concerning a certain ap-

pointment. A deputy undertook to recommend to a minister the appointment of a man in my county to a responsible position upon an international cheese board. The Government appointed a man who had the capacity all right, but whose son was married to a girl who had four brothers at the front. That man was out against Union Government in the riding that I represent, in South Perth, and in West Huron or North Huron.


Jacques Bureau: He was a wise man.


An hon. MEMBER:: He's all right.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: The hon. member for Three Rivers says this man was wise, and another hon. gentleman says he is all right. I am not complaining, the party in question is a free man. The young woman to whom I have referred was married to this man's son, had four brothers at the front: one had been just killed, another has since been killed, the third has been wounded, and the fourth is still on active service. The husband's father and the husband both declared that the woman would never be *allowed to poll her vote. They prevented her from polling her vote as a soldier's sister, and she did not poll it. Now the appointment of that man to the position in question seared and shocked the conscience of the loyal people in the county which I represent. It seared and shocked the conscience of those who had not voted. I think it seared and shocked the conscience of a few pro-Germans, the thing was so heinous in its character. I spoke to the minister about the appointment, and he said that for his information he had depended upon his deputy.
I do not blame him, he was new in the position, but I want to fell hon. gentlemen that deputies assume powers that usurp the ordinary functions of members of parliament who ought to know about these appointments. The deputy in question might have inquired from somebody. I do not want to be consulted in such matters, but as member for the riding I do not want to be insulted, and I shall not stand for that sort of carelessness in the future, either from the Civil Service or anybody else. I think there should be some decorum displayed in connection with these matters, and some courtesy, and reasonable attention paid to the position of the member toy ministers and deputies, so that a man will not be held in contumely and contempt by things being done in his riding for which people hold him responsible, although he has had nothing to say in regard to them.

I hope the Civil Service will remember that there are duties devolving on them towards the public men of this country, and if members are not to be consulted as to who is to be appointed to positions, at least they should be consulted as to whether any Tea-son exists for not selecting .such men as I have described.


Mr.   D@: Will the minister be kind enough to tell us why the employees of the Government railways do not come under this Bill?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: An exception was made of the employees of the Government Railway System because it was found difficult to apply the Act to that service. When the resolution was before tbe House some four or five weeks ago, I stated that during *the recess the Civil Service Commission were to make an investigation into that class of employees and endeavour if possible to arrive at some method of putting them under tbe Act, and if the Commission are able to make any practical suggestion, next session it will be considered.


Mr. DEVLIN:: May I ask the minister if the Civil Service Commissioners themselves come under the operation of this Bill?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The Commissioners are deputy heads.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: I understood the minister to say that deputy heads come under the operation of the Bill.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: They do. They are under the Civil Service Act, of course, except as to appointment.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: Will the deputy ministers hereafter be appointed by the Commission, or by the Crown?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: By the Crown.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: And the Civil Service
commissioners will, be appointed by the Crown?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: A few minutes ago the hon. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Bureau) spoke of other commissions such as the Hospitals Commission and the Food Control Commission. What about the members of those bodies?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: They will be appointed by the Crown.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: And will the members of the War Purchasing Commission, and these other commissions, also be appointed by the Crown?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes, but not their staffs.


Mr. MURPHY:: I understood the minister to say in the early part of his remarks that public service covered all the temporary employees at present employed under any of these commissions or war boards?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Charles Murphy: Later on, the minister in answer to some other gentleman, gave another explanation that seemed to enlarge the scope of his first statement. I refer to his statement that the expression "public service" extends -all through the Act. Will my hon. friend explain what he meant by that?
Mr. A. K. MAfCLEAN: The words "public service" occur in the present Civil Service Act but they had no definition. I really do not know why they were put in. The definition of Civil Service, my hon. friend will see by reference to subsection (a) of section 2, includes ofidcers, clerks and employees in all of the several departments of the executive Government of Canada. We thought that the definition of public service was somewhat wider and would include everybody in the employ of the Crown, or of Parliament, and particularly it was designed to cover the employees of commissions, such as the Canada Food Board and the War Purchasing Commission, so that hereafter the employees of these commissions would be appointed by the Civil Service Commission.


Charles Murphy: Then the Bill covers more than a temporary purpose?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Mr. PROULX:: Are the heads of these commissions to be appointed by the Civil Service Commission?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No.


Edmond Proulx: Why?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I do not think it would be desirable or practicable that heads of .commissions should be appointed by the Civil Service Commission.


Edmond Proulx: I understand that under this Bill only deputy ministers will be appointed by the Governor in Council?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Edmond Proulx: That refers, then, to the members of the Civil Service Commission?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That is true.


Edmond Proulx: Why should not the heads of other commissions be appointed by the members of the Civil Service Commission?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The heads of commissions are but 'temporary employees, and they are selected for a special purpose. I do not think it would be fair or practicable that they should be appointed by the Civil Service Commission.
iMr. DEVLIN: I would like to follow up the questions I asked a few minutes ago respecting these outside commissions. They are classed, I understand, as in the Outside Service. Am I right?


Air.  A. K. MAOLEAN@: I do not think they are classified at all either .as Outside or Inside. They .are temporary employees.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: Well, then, they are not classified by .this Act.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: They come within the definition, of public servants. They do not belong to 'the Civil Service properly, either Inside or Outside, but they are in the public service.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: I -understand that, but the moment this Act passes it will .apply only to what is known as the present Inside Service, not to what is known as the Outside Service.
iMr. A. K. MACLEAN: That is not correct. I have stated more than once that all appointments to the Outside .Service will fall within the Bill, subject to some exceptions. L wish the hon. gentleman would leave the consideration of that matter until we reach the section.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: It has reference to this very section. If I left it I could not come back to it.


Air.  A. K. MAOLEAN@: I have explained that matteT several times and have called the attention of the Committee to the exact clause, section 41. I think it is hardly fair we Should be discussing it again.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: I don't want to be unfair to the minister; I don't think I have been - Mr. A. K. MACLEAN: I want to make progress, that is all.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: I did not have section 41 in mind at all, but rather section 55 dealing with the Outside- -Service:
55. The Commission shall, as soon as practicable after the passing of this Act, after consultation with the several deputy heads and other principal officers and employees, prepare schedules containing lists of the positions and the duties an-d salaries attached -thereto.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That clause has reference to the organization of the outside Service and also of the Inside Sex-vice.


Jacques Bureau: I am not satisfied as to the definition of " public service." If the term " public service " includes everything, we can leave out the definition " Civil Service," and I still stand by my proposition that it should be defined as follows: "Public service" means and includes all officers', clerks and employees in the service of any commission constituted by virtue of an Act of Parliament, whereby the mode of appointment, dismissal, and so on, are therein determined. That would bring the employees of the Senate and the House of Commons under the definition of Civil Service. As the definitive clause is now drawn we do not know what it means. It says:
"Civil Service" means and includes all classes of officers, clerks an.d employees in or under the several departments of the Executive Government of Canada and in the office of the Auditor General and in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory, appointed hy the Governor in Council or other competent authority before .the first day of July, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-two

I suppose these men might request superannuation or take advantage of any law passed by this Parliament to protect Civil servants for performing faithful duty to the country. Men employed since 1882 have worked for thirty-six years for the Government, and I suppose they are entitled to some recompense. The clause goes on:

-or thereafter appointed or employed in the manner provided in the Civil Service Act for1 the time 'being-, in force.
We do not know what employees these are, or anything about them. I would substitute for that definition the following:
"Civil Service" means and includes all officers, clerks and employees in the service of the Crown or of Parliament.
I want to protest against anything which will take away from the Act, if we are going to pass it-and I am in favour of it, and think we should pass it,-the power to appoint the personnel of commissions such as the Bureau of Public Information headed by Mr. Nicholls, and other commissions which are the result of the very prolific Orders in Council we have to-day.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That is why the definition o'f "public service" was put in the Bill, to cover just such cases as my hon. friend suggests.


Jacques Bureau: May I ask why the term " Civil Service " has been defined, if it covers everything?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That word rather denotes the purpose of the Bill. It is an old sedbion, and it was not considered desirable to revise entirely every section of the Act. We might very well drop the definition "Civil Service" altogether, but I do not think it would be well to do that.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Why not say that the "Civil Service" means all officers, clerks and employees in the service of the Crown or in the public service?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Except that the word "public service" is used in another sense throughout the Bill.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Why not leave "Civil Service" out and say that the "public service" means all that the former term includes?


Donald Sutherland: In speaking on this matter yesterday, I expressed my inability to distinguish between "Civil Service" and "public service," and that may account for my inability to see where this section cov ered the Pensions Commission. I understand from the explanation that has been given that thiat commission would come under the term "public service."


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Donald Sutherland: The Bill says:
"Public Service" means and includes all officers, clerks or employees in the service of the Crown or of Parliament
I would assume from the wording of that section that it would include the men who are in the public service across the sea at the present time.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That is military
service, not Civil Service.


Donald Sutherland: I would imagine surely that that is public service.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It is public service in a sense, but strictly speaking it is military service, and there is a separate statute covering matters of that kind,


Donald Sutherland: May I ask if the public service has been administered in this sense since the passing of the Order in Council on February 13? In listening to the hon. member for North Perth (Mr. Morphy) relate what had taken place in his constituency, I felt that as the representative for the constituency from which I come I possibly ought to know something about conditions in that riding.

An appointment has recently been made there which, I assume, would not come under the Civil Service Act. In this appointment is suggested one of the reasons to which I attribute the breaking down of the Military Service Act. The official to whom I have reference was appointed representative of the Department of Agriculture on the Leave of Absence Board for military district No. 1, although he had stumped the constituency during the election campaign in opposition to Union Government and to the Military Service Act.


Jacques Bureau: It would appear from a return respecting the staff of the Food Controller's office that the chairman of the Food Board reserves to himself the power to say anything he pleases, notwithstanding the Civil Service Commission or anything in the Civil Service Act. In an Order in Council respecting staff and salaries of the Food Board I find the following:
The minister observes that the Food Controller states that the above method1 of using item numbers to denote the maximum salaries! that different members of the staff may be paid enables him to discharge incompetent persons and engage others without the necessity of having an Order in Council in eaott instance, and that this method' has received: the endorsation of the Auditor General.
Instead of saying:	I want one clerk to
copy letters, another to stamp envelopes, and so on, he says: I want so many men at from $1,000 to $2,000 a year each. This means that we are substituting a commissioner for the Governor in 'Council. The chairman of the board, who is not under the control of the Civil Service Commission, may say,	as' is sametimes done in the Estimates, that notwithstanding	anything in
the Civil Service Act or any other law, $600,000 shall be paid out under the patronage system to the staff of the commission. I insist that this Act should cover every commission, and that no exception should be made unless set out in the statute creating the commission. Let us have a real Civil Service Act, not a mere camouflage which will make the people believe that something has been done and for which those who have promoted the Bill may take credit.


Georges Henri Boivin: Shall clause 2 carry?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Jacques Bureau: I submit that in what I have said the very basis of the whole Act is involved. If we do not define what
really constitutes Inside Service or Outside Service, the Act is useless.
At one o'clock the committee rose.
The committee resumed at three o'clock.


John Albert Sexsmith: Paragraphs (f) and (g) of section 2 read:
(f)	"Outside Service" means and includes the other officers, clerks and employees included in the public service, not being part of the Inside Service.
(g)	"Public Service" means and includes all officers, clerks or employees in the service of the Crown or of Parliament.
By reading that, we really have very little knowledge of -what may be included in the Outside Service. On the canals and in many other places in Canada we have men employed', some for eight months, others, for shorter term's. Some of them are called permanent employees and others temporary.
I should like to know under what heading they will come. Will they come under this Act?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


John Albert Sexsmith: I do not want to be understood as opposing this measure. I have said that I agree with the principle of it, but I think we have, perhaps, gone a little far afield. The clamour throughout the country in the past has been, not so much in regard to the appointing of men to swing a bridge o.r run a post office, as against the patronage slate for all purchases in the various departments at Ottawa, as well as throughout Canada. In the past we have had to comply with that patronage *slate, and I quite agree with the Government in their endeavour to abolish it. We have, however, very little information in regard to this Bill, and the acting minister has acknowledged that it is, to a large extent, a temporary Bill. If we read the clauses respecting the Outside Service, we see that the commission, immediately after the passage of this legislation, is to get together and formulate rules and regulations in connection with the Outside Service. I entirely agree with the sentiments expressed this morning by the hon. member for As-siniboia (Mr. Turriff), that such an important Bill as this, involving as much as if does, should not be brought up in the dying days of Parliament in the endeavour to have it rushed through. The members of this House are entitled to all possible .information before the Bill is permitted to become law, and I would seriously recom-

mend to the acting minister to take into consideration the .advice given this -morning toy the toon, member for Aseinilboia, to withdraw this measure for the present and refer the matter to- a committee of this House who may confer with the Civil Service Commission -and with the heads of the different departments and have the regulations and rules' all consolidated and brought down at the next session, as will evidently have to toe done. We can then deal intelligently with the situation. -Since the Order in Council -was passed a few months ago we [DOT]have been making appointments to the Outside Service in all parts of Canada. Why not let us go- on during the re-cess under this Order in Council as we have been doing? -Then perhaps toy the next session of Parliament we shall -have a better knowledge of how this -legislation will work out, especially if the committee sees fit to appoint a committee of this House to consult with the Civil Service and the heads of the different departments.


Mr. TWEEDTE:: I am absolutely opposed to the withdrawal of this Bill. It is the duty of the present session of Parliament to p-ass- this- Civil Service Bill, because -of the solemn agreement entered into with the people of Canada. I do not see that -there is anything to be gained by standing this Bill over until the next session. As was suggested toy the Acting Minister of Finance, there may be some defects in the Bill, but I have never yet seen any Bill, except perhaps Bills relating to private legislation, in which there have not been some defects, -and which have not, from time to time, required amendment. The suggestion, of the hon. member -is that this Bill be reintroduced in-to this House -at the next session, and that a committee of members he appointed to work out a measure in the interests. of the country. If there are defects in this- Bill, I know of no method toy which those defects can he made more -apparent to the Government -and the public -than -by enacting the Bill and putting it into force. I know of no body of men more competent to observe the defects in the -operation of the Act than- the members of the Government -themselves, and more particularly the members of the Civil Service [Commission, who will have charge of the administration of the Act. If we find that the time between now and the prorogation or adjournment of Parliament is not sufficient for us to discuss and pass- this Bill, -then it is our duty to come back here in August, as was suggested by the Prime 
.Minister, in order to give the Bill full consideration. But it is the duty of this Government to the country and to the Civil (Service at laT-ge that this Bill be placed upon the statute hooks this- year and put into operation -as speedily as possible.


Mr. COWAN:: Like the hon. member for West Calgary (Mr. Tweedie), I desire- to see this Bill passed, because I am anxious to get back t-o Regina, and should not like to return to that city if this Bill is not passed, because I know -the attitude of my constituents in regard to this -matter. After the explanation of the Acting Minister of Finance as regards section 2, I find it quite easy for me to support it. As I understand his explanation, this Bill brings- within- its operation all the employees of the Dominion of Canada, with the exception of the deputy ministers, the Civil Service Commissioners, the Militia of Canada, and the railway employees, .and, as the hon. -member for Victoria (Sir -Sam Hughes) has said, the senators of the Dominion. The deputy ministers should be left out of the operation of this law, because, as a firm believer in what is termed the pyramid system of organization, I feel that this Parliament should hold right under its control a certain body -that will be directly responsible to it. As I take it, these deputy .ministers will, hereafter be responsible to the ministers, the ministers being undoubtedly responsible to this Parliament, so that we shall have direct control o-ver those deputy -ministers. If at any time a deputy does .something that he should not do, as we were told yesterday, by the hon. member for Kingston (Mr. Ni-ckle) .that -one of them did, it would not take this Parliament very long to get rid of such a deputy minister, and in that way we would have the necesary efficiency in that particular department. The militia, of course, should he -exempted -from the operation of this legislation. The Civil Service Commisioners should also be exempted, because the commission should toe directly responsible -to this Parliament. I may be wrong, but I do not think w.e should ever attempt to bring the employees of the Government railways under the operations of this Act. Those railway employees should in my opinion, be under a separate commission, just as independent as this one will be, and just as -subject to Parliament, but absolutely free from political control or interference. Where we have such a large body of -men technically trained as railway men -are, we should not attempt to bring

them under the control of a commission such as this, which coul<i not attend to the work as efficiently as a commission of technically trained men, specially delegated for the purpose, could do. I think, therefore, everybody that should be reached by this legislation, is being reached. We should bring all of the Inside and Outside Services under the operation of such a Bill as this. The Bill may not be perfect, but I do not think that any law .that could be regarded as absolutely perfect was ever passed by this or any other Parliament.
If they were all perfect, there would he no need for us to come here year after year to improve them. We must therefore treat this Bill as we would any other Bill. It must be considered in relation to present conditions and we can make any amendments in the future that are deemed desirable. I have no doubt we shall find defects in the Act, but we can deal with them next year just as we are dealing with the Bill to-day. The people in the section from which I come are very anxious to have this Bill passed, because they have seen some of the evils of patronage. I do not know whether this Bill touches the question of patronage in the matter of buying supplies, hut that is a different matter altogether. Let us clean up patronage in the matter of appointments, and we can deal with the other matter later. I unhesitatingly support this Bill.


Mr. BLAKE:: I suppose the public hangman comes under this clause. I think it is very important that we should include some one empowered to act as Civil Service executioner, for we know that many departments are over-manned.' In the Printing Department, for instance, I arh informed there are two hundred surplus men floating about doing nothing, and when I brought that fact to the notice of a responsible member of this Government he told me it would be political suicide to clean that department up. In the Statistics Branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce there are a hundred and thirty men doing what it takes only seventy-four men to do in the United States, and there would be between seven and eight hundred men in this branch in the United States if they engaged men on the scale we do in proportion to the amount of work to be done. I do not see in the Bill any provision for remedying these conditions. The hon. member for Lambton has said that the Bill will reduce our expenditure on the 'Civil Service by thirty or forty per cent. I have no doubt it should 113
be reduced to that extent, but I do not see any means provided in the Bill for doing so. Section 10 of Part 2 provides that the present status of employees shall be preserved. Section 25 deals with the employment of extra assistance. It may be necessary to have extra help in certain departments at certain times on account of the growing business of the country, but I think the main business of the commission should be first to deal with the overmanning of departments. I think they could set a fine example to all municipal governments in this country, because I think I am safe in saying that there is hardly a municipality where three men are not employed to do the work of two. I think this matter should be considered, while we are dealing with the definitions under this clause.


Mr. THOMSON:: I listened attentively this morning to the criticisms of this Bill. Most of the critics were in favour of the principle of the Bill, they said. I do not wish to question their sincerity, but it seems to -me they took a very strange way of showing their love for the Bill. As the discussion proceeds, it seems plain either that we shall be here all summer or that the Bill will be talked out. I think in these strenuous times, when the news from the front is so serious, members of this House could be better. engaged than in wrangling over this or any other Bill. I am an enthusiastic supporter of the principle of this Bill and of the abolition of the patronage system. It would seem from the discussion that some have a lingering love for the old system. We have heard about the benefits of having appointments made on the recommendation of the member for the constituency. That sounds very well, but as a matter of fact it has not been the practise in the past. In the constituency I represent the recommendations have not been made by the member for the last thirteen or fourteen years. When I was rejected by the people of that constituency, it was- I who recommended the appointees, and not the member, and when I was elected as their representative I had nothing whatever to >s-ay about patronage; and that was the situation in nearly half the constituencies in Canada under the old system. I am very anxious,to see this Bill go through at once. Whatever defects there are in the Bill will appear when the Act is in operation, and we oan rectify them next session. This will not be the last session of this House, we hope. Let us put the Bill through at once and



get away, because I think we could be better employed elsewhere. But if the Bill is to be held up or talked out, and that seems to be the intention, I would beseech the Government to keep in force the Order in Council doing aw.ay with patronage. I am not much of a lover of Government by Order in Council, but the situation is such that I think the Government would be justified in retaining the Order in Council if this Bill does not pass this session. I am satisfied that the vast majority of the people of Canada would approve such action, and I am satisfied, notwithstanding all we have heard this morning, that a pronounced-majority of the members of this House are favourable to the principle of this Bill and favourable to the abolition of the system of patronage.


John Albert Sexsmith: I absolutely agree with my hon. friend that we could be better engaged than m discussing this Bill. That is one of the main reasons I urged that the Bill be withdrawn, and I again ask the minister to withdraw it. So far as I can see we are operating just as effectively with respect to the Inside and Outside Service under the Order in Council passed two months ago, as we could operate under this Bill. The Government could apply the Order in Council, and then next session after we have discovered the defect in the system we could discuss the matter more intelligently. If it is not true that the Order in Council is as effective as this Bill, I withdraw my objection.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: During the last election the.Prime Minister pledged himself to the elimination of patronage in appointments to the public service. This Bill has been introduced to implement that promise, and I therefore cannot acquiesce in the suggestion that it be withdrawn. It is true that we are now operating under the Order in Council, but that w-as largely a direction, and not an enactment, and there are grave doubts as to the porver of the Government to pass an Order in Council covering the appointments to the Civil , Service in the manner indicated in the Order in Council. It is therefore considered wise -and businesslike on the part of the Government to give statutory effect to the principle of the Order in Council. If this Bill were entirely new, I could appreciate the objections raised by hon. gentlemen. But ninety-five per cent of the clauses are old and have been the law for many years. The substance of the new clauses was set forth in the resolution upon which this Bill is founded, and we had quite a lengthy

discussion when that resolution was- moved. That was some four or five weeks ago. Therefore, I fail to appreciate the contention that the House is taken by surprise m being asked to enact this Bill. This morning there were some suggestions made as to clause 2, particularly the definition of "Civil Service." As stated this morning, paragraph (a) of section 2, which defines the term "Civil Service," is really not necessary, and so I propose that the clause be struck out. I therefore beg to move:
That paragraph (a) of section 1 be struck out; that paragraph (e) of section be amended by striking out the words "that part of the Civil Service" and inserting in place thereof the words "those officers, clerks or employees who are"; that paragraph (d) of section 2 be amended by striking out the word "Public" and substituting therefor the word "Civil" and by striking out the words "or Parliament" and also that the paragraphs he relettered from (a) to (f) inclusive.
I suggest the striking out of the words "or of Parliament," because that is covered by a subsequent clause.


John Allister Currie: The Acting Minister of Finance said that members have had considerable time to examine this Bill during the interval since the Bill was introduced, and also that there had been some discussion on the resolution. The -members of Parliament have been getting a little bit of information about this Bill, and about the activities of these gentlemen, and this is one of the things that I intend to bring before the House. This morning I made a reference to a letter that was written by a member of the Civil Service threatening, and endeavouring to intimidate, the members of this House into supporting this measure. We have also heard speeches in the House endeavouring to intimidate threatening that if it did not carry immediately this House would be prorogued until next August. Well, we are not afraid of having this House prorogued until next August. We have had sessions lasting almost a year, and that sort of thing does not go down with the members of this House at all. We might continue in session for four or five weeks longer with benefit to the public interest. There are. many things that we might go into and discuss; for	instance, the appointment of a curator of German property which has never been made although vi'e have been at war fo-r four years. A committee of this House, might spend a few weeks investigating some of the commissions that have been operating under this Government. In reference to the

question of patronage, there is patronage and patronage. The moist odious form of patronage is nepotism. The outcry of the public against tlhe administration of pat-ranage has not been in reference to- the appointment of people. I challenge any of those hon. members who have been talking about 'the evils .and troubles of patronage to point oat one single case that has occurred in 'the last eight or ten years where _ .any great mistake has been made in reference to appointments. There is such a thing as patronage in the Public Works Department and matters of that kind and those are the things that the people are talking -about. The Civil Service is divided into two parts, the In-si'de and the Outside Service. The Inside Service has been under the commission and the Outside Service has not. Anybody who knows anything about these services will unhesitatingly say that in the great -majority of cases the men of the Outside Service have higher qualifications -and do much harder work than those in the Inside 'Service, .although they do not get the same money at all. They . have had this organization formed amongst the civil .servants to get a little rise in pay. For my part, with reference to the Outside Service, I think we might have adopted the principle .adopted in England and given them a war bonus of, say, ten per cent, because everybody knows that it is very difficult for the members of the Outside Service to live -under 'the conditions that exist at the present time. Instead of giving them a ten per cent rise you give them this Bill, which means that when they ask for bread you give them 'a stone. There are two kinds of patronage. This Bill is the result of an agitation that has been carried on by the Civil Service organization. The circular I read this morning shows that -that organization i-s endeavouring to intimidate members of Parliament. I shall go further and read yo-u a letter that members of this organization have issued in order 'to carry o-n their agitation and to extend it to 'all parts of the country. I hold in my hand a letter issued by the secretary of the Canadian Postmasters' Association, in which he says:	.
Aurora, Ont., April 19, 1918.
Dear Postmaster:
Postmasters more than any other class feel the hardships of war prices owing to the small allowances given them by the Government.
It has beenv decided by our Association that the time has come when we should make a determined effort to secure relief.
113*
You must help if success is to be achieved that is, if you desire it, we believe most if not all do-you ask how-well by writing to the Member for your district at Ottawa. Explain the amount of work done in your office each day-show the cost of hired help, if any- duties of office, hours of service, rent paid, and the amount paid you each month-compare the Government. pay with what you could earn with the same labour on a farm or at some other occupation, but do not find fault with any Postmaster's salary as compared with your own. Write this letter in your own words but do it at once.
If you have a local paper published in your town or village will you kindly see the editor or publisher and have him print an article calling the attention of the public and the Government to the hardships imposed upon us through the adoption of commissions dating back to Confederation-explain to him how the war has added many millions of letters and circulars, etc., sent out by the different departments of the Government upon which there is so much extra work but not a cent of pay. [DOT]
Now for a big united effort and don't fear to talk plain to your Member. If you feel like quitting your job in disgust, say so. When you have done this sign the attached counterfoil and mail it to me.
This came from the town of Aurora, which I understand is also the native town of the Deputy Postmaster General. In every other department a similar agitation, a similar propaganda, is carried on, and we know very well that the agitation has blossomed forth in respect to this Bill. Now, hon. members will wonder what is going to happen to the patronage business? When this House divests itself of its power, as it is going to do under the Bill, it will have deprived itself of one of its ancient privileges and prerogatives-the right to say who shall be .appointed to positions in the public service. Then the- right of appointment will come not from the Crown, not from the minister, but from the Civil Service Commission. Will the commission make the appointment? I am going to tell hon. members that -when the commission want to appoint somebody in their districts they will send a letter to the postmaster or the custom house official there, and these men will nominate appointees to the Civil Service in Ottawa. That is how the appointments are going to be made. Is not that patronage? One of the most prominent men in the city of Toronto was filling the columns of the papers a few months ago with weird appeals .and complaints about the appointment of people to the Civil Service, and at the very same time he was seeking the appointment of his own daughter to a job in the Civil Service, and she got the position. There is a lot of hypocrisy in this world, but I think I am talking

to a lot of hard-headed men who do not take any stock in hypocrisy. Will the public interest be better served by having appointments made by the member, through the minister who is responsible, or by leaving the appointing in the hands of irresponsible people who will select whoever they like?
Now, a word about appointments to these commissions, and which are not to come under the operation of the Civil Service Act, although those staffs will. I think it is time we called a halt to the appointment of commissions for everything. This attempt at the devolution of responsibility from the Government to commissions, is something the country is wide awake to now and is taking notice of. The other day as I sat at luncheon in one of the prominent clubs -in this city, a gentleman who occupied the seat alongside of me, .said: " Currie, you notice all these people who are sitting here; let us count how many representatives of commissions are sitting around this room?" We started to count, and we named nineteen of them. Each one of these commissions performs functions that should be discharged by some department of this Government over which the Government should have authority to rule and as to whose proceedings they should have a say. This Parliament is becoming nothing but a rubber stamp to initial the doings of these different bodies.	[DOT]


Rodolphe Lemieux: The gentlemen to whom the hon. gentleman has referred were all clu'b men.


John Allister Currie: They were all club men
sitting round a table in that club. You can go there every day and count nineteen or twenty-five of them if you wish. I think the time has come for Parliament to put itself on record, to speak plainly and act openly. This Civil Service Commission is another commission whose hands we are strengthening .and to whom we .are furnishing greater powers. What is happening alreadyf Everybody knows well, and nobody better ihan the ministers of the Crown, that there are several services so organized here that the members of the service, from the deputy down, will defy a minister and evade what he asks them to do, and' he has no recourse. There are many men going around the Oivil Service who do not do a day's work, in fact they are doing nothing 'but stirring up trouble, and at the same time drawing money from the people of the country. The people would be very much shocked to know that
I.Mr. Currie.]
but it is a fact. These men do not do a minute's work, let alone a day's work, in their departments.	They are walking
around here, going to public meetings and organizing various societies, and setting themselves up as censors of the public, and all that sort of thing. If the minister in charge	of	a department .says a word as to- what is happening he is met immediately with a threat that the majority of his staff will walk out. Talk about the tyranny of the labour unions. There is one thing about the labour unions, they have men over them who are sensible and will not let them walk out without cause-they are subject to discipline. But this Bill takes the control of the discipline -of the Civil Service entirely out of the hands of a minister; it will deprive him of all power to do anything with the men under him. As I said you -are loading a gun that has not got a trigger ,on it. You cannot fire these men even if you want to, they will stay in the service for all time.
The Acting Minister of Finance has said that this Bill has sheen a long time before the House. Certainly it has, and the longer it is before the House the more we realize what a great mistake was made in introducing it. The Prime Minister is a very human man with a big heart. Very often his attention is called to something, and great pressure is brought to bear upon him to- carry into effect what is sought. The propaganda to which I referred is worked upon, him, in the same way as it is worked upon the members. He receives thousands of letters about a certain thing, and in the fullness of his heart he decides that it is .better to do what is asked than to have difficulty. The demands of the Civil Service have been before this House for many years. A few years ago experts were brought in from the four quarters of the earth to go through the Civil Service and to ipake recommendations with the object of rendering it more efficient. The experts went to the departments and they made recommendations'. Those recommendations were laid on, the table of the House and Parliament was- supposed joyfully to .adopt them. ,1 do not thinlk any one of the recommendations made at that time has ever been carried out. There may be one, hut -if s-o, I do not know of it. Why the Civil Service organizations were so strong the ministers could not take action. As I have already said, the ministers -are defied and they know that as well as I do. What we should do with the present Bill is to put

power in the hands of the ministers so that they shall have the power of dismissal.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: We have the power.


John Allister Currie: But you do not exercise
it. I can name two or three men who have made themselves offensive to the whole Canadian public,. and you do not dare to dismiss them.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Name.


John Allister Currie: I could name them, but I will not do so. It would only make trouble and I am too good a Canadian to start trouble unnecessarily. But these men have done things that they should not have done, and the organ of the Civil Service in Ottawa is continually filled with denunciations of the Government. I would like to take that journal and read its contents to the members of the House, and I have no doubt at tall they would throw this Bill out in five minutes. The columns of that journal are continually filled with attacks not only on members of the Government, but on gentlemen on the other side. When hon. gentlemen opposite were in office they often received a broadside from, behind consisting of high explosives from the journal of the Civil Service. Those hon. gentlemen when they were in power could not do anything in their departments but what we of the Opposition knew all about it, showing that ir any members of the Civil Service are not true to their salt. I do not class all the members of the Civil Service in that category. Many of them are entitled to the highest praise, big men, who are receiving far too little money for the services they are performing. These men are doing -three-fourths of the work, and the other cne-fourth is disttibuted amongst chaps who do not do anything but walk around and wok nice. Some of the members of the House are sympathetic towards this Bill, and other similar measures, because, they are of the opinion they are going to , pass something which will be of benefit to the public. It is not the appointment of men to office that has raised the cry about patronage. That cry has originated from such jobs as the building of sawdust wharves, and the expenditures of large sums of money on works that are not necessary in the interests of the public at all. That is what constitutes patronage, so called, and not the appointment of a few civil servants to office. In my opinion the people of this country will not stand for the appointment of men to the public service not being in the hands of the member whom they have chosen and whom they have
made responsible. They certainly will not approve of handling those appointments over to the local postmaster or the local custom house officer instead of to the member for the constituency.
That is the system that is shown clearly through the method1 of organization they have introduced, and if the hon. member for Strath Perth had the means of finding out how the appointment he mentioned was made, no doubt he would find that some postmaster wrote a private letter to the department.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: It was one of the deputies who undertook to do the job.


John Allister Currie: Did the deputy know the man?


Hugh Boulton Morphy: No, he did not, or he would not have appointed him.
Mr. 'CURRIE: How did he get his name at all? Who sent the man's name to- him?


Hugh Boulton Morphy: You will have to ask the deputy.


John Allister Currie: It was probably the postmaster.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: No- -chance.
Mr. -CURRIE: However, that is- the condition of affairs, -and if members of this House feel like absolving themselves of all responsibility for -appointments, and- turning them over to postmasters, customs' and excise officers, landing waiters and -men like that, of course, they may go- ahead and do it. That -is what this Bill provides. If the acting minister 'thinks there should still be one particle of responsibility -attaching to members of this House-and some responsibility -should attach to them in their own ridings-'then let the Bill stand. We have an Order in 'Council dealing with 'this- question now. I say, let us try out the system outlined in that Order in Council and -see how it works out for six or seven -months, and then we will know whether -or not it is a good system. The Government can cancel an Order in Council a't any time, but if you pa-s-s a Bill like this it is necessary to oo-me back to- Parliament to have the -matter righted. That is my argument, and I think I have put on the records of the House sufficient evidence ito show hon. gentlemen how the oracle will be worked in their ridings. I do not think -any m-an of -sense would stand up in this Bouse and sup-port that method o-f patronage as the proper one as -ag-amst the method that has prevailed.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I have listened to what the Acting Minister of Finance said a moment ago, and he needs not to he assured of my full sympathy for Civil Service reform. But I do not think he is backed up by his own friends. There seems to be a cleavage between the goody-goody element in the Unionist party and the other fellows. Indeed, it seems very clear that the Prime Minister himself, who, my hon. friends claim, is in favour of the Bill, is not much enamoured of this legislation, otherwise he would be in his seat and would stand by my hon. friend and see that the Bill is carried through. What have we seen since the beginning of this debate? I have seen my friend, the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. J. D. Reid), smiling quietly not saying a word. Of course, the railway employees do not come under the jurisdiction of the commission; they will remain under the close jurisdiction of the Minister of Railways and Canals. When my hon. friend from Regina (Mr. Cowan) said we must not expect the railway men to be put under the Civil Service Commission because they are experts and technical employees, and so on, that the commission could not deal with them, he does not seem to know that the technical officers of every department come under the jurisdiction of this same commission. I say to the acting minister: If you want to .abolish patronage, do. not give us a sham, give us the real article, and put every railway employee from one end of Canada to the other under this commission, otherwise you will not be sincere in the eyes of the people. The acting minister, turning to his friends-I do not know if he was addressing himself to the Tories or to the Grits-addressing my friend from North Simcoe (Mr. Currie) with some severity, said that the Prime Minister had given a solemn pledge at the last general election that there would be Civil Service reform. Surely my hon. friend the Acting Minister of Finance is not serious. He knows just as well as I do that the pledges given by the right hon. gentleman who lead's the Government cannot be taken seriously by the country more especially on this question of Civil Service reform. He should remember when we were sitting together on this side of the House,, and poking the ribs of his present leader. He recollects that in 1907 the Prime Minister, in his' celebrated Halifax platform, ,a platform which was engineered to defeat my hon. friend (Mr. A. K. Maclean) just as much as his friends on this side of the House, had for the goody-goody element of

the country a Civil Service reform plank. Hero is what he said, when my hon. friend was the running mate of the right hon. gentleman in Halifax, that is in 1911, when he was running against him.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The Prime Minister
said-


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: I rise to a point of
order. What paper is the hon. gentleman reading from?


Rodolphe Lemieux: I am just using a refresher.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: Mr. Chairman, I think I am entitled to the name of the document from which the hon. gentleman is reading, or else he should lay it on the Table.
Mr. 'LEMIEUX:	iMy hon. friend is too
fresh.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: I may be too fresh, but I would not he ashamed, to give the name of any document I quoted from.


Georges Henri Boivin: * Order. The hon. member for Maisonneuve has the floor, and no interruption, of course, can be allowed without the permission of the member who has the floor. Hon. gentlemen will remember that the same rule which applies in the House applies also in committee. While I .am on my feet I shall ask the hon. member for Maisonneuve not to wander too far away from the clause under consideration.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I am simply reading the article for the benefit of the acting minister.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yon need not
read that article for me; it was read the other day and I remember it quite well.


Rodolphe Lemieux: 
Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Are you in favour of the Bill?


Rodolphe Lemieux: I am in. favour of the
Bill, but not of a sham reform. Will the hon. gentleman put railway employees under the proposed Act?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I gave good reasons why they should not come under it.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The hon. gentleman
gave not good reasons, but pretexts. He cannot make any progress with his legislation in this form. If he will follow the sound advice given by the Hon. member from Qu'Appelle, he will let this Bill stand for further investigation and when next session comes we will see what can be done.


Mr. H. A. MAOKIE:: To whom does my hon. friend refer when he uses the expression "goody-goody"?


Rodolphe Lemieux: I will drop a line to Mr. Beaufort; he will let me know.
Mr. C'HABOT: I hold no brief for the Civil Service in Ottawa, nor .am I here to defend their rights or interests or to eulogize them. The attack, however, which has been made on the service in Ottawa by the member for North Simeoe (Mr. Currie) is both unwarranted and uncalled for. I consider his criticism far too caustic, too harsh, even unfair. If the picture which he draws of conditions existing in the
4 p.m. service is a true and accurate one, members of the House and the people of Canada must come to the conclusion that the Civil Service is a very inferior body and that the cases of inefficiency and incompetency among them are too numerous to mention. Canada is not leading the way in the matter of Civil Service reform. Civil Service reform has been carried out in other countries with very gratifying results and if Canada could emulate the examples of other countries in that respect, our service, which at present is second to none, would be materially improved in efficiency. I have had a great deal to' do with the civil servants of Ottawa. My relations with them have been very intimate; my experiences in that line have been varied and extensive. While some men in the service are not'up to the mark and some departments are overmanned, we have in the service men worthy of the positions which they occupy, men thoroughly well qualified, men who do honour to themselves and to the positions which they hold.


Levi Thomson: Either I expressed myself very imperfectly, or the member for Mais-onneuve (Mr. Lemieux) has misundei-


Rodolphe Lemieux: 
Levi Thomson: My hon. friend is helping.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: The member for North Sim-coe (Mr. Currie) intimated that he would not be induced to- alter his opinion because of any threats which had been made. I -made no threat. I suggested that it was the duty of Parliament to deal with the 'Civil Service Bill during this session, and that -if we were crowded for time it was our -duty to come back here in the fall -and dispose o-f this, or of any other legislation which required attention. I was surprised to hear the attack which he made on civil servants generally. If he -f-ormed the impressions which he appears to have -from the civil servants with whom be is associated in his riding, it is time that we had an investigation of that body and -cleaned them -all out.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The member for North Si-mcoe said that practically no- one in his riding was in the Oivil Service.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: He talked -about civil servants as if they were blacklegs 'and thieves; -as if they were bringing undue pressure to bear on members of this House.


John Allister Currie: That is unparliamentary language, 'and should be withdrawn. I said nothing of the kind. The hon. member is putting words into my mouth that I never uttered.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I think so.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: 
Georges Henri Boivin: All I ask is that the hon. gentleman who now has the floor (Mr. Tweedie) accept the statements made by the member for North Simcoe.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: I accept the statements which he made, and I interpret them as nothing more or less than a distinct insult to the whole body of civil servants throughout Canada.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Georges Henri Boivin: Older.


John Allister Currie: The . hon. member for Calgary (Mr. Tw-eedie) is trying to put me in wrong with the civil servants-. I have been more in touch with the civil servants of Canada than the hon. member for Calgary has, and during my public career I have had their support; with the hon. gentleman it is different. I did not insult the public service. I said that there were a gTeat many good civil servants in the out-side service and that the Government should supplement their salaries.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: My hon. friend has made this statement-


John Allister Currie: I have the floor now; the hon. member is young in this Parliament yet. With regard to my saying that civil servants were continually threatening the ministers and endeavouring to have their own way, it is only a few hours since the member for Ottawa' (Mr. Chahot) who is now so zealous in his commendation of civil servants, said that since appointments and promotions had been taken off his hands-a promotion means the same as an appointment-he had felt as if he were in a new heaven.
Mr. CHA1BOT: I referred to the system.


John Allister Currie: The hon. member u-sed to have a levee every morning when we *were in the old building. I have seen queues of applicants almost a quarter of a mile long waiting to get into his office.


John Léo Chabot: The efficiency of the Civil Service has, no doubt, been improved by the appointments made through my -influence or upon my recommendation.


John Allister Currie: The hon. member 'has
hardly had time to eat his meals on account of the numbers of applicants for positions. With all due regard to my hon. friend and with all due reg-ard to -the Civil iService, I have said again and again that there are good people in the Civil Service, the best people in the -country-the Civil 'Service could not get along were it not for such people-'but I say that there -are in -the Civil Service a number of -people whose services could he dispensed with. I have -been on committees that have had to- do with departments of- Government, and I

know whereof I speak. I have no hesitation in saying this. I am not afraid of the Civil Service, neither in my own riding, nor at Ottawa, and threats toy the Civil Service or toy any hoo. member,Ibe he layman or lawyer, in this House representing the Civil Service, cannot frighten me. If I have to say a word about the Civil Service, I shall have my eay and shall say it without hesitation.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: I rise to a point of order. Is the hon. member to be permitted to -make .a speech? The hon. member rose to correct a statement which I made. I was perfectly willing that he should do that, tout he is going on and delivering a speech. The hon. member has delivered a speech against the civil servants; now he is compelled to deliver one in their favour.
iMr. CHAIRMAN: Order.


John Allister Currie: It is not necessary for
you, Sir, to rule. Yon know the hon. member is out of order.


Georges Henri Boivin: Order. I desired to rule that the hon. member for North Simcoe .(Mr. Currie) had the floor and was entitled to make a speech, tout I wished at the same time to appeal to>
the parliamentary experience of the hon, member for North Sim-eoe and to. ask him. to. confine his remarks to the clause under discussion. The clause under discussion is a definition of the words and terms, and expressions used in the Bill, and I think the hon. member will himself *admit that he is going a little too far afield.


John Allister Currie: I do not think the hon. .member for West Calgary (Mr. Tweedie) asked you to rule as to whether I should go away from the point or not. I think he said I was making a speech.


Georges Henri Boivin: Order. If the hon. .member for North Simcoe does not wish to abide toy the ruling of the Chair, he has no right to discuss it; all he can do is to appeal to the House for a decision.


John Allister Currie: There has"been propounded in this House a new rule, that when the .Speaker makes a ruling the matter should not be argued. It has always been one of the principles of the House of Commons that when a ruling is made it is possible for members to express themselves as to whether they think the ruling is right or pot; and if the Chairman does not think a point is well taken, I have seen the House of Commons adjourn and the Speaker even go and consult the ancient authorities. All I said was that I accepted the ruling of the Chair as far as not wandering from the
point was concerned. What the hon. member for West Calgary asked a ruling on was not that; he asked a ruling as to whether I could make a speech or not. I think I am perfectly in order in making a speech.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: That was not my point of order. While I was making my speech, the hon. member for North Simcoe rose to interrupt, and I sat down. Now the hon. member is going on and making a speech.
I sat down in accordance with your suggestion.


Georges Henri Boivin: I understood, perhaps, wrongly, that the hon. member for West Calgary had terminated his remarks when I gave the floor to the hon. member for North Simcoe-


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: I had not finished.


Georges Henri Boivin: -but I shall make it a point, the moment the hon. member for North Simcoe has terminated his remarks, to see the hon. member for West Calgary and give him an opportunity to continue his speech.


John Allister Currie: The hon. member for West Calgary sat down before I rose at all. He is drawing on his imagination when he says that I interrupted him before he finished his speech. If 'he is anxious to take the floor, I shall give it to him for a while.


Thomas Mitchell March Tweedie: I accept with a great deal of pleasure the laudatory remarks which have been uttered by the hon. member for North Simcoe in regard to the Civil Service. I wish to call the attention of the committee again to the question of threat which was referred to by the hon. member. He read a letter which was sent to him by the Postmasters' Association, and he indi-[DOT]cated to the committee that that was in -the nature of a threat; that that was duress which was being used by the members of that association to force legislative action by the members of this House of Commons. He resents the fact that any organization of civil servants should have the presumption to address their requests and demands to this House or to any individual member of the House of Commons. The class of civil servants with whom he has had experience must be vastly different from those with whom I have in the past had experience, and while he may not personally care to receive deputations or correspondence from the members of the Civil Service in his riding, I can assure you, Sir, that I am only too glad at any time to re-


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: If I may be permitted to say a few words-


Georges Henri Boivin: I do not want to have it said, after 't!he bon. gentleman has begun his speech, that I am calling him to order, but I must once more read the rule which I read, last night, and again this morning, but which seems to have been forgotten:
Speeches in Committee of the Whole must he strictly relevant to the item or clause under consideration.
We have wandered very far from that rule. Yesterday we did it with the consent of the committee, but to-day, unwittingly, the members one after the other have failed to observe the rule. It is a very difficult position for the Chairman to be in. A moment ago I called to order the bon. member for North Simcoe, who was no more guilty than the other members who had preceded him. There must come a time when hon. members must be called to order or no progress whatever will be made with the Bill. I appeal to the hon. members to assist the Chairman in enforcing the rules of the House, and to confine their remarks as much as possible to the clause under consideration.


George Green Foster: I think if the Chairman will maintain that stand, the House will support him.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: What I intended to say is not relevant to the clause under consideration. It had been my intention simply to refute some of the arguments that have been made against the Bill by hon. members. I could cite oases by the hour on the other side to show that the Act is really required, but I shall not make the argument, as I will not be the first to offend against the rule.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section as amended agreed to.
On section 3-Civil Service Commission:
Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: I think it is somewhat unjust to pay the Civil Service commissioners a lower salary than is paid to some of the men they appoint, or- at all events a lower salary than men will receive whose qualifications must be certified to by the commissioners. I call the minister's attention to what seems to me an injustice.


John Léo Chabot: I agree with what my hon. friend has said. I think the fair-mindedness, integrity and ability of the Civil Service commissioners is universally recognized. The placing of the Outside Service under the commission will bring about forty or fifty thousand more men within their jurisdiction, and their scope of action
will necessarily be widened. I think that putting the Civil Service under the com-, mission will save the country many thousands of dollars a year, and for these reasons, and many others I could enumerate, I think the salaries of the commissioners should be increased. I think they should get the same salaries that other commissioners in different spheres -are receiving, because the Civil Service Commission, in my opinion, is the most important of them all.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Representations
have been made 'by several hon. gentlemen to that effect, but the decision of the Government has been that no increase shall be made this year, but that the matter shall be considered at the next session of Parliament. I might point out that the latter part of this section is a new one, namely:
Provided, however, that any commissioner hereafter appointed shall hold office during: good behaviour for a period of ten years from the date of his appointment, but shall be removable by the Governor General on address of the Senate and House of Commons, and shall cease to hold office upon reaching the age of sixty-five years.
I think this is practically the same clause that appears in the Railway Act with reference to the railway commissioners.
,Mr. BUREAU: I think the present railway commissioners arg appointed for life or until they reach the age of fifty-five.
iMr. A. K. MACLEAN: The present Civil Service commissioners hold their office for life.	.


Jacques Bureau: But any -appointed hereafter are limited to ten years, or less than that if they should reach the age of sixty-five before their ten years has expired. For the sake of uniformity I think we should delete the word " hereafter " and say that the commissioners shall hold office during good behaviour for a .period of ten years.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Up to date there has been no limitation as to the tenure of office of members of the Civil Service Commission. When the present members v-ere appointed it was with the understanding that the appointment was made during life or good behaviour. We do not wish to apply the new provision to the present members.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The powers of the Civil Service Commission are very wide, and justly so. They have to supervise the Inside and Outside Services throughout Canada. They will be flooded with

correspondence and they will have to conduct investigations into the various services. I see it is provided that they shall have full power to investigate conditions in the service from one end of the country to the other. There are inequalities in the service. Take, for instance, the salaries paid to the commissioners. The Hon. Mr. Roche is given $6,000 and the other two commissioners $5,000 each. They will have jurisdiction over deputy ministers. Is it fair that deputy ministers should get more salary than the commissioners? I know of at least four of the deputy ministers whose salaries will be higher than those of the commissioners themselves. Since you are making a reform you should correct any inequalities that mdy exist. It is not fair that Mr. Jameson, Mr. Larochelle and Hon. Mr. Roche should have lower salaries than those over -whom they have jurisdiction.


Mr.  A. K. MACJLEAN@: They have not jurisdiction over the deputy ministers.


Rodolphe Lemieux: 
Alexander Kenneth Maclean: They have only jurisdiction in the matter of appointments and promotions.


Rodolphe Lemieux: They are under thti commission. They have to submit to the rulings of the commission, and it seems to me there should be a readjustment of salaries.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Would the hon. gentleman be willing to cut down the salaries of the deputy ministers and adjust it in that way?


Rodolphe Lemieux: I am not saying that, but you might perhaps increase the salaries of the commissioners.


Mr. DAVIS:: Do I understand lines 31, 32 and 33 of paragraph 3 'Section 3 to apply simply to the commissioners who have hitherto been appointed? There seems to be a conflict between that and the provision beginning with line 35. I suggest that lines 31, 32 and 33 might be struck out altogether, and then the other clause beginning with line 35 would read:
Provided, . that any commissioner hereafter appointed shall hold office during good behaviour for a period of ten years from the date of Ms appointment.
*-and so on. I do not see why the commissioners already appointed should not have that limitation of ten years as well as those hereafter appointed.

i Mr. PEDLOW: I do not see why lines 31, 32 and 33 should be included at all, because the point appears to be covered by the next paragraph. [DOT]
. Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:	The last provision is intended to apply only to appointments hereafter .made. The Civil Service Commission has been in existence for a good many years and some of the present members were appointed a long time ago. It would hardly be fair to limit their tenure of office to ten years. I think that should only apply to future appointments1.
i Mr. DAVIS:	As the clause now stands,
there is no limit of age imposed upon those who are already appointed. It is only those who may toe hereafter appointed who must cease to hold office on reaching the age of 65 years?


John Allister Currie: 
Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The suggestion that the commission be enlarged from three to five members is not at the present time favourably received by the Government. However, this Bill will be, in one form or another, before Parliament next session.
In the meanwhile, I promise my hon. friend that due consideration will be given to the suggestion. I do not say that it is without merit, but I do not think we should enlarge the commission now.


Joseph Read: I agree with the hon. member from North Simcoe in the principle which he has enunciated with respect to returned soldiers, and my reason is that there has already been a disposition shown to turn the soldiers down and not give them a fair show. In my own province quite a considerable number of the best offices in which vacancies have occurred have been given to old partisans rather than to returned soldiers. As this commission should he a purely judicial one, I would suggest the appointment of two returned soldiers, so as to equalise that body as far as possible and eliminate the personal equation as it applies in politics.


Mr. THOMAS FOSTEB:: I quite agree with the suggestion of the hon. member from North Simcoe. We must appreciate the fact that we have, or will have soon, some five hundred thousand men overseas, and the number may reach onri million. We are now engaged in considering a Bill that will greatly affect these men, and in which they will be considerably interested. It has been suggested that the ministers do not approve of making an enlargement of the board at the present session. As I ..understand it, however, the Bill is before the House for its approval, and if a majority of the members decide that the commission shall consist of five members instead of three, I think their decision should go into effect. I cannot quite understand the course of the Acting Minister of Finance in objecting to the suggestion.


Charles Murphy: A short time ago the hon. member from Neepawa (Mr. Davis) asked a question with reference to the age limit of the Civil Service Commissioners. [DOT]I did not hear the question answered, and perhaps the hon. gentleman would restate the point.


Fred Langdon Davis: My question had reference to the enforcement of 'the age limit in the case of commissioners hereafter appointed- I understand it does not apply to those already in office. Am I correct in my understanding?
Mr. A. K. iMACLEAN: Yes, that is the intention.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: Judges on the Supreme Court Bench' are held to be competent after

they have reached the age of sixty-five years.	[DOT]


Mr. CARVELL:: At any rate they sit.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: Tihey sit and are held to be competent. Why should the Civil Service [DOT]Commissioners be thrown out, without .any provision apparently 'being made for them, after reaching the .age of sixty-five? I think we should at least place the age for retirement at seventy, and after that grant them a pension, or do something for the poor fellows. Do not throw them completely on the street.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The purpose in limiting the age was that there would be a vast amount of work !to be done by the commission, largely on account of the additional duties imposed npon them by this Bill, and it was thought that men, after reaching the age of sixty-five, would be un- able to properly perform the work.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: 
Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No provision is made in this Bill. If Parliament ever adopts a superannuation Bill I believe it should be made applicable to them.


Mr. PEDLOW:: 
Rodolphe Lemieux: 
Hugh Boulton Morphy: With reference to the question of salaries, I would like to know from the minister what will be paid to the secretary of the Civil Service Commission, so that the House will know what this board will cost? There seems to be no provision made for the secretary. The present secretary is a very capable man

	.



IX, 1018

Alexander Kenneth Maclean: His salary is provided for in the estimates.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: How much is it?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: He is now receiving $3,800.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Is that all?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Well, he is a man of great experience, and has been secretary of the commission- for about ten years, and is a very active, capable and painstaking official. If seems to me that this Bill should provide a reasonably decent salary for Mr. Foran in that position.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think the estimates provided an increase for him this session.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Of how much?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: An increase of $700.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Making his salary $4,500. I notice that the Railway Commission has a pretty heavy salary list, the Chief Commissioner is paid $12,500, the Assistant Chief Commissioner $0,000, the Deputy Chief (Commissioners $8,000, and two commissioners each at $8,000. If the Civil Service Commission is to be of effective service to the country, there will come within ite jurisdiction five thousand Inside Service employees and sixty thousand Outside Service employees. xliis undertaking will relieve the members of enormous work and will consequently put a tremendous strain upon the commission. I do not like to fall in just now with the appointment of either a lady or a returned soldier to the commission, because taking the personnel of the commission, I am satisfied that the interests of the returned soldier will probably be better looked after 'by men of this calibre who are not returned soldiers than if a returned soldier were added. The commissioners, not being of the returned soldiers class, are in a better position to render absolute justice in every case. Will an appointment such as that of Mr. O'Connor, the late Cost of' Living Commissioner come under this Bill?


Georges Henri Boivin: I am afraid the hon. gentleman is out of order. His question has nothing to d-o with the number of commissioners or the salaries paid to them.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Probably I am out of
order, but 1 do not like to be always talking.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think if a commissioner were required to investigate specially some particular subject, he would probably be appointed by Order in Council and would not come under the provisions of this Bill. But Mr. O'Connor, I think, is a member of the Civil Service, and was merely assigned to certain duties as an investigator by the Labour Department.


Georges Henri Boivin: Shall the section
carry?


John Allister Currie: Before it is carried, I would like again to impress upon the minister the advisability of making an arrangement for the appointment of a returned soldier. Members of this House, or at least, some of them,-owe their seats to the soldiers, and here is an opportunity to do something substantial for the soldier in a practical way. Instead of doing it for the soldier, with all due regard to the present personnel of the commission, it has been a little "bit" for politicians. Let us be frank about it, and take this clause into consideration before the Bill is declared passed. We have not done very much for the returned soldier this session. True, there is one measure about pensions, but pensions will not interest more than fifteen per cent of all the soldiers who return after the war is over; in fact, a great many will come back far more efficient than they were when they went away. Everybody was clamouring for the soldier when he went away, and it is "Tommy this and Tommy that" when the war is on, but after the war its Tommy get under the barn or out in the woods so far as any position is concerned. The House is sympathetic toward the returned soldier, and I think that the Government should seriously take into consideration increasing the number of commissioners to include a returned soldier. If they do not, I can *assure them, that, the soldiers will come to the conclusion that they are not being considered in the matter at all. We are inclined to do a great deal of talking about the soldier and very little acting if we can *avoid it. For that reason, I would ask the minister to let this section stand, and go on with some others, and to sleep over it on Sunday and see what can be done. I am not asking anything unfair when I ask that the soldiers have a representative on that commission. I am doing it in, all earnestness, and I think I am supported by members on both sides of the House. There is a feeling abroad that this Bil],is not doing justice to the soldiers, and here is a chance to prove that it is.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think it is quite likely that the additional work which will be imposed upon the commission by this Bill will render it necessary-to enlarge the personnel of the commission. I do think, however, that the commission should not be enlarged for the present year, -at least while the new Act is being tried. After an experience of ten or twelve months With the new Act, the present commissioners will be able to reach a much sounder conclusion as to the increase which should be made in the personnel of the commission. I do not object to the suggestion of my hon. friend; it is quite a proper one, and has much merit. But I do think that the matter should stand over for another year. As I have already said, this Bill will almost of necessity be before Parliament next session. The, Civil Service Commission in administering the Act will find many defects in the legislation, and I have no doubt they will be back at the next session of Parliament asking for amendments and additions to the present Act.


John Allister Currie: My reason in asking for this now is this: The Government has already appointed these commissioners, they are political appointees, and there is not a returned soldier amongst them. Not that a returned soldier has any particular merits for a position of this kind simply because he is a returned soldier, but if we are going to give returned soldiers the preference why not start by appointing two of them to this commission? I should be willing to trust the work of this commission to two Liberal returned soldiers. I fought alongside Liberal soldiers, and found them just as good as Conservatives. -In the trenches there is no politics; all are equal; the only thing required is obedience to authority. I could use very strong language with regard to this matter. Every commission lately appointed that has done well has a returned soldier on it, while, strange to say, some of the commissions which do not include returned soldiers are giving the Government any amount of trouble. Take, for instance, the Food Board. If that body was in charge of a returned soldier he would make the people " stand round." We -should know whether we were breaking the law at breakfast time, because a returned soldier knows what discipline means. If two men are to be added to the commission, it is well to appoint (hem now. The country will not grudge the claries of two- -additional -men, and we shall know whether the Government intends to . implement its promises

and pledges to the soldiers during the election-that the Government w-ould support them both .in, the -trenches and after they returned to Canad-a. Now is the time to implement that promise, but that i-s not being done. Before this Bill is passed the acting minister should take -this matter into careful consideration with the other ministers, who, I know, are sympathetic, and with the Prime Minister, in whom the soldiers have confidence. Let us have a real Bill so far as returned -soldiers are concerned; let us not leave the returned soldiers to the mercy of examiners or of the recommendations of inspectors, postmasters and customs officials through-out -the country.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: We could not now amend the Bill so as to enlarge the commission. It would be necessary to introduce a new resolution and to give forty-eight hours' notice of it.


Mr. CURBIE:: I do not think the House will object if the acting minister introduces a resolution of that kind. I have seen authority to spend $50,000,000 go through this House in a few minutes, and if the acting minister will bring down a provision such as I have suggested, I am confident that members will be willing to stay the rules and to pass it in half an hour. No man here would raise his voice against doing justice to tihe returned soldier.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I agree with the member for North Simcoe (Mr. -Currie) that in the event of its being possible to increase the number bf s commissioners to five, one of them sh-oultl be a returned soldier who is capable of filling the position. It has been urged by several speakers during this discussion that Civil Service appointments in various localities throughout the country should be made by the selection of local candidates- as far as possible. I am informed that a returned soldier 5 p.m. was recently sent from Montreal to fill a position in the Immigration Department in western Ontario. I am glad to know that it is possible to find in M/ontreal a returned soldier capable of filling .a position in western Ontario, but unfortunately the appointment was resented in western Ontario. The appointment of a returned soldier on the Civil Service Commission would prevent anomalies of that kind, and ensure that returned men. capable of filling positions in particular localities should be taken from those localities if at all possible. I repeat ag-ain my suggestion that -a woman

should be appointed on the Civil Service Commission. A large number of civil servants are females who require consideration not only in point of ability but in the matter of their surroundings and in other respects, in both the Inside and the Outside Service. It is desirable that a capable woman should be on the commission, not only to assist in the selection of female employees, but also to look after their interests after they have been appointed!.


Rodolphe Lemieux: 
Matthew Robert 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.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I see no objection whatever to the appointment of women to the Civil Service Commission). I do not think the statute prohibits it. At the present time, however, there -is no- vacancy, and it is hardly practicable to consider the question unless we decide to enlarge the commission-. The commission, I think, must very shortly he enlarged, (but it would be better to wait for a year -and ascertain just to
what extent it ought to he enlarged. The commission will in- that way be able to gain a great deal of knowledge in administering the Act during the next six or ten months. If there is no objection' to- passing this clause, I shall during the next day or two present the suggestion of the hon. member (Mr. Blake) to the Government for consideration, -and if the Government decides to enlarge the commission, a resolution will Ibe introduced and the suggestion made effective.
Mr. NI-CKLE: As the acting minister has stated that the commission must very shortly he enlarged, I suppose that he- will not be averse to going the -length of saying that if that is done he will keep in mind -the recommendation of the -hon. -member for North Simeoe (Mr. Currie) that a returned -soldier should be appointed, because in my opinion it -is very essential that somebody should be there who will- constantly watch the interests of those men.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I have no- hesitation in saying that.


John Allister Currie: I understand then that
the minister is willing to come back to this section- -and give u-s a statement as to whether or not the Government has- considered this matter.
, Mr. A. K. MACLEAN: Yes.


Charles Murphy: Under this- section the ten year tenure of office seems to- apply only to commissioners who maybe appointed in the future. Why is- a distinction made betwen present and future incumbents-.
- Mr. A. K. MACLEAN : The present commissioners were -appointed for life. That was- the effect of the statute at the time. It would hardly be fair to cut down the tenure of office of the present commissioners.


Charles Murphy: What is- the reason for the change?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think the change is a good one to introduce.


Charles Murphy: I am not questioning it, -I am only asking for an explanation.
'Sir ROBERT BORDEN:	I-t was based
on the analogy of the Railway Commission.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I have already
stated to the committee that we are applying to the Civil Service Commission the principle which is now found in the Railway Act in respect of the appointment of Railway Commissioners-.


Rodolphe Lemieux: If the principle laid
down by the minister is a proper one-



and it is a proper one-that if a man has been appointed for life, the period of his services to tihe State must not be changed, surely the same principle should apply to the members of the Civil Service who enlisted under an Order in Council granting them during their time of service their full salaries in addition to their military pay. Why should there be a difference between their case and the ease of the Civil Service 'Commissioners? Another Order 'in Council is passed, and the civil servants are now refused that which they were solemnly promised by the first Order in Council.	~


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I do not wish
to enter into a discussion as to the merits of that Order in Council. It is not relevant to this section.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It is, by analogy.


Donald Sutherland: 
Georges Henri Boivin: Order. The principle of the Bill and the time of its introduction have been discussed for a day and a half. I have been obliged to call many hon. members to order, and the House a few moments ago agreed to support the Chairman in keeping the debate relevant to the clause under discussion. Whether the Bill should be introduced now or not has certainly nothing to do with the number of commissioners to be appointed.


Donald Sutherland: I submit, Sir, to your ruling. I was referring to the fact that the proposition of the acting minister was that, in the future, it might be advisable to appoint further representatives on this board, and I am of the opinion there is a connection between the two. That is the reason why I brought the matter to the attention of the committee. I should like to say .a word or two as to the advisability of increasing the salaries and also of extending the scope of the commission. This is a matter we ought to consider very seriously. The financial condition of the country is such as to demand that we should exercise the greatest economy with regard to all matters of administration. We cannot see very far into the future, but I think the -man is blind who cannot foresee great difficulty in carrying on in this country in the years to come. We are fixing salaries, and the minister intimates that next year it may be advisable to increase those salaries very materially; that other commissioners are receiving larger salaries. I have not anything to say with regard to that more than that I do not agree with a good many of the statements that have been made. There are, apparently, always many people who are anxious to get into the public service, and after they are once in the public service, their efficiency, in the minds of a great many people, is judged by the amount of salary they are drawing. I do not think there is any connection between the two. A man ishould only be appointed to a Government position because of the eminent 'qualifications which he possesses. If that policy were carried out in its entirety I would have no objection whatever



M, 1918

[Stage Direction]
to the present Bill going into effect im, mediately, but that policy certainly has not been pursued in the past, and I do not expect it will 'be pursued in the future. The idea that a large salary indicates efficiency or ability on the part of the recipient is something I do not agree with.
Section agreed to.
On section 4-duties of Commission:
Fred Langdon Davis: I cannot find any clause giving the commission power to recommend dismissals or reductions in the staff. I thought that one of the evils of the Civil Service was over-manning. I know of one fidae where the sub-head of a department ihas been brought before the deputy minister for inefficiency, but no one has urged this man's dismissal. I am told that on account pf the introduction of machines in the Statistics branch, seventy-five to a hundred men in the Department of Trade and Commerce statistics could be dispensed with. The work of that branch is done by seventy-four men in the United States* and if they employed men there on the scale we employ them, in proportion to the work to be' done, seven or eight hundred men would be required in that branch in the States. If the commission is going to effect what the people and Parliament of Canada desire, we must have some means of getting rid of supernumeraries. There is provision in the Bill for transferring supernumeraries from one department to another,"but not for dismissing them from the service. Is the principle we adopt that once a man gets a Government job he has a job *for life, and must be maintained whether the Government has any use for his services or not? If that is the principle, it should be clearly recognized.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The power of dismissal rests with the Governor in Council, and is provided for in section 30 of the Bill. I do not think it would be wise to put this power in the hands of the commission. Clause 4, I think, gives the commission ample authority to make recommendations to the Governor in- Council, and there is on the Order Paper to-day a resolution providing that the Civil Service Commission shall prepare a list of employees who owing to advanced age, failing health or lack of experience or ability, are not capable of rendering efficient service. These men may be dispensed with on pecuniary provision to be determined by the commission. This resolution will be introduced in the course
n4j	[DOT] :i
of a day or so, and I think it will give the commission the power my hon. friend desires. One of the difficulties in the past in dispensing with the -services of -employees has been -that we have no Superannuation Act providing for the retirement of civil servants -at a certain -age, say sixty-five years. I think it would be in the interest of the -State if we had a 'Superannuation Act-, and that matter will have to receive the consideration of Parliament some day soon.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I understood that five per cent w-as deducted from the salaries of all civil -servants.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That goes to a retirement fund, not a superannuation fund. It is paid to the civil servant on his removal fro-m office or to his dependents in the case of his death.


John Allister Currie: Would it not be advisable to incorporate this resolution in the Act, with one change? If instead of the word " forthwith " we substituted the words " from time to time," that w-ould allow the Civil Service 'Commission to appoint a board to make an investigation of the different departments from time to tim-e with a view to the removal or superannuation of the inefficient. In the United -States efficiency experts go through the different departments from time to -time for this purpose, and if they find a man who- has done no work for -six months or is an idler or inefficient, they have power to- remove him. If we made this resolution one of the sections of the Bill, with the change I have suggested, it would inves-t the commission with this power.


Mr. MOW  AT@: In -all business concerns it has been the rule that the appointing authority shall be the dismissing authority, because that gives more power from the very m-oment the appointment is made. While it is proper that -the Governor in Council shall assent to any dismissal, I think it would work out better if the dismissals were to be recommended by the Givi-1 Service Commission and not to become effective until approved by the Governor in Council. Otherwise, we would seem to be returning to the old system of making the dismissals -a departmental, and to some extent perhaps political, matter. Would it not be better and more convenient for the Cabinet to ih-ave action taken in the first place by the commission?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The dismissing power, while resting with -the Governor

General in Council, virtually is under the deputy head. It must be so because nobody but the person under *whom the civil servant works will have cause for dismissing him. I do not think it would be proper that the commission should have the power Of dismissal because they could only do it on the recommendation of the deputy head. So long as the technical power rests with the Governor in .Council that is a protection for the members of the civil service against the deputy heads.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I think that what my hon. friend from P.arkdale (Mr. Mowat) says is right. If you are going to abolish patronage you should abolish it for good. Appointments are to be made on the recommendation of the Civil Service Commission. We are arranging that the Civil Service may be investigated by the commission, and when a dismissal takes place it should be by virtue of powers conferred on the commissioners; otherwise, the ministers and the Government would be pestered all the year round and patronage really would not be abolished. There would be some political influence Ito maintain in office a man who otherwise would deserve to he dismissed. If you ,are going to abolish patronage, wipe it out completely. The only way to do that is to leave the handling of the Civil Service, both the appointment and dismisal, to the Civil Service Commission.


George Brecken Nicholson: If this Bill passes it assumes to place under the Civil Service Commission some 70,000 public servants throughout the Dominion. It seems to me that to expect three men in Ottawa to see that all these officials are efficiently carrying out their duties is to place upon their shoulders a responsibility entirely beyond their ability to successfully carry out. It brings us back to the point that if iwe are going to abolish patronage, we must place the power of dismisal in the hands of the man who is employing the official.


John Allister Currie: The commission employs him here.


George Brecken Nicholson: The commission is
the employing bead just in the same degree as the executive of the Canadian Pacific railway in Montreal is the employing head but I question very much whether you would expect the president, and his first and second vice-presidents, to determine whether a section foreman was doing his duty on one of the Pacific divisions of

the road. It is in that relative position that you place the Civil Service Commission. If you impose upon them the responsibility of determining whether any one of the
70.000	public servants was or was not doing his duty. The work of even investigating the circumstances surrounding those
70.000	public servants would be too great for them to do. It would be a physical impose sibility for any three men you could find on the top of this earth. Some one must be placed in. control of each individual who will see whether he is, or is not, doing his duty, and he must have the power to dismiss any who are not properly attending to their work. Otherwise we will get back to the point at which we started.


Fred Langdon Davis: It seems to me that in this matter we are trenching oni a question that is fundamental to this Bill and it is this: When this Bill comes into force who is going to be held responsible for the efficiency of the Civil Service? It is going toi be the duty of the Civil Service Commission to see that we get efficient men, and they are expected to isee that there is no favouritism in connection with the different employments. Should not one of their powers be to recommend that only so many men shall be employed and to determine how many may be required? They should have some knowledge as to this.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: How could they get that knowledge? They will be busily engaged in performing the'duties of their office, making appointments, holding examinations and attending to promotions. How could they acquire knowledge as to the proficiency of any 'particular official? That knowledge must be with the administrative head of the department; I do not see how you could look to anyone else.


Fred Langdon Davis: Is this board only to be an examining board as to the competency of candidates for the Civil Service, and is it to have nothing to'say about promotions or anything of that sort?
Mr. A. K. iMAOLEAN:	Promotions are
to be made by the 'Civil Service Commis-ision, but it is largely an appointing body. It was never intended that the 'Civil Service Commission should have to examine into the efficiency of departments from time to time or make inquiries as to the efficiency of any members of the service.
Mr. CURRilE: I think that is one of the weak features of the Bill. The hon. member for East Algoma (Mr. Nicholson) pointed out what is absolutely correct, that in

the 'conduct of a business, say of a railway such as the Canadian Pacific, the man who is immediately over the employees, that is the superintendent or the foreman, employs the men and he must necessarily have the power of dismissal. But such is not the case under this Act. This is a peculiar Act. The party that employs here is the commission, and the party that promotes is the commission. The only party that can dismiss is the Governor General in 'Council. There is no provision made whereby, if a minister has an efficient employee he can dismiss him unless the deputy head approves. The Civil Service Commission should have an inspection staff whose duty it would be, where complaints were made, to investigate and, when good reason is shown, to have the employee dismissed. The postmaster of Ottawa, or of any large town, will have nothing to do theoretically with the appointment of his staff. An appointee may not be a local man or may come from any part of the country. The hands of the postmaster are absolutely tied whether the members of his staff are doing their work properly or not. I quite agree with the hon. member for East Algoma that some arrangement should be made for the maintenance of discipline in the various departments. You cannot have discipline unless the power that appoints is also the power that dismisses. There -should be an appeal from that power to the Governor in Council if a man thinks he has been unjustly dealt with. The Civil Service Commission not only has the power of appointment hut has the power of promotion. That means that the commission must know whether a man ib carrying on his work properly and is entitled to promotion. If you are going to have promotion for anything else except for length of service-in which case a man goes up automatically-you must have some provision for determining the merits of the candidate for promotion. If you are going to have promotion for merit you must have some inspection whereby the merit of the man can be judged. I have in my mmd the- case of a man of high qualifications, a man who, in private life, would be drawing a salary of $5,000 or $6,000 a year. If I required his services for the business he is in I would be very glad to give him $5,000 a year. He is drawing only $1,800 from the Government, and he finds himself in the position that his salary is not adequate for him to live on. That man is an expert accountant, who could undertake the inspection of any one of the largest hanks in Canada, and still he is compelled
to live on such a paltry salary. How are you going to arrange matters so that the commission shall take cognizance of such cases and give these men their deserts? I want every man in the service who is doing his \vork well and properly to receive proper recognition. No provision is made for that in this Bill. If there were some kind of inspection bureau whose business it would be to consider the service which each person was rendering, a deserving man could come before this bureau and say: I have been working very hard night and day for the Government; I do not get paid for my night work, but I get the work done; a great deal of additional work has fallen upon me because of the war-or for other reasons-but I am willing to stand up to it and I want you to consider my conditions of employment and grant me an increase of pay. In such a case the bureau of inspection would verify the man's statement -and forward his case to the Civil Service Commission accompanied -by the recommendation " this man is deserving." Or an officer in charge of the business of a custom house, might say: "I have a lot of men here, but I can get along with fewer; there -are three or four loafers who are doing nothing but sit round; they are all the time smoking cigarettes instead of doing a good day's work and they simply defy me." The inspector who is investigating the case would say: "Suspend these men, because we are going to report." The men would come before that inspector and would have to prove whether they were entitled to remain on the staff or not. I think that is the procedure that would be followed in the case of any large business institution. Why not make this Bill a thoroughly business measure? Otherwise we are only wasting the time of the House and doing great injury by changing the present law. Under that law you have some responsibility in connection with appointments, but unless you introduce business methods under the present Bill that responsibility will disappear.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Might I draw the attention of the hon. member for Nee-pawa (Mr. Davis) to subsection (to) of section 4. That seems to! give the commission power, upon the .request of the head of any department, to- make an investigation as to the efficiency of a department or any branch of it.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: I was looking at the section when the minister spoke, and it seems

ito me that all these subsections give the commission all the powers that are required, *without, however, the power of dismissal. Therefore if a man in one of the lower grades of the Service has been guilty of an act which would warrant his dismissal the commission has no power to deal with his case, even though they appointed him, and the matter must go to the Governor in Council. It does not seem to me consistent with modern conditions that the commission that has the supervision of all the members of the Service within the classes mentioned, and who- appointed the man-


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It would seem
quite proper that the employer should have the right of dismissal. The Civil Service Commission will scarcely ever be in a position to exercise' a reliable judgment in respect of the dismissal of any person. They would have .to- act upon information given to them by the deputy head, or some other officer of the department under whom the person who is recommended for dismissal worked. I think the suggestion that the power of dismissal ought to go to the Civil Service Commission is unsound in principle, and, I think, will not toe found in the -Civil Service Act of any country.


Fred Langdon Davis: I did not suggest that the [DOT]commission should have the right to dismiss, but that they should have the right to' recommend that the number of employees in a department should (be reduced, and possibly, on investigation, that a certain person should be dismissed.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think we have that power now.
1 Mr. DAVIS: I doubt whether it is contained within the limits- of section 4.


Mr. HOCKEN:: I understand from the minister that the dismissal has to take place on the report of the deputy minister. I was wondering what would (have happened in the Kingston post office had the deputy minister reported that Mrs. Narraway's presence was not necessary there and asked for her removal. It just emphasizes what I said, that we are putting altogether too much power in the hands of the deputy ministers. We are making the deputy head, in the last .analysis, the -sole referee. Then, if I understand correctly, promotions are also made upon 'the recommendation of the deputy minister to 'the Civil Service Com-, mission.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: You make promotions dependent on the recommendation of the deputy minister, and he has the power to promote those who may or may not be efficient.


Air.  A. K. MAOLEAN@: What could you put in place -of (that?


Horatio Clarence Hocken: I do not suggest putting anything else in its place, but I do suggest that in framing this Bill -some check should be placed upon a deputy -minister, and when we com-e to the proper clause I may have something to suggest in the way of strengthening the Bill so as to discourage that favouritism and nepotism which it is alleged n-ow prevails.
Mr. PEiDLOW: I take it that the management of the business of the Dominion Government is no different in principle from that of any other large business concern in the country. You must have centralized authority having sole control and being supreme in arranging matters of organization, filling vacant offices, making promotions, carrying out dismissals and dispensing with supernumeraries. I think it is the intention of the Acting Minister of Finance to make provision by means of this Bill along those lines. The Oivil Service Commission is the best power to take the place of centralized authority, and corresponds to an individual in a personal organization. When you begin to develop the business -along definite lines you must -appoint heads of departments. Now, the business- of this country has been developing for years, and at the present time is developing along larger lines than- it has ever done before. Consequently you must organize new departments under special heads. If you want to hold the -special heads-deputies, or whatever you like to call them-responsible for the working out of their departments you -must place them in control of those departments. We had an exhibition in one of the departments of the Government a few days ago of the mistake of following a different course. In the Department of Labour a junior employee upset the whole machinery of the department and caused the dismissal of the best department head that the Government has had for many years past, a man who gave good service to the Government. But his work and the work of the employees under him was interfered with by the man over his head. It is a very difficult matter, as I see it, to draw the line through any mechanism of tfee Government

machinery, but I insist that the steps should be by easy grades, so that there will be no confusion caused by the reorganization undertaken by the Civil Service Commission throughout the many ramifications of the business of the country. The commission holds the department head responsible. He can only be held responsible provided he has control over those under his immediate charge. In that case I contend that in the case of an appointment which is unsatisfactory to the department head he should have recourse to the commission. Again, if the department head has been guilty of unfair treatment of an employee, that employee should have recourse to the commission, but only through the department head. In that way, you avoid friction. I claim, therefore, that in every case the employee should be responsible to the man immediately above him, and that man to the department head and the department head to the commission. In the case of the Department of Labour, the individual complaint-.and I merely mention that to illustrate the principle- should have been to the department head, from the department head to the minister, and from the minister to the commission. And the commission, or else the Governor in Council, should have the last say in the retaining or dismissing of any employee. The same would hold good with supernumeraries. There is provision in the Bill enabling the commission to enter into any department and investigate it. I understand from Part II. that that investigation is for the very purpose of dealing with supernumeraries. In my judgment, if you are desirous of having a perfect working machinery in the Civil Service it must all work from a centre and to a centre. If there is overlapping you will have difficulty just as there was the other day with the Department of Labour.


Charles Murphy: In subsection (d) of this section, one of the duties of the commission is, " to obtain the assistance of competent persons to assist the commission in the performance of its duties." May I ask to what class of assistance that subsection applies?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It would apply, for instance, to examiners to hold examinations throughout the country. 'That is what it was intended for.


Charles Murphy: Not to the clerical staff of the commission?	.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It has no reference to that at all.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to. *
On section 8-Illegally obtaining examination. papers.
Charles Murphy: May I ask where these examination p.apers are printed?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: They are printed in tlhe offices of the Civil Service Commission.
Mr. MiURPHY:	Under their supervision?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


John Allister Currie: 
Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The papers are
prepared by examiners specially appointed by the commission.


John Allister Currie: Who are the examiners?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: They change
from time to time.


John Allister Currie: Are they permanent?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Oih, no, they are not permanent.


John Allister Currie: Where is the authority
given the commission to appoint examiners?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: In sub-paragraph (d) ef section 4.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 9-Soliciting appointments.
Charles Murphy: If a capable and deserving official who, by reason of some feeling on the part of the deputy minister, is not given the promotion to which he is justly entitled, has representations made to the minister by the member for the constituency from which he originally came, would that be an offence under this section?


Robert Laird Borden: I think the section means that he is confined to making such representations to the Civil Service Commission.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Who is to apply the principle of dismissal?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Dismissal is by the Governor in Council.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Is that the intention of the Act? This board which determines a man's qualifications and selects him for appointment should be responsible for him; if he commits flagrant offences which justify his dismissal, the board should have power to dismiss him. To limit the com-

mission's power in this respect is like shearing Samson of his locks. The commission should be a strong body, with all the powers necessary to their duties, not an inefficient body, of no avail in the public service. If they have power to appoint men, they should have power to reject them.


Charles Murphy: Subsection 2 of section 9 says:
Any person who, directly or indirectly, solicits or endeavours to influence any Minister of the Crown or the head of any department in favour of his appointment or promotion or to increase his salary, shall (be deemed to be unworthy of such appointment, promotion or increase, and1 it shall not be accorded him; and if he is employed1 in the public service, he shall be liable to immediate dismissal.
I am speaking of a case of which I have knowledge, and in which, in an endeavour to obtain some attention at the hands of the minister and the justice that the official claims he is. entitled to, representation has been made to the minister. Would such representation be deemed a contravention of the subsection which I have read.


Air.  A. K. MAOLEAN@: I think it would be.


Charles Murphy: Then how is such an official to obtain justice?


Robert Laird Borden: By putting his case before the commission.


George Green Foster: Subsection 3.


Charles Murphy: If he does put his case before the commission-, the deputy minister, who would be complained of in the submission of the case, would probably make the man's life unbearable.


Robert Laird Borden: I should think that the commission would have the right to make a representation to the minister.


Charles Murphy: Surely the minister is not absolved of responsibility by this subsection.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not say that. My hon. friend inquires,-does he not?^-how the case may be brought to the attention of the minister, assuming that the deputy minister is. unfair?


Charles Murphy: Partly. Representation has been made direct to the minister on behalf of the official.


Robert Laird Borden: Rightly or
wrongly, the section seems to provide that instead of going to the minister the man himself or the person who acts on his be-

half shall go to the Civil Service Commission, who, if they deem it a case of injustice, may make representations to the deputy minister. If they find those representations unavailing, they would naturally take the case to the minister. That is what I understand by the section.


John Allister Currie: This is a very drastic clause. Take the case of a town or village close to a recently established munition work. The customs officer there suddenly finds that he has to take care oif a customs revenue of from $500,000 to $2,000,000 instead of $20,000 a year which came in before the munition work was established. If a member of Parliament should make a suggestion to a minister of the Crown that more men be appointed in that customs office and that salaries of the employees be increased, he renders himself liable to the pains and penalties of this Act.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Subsection. 2 of section 9 would appear to be too drastic. I am willing to drop it if hon. gentlemen think that that should be done.


John Allister Currie: The whole section is nothing but camouflage. The importuning of ministers of the Crown will go on just the same. The clause has been in the Act since 1908, but as a matter of fact ministers have made scarcely any appointments without first being importuned,.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not think the note " 1908 s. 42 " is accurate. The provision was not in this form in 1908.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Section 42 of the present Act reads:
No person shall, directly or indirectly, solicit or endeavour to influence a member of the Commission with respect to the appointment of any person to the Service.
And so on. Subsection 2 prohibits direct or indirect solicitations to influence a member of the commission.


John Allister Currie: Now the words "member of the commission" are omitted and the words " Minister of the Crown " substituted therefor. May we canvass members of the commission, but not ministers of the Crown? It would seem that ministers of the Crown want to avoid all responsibility.
At six o'clock the House took recess.

After Recess.
The House resumed at eight o'clock. PRIVATE BILLS.



GOSPEL, WORKERS CHURCH JEN CANADA.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Hon. A. K. Maclean (Acting Minister of Finance), the amendment made by the Senate to Bill No. 59, to incorporate the Gospel Workers Church in Canada,-Mr. Middlebro,-was read the second time and concurred in.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 76, for the relief of William Leo Walpole.-Mr. Fripp.
Bill No. 77, for the relief of Mary Claire Dawson Hislop.-Mr. Jacobs.
Bill No. 78, for the relief of Martin Hafner. -Mr. H. A. Mackie.
Bill No. 79, for the relief of Ida Sophia Wardell.-Mr. W. F. Maclean.
Bill No. 80, for the relief of Edward David Hill.-Mr. Richardson.

[Stage Direction]
The House resumed in Committee on Bill No. 53, respecting the Civil Service of Canada,-Mr.. A. K. Maclean,-Mr. Boivin in the Chair:
On section 9-soliciting appointments:
George Brecken Nicholson: Subsection 2 might he all right in so far as it relates to the minister of the Crown; but when you extend it to the point where you forbid an employee in any department to appeal to the immediate head of the department, the officer under whose direct control the employee may be, for promotion, or an increase of salary, or in regard to any other question that may relate to his service in the department, and instead of that pass him over the head of his immediate superior and send him on to the commission, which, as I understand it, will be the head of the Civil Service, you are entirely reversing the system under which any large body of persons can be employed. If I understand anything .about the maintenance of system in the employment of any body of persons whatever, the principle is that the employee shall appeal for a recommendation to his immediate superior before going to the head of his department, and unless he receives that recommendation I do not see how the executive, if I may be permitted to put it in that way, can intelligently deal with the case. Subsection 2 might well be struck out of the Bill.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: If it is the judgment of the committee that subsection 2 be struck out, I am quite content.


Jacques Bureau: Subsection 1 of section 9 reads:
No person shall, directly or indirectly, solicit or endeavour to influence any minister of the Crown.
Would it not be better to prevent any influence being brought to bear on the members of the commission? If they are to have the direct recommendation, and if we are going ito punish anyone who solicits a minister for appointment or promotion we should also protect the members of the commission, because they are the ones to whom you are to apply in the last resort if you are going to procure the appointment or promotion.


Mr. SHEARD:: Section 9, in my opinion, could very well be struck out of the Bill. Subsection 1, if interpreted strictly, debars me from giving a testimonial of character to any applicant who may wish to enter the Civil Service. If a civil servant has been unfairly and unjustly treated in a department surely the minister at the head of that department has a right to hear that civil servant and to go into the merits and demerits of the case. Otherwise, representative government is at an end so far as that department is concerned. It is the privilege and right-.and it has been so	stated	on	the	floor	of thisHouse during this session-of any subordinate	to go	to	the	Bead	of his
department and to make any representations he sees fit and proper to make, and I do not see why we should deprive him of that right. This clause contravenes the broad spirit of British liberty as I understand it, and debars a subordinate from appealing to the head of his department whom we in. this Parliament hold responsible for the proper administration of that department. Instead of striking out clause 2 of section 9, I move that the whole clause be struck out, as I can see no good purpose in it. We desire, if I interpret the spirit of the committee correctly, that the minister shall be the head of his department with absolute control and that the various promotions shall be subject to his approval.


Rodolphe Lemieux: There is good sense in the remarks, of my hon. friend (Mr. Sheard). In endeavouring to accomplish a reform we must be careful not to defeat the very object of that reform. What is


Donald Sutherland: I am not going to oppose the dropping of this section, but in view of the statements made by the last speaker I want to say a word as to how an applicant is going to have his case brought before the commission. The commissioners are naturally possessed of the instincts that were characteristic of them oefore they were appointed to their present positions, and they have their social connections, as people have in other walks of life. The result, I am afraid, will be that those who come in social contact with the commissioners will have a great advantage over those who do not, and the consequence will be'that an humble individual who is not in a position to advocate his own claims will not have the same chance as the designing individual who would see to it that some one got next to the commissioner or deputy minister and argued his case, not in a way that 
would render him liable under this Act but in an insinuating way that would nevertheless accomplish the purpose in view. I think this section indicates that the Bill was not drafted with very much care, or it would not have contained this clause. I am heartily in accord with the views of the committee that this section should be dropped.


George Brecken Nicholson: 
Henry Herbert Stevens: How is a member to know what representations to make to the commission if no one first makes representations to him? The first part of the section says distinctly that no one directly or indirectly shall solicit any assistance. So -how can I tell which one of all my constituents wants to make representations unless he first applies to me? Clause 3 is absolutely idiotic unless the two preceding clauses are removed. .


George Brecken Nicholson: The first clause says that no person shall directly or indirectly solicit or endeavour to influence any minister of the Crown. That is simply providing against bringing political influence to hear. It does not remove the opportunity for making representations to the commission.


Charles Sheard: I submit that clause 3 in the broad interpretation is somewhat of a gratuitous impertinence. The first two clauses deny the right to representatives of this House to any influence, in the public service. In the drafting of this Bill the commission are hedged around with more red tape and precautionary measures than attach to His Majesty the King. It is going beyond all reason to say that the people's

representatives shall not have the right to submit .representations to their 'majesties the commissioners.


John Allister Currie: I do not wish to oppose the dropping of this section, but I wish to say a word over its funeral. During the last session I listened to the great representative of the French Government preaching democracy-Mr. Viviani. I shortly after listened to the eloquent representative of Great Britain. They told us that this was a war for democracy. Democracy means representative and responsible government. Yet, this is an attempt largely to set up a bureaucracy. It is opposed entirely to the principle of democracy to set up such a system as that, just as if we were in Prussia where nobody would' dare approach the bureau, or communicate with it, or do anything of the kind. The hon. gentleman who has just sat down (Mr. Sheard) is a student of democracy, and he will very readily understand. The clause, to my mind, is an impertinence, especially the third sub-section.
I suppose we cannot even look at the commission with a spy glass. I have objected largely to all the clauses of this Bill, and I think that if the ministers will look at it from the proper standpoint they will realize that it is an. entirely undemocratic measure during war time. If anything can be said to win the war, it is certainly not going back on democracy. The best thing we can do is to drop this clause and go on with something else.


Charles Murphy: I would like to say a word just to clarify the situation so that we may understand the effect of dropping this clause. I would ask hon. members to realize what it means, and particularly those of my colleagues in this House who have been expressing their great delight that this Bill relieves them of any further annoyance in connection with patronage. If this section is dropped-and I am not opposed to dropping it if that is the wish of the committee-it throws the whole situation open again, and-gives an opportunity to any one in this country to worry and harass every public man and candidate, *ministers, members Of the commission, deputy ministers and heads of branches just the same as in the good old days. If my hon. friends desire that situation, I can stand it as well as they can. I deem it my duty to point out that this will be the effect of dropping that section. If the desire of the committee is to drop it, I am not going to oppose it.


Jacques Bureau: I do not see how leaving the clause in would prevent any person from doing what is here prohibited. The clause says that no person shall attempt to influence any minister of the Crown, but supposing he does, there is no fine ^ or penalty. This merely expresses the opinion of this House that he should not do it.
Amendment (Mr. Sheard) agreed to, and section dropped.
On section 10, paragraph 1-Organization of departments; how effected:


Charles Sheard: We want the word "minister''' to be inserted there. The section provides that the commission shall prepare plans for the organization of the department after consulting with the deputy heads, heads of branches, and other chief officers. We want to hold the minister absolutely responsible for the administration of his department, and therefore the section should contain a provision that the minister also should be consulted.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The Bill practically does contain the provision that my hon. friend (Mr. Sheard) suggests. This clause merely enacts that the Commission shall consult with the deputy heads with respect to the matter of reorganization and then report. The commission could get no assistance from a minister of the Crown that would be of value in the reorganization of the department. At least very few ministers would have that exact and detailed knowledge of the work of the department which the deputy head would have. But, when the recommendation of the commission is made, it must be approved by the Governor in Council, and accordingly the minister approves of any recomenda-tion that may affect his department. The matter now stands just, as my hon. friend would like to have it.


John Allister Currie: hung back and opposed any change and have carried on in the same old way. The ministers should be supreme t>ver the deputies. Why should we desire to detract from the minister's responsibility and from the authority wihioh the minister should possess in his own department? The day has gone by when we can put square pegs in round holes in managing the departments. 'The minister must take charge of his department and run it. We have ministers in this Government who are capable of doing that and I propose that we shall give them the opportunity. For that reason I support the suggestion of my hon. friend from South Toronto (Mr. Sheard); I think it is one that the Government should adopt.
Mr. A. K. MiAQLEAN:	The Governor
General in Council cannot approve of any report submitted by the commissioners for the reorganization of a department unless it has the express approval and sanction of the ministers. The clause simply enacts that the commission, after consulting with the deputy head, shall report a system of reorganization. But it has to be submitted to the Governor General in Council for approval, that is, it must have the approval of the ministers of the several departments. It would be impossible for the commission to work out any scheme of reorganization unless they consulted with the deputy heads. I cannot see any objection to the clause.


Charles Sheard: I am satisfied with the
minister's explanation.
'Mr. CUEEIE: I am not quite satisfied, because I think that the clause ignores the minister altogether. The initiative is entirely left to the deputy heads and the commission, whereas the suggestion .as to what shall be done in the department should come from the minister.


Walter Davy Cowan: I do not think that it
ignores the minister. The Bill gives the commission power to consult with the deputy heads and the head's of 'branches, tout they may also consult with the minister and with as many other people as they have a mind to. We ought to give this commission power to get all the information they can get and to use it. Unless they get that 'information we cannot expect any sensible result or proposal from them. It is utterly [DOT]impossible that any minister could have [DOT]technical knowledge of all the branches in [DOT]any one of the departments. In- the case of a department of half a dozen branches under half a dozen technical heads the commission must consult with these heads in [(Mr. Currie. ]
order to get the knowledge necessary to make an intelligible report.


John Allister Currie: I know ministers- in this [DOT]Government who are just dying to take hold of their own department and 'Straighten them out. They have so stated publicly. [DOT]Let us give them a chance by inserting the [DOT]word "ministers" in the clause.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: I understand the
minister to say that after the deputy has drafted the regulations the minister must pass upon those regulations before they [DOT]are adopted?


John Allister Currie: That is the Cabinet, not the minister.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: The Cabinet is an assemblage of the ministers'. If I understand the matter as presented, the ministers must necessarily pass upon, what the deputy heads have placed before them.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The recommendations get to council by the submission of the minister who is the head of the department. [DOT]


Georges Henri Boivin: 
Charles Murphy: I desire to make a suggestion which, in the light of actual experience, I think will improve the section referred to. The first Civil 'Service Act, as the minister knows, was passed in 1908 under the Government of which I happened to be a member, and the administration of the Act was .attached to the department of which, at that time, I had charge. It was found that there were a good many anomalies in the departments owing to the fact that the same system of organization and classification was not carried out throughout the service. I take it that this new section is designed to. remove those anomalies, and secure a levelling up throughout the service. That will be difficult unless some specific direction is given to the commission, so as to secure similar organization and classification in each department-in other words, so that the anomaly may not be presented, for instance, of men in different departments hut doing the same class of work being paid different salaries. There are many such anomalies in the service in Ottawa, and I would suggest adding after the words "public service" in line twelve, the words: " Such organization, as far as possible, to follow the same general principles in all departments." If some authority such as that be not inserted, the commission will find it very difficult, indeed, to secure cooperation in all the departments.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am willing to accept the hon. gentleman's suggestion, and I move that there he added after the words "public service" on the twelfth line, the words:
Such organization as far as possible to follow the same general principles in all1 branches of the Civil Service.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Jacques Bureau: A question was raised as to the reorganization being made. Reorganization is effected by consultation on the part of the heads of the departments,
or the deputy heads, with the commission. Then subsection 2 provides:
(No change shall he made in the organization of any department until it has been so reported upon by the said Commission.
That reorganization is in force and effect the moment it is approved by the Governor in Council. Following the reorganization, there will have to he a classification of the various employees who have heretofore been in the department, as provided in subsection 3. After this is done and the organization is complete, why not submit that organization and classification, with all the recommendations of both the commission and the deputy heads, to the Governor in Council?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That would be simpl-y going over tihe work a second time. Nothing would be accomplished by that.


Jacques Bureau: The fact that a plan of a house has been drawn does not exempt from accepting delivery of the house .to complete the contract. A plan of organization may be elaborated and approved of by the Governor in Council, but the carrying out of the organization and classification is done by the deputy heads, and approved of by the commission.
Section as amended agreed to.


Charles Sheard: Before we go further I would ask the minister if there is any provision in this Bill for the dismissal of a public servant?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes, we will come to it later.
Section 11-Tenure of office.


Air.  A. K. MAOLEAN@: There is no change in this section. It is the same as in the present Civil Service Act.


Mr. McKENZIE:: The .section provides that appointments shall he during pleasure. Under the old condition of things that was always understood to be the pleasure of the Crown. Whose pleasure is it now?


Jacques Bureau: The pleasure of any party that is in power.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The pleasure of the Crown.


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


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
On section 12-Addition to salary on appointment :
Jacques Bureau: Is there any change here from the old Act?
Mr. A. K. 'MACLEAN: The section is just the same, except that the sum .stated in the third line is $200 instead of $500.


Jacques Bureau: I asked the question because the note at the end of the section would indicate that it was a repetition of section 33 of the Act and the amendment is not shown by brackets. Why has the amount of $500 been decreased to $200? There must be some specific reason.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The reduction is made because under section 46 there is to be a reclassification of the several divisions. On reference to that section it will be found that [there are more grades provided and that there is not the same difference in salaries between the grades as heretofore:. For instance, in the first division the minimum salary at present is $2,800 and the maximum $4,0(M). There is now to be inserted between those two .amounts another grade, and the rises are more frequent. Section agreed to.
On section 14-Appointments to be on probation:
Mr. A. K .MACLEAN: I move to strike out the words in subsection 1: " And the cause of the rejection shall be reported by the depulty head to the commission," and to add at the end of that subsection the words: " and the cause of rejection, or the reason for extending the period of probation shaill be reported by the deputy head to the commission." It is practically putting at the end of the clause the words which are struck out in the middle.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The clause does not state whether or not the commission shall investigate the cause of rejection as reported by the deputy head. The deputy head may be ill-tempered-people grow old and do not retain the same equanimity as when they are young. The deputy may have a grudge against, or may not like, the employee on probation, and may at once report to the commission that So-and-so is rejected. Will the commission investigate the cause of rejection?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Look at subsection 3.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The Commission shall decide whether the name of a rejected person shall he struck off 
the list as unfit for the service generally or whether he shall he allowed a trial in some other .position for which he may he eligible.


Jacques Bureau: He might remain oh the list and lose his job in the department.


Rodolphe Lemieux: On second thought, this subsection is not so clear as it seemed to me at first. It could state, by inserting a word or two, that the commission, when such a report is made by the deputy head, shall investigate. Let us take a concrete case: Suppose I am deputy head of a department and a clerk is appointed on approbation, and I do not find him, or her, as the case may be, a proper officer even on probation. I give some reasons in my report to the commission. Now the commission will decide whether or not my report shall be accepted. Will there be some investigation to ascertain whether the causes stated in the report are valid or not?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I really do not think it is necessary to provide for that in the section, because the commission are obliged to make some investigation before they can render a decision.


Rodolphe Lemieux: That is not very clear.
iMr. A. K. MACLEAN: However, if the committee think that there should be an amendment, the words " after investigation " might go in after the word " shall ", in tlhe first line of subsection 3, which would then read:
(3) The Commission shall after investigation, decide whether the name of the rejected person-
Mr. LEiMIEUX: That is what I mean.


George Brecken Nicholson: In addition to that, there might also be added a rider giving the commission authority to retain the employee in the regular service. I would suggest the addition of the following to subsection (3) : " or the commission shall have the power to decide whether the rejected person shall be retained in the original position."
An ham. MEMBER: The same or some other.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It would hardly tie wise to retain the employee in the department after the deputy head has reported him to be incompetent or inefficient.
I think it would be for the good of the Service that he be not sent back to that same department.


[Stage Direction]
Amendments agreed to, and section as amended agreed to.

On section 16-Professional and technical positions:
Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I move that the word "competitive" be inserted after the word "without" in the 13th line of this section, so that it will read "either with or without competitive examination."


Jacques Bureau: Is this not against the principle laid down in this Bill? The deputy head is supposed to accept the man selected by the commission.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The only difference between this clause and the clause in the old Act is that the approval is to be by the commission instead of by the Governor in Council.


Charles Sheard: Why -does the minister put in the word "competitive"? Would a surveyor' who is a Bachelor of Science be expected to enter a competitive examination in order to take a position in the Department of Public Works?


Rodolphe Lemieux: I would put the same question with regard to architects and translators. When the old Act had been in force only a few months we were in need of a competent translator for the Labour Gazette. I suggested the appointment of the late Mr. Lanctot, and the question arose whether a translator was a technical officer. I submitted that a competent translator was a technical officer; the matter was discussed in Council and referred to the Minister of Justice, Sir Allen Ayles-worth, who prepared a memorandum on the subject which may now be found in the Department of Justice. Would an architect have to pa?s a competitive examination before he could be appointed to a position in the Public. Works Department? It is represented to me that under this Bill he would.


George Brecken Nicholson: This clause provides that the commission has authority to make such appointments without competitive examination.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: When departments require officers with professional or technical knowledge, in some cases advertisements are placed in the press and applicants are requested to communicate with 9 p.m. the Civil Service Commission.
If two or three of the applicants appear to have equal merits, the commission would likely adapt the procedure which I outlined last night, that of appointing a board to consider the relative merits of each. In that case some sort of examination
might be prescribed. The commission are not obliged to do that, however.	.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Wherein does this section differ from the old section 21?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: "The Commission" is inserted in place of "The Governor in Council." That is practically the only change.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: I think that is a mistake. The old section was intended to check the appointment of experts by requiring the submission of each case to the Governor in Council. The members of Council, sitting around a table, will not agree to the appointment of a man as an expert if he really is not an expert. I had occasion last year to look into the administration of section 21 under the present Act, and I found that considerable abuse existed.
In a return brought down to the House it was shown that 175 appointments of so-called experts had been made under section 21. I found that the appointees were [DOT]mostly men who were over age and who were receiving small salaries such as- $1,100, $1,200 or $1,500 per annum. They were not experts at all, but they were favourites of the administration and they were called "experts" to* avoid examination and placed in those positions under section- 21. If you open the door any wider -and allow the commission- to appoint, without examination, any person that they may call an expert, we might -as well dispense with the Civil Service Act altogether. I would suggest to the minister that he maintain the language of section 21, so that there will be -some check in the appointment of these technical officers.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I would submit to my hon. friend that the old section, to which he refers was claimed- by many members of Parliament to be subject to -abuse. It .was urged that frequently men were promoted upon the ground that they were -technical or professional officers and, on the recommendation of the deputy head and the approval of the Governor in Council, such men might be promoted t-o a higher position- and receive -a higher salary. The purpose of this new section was to remove that power from the Governor in Council, which is always a political body. I thought the House would agree that the approval 6-hall be placed in the hands of the commission! just to avoid possible abuse. I think this section is- much preferable to the old section 21.	.

'Mr. MURPHY: There is just this albout it, that the remodelled section may lead in its operation to a conflict between the Civil Service Commission .and the deputy head, because it makes the appointment rest on the recommendation of the deputy minister. I am aware that the suggestion has been made to my hon. friend, possibly he has not had time to consider it, and I do not want to press, it, but I think it proper to bring it before the comlmittee, so -that when it is sought to- invoke this section, the intervention of the- deputy minister should be confined to asking for an appointment.
M.r. A. K. MACLEAN: I propose changing the word " recommendation " to " request."


Charles Murphy: I appreciate what my
ihon. friend says as being a move in the direction of meeting the .situation which I am about to disclose, that is, that the deputy minister should be restricted to asking for an .appointment in a certain grade andi not for the appointment of a certain individual. That feature of the appointment should be determined by the commission, and not by the deputy minister. The .section, as it stands, would prevent that being done by the commission. I do not know whether my hon. friend has had time to go into the details of the question, but I desire to draw attention to it, so that if the change is net made now, it may be considered when the 'Bill is brought up again.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I beg to move:
That the word ''recommendation" in the tenth line be struck out and the word "request" be inserted!
'Mr. SHEARD: I .submit to the minister that the word " competitive " before the word " examination " is an injury rather than a benefit. If, in these technical examinations such as the one illustrated, a first-class man was an applicant, I doubt very much if he would 'Submit to enter into a competitive examination, especially if .he had university or other qualifications which proved his status beyond peradven-ture. I know I would not if I were making application. I would say that I had got beyond that stage in my professional career. I do not think it is desirable to put in the word " competitive."


Mr. DENIS:: I would like to see the
words " professional' dr technical " in the ninth line defined. W.e are simply trying to avoid a difficulty by not defining those words. I wonder, .if the question were

asked the members of this committee individually, if there would be two opinions alike. . If we do not assume the responsibility of defining those words, how will the commission define them? I would suggest amending the first clause by adding to it a paragraph <iefining those words, " professional or technical," or else putting at the end of section 16 a definition of those words. It is no use trying to avoid the difficulty, it will come before the commission.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Will my hon.
friend offer the committee a definition of the words " professional or technical?" I do not think it is possible to draft a section which would meet his suggestion. It rests with the commission to decide whether the knowledge and ability requisite for any position is professional or technical. I do not see how you could possibly define the words.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: The difficulty arose in regard to section 21 in connection with the famous case in the Militia Department. An issue was raised -between the minister and the commission as to the definition in connection with the appointment of a military tailor. I do not think they got beyond the regulations.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Those words were used in the British Civil Service Act and in the United States Civil Service Act, and I do not think either the British Parliament or the United States Congress has been .able to find any words to define the idea.


John Ewen Sinclair: What necessity is there for technical officers in the Outside Service. I had the honour of sitting in this House at the time the original Act was passed, and it was represented to this House that occasionally eminent engineers or men from the outside would be required to do such important work as designing the Quebec bridge or other work of that kind; that such men would not submit themselves to an examination before any commission, and that section 21 was necessary, when a case of that kind arose, to enable the Government to secure the services of an eminent technical expert for carrying on such work. It -strikes me that we do not require the section so far as the Outside Service is concerned.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Take the engineers of the Public Works Department.


Mr. SIN CLAIR:: They are in the Inside Service.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No, not in the several provinces. There are engineers in the Marine and Fisheries Department. In the Outside Service many technical officers are required, and, of course, a great many in the Inside Service.


John Allister Currie: Take the case of the
Marine and Fisheries Department. Inspectors of boilers and hulls have now to pass a special examination provided by the department. Will they now be examined by the commission?


Jacques Bureau: I do not see that the
section is improved by the amendment that has been moved. The Minister of the Interior may make a request for a surveyor and it is for the commission to do the rest. Under the old Act, the appointment was made by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of the minister of the department.
The recommendation of the minister was based on the report in writing of the deputy head, and the man, before being 'appointed, had to get a certificate from the Civil Service Commission that he was qualified to fill the position. When all these steps had been taken we had a record showing what the deputy head had reported in writing to the minister, the minister's recommendation, the certificate o.f qualification by the commission, and the Order in Council making the appointment. To-day all a minister has to do is to make a request to' the commission that he requires an expert accountant, we will say, and we have no record showing what the man is required for or whether he is qualified. I think the clause ought to be further amended so that if a request is to be made it shall be made in writing, stating the reasons and the particular service for which the man is required.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think this clause is preferable to section 21 in the old Act, which permitted .a man to be appointed when the qualifications required were " professional, technical, or otherwise peculiar." We are striking out the words " or otherwise peculiar."


Jacques Bureau: That is not what I object to. I say the request should be in writing.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Under the old Act it was possible for the deputy head to read almost anything into the wording of section 21, thereby rendering the section liable to great abuses. We are here restricting the
appointments to those offices requiring professional or technical qualifications.


Jacques Bureau: That is all right. What I object to is that an appointment can be made at the request of the deputy head. Under the old Act the recommendation was made by the minister upon the report of bis deputy, and then the applicant had to get a certificate of qualification from the commission. The section reads:
If the deputy head reports that the know* ledge and1 ability requisite for the position are wholly or in part professional, technical or otherwise peculiar, the Governor in Council upon the recommendation of the head of the department 'based on the report in writing of the deputy head, may appoint a person to the position without competitive examination and without reference to the age limit, provided the said person obtains from the Commission a certificate, to be given with or without examination, as is determined toy the regulations of the Commission, that he possesses the re-i quisite knowledge and ability and is duly qualified as to health, character and habits.
The deputy head had to make a report in writing to the minister showing the necessity for appointing a man with technical or professional knowledge. The record was there in writing. But under this section all the deputy head has to do is to send in a request for a technical man and the commission, may appoint him. I do>
not object to substituting the commission for the Governor in Council, but I want to know for what particular purpose the expert accountant or land surveyor is required and what branch of the service he is going to be employed in.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Under the old
Act it was necessary for the report to be in writing, because the 'Governor in Council had to approve the appointment. If we compelled the deputy head to make a report in writing to the commission to the effect that a technical officer was required for some particular work it would rather tie the hand's of the commission. A member of the 'Civil Service 'Commission informs me that just a few days ago they were requested to appoint a technical officer, but upon investigation they Ifoundj that the work was not of a professional or technical nature. I think it is 'better not to embarrass the commission by a report from the deputy head as to the necessity for a technical man. The commissioners should be allowed to decide whether or not it is a technical position.


Jacques Bureau: Perhaps I did not make myself clear. The minister says that a report in writing had to he made because



the recommendation had to go before Council. We all know that, the report in writing was to enlighten the minister, so that he could discuss the matter before the Governor in Council when he made his recommendation.


Mr. MEIGHEN:: Does the old section say that the commission shall certify that the man required is a professional or technical man? I would not object to the section in the old Act if we gave the commission power to decide whether or not the man required was a professional or technical man.


Jacques Bureau: The Governor in Council appoints the man provided his qualifications are certified by the commission.


Arthur Meighen: But under the old Act the commission had no say as to whether the office is really one requiring a technical or professional man. I understand that the complaint in previous years, of course mostly prior to 1911, was that the Governor in Council virtually decided that any office they wanted to fill was a professional or technical office, and in that way drove holes through the Civil Service Act. If it were inserted in the Bill that the commission should decide the character of the office, and whether a technical or professional man was required, I think the old clause would read very well.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I would point out further that under the present Act the recommendation of the deputy head names a person. Under this section the deputy minister is not called upon to recommend any person, but simply to advise the commission that there is a vacancy for which he requires a person having technical or professional knowledge, and the commission finds the man for him.


Jacques Bureau: The Acting Minister of Finance has just answered my hon. friend the Minister of the Interior, for he said that the deputy head advises the commission he requires a person with technical or professional knowledge for a certain position. If the deputy head is to decide whether a technical man is required or not, I do not see where the commission come in. Under the old Act they had to certify that the applicant was qualified. What does the word "request" mean? I say that the request should be in writing, stating the reasons for the appointment, so that we would have a record of all the steps gone through up to the appointment.
The insertion of this word "request" means that the deputy is going to ask for
f(Mr. Bureau.]
a certain man. Then the commission, will send a man and say: "We certify that Mr. John Jones is a chartered accountant having all the qualifications necessary to fulfil the requisition sent in toy the Deputy Minister of Finance."


George Brecken Nicholson: The argument of the hon. memlber for Three Rivers (Mr. Bureau) presupposes that the Civil Service Commission are going to make wholesale appointments to the Civil Service for which there is no justification.


Jacques Bureau: Not at all.


George Brecken Nicholson: 
Jacques Bureau: I do not want it to
go on record that I am advocating leaving the matter in the hands of the Governor in Council or that I am afraid that the Civil Service Commission are going to make wholesale appointments. On the contrary, I want to help them' and I want to trust them. They will make an appointment at the request of the deputy minister. The deputy minister makes a request and I *want that request to be made in writing, stating exactly what the position is that he wants to fill. Otherwise they might send a telephone message and which would not become a matter of record. I do not doubt the ability of the commission to judge of the qualifications of the applicant, but the request from the deputy head should be a matter of written record.


George Brecken Nicholson: If that is all the hon. gentleman requires, why not put in a blanket clause providing that a record should be made in connection with every appointment to the Civil Service?


Jacques Bureau: We want to have a record of the requests that are made.


Mr. CRONYN:: I beg to move:
That clause 16 be amended by adding, after, the word "request" the words "in writing", and after words "deputy head" the words! "giving his reasons for such request."
That will preserve a record of the whole transaction and meet the suggestion of the honi. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Bureau). '


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Charles Murphy: May I draw the attention of the minister to the possible necessity of an amendment to the last part of the section by reason of his having introduced the word "competitive" in the thirteenth line? The section originally provided that the appointee should be selected either with or without examination. My hon. friend inserted after the word "without" the word "competitive." The last portion of the clause reads:
An appointment as a professional or technical officer shall not qualify a person for appoint-: ment or transfer to any other position in the pulblic service open to appointment upon competitive examination only.
In view of the introduction) of the word "competitive," will the last part of the section still apply?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes, I think so.


Charles Murphy: Why should it apply to a person who has been appointed in a competitive examination?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I do not think my hon. friend understands the situation. The section provides that if one obtains entrance into the public service upon the ground that he is a technical or professional officer, he cannot later be transferred to another position the appointment to which is made by competitive examination.


Charles Murphy: I can conceive of a case where a person might be selected in the first instance and be debarred in the other, but if my hon. friend has given consideration to it, I shall not press the point.
Section as amended agreed to.
On section 17-Promotion to be for merit:


Charles Murphy: Should not you change the word "recommendation" to "request" and make it conform to the previous section?
115*


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: I read in the first line " public service." Should not that be "Civil Service"?


Georges Henri Boivin: The minister struck out the first paragraph of section 2 and replaced the words "public service" in the last paragraph with the words "Civil Service;" so that all through the Bill the word "public" should be replaced by the word "Civil." [DOT]


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: This section will now, I understand, apply to the Outside Service as well as the Inside Service. The promotions in the Outside Service, I presume, will be more systematic and regular than they have been in the past. I would like to know what the machinery will be for making promotions in the Ouitside Service. In the Inside Service it is readily understandable how the deputy head can get knowledge and promote men. But, how has the deputy head sufficient knowledge to promote a man in the custom house in North Sydney? There must be some machinery by which the deputy head can get, regularly and properly, and without the possibility of pull as it is being used now, knowledge of the Outside Service so that everybody in that service will get promotion regularly according to his merits without being subjected to the influences that are at work now and which in past years have kept men back and put other men forward who did not deserve to go forward because they happened to have influential friends at court.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: A later clause in the Bill provides for a reorganization and classification of the Outside Service, in so far as it is possible to classify it. For instance, the customs service, the inland revenue service, and the post office service in the larger cities and towns may be classified; to some extent they are classified now. In such cases, promotion will be made according to seniority and merit. The commission will secure such information as they desire from the chief officer of that branch of the Outside Service.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: It is understood, then, that it will devolve on the chief officer in any such service-the post office, for instance, or the custom house-to grade his officers and recommend) promotions as he may deem it advisable?
Mr. A. K. MlAOLEAN : The classification will be made by the commission where none exists. The head of the branch of the service affected might possibly make

recommendations. I do not know whether the commission will ask him to do so or not, but he can give them such information as they desire.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: That is just what I want settled and not left to haphazard. We have it well defined and laid down in this Bill, as far as the Inside Service is concerned, that promotions will be made by the commission on the recommendation of the deputy head. But as regards the Outside Service, no defined machinery exists- for that purpose. I readily understand that the employees are to be graded, but how are the promotions to be carried forward according to this grading afterwards P
(Mr. CRONYN: It Seems to me that section 55 deals with that question as regards the Outside Service. Under that section the commission would have to go into the matter with the several deputy heads and other principal officers and employees.


Jacques Bureau: Do I understand the word " promotion " to mean that when, a public servant is changed from one position to another his condition is bettered? Or does it only mean passing from one class to another?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That is what it means.


Jacques Bureau: Just from one class to another class, not from one position to another which would improve his status?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It means from one grade to another.


Jacques Bureau: The section requires that in case o,f promotion the man must do work of greater importance and responsibility; he abandons the work of one class to take up that of another. The subsection provides that the deputy head may at any time during the period of probation cancel the promotion. The old Act provided that when the promotion was cancelled the employee returned to his former position. Now, suppose that an officer has been promoted, another man has been taken on in his place, and .at the end of six or eight months the deputy head chooses to cancel the promotion. What is going to happen to the man whose promotion has been cancelled unless we provide that he shall return to the position he formerly held? There is no provision to that effect in this Bill, although there was in the old Act.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: There is no express provision for such a case.

.Mr. BUREAU: There was in the old Act.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: But he is not retired from the service.


Charles Murphy: Would he not .go upon the list of supernumeraries?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: He would probably fall into the list of supernumeraries.


Jacques Bureau: " Probably " is not an answer.	*


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The man is not retired, at any rate..


Mr. PAPINEAU:: If the deputy recommends cancellation of a promotion that should be reported to the commission, and the party, concerned should have a chance to defend himself.


Jacques Bureau: 
Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I would suggest adding after the word "promotion" in the last line of subsection 2 the following words:
"And the cause of such cancellation shall be reported in writing by the deputy head to tha Commission.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Jacques Bureau: I would suggest the following addition to the subsection:
The person whose promotion has been so cancelled shall then return to .the performance of the duties in which he was previously en-i gaged-[DOT]
iMt. OROTHERS: Would that not follow if his promotion were cancelled?


Jacques Bureau: I do not think it necessarily follows.


Mr. CROTHERS:: I think if you read the old section you will find this: A man may be promoted, that is on approbation, and that promotion may be confirmed by the deputy head, or cancelled. If cancelled he goes back to his former position.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Does the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bureau) move an amendment?


Jacques Bureau: The section can stand while I draft one.


Charles Murphy: Is provision made in a later section of the Bill for an annual report?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: By the commission. Yes.


Charles Murphy: Are the appointments made under section 16 to be set out in that report?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: We can discuss that when we come to the section which deals with the matter. '


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I would move
that subsection 2 Ibe further amended by adding the following words at the end of the subsection :
And the person whose promotion is cancelled shall then return to the performance of the duties in which he was previously engaged.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Mr. iMcKENZIE:	I think we are creating a difficulty there. Suppose the position he formerly occupied is filled by somebody else, it would necessitate a rearrangement all around. Is it not well to leave it in the hands of the commission?
Jacques Bureau: His successor in the old position is on probation also.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I would favour leaving
the disposition of the individual in the hands of the commission; it would not disturb the department so much.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am informed
that the party filling a position from which another has been promoted is also on probation, so that there will be no trouble in the. one promoted on probation reverting to his former position,


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: It would be an injustice to the other man if he had been filling the (position on probation for six months.
Section as amended agreed to.
On section 18-exchanges and transfers.
Mr. H. A. MAiOKIE: I would ask some explanation of the words "or in different branches of the public service." Under this provision, is it not possible for instance for an Ottawa man to be sent to Edmonton? We have already a number of Ottawa people, and a number from Calgary. We like these gentlemen very well, but we also like to see our men getting positions, and I submit that some protection should be given to our own people. I quite understand that a department may have a surplus of men or women, and it may be in the interest of the Government to send these people to the different branches in the Outside Service, but it creates a great deal of friction. The matter has been discussed fully and I do not care to repeat the arguments used, but I submit we should be protected so that the commistaion cannot say to those who are to be transferred:	"You
shall go to Calgary, and you shall go to Edmonton."	.
Mr. OOOKiSHUTT: . I quite agree with my hen. friend from East Edmonton (Mr. Mackie). I look upon this section with a good deal of suspicion, as to how " the filling of a vacancy in a department by a transfer from the Inside to the Outside Service or from the Outside to the Inside Service in the same department or in different departments, or in different branches of the public service " will work out. That is where we are going to have the very trouble referred to by the hon. member for Edmonton, and to which I drew the attention of the committee yesterday. It appears to me that there should be some limit set. I would suggest that no more men be sent from the Inside Service to the Outside Service than are received1 from the Outside to1 the Inside Service. That is the least that can be done in. the w.ay of straightening the matter out. We want our people employed as far as possible in their own localities. They are the likely people to occupy such positions. I, for one, certainly think that the powers of transfer should be decidedly limited both with the deputies and the Civil Service Commission itself, though I think the matter is safer in the hands of the commission than in the hands of the deputy head. I understand, however, that they are both more or less concerned in the transfers, one cannot do it without the other. That is where the great difficulty will come in. It will lead to friction and dissatisfaction in the working ol the Act if a large number of Inside Civil servants are sent throughout the country and placed in constituencies where they are not wanted. That is the way the Kingston affair 'turned out, which was mentioned by the hon. member foT Kingston (Mr. Nickle) last night. The minister should devise some means of limiting the powers of transfer.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: I would suggest the following amendment in line 3: after the wilds "public service": "the transfer from one branch of the public service to another shall not be made without the written approval of the responsible minister.''


Mr. SIFTON:: That could be included in a new sub-section.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: It could be, but what I desire put in the section is that a transfer will not be made from one branch to another without the written approval of the responsible minister.


Jacques Bureau: Or the head of the department.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: I prefer the responsible minister. Then the commission will be very careful in making transfers.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The only objection I see to the suggestion is that you are introducing a minister into Civil Service appointments. The purpose of the Bill


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: A transfer is not an appointment.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It is the approval of a transfer. If it is a transfer, that means a new appointment for somebody, it is not so very objectionable, of course. It is possible that this section might [DOT] give rise to the abuses suggested by my ho-n. friend, but, having regard to the approving power of the commission, we should at least wait until we find that it is being abused before we change it.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: Within the last two weeks I stopped four transfers from Ottawa to the Outside Service in anot'heT province. *


Mr. PARDEE:: I am not prepared to offer an amendment to cover the ease, but I think that some provision should be made whereby new appointments shall not foe made outside the districts within which the work - is to be done. I quite understand that in the event of civil servants not being required in a department in Ottawa or Toronto, places would have to be found for them in the Service. I am in favour of Civil Service reform, but I am not in favour of a number of men being sent from Ottawa to my constituency, because men in that constituency are quite able to pass the competitive examination and to carry out the duties of any position- that may foe vacant within it. Until some amendment is offered to cover this point, I -think the clause- should stand-.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: Employees- in the office of a minister or a deputy -minister are sometimes sent to -another branch of the department as typists or in some other capacity and are continued at such salaries as $1,400 to $1,700 a year. These persons so tr-ans-

ferred- are often not able to earn, in their new positions, the salaries which they had previously been receiving. Is the minister making provision against su-ch an anomaly as that?


Air.  A. K. MAOLEAN@: There is no provision in the Bill for a case of that kind.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: Such cases have occurred in different departments.
iMr. CROWE: I agree that -positions which are vacant within- a province should- be given to persons- living in that province. Two or three weeks ago- a notice was sent to members of the 'House, from which I quote the following:
The Civil -Service -Commissioners hereby give public notice that applications will be received from candidates qualified to fill the following positions in -the Civil Service of Canada.
Tfoe firs-t position w-as that of postmaster at Lethbridge, and it was announced that the examination would take place in Ottawa. Why should that position be filled from Ottawa? Should not that examination be held- in Alberta and the appointment m-ade of a person in that province? The -same applies to British Columbia; if a position is vacant there, w-hy
10 p.m. should it not be filled by someone from that provinee? Not long ago a matron went from Ottawa to fill a position in a convalescent home out there. Surely that is n-ot right.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I am surprised to find this parochialism prevailing among -our extreme protectionists. To say that a man should not -be sent where his- services are most required is protectionism running mad. I w-as told by the member for Brantford (Mr. Cockshutt) the other day that I never moved very -much from Cape Breton and that my knowledge was confined practically to herring. Of course, I accepted that good-naturedly, but may I point out that I live in a province where we have to take men from Montreal, Quebec, New Brunswick-all along the line of the Inter-col-onial. The -management of the Intercolonial send their men where they are most needed, or where they can -suitably fill positions. If a m-an is sent from -Montreal to look after the station at North Sydney we d-o not say a word about it. It is good policy that a man shall not be transferred from one provinee to another if that can reasonably be avoided, but I think we may safely leave that to the department. It is- altogether too- parochial to say that in this great democratic country

of ours a man should not go from one province to be employed in another. The disposition of civil servants can well be left as a matter of policy to the commission and to the departments concerned.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Last evening I read from a statement prepared by a member of the commission setting forth their policy in respect to transfers from one town to another or from one province- to another.
I will read again that portion of the statement :
There is naturally a very strong feeling throughout the country that positions should, wherever .possible, be filled, by the appointment of local persons and that except in the case of transfers, which might occasionally become necessary, "outsiders" as they are regarded should not receive preferment.
As the member for North Cape Breton says, it may be quite necessary at times to make a transfer from the Outside to the Inside Service, or vice versa. I do not see how you can prevent that by legislation. Would it meet the view of the member for Edmonton (Mr. Mackie) if this section were amended by adding after the word "of," at the end of the 4th line on page 8, the words "the heads of the department or departments affected, and by"?


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: I would rather throw the responsibility on the acting minister. My only point is the necessity of some safeguard against the making of unnecessary transfers. I may say to the member for North Cape Breton (Mr. McKenzie) that we are not parochial, and that we are not running mad

but we do not desire to run amuck. Because we do not take two hours to explain our views here, is no reason why we are not sensible in presenting these amendments.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: 1 do not wish to half-do things myself.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: In the western provinces the population i3 increasing very rapidly and men naturally, as they come into that country, expect to get positions. Consequently, there are men who should be promoted who will be prevented from being promoted by having some individual from some other town taking the higher position. I understand, of course, it is sometimes necessary for a department- to make a transfer, but I desire to guard against a wholesale use of transfers.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I suppose there is a good reason why the hon. member for East Edmonton (Mr. H. A. Mackie) is afraid of competition from the outside world. As a
Nova Scotian, I am not afraid of any such competition. We in Nova Scotia are ready for all-comers, and our own breed and our own production will be so superior to theirs that we are not afraid of competition. I can readily understand that men coming from some other places-I am not going to name any place in particular-may be afraid of the enlightened competition that might come from the outside world. Nova Scotia is, however, not one of those places.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: In the western provinces we hope very shortly, not many years from now, to put into practice the policy which these gentlemen suggested, but which during their whole administration they did not dare to put into practice.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I beg to move:
That alter the word "of" at the end of the fourth line on page 8, the following words ha added:	"The head or heads of the department
or departments affected and by."
The clause will then read:
Or in different (branches of the Public Service, may he made on the recommendation of the deputy head or deputy heads, as the case may be, with the approval of the head or heads of the department or departments1 affected and by the Commission.


Mr. COCKSHUTT:: What does the minister mean by the " head " of the department? I understand that is the minister.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


William Foster Cockshutt: Then why not say " minister "? If we said " minister," there would be no doubt about the matter. In some departments the supervision is more or less divided.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The interpretation section says that the " head " of the department is- the minister.
iMr. JOSEPH BEAD: I quite agree with the original draft of the section. Not only is it very much in the interest of the country that these exchangee should be made from one province to another, but it is desirable; and, as a matter of fact, the Civil Service Commission has already been making a considerable number of transfers. In Prince Edward Island we often have visits from agricultural representatives from Ontario, and we, in exchange, send our Prince Edward Island men to Ontario. Exchanges of that nature, especially in the agricultural department, are very desirable, because a number of Ontario farmers know more along certain lines than our farmers do, and vice versa. You know that two knives sharpen each other when you rub

them together, and so we are going to enlighten those western people a little, and we are endeavouring to do it all the time by sending our people out West, and we want our western friends to visit us in the East, and we shall show them some things that they do not see in the West.


Charles Murphy: Section 18 says:
The Commission shall in each case determine whether a .person sought .to he transferred or exchanged possesses the requisite knowledge and ability and is duly qualified' as to health, character, age and habits.
It is intended to restrict the work of the commission solely to that which is defined there, or is the commission to have anything to say as to the sufficiency or otherwise of the reasons of the transfer?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The former part of the section says that no transfer can be [DOT]made except with the approval of the minister and the commission. They must approve the transfer, and then they must satisfy themselves as to the requisite knowledge and ability, health, character, age and habits of the party transferred.


Charles Murphy: I am afraid the amendments have created a redundancy and a confusion there.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: The matter to which I called attention some time ago deserves more than passing notice. It is an important item, and it should have been dealt with under clause 2 of this section. I would suggest that all the words in that clause after the word "shall" be struck out and the 'following inserted instead:
-not necessarily carry with them the salary that the individual has been in receipt of in the previous position.
That means that that feature of the transfer will be left open to be dealt with by the commission and the deputy of the particular department. The individual may not necessarily be worth as much in the department to which the transfer has been made as in the previous position. The individual may not have been giving satisfaction in the previous position and may be transferred for good reasons, and if he is transferred to a lower position, he should not necessarily draw the higher salary. A great Seal of dissatisfaction has been caused in Ottawa where transfers have been made, such transfers carrying with them the higher salaries that the parties transferred are not capable of earning.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I do not see what arrangement could be made in the case of a member of the Civil Service who has been receiving a stated salary in some special grade or division of the public service, and who is transferred to another department and doing work of less importance and still receiving the old salary. I think it would hardly be fair in any cases to reduce the man's salary.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I think the same rule should be followed as obtains in private business, where if a man is not capable of earning his salary he is dismissed. But the Government- are more lenient. I do not see why a change to another department should carry with it a larger salary than employees of that department are earning. The instances I gave are of typists earning $1,700 a year, who were transferred to a department where the employees were receiving only $1,000 a year and had been longer in the service than the ones who were transferred. I think we should provide against cases of that kind.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I cannot suggest any method at the moment of meeting the case which my hon. friend suggests, but I will give it consideration between now and Monday, and we can then revert to the consideration of this section.


William Foster Cockshutt: It is not only the transfer from the inside to the outside service that we might object to, but the transfer from one place to another. For instance, a party might go from Ottawa-we expect most of them will,-to Toronto, or from Montreal to Toronto, and that is what we want to avoid. We do not want the large centres to get more than their share of appointees. We do not want them to be sent into the smaller places where there are comparatively a small number of offices to be filled. I do not want to be construed as objecting to a person being sent from one province to another; I never suggested that. We object to the moving from one part of one province to another part of the same province as much as we do to the transfer from one province to another. We want to get the proper number for each electoral district, and I think the minister should add something to the effect that employees shall not be transferred from one city to another city, or from one city to a village, or from one electoral district to another electoral district; I think "electoral district" is the better word.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Before a transfer can be made under the section as amended,

the recommendation of the deputy head must be approved by the minister and by the commission. I do not see how any greater protection could be afforded.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section as amended agreed to.
Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I thought the section was to stand for further consideration.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No. If I can find any amendment to meet the case mentioned by my hon. friend, which I do not think is possible, we can revert to the section. The amendment, however, need not necessarily go in this section.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: The matter will not be lost sight of?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No.


Jacques Bureau: It will only be forgotten.
On section 20-Annual increases, how made:


Mr. FIELDING:: Why do you limit it to the word " annual?"


Mr. FOURNIER:: Take the case of a young lady appointed temporarily to the Post Office Department, we will say, on the first of December, 1912, and who was appointed permanently in 1913, and promoted in 1914. If the deputy head has a grudge against her, he need not recommend an increase, and she will be left in the cold. What was the procedure under the old Act? Did the civil servants receive an increase every year?


Air.  A. K. MAOLEAN@: The present section is practically the same as the old. In reply to my hon. friend from Shelburne pud Queens (Mr. Fielding), the word "annual " is inserted because the increases aTe statutory annual increases.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I understood that the Outside Service got a statutory increase of $100, and the same grade in the Inside Service an annual increase of $50. Does this section cancel that?


Air.  A. K. MAOLEAN@: There are no statutory increases for the Outside Service.


Jacques Bureau: UndeT the old Act the increase was automatic, some getting an increase of $50 and some $100 a year.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: The increase is made by Order in Council every year.
Mr. OOCKSHiUTT: I think there is a well understood rule that the letter carriers get, perhaps without statutory provision, an advance each year until they reach a certain maximum, and it appears to me that this section is going to knock that on the head. I do not think that is desirable. I think every one who gives good service is entitled to his annual increase to the maximum of his class. Under this section, the letter carriers will not get it until every case has been considered by the Deputy Postmaster General. I think now the letter carriers get an increase of 25 cents per day each year up to about five years, until they reach a maximum of $2.75 or $3; it is certainly not less than $2.75, and perhaps it is more in the West. I think that increase should be continued without any reference to the deputy head.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I had understood there was provision in the Act for a statutory increase. There is certainly discrimination between the Inside and Outside Service, if I am correctly informed, because while the Outside Service receives an increase of $100 the same grade in the Inside Service receives only a $50 increase every year. So a man in the Inside Service after ten years' service would be no better off than a man who had been in the Outside Service five years. That- seems to be an injustice.


John Allister Currie: Section 47, which we have not reached yet, says:
There may be given to every officer, clerk or other employee in the first division an annual increase of $100, and in the other divisions an annual increase of $50, until the maximum of the grade is reached1.
That is virtually imperative. But the section now under consideration changes that. It says:
No officer, clerk, or employee shall receive any annual increase of salary except on the report of the deputy head, concurred in by the Commission, that such officer, clerk or employee is deserving of such increase.
That clause permits a great deal of what we may call the old political spirit, and I think it should be amended to say that:
Every officer, clerk or employee shall receive an annual increase of salary, except on the special report of the deputy head, concurred' in by the Commission, that such officer, clerk or employee is not deserving of such increase.
Then the increase comes automatically, unless, the officer has a black mark against him and the deputy can show any special reason why he should not have his increase he will get it. As it stands there, when one side of politics' gets in, the fellows of that political colour get their increase automatically every year and the other fellows do

not. If we are going to take the service out of politics, or drive all kinds of partisanship out of it, I think it would be only fair to change that clause in that way.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That clause has been in the Civil Service Act fOT quite a number of years. It was never intended that the increase should be received by a civil servant as a matter of course. I doubt very much if that amendment should be carried. That section was drafted having in mind the Inside Service and, I am going to ask the committee to allow me to drop it here and when we reach the clauses having reference to the Inside Service we will take the matter up and it can be considered.


John Allister Currie: That clause has caused more canvassing and difficulty than anything else in the service. Civil servants, within three months of the time when the annual increases are given, start writing to members and importuning them to go and see the ministers in order to help them to get their increases. This removes that difficulty. If the civil servant knows that his increase will come to him automatically if he has done his duty and if his conduct has been good, he will not bother about it and that difficulty will be overcome.


Mr. TRAHAN:: If the suggestion of the hon. member for North Simeoe (Mr. Currie) is adopted, there will be a report from the deputy head stating that the officer does not deserve an increase and that report must be concurred in by the commission. Would it not be just to the employee that the report, before being sent to the commission, should also be sent to the employee so that he will have the right to defend his case before the commission? That will prevent an abuse of power by the deputy head.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I would not think that would be in the interest of the Civil Service.


Arthur Trahan: Why not? It is in the
interest of the public service that when a report is made against an employee he shall have an opportunity to defend and protect himself. That is the way to protect civil servants. If you have a deputy who' wants to persecute some employee without reason and make adverse reports concerning him why should you not give that employee a chance to defend himself before the commission and to contradict if possible the adverse report that is made?
Section dropped.
[IMr. Currie.]
On section 23-salary to be raised to new minimum:


Jacques Bureau: I see that the grades are changed by this Bill. We shall come to that later on. Take a person in 2B under the Act of 1908 with a salary of $1,600 and who has been for over a year at the maximum. He is eligible for promotion to 2A, the maximum salary of which is $2,100, on the recommendation of the deputy head. Does this clause mean that that employee shall be classified in grade D under this Act, with salary beginning at $1,700 and rising to $2,100? He has reached the maximum of his class hut he finds himself in a higher class, under the new classification, than the one which he has now reached. Yet this Bill provides that there shall be no promotion from one class to another. What is to become of that officer?


Mr.  A. K. IMAOLEAN@: If under the new grading the maximum is below the maximum in the existing division or grade that officer goes to the present maximum.


Jacques Bureau: He will have the benefit of the higher grade in order to reach the other maximum?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.
Mr. PEDtLOW: Has this section any relation to the employees in the Customs Department?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It has relation to the employees in all the departments.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: 
Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Will the hon.
gentleman please reserve his remarks on the subject of salaries until we come to section 46?


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 24-Additional payments forbidden.
John Ewen Sinclair: What significance have the words " permanently employed " in the fourth line of this section? Under section 3, which we have passed, the officers are employed on their good behaviour, and -in section 11 it is provided, that except where otherwise expressly provided, all appointments to the public service shall be during pleasure.
Mr- A. K. MACLEAN: " During pleasure " means a permanent appointment.
'Mr. OURR'IE: Does this section bar the granting of additional salaries by Order in Council?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: A great many employees in one department are working overtime in another department. Will this section debar them from receiving payment for that overtime?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It does do that.


John Allister Currie: What about customs officers who, as the minister knows, work overtime for extended; periods?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Remuneration for that is voted in the estimates.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I have knowledge of the fact that some employees in the Post Office Department are doing night work, at the present time, in the Department of Finance, and are being paid for their overtime. Will this section prevent those employees from doing that work and getting paid for it?
Mr. A. K. M1AOLEAN:	I think it does
prevent that.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I think they should be
permitted to do this work, if it is necessary, and be paid for it.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think at one
time that was permissible, but it led to certain abuses and Parliament prohibited the practice. I do not kno-w to what extent abuse has occurred, fbut I think it is 'better that those in the public service should not be allowed to engage in additional work after hours-it leads to favouritism and disturbs the service.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 25-Temporary employment.
Alexander Kenneth Maclean: This section is
exactly the same as the present section 23, except that the authorization has now to be made by the commission instead of by the Governor in Council.


Mr. CAHILL:: Should mot the request
referred to in the section be a written request?


William Foster Cockshutt: 
William Foster Cockshutt: If that is going -to
be done all right. I wish to draw the attention to the provision that temporary employees shall not be employed more than -six months. That is not going to he lived up to at all, nor is it likely to be lived up to unless the regulations are entirely changed. As I pointed -out in my remarks last evening 'there are -many employees in the Brantford post office at the present time who have been at work there from three to four years and they are still called " temporary " employees. These men are relieving other employees who have gone to the war. It appears to me that a man who has been employed for three or four years in any branch of the public service should no longer be classed as a temporary employee. He is there nobody knows how long, -but until the war is over. Perhaps some of the men will never come back; some will be killed, others maimed. All through these four years these so-called temporary employees have 'had to submit to the -status of temporary men-and did not get statutory increases, their uniforms were not supplied, and -many other perquisites that would go to the regular occupant were not given to them, because they are classified as "temporary" employees while really they are permanent employees. This system is decidedly wrong.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I quite agree that possibly there have been abuses. It has been a method employed to get persons into the service. I trust now that the commission will have jurisdiction, the Act in this respect will not toe subject to such abuses in the future. My hon. friend inquires how the temporary employee -may be kept in the position which he tills during the absence of the civil servant on military service. A way in which it could be done is that a new employment could -commence at the end of the six-months' period.


Mr. MOWAT:: The last clause provides for that.


William Foster Cockshutt: When a man has
thoroughly mastered -his job, he -will be changed off or dismissed at the end of six months? That is not the intention.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That last part ot the clause reads:
One or more extensions of such period* of employment may toe granted' by the 'Cpmmission, but each such extension shall toe limited* to a period not exceeding six months.


Jacques Bureau: That is a new clause?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes, provided especially to meet cases of that kind.


William Foster Cockshutt: I think it is very objectionable.


Mr.   D@: Instead of the extra assistance being secured on the report of the deputy head, it should toe asked for by the minister, because it calls for expenditure, and the minister is responsible to Parliament.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am afraid, if the minister is to make the authorization, there will be a very much greater expenditure of money.
Mr. DuTREMBLAY: I want to keep the minister responsible to this House as much as possible.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think it is much safer to have the authorization made by the commission.


Frank S. Cahill: I would suggest that in the third line of subsection (1) the word "written" should be inserted so that it will read: "on the written request of the deputy head, that such extra assistance is required."


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think the word " report " is more suitable than the word " request."


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: There is no objection to inserting the word "written?"


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: 'No, that can be inserted.


Charles Murphy: There should be some limit set upon these six months' periods.
If not, they may be continued for such a length of time that temporary employment would really become permanent employment.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It is quite true that there might be room for abuses, but I 
do not see how you can provide against that very well.


Charles Murphy: Unless you would limit it in the case of a particular individual to a certain number of renewals.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It is a difficult case to provide for in a Bill.


William Foster Cockshutt: It has resulted from war conditions.


Charles Murphy: It is an abuse that existed before the war, and which has been aggravated by the war.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: We shall see how it works out this coming year.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 27-Holidays.
Mr. McQUARRIE:: I would suggest that the word " may " in the first line of this section be struck out and the word " shall " substituted. I think it only right that civil servants should be entitled, as a matter of right, to eighteen days' vacation as provided in this section, that it should not be left to the deputy head to decide whether or not an employee shall get his holiday. In my constituency it has been brought to my notice that there are employees in the public service who have received no holidays whatever for some years, and I have been requested to bring this matter to the attention of the House and to point out that there has been an injustice in some cases.
I suggest that the minister consider the advisability of making this section mandatory instead of permissive.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I would suggest in addition to the first part of this section. It reads:
The deputy head may grant to each officer, clerk or other employee a yearly leave ofl absence for a period not exceeding eighteen days in any one fiscal year, exclusive of Sundays and holidays.
I would add the words "after they have been one full year in the service."


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Do I understand the hon. gentleman to propose that as an amendment?


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: Yes.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I shall accept that amendment.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: I think eighteen days is too short a time for a vacation.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: It is really twenty-one days, the Sundays are not counted. '


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: Even so, take for instance the inspector at iEdmonton, Mr. Cairns, a very efficient man, who has been in the service a long time. That seems a very short holiday to give an efficient public servant. There seems to be no discretion to grant a longer period of vacation than twenty-one days. I submit that it should be left to the discretion of the deputy head.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: There is provision for a
longer absence under certain conditions.


Georges Henri Boivin: Shall the amendment moved by Mr. Pedlow carry?


Jacques Bureau: What about the first
amendment substituting the word "shall" for "may"?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: In answer to the suggestion of the member for New Westminster (Mr. McQuarrie that the word "shall" be substituted for "may," I wish to point out that this section applies to both the Outside and the Inside Service, and in many cases it would be impossible to grant members of the Outside Service a holiday. I do not think it should be obligatory in any event. As a matter of fact, the Inside Service regularly get their holidays, I think, with rare exceptions, but it might happen in some years that a great number of employees could not be spared for one reason or another. I think we may well trust the administrative heads of departments to see that all employees get the regular holiday unless there is some good reason why they should not.


William Garland McQuarrie: Why is it not possible to arrange holidays for employees of the Outside Service as well as for those of the Inside Service?


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: In many customs offices where only one man is employed, the office would have to be closed if he took three weeks holidays. Besides, in many cases the employees have no desire to go from where they are.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: As to the question of using the word "may" or "shall," when you are dealing with the prerogative of the *Crown the word "may" is always used, but it is construed to mean "shall." In this case the deputy minister is exercising the *prerogative of the Crown.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 30-Dismissal:
Jacques Bureau: We are closing one end of the pipe of patronage and opening the
other. If a man does not suit the gentlemen who are running the department, he may be dismissed on the recommendation of the Governor in Council.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I do not see how this section can be amended. The power must remain in the Government to dismiss.


Jacques Bureau: Bo far as appointments are concerned I have no complaint, but there should be a safeguard also in the matter of dismissals. Let this section stand and we will think it over on Sunday and come back on Monday with some inspiration in the matter.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Let us pass the section, and we will revert to it later.


Jacques Bureau: How can we Tevert' to it if we pass it?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: By consent of the committee.


Jacques Bureau: I understand that the idea is to pass the Bill to-night, and then we shall hear no more of it. If the Bill is not to pass to-night, all right; I reserve the right, with the consent of the Government, to come back to this section later.


Charles Murphy: By section 2 " deputy," or " deputy head," is stated to mean the Auditor General, in all cases in which such *meaning is not inconsistent with
11 p.,m. his powers and duties under the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act. The Auditor General cannot be dismissed except by a vote of Parliament.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: The Auditor General is really not a deputy head.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: He is given the position of deputy head for the purposes of this Act. All persons who are in charge of a number of employees are called deputy heads.


Charles Murphy: I direct the attention of the Government to this so that the argument may not afterwards be made that the dismissal of the Auditor General was provided for or intended by this section.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 31-suspensions:
Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I move:
That, In clause (a) of subsection 1, the following words he stricken out: "or from the receipt of his salary."
They do not seem to serve any good purpose there. The words rather suggest that a man might be performing his duty

by working in a department and not receiving hie salary. That would hardly be fair.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Jacques Bureau: I beg to move:
That in the first line of subsection 2 after the word "suspension" the words "with the reasons therefor" be inserted, and that after? the word "reported," the words "in writing'' be inserted.
The subsection will then read:
All oases of suspension with the reasons therefor shall be reported in writing by the deputy head to the Commission.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section as amended agreed to.
On section 32-commission to control staff:
Jacques Bureau: This is an entirely new clause. In this Bill we have so far been dealing with the Civil Service Commission and the commissioner or commissioners. This section says: " or other members composing any commission or board appointed by the Governor in Council." What commission or what board will that be?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: This would apply to any commission appointed by the Governor in Council. It is designed to put the commissioner or commissioners in the position of deputy heads under this Act. For instance, one or more of the pension commissioners would make all such recommendations as are made under this Act by deputy ministers.


Jacques Bureau: That does not answer my question. Power is here given to the Civil Service Commission to "oversee and direct the officers, clerks and employees under its, his or their control." By this section this power is also given to " other members composing any commission or board." Why does the minister not say:
" or the commissioner or head of the commission appointed by the Governor in Council?"


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: 
Louis Joseph Papineau: I understand that there will be a commissioner who will have all the power of the deputy head, so that he will replace him in the department.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: 
Jacques Bureau: In a department, the deputy head has to- make that request. In the oominiesion or board, any member of the oommiesion or board may make it?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.
(Mr. BUREAU: I should think that the chairman of the Railway Board, or in hie absence, the vice-chairman, would make the request. I d-o not think it would! be well if any member of the commission might make requests. By this section we are giving members composing any commission or board appointed by the Governor in Council wider powers than the deputy heads now have. The duties of the deputy heads are defined by Act of Parliament, but here you have members of a commission or board each acting as an independent deputy head.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: What does my hon. friend suggest?


Jacques Bureau: I would suggest that the section read:
The -Civil Service Commission, the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission or the acting Chairman, and the Chairman of any board or commission appointed by the Governor in Council, or the acting chairman for the time? being.
Mr. DAVI-S: If in line 28, after the word "conferred," the following words:	"and
be subject to all the duties imposed " be added, so that the clause would read:
And shall with respect to such officers, clerks and employees have all1 the .powers conferred and be subject to all the duties imposed' by this Act on the deputy head of a departr meat.
Would that not meet the case?


Jacques Bureau: That does not affect my suggestion. My idea is to have the head of

a commission or board or some one acting in his stead, perform the duties and take the responsibility.


William Stevens Fielding: In some cases there is only one commissioner.


Jacques Bureau: Then so much the easier.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I think this section is entirely superfluous. We have now the Civil Service Commission with a head properly appointed, and certainly he has all the powers necessary for the working of that commission. Now you are making him and the two other members of that commission deputy ministers. In the case of a commission with half a dozen men they would all be deputy ministers. That seems to be creating confusion unnecessarily. I think the Order in Council appointing any commission should define its powers.


Fred Langdon Davis: Having in mind clause 3 of section 4, I beg to move that after the word "conferred" in section 32, there be inserted the words "and be subject to all the duties imposed." Clause 3 of section 4 reads:
The deputy heads and alt other officers and employees in the Public Service shall give the Commission such access to their respective departments and offices and such facilities, assistance and information as the Commission may require for the performance of its duties.
Amendment stands.
Section stands.
On section 34-Oaths.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I object to schedule "B,'' which reads as follows:
And that I will not, without due authority in that behalf, disclose or make known any matter or thing- which comes to my knowledga by reason of my employment as (as the case may be).
We do not want a civil servant to be a spy, but at the same time jie is an officer paid by the Government of this country to fulfil his duties conscientiously. This oath of secrecy would prevent him from divulging any scandalous proceeding, we will say, that came under his nQtice in the performance of his duties.


Mr.  A. K. MLACLEAN@: This is applicable to the Clerk of the Privy Council.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It extends to other employees. Clause 2 reads:
In the case of the Clerk of -the Privy Council, and all officers, clerks and employees under him, and in the case of any officer, clerk or employee of whom the Governor in Council requires the same, there shall be added to the [DOT] oath at the asterisks, in the form of the oath
in the said Schedule A, the words contained in Schedule B. to this Act.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That is, when
designated by the Governor in Council for special reasons. This has always been the law, and I think it is a very good provision.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I should like a better reason than that from my hon. friend.


Fred Langdon Davis: What force does my hon. friend attach to the words " without due authority in that behalf '>
in schedule B?


Rodolphe Lemieux: A civil servant may discover in the performance of his duties some gross disregard of the public weal; something scandalous may be going on, but he may be debarred by the deputy head or some other person in authority from divulging what he has seen. He might say " I am under oath of secrecy and cannot divulge these things." I quite agree that there must be secrecy in some things. For instance, the Clerk of the Privy Council cannot divulge what takes place in Council. If it should apply only to the Clerk of the Privy Council I would raise no objection, but this subsection is not at all clear. I am only raising the point in order to make it clearer. It applies to "any officer, clerk or employee of whom the Governor in Council requires the same."


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: The Dominion Police force, for instance.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I quite understand that detectives must take an oath of secrecy and must not divulge what takes place. You ought to make it clear so that there will be no ambiguity. The Government might appoint a commission or a hoard and the Governor in Council might direct the deputy head to- give special instructions to the men employed under him not to divulge what should take place.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: They would have to go before the Clerk of the Privy Council and take an affidavit to that effect? A mere instruction would not he of any use.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: My hon. friend (Mr. Lemieux) can understand how and why there might be many officials in the Naval Service or the Militia Department who should be bound to secrecy. This section has been in the statute for a long time; it has not created any difficulty in the past and I -think it is a very wise provision.


Mr. BURRELL:: Take the case of confidential documents being sent down to the King's Printer to be printed; it is necessary

to have all the clerks in that department bound over to secrecy.


Jacques Bureau: I do not object so much to that, but I would like to know the reason why the law is being changed. In the old law it is provided that the officer shall take and subscribe to the oath of allegiance and also the oath contained in schedule C, which is as follows:
I... .solemnly and sincerely swear that I will faithfully and honestly fulfil the duties which
devolve upon me as	and that I will not
ask or receive any sum of money, services, recompense or matter or thing whatsoever,, directly or indirectly in return for what I have done or may do in the discharge of any of the duties of my said office, except my salary or what may he allowed me by law or by an order of the Governor in Council.
I think that is a wise oath. I would like to know the reason why that oath, as well as the oath of allegiance, has been suppressed.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The oath of allegiance is referred to in connection with section 34, but it is not in the schedule. We will insert the oath of allegiance when we reach it.	.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Surely the oath of allegiance is in the schedule.


Charles Murphy: The text is not given, but it is referred to in the section.


John Allister Currie: I cannbt understand why that schedule A is amended. With reference to schedule B, wherein the officer declares that he will not make known any matter or thing which comes to his knowledge by reason of his employment, why should a man be debarred from telling his superior, or the deputy minister, if anything occurs to the detriment of the service? He is precluded from doing that now. He has to close his eyes to anything that takes place.


Rodolphe Lemieux: That is exactly what I am saying.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: The schedule will stand.


Rodolphe Lemieux: You will amend the form?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Yes.


Jacques Bureau: Then how can we pass the clause? The clause is subject to certain conditions and those conditions are contained in the schedule.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: You can put in any conditions you like.


Jacques Bureau: But schedules A and B are part of the clause. If you pass the clause you cannot change them.


Arthur Lewis W. Sifton: My hon. friend the Acting Minister of Finance says he is going to make new sections.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 35-Voting at elections permitted, but partisan work forbidden:
Jacques Bureau: I think the last words in that section " dismissed from the public service," aTe sufficient. All that is necessary is to provide is that the person violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of an offence and shall be dismissed from the public service.


William Foster Cockshutt: Does that mean that he is debarred from taking part in a municipal election?
'Mr. A. K. MACLEAN: I think not.


William Foster Cockshutt: Should you not mention that?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: No.


Jacques Bureau: It says in any Dominion or provincial election.


William Foster Cockshutt: But it does not say that he is not debarred from taking part in any municipal election.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It is better as it is; he is at liberty to do so.


William Foster Cockshutt: He is not debarred.


William Stevens Fielding: The clause, I believe, has been in the law for some time, but I happen to know that in a matter of very great importance the word " provincial " was held to cover everything municipal inasmuch as the provincial authority creates the municipality.


Herbert Macdonald Mowat: Very often the postmaster or the collector of customs occupies the position of reeve, or other office in a municipal council, and it would be a pity to deprive them of the enjoyment of that privilege.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: Would this be considered partisanship:	A postmaster is a
road foreman under the provincial government. He has power to engage men and dismiss them as he likes, and I know of instances where he has exercised the power just as he fancied. Would that be called partisanship?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: This section would not cover that case.


John Allister Currie: Would he not be using
party funds? As the schedule does not contain a definition of what " party funds " are I would like to know from the minister what is meant by the term?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I do not know,
perhaps my hon. friend; would undertake to give a definition.


Jacques Bureau: Nobody in this House
could define what party funds are.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Let us be serious. I
consider that the last line of the first section advertises Canada in rather a wrong way. It smacks of corruption and I would drop the expressions used there.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: "Party funds"
need not necessarily suggest corruption.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Generally it does.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Not always


Rodolphe Lemieux: Generally it does, from what I have seen in the case of others. I do not think it is a line that should be ai-lowed to remain there because you seem to say by this section: "You A, B and 0 in the Civil Service being electors and on the list can cast your vote. I, your chief or vour party leader, may receive and deal with any money or any party funds, but not you." It seems to me that we should not advertise in this way the political corruption that may take place in the country.


John Allister Currie: We will take another round out of this clause which reads:
No deputy head, officer, clerk or employee In the public service shall be debarred from voting at any Dominion or provincial election.
As a matter of fact I understand that in some of the provinces, Dominion civil servants are not permitted to vote at provincial elections. I think that is the case in the province of Ontario. It would seem as if this section confers upon such civil servant the right to vote in provincial elections which we have no power to do. As long as we say that they are not debarred from voting in the Dominion elections, that is as far as we can go. The section goes on to say:
If, under the laws governing the said, election, he has the right to vote; but no such deputy head, officer, clerk or employee shall engage in partisan work.
-and so on. Now we have discussed what constituted partisan work in this House and we have had some very violent arguments about it. It was declared at that time that partisan work was not objectionable unless it was of an offensive character. The mere
fact that a man went around in the company of a few party friends smoking his pipe peacefully, or attended a political meeting, was not regarded as partisanship as long as he did not do anything offensive or act in a partisan way. But we are leaving the word "offensive" out altogether in this Bill, and a man who simply attended a political meeting would be considered guilty of an offence	as the Bill
stands. A member of the Civil ' Ser-who went to a political meeting and merely listened to the speakers, he would he regarded as having engaged in partisan work. I think the minister would be well advised if he inserted the word " offensive " in the section. That would give a man in the public service a chance to justify himself who happened to be in a crowd listening to a soap box orator who was delivering an arraignment against this Government, because that man could say, " I did not take any part in the proceedings. I was only an on-looker." The clause as it now stands is a very drastic one and could be construed in a very drastic manner. Under the old definition everybody -in the service knew what was meant; they could attend a political gathering and they could vote; tout they could not become agents or canvassers or take an offensive part in an election. That is only fair; I would not deprive any man in the service of the right to attend a political meeting. He has the right to vote and before voting should have the right to listen to both sides if he so desires. For that reason I would ask the minister to insert the word " offensive " before the words " partisan work." Hundreds of men. have been charged with violation of the law and taking part in elections offensively and it all hinged on whether they were offensive partisans or not.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Who shall decide whether a civil, servant has been engaged in political work such as to merit dismissal?


Jacques Bureau: The judge.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: If dismissal was a penalty I suppose the minister, the deputy head or the commission should decide that. I think it very important, now that the Civil Service Act is being made applicable to the Outside Service, that all public servants abstain from taking part in elections. They are, of course, entitled to the right of attending meetings and to vote.


Rodolphe Lemieux: You invite them under this clause to take part in politics. They are not debarred from voting at elections.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: They have the right to vote but not to engage in partisan work. I mention this in the interest of the service-and I think it is also in the public interest-that hereafter they abstain from taking part in an election.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Who shall decide whether an officer has been offensively partisan and deserves dismissal? Will it be the minister, the deputy head or the commission?


Jacques Bureau: The Governor in Council under section 30.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I would say the commission.


Matthew Robert 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.


John Allister Currie: I object to the clause as it stands, because it is open to such wide interpretation. The Elections Act provides that a man taking part in an election must either be an agent or a canvasser, drive voters to the poll, and so on. All these things are clearly defined as taking a partisan part in an election. If we are providing a penalty of $500 or imprisonment, we should not leave the interpretation of political partisanship so wide open. If a public servant happens to stand on a street comer when a political meeting is taking place, he might be charged with partisan-iship, taken before a magistrate and fined $500. The wording of the clause is altogether too loose with a penalty so high as that, and in justice to these men it should be clearly stated what partisanship consists of, whether attending public meetings, speaking, canvassing for votes, driving voters to the polls, treating or entertaining them in any way.


Rodolphe Lemieux: There is no more treating.


John Allister Currie: [DOT] There is, in some parts of the country. Some definition should be included in this clause similar to that contained in the Elections Act. There are certain definitions in that Act of what "taking an active part in an election" is, and of what an "agent" is. But this section is open to any construction whatsoever.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: I think the section is correct as it stands. I do not think any person in this House will have any diffi-

culty in deciding whether or not a man is taking a partisan part in an election. And I do not think you can make this provision too strict. I think that men appointed to positions in the public service should absolutely eschew partisan politics; they should not do any more than cast their ballot. That is what this clause gives them permission to do. I think we are splitting hairs. I do not think this section can be misunderstood by any person. And if any civil servant is in doubt as to its meaning, it is his business to be on the right side, and if he keeps on the right side he won't be fined $500.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: Might I call attention to what I consider to be a somewhat drastic provision. We are all actuated by the desire to punish men on the opposite side of politics, and we are always prepared to condone anything our own friends do, and candidates always try to get everybody to do as much as possible on their behalf. This section provides that any person violating its provisions shall be tried summarily. But who is going to lay an information against an individual whereby he is going to be penalised and fined $500?


Jacques Bureau: The other fellow.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: Who is going to take the responsibility of seeing such a man go to jail and his wife and family suffering because he has been induced to do something which has been created a wrong by this section? Is it not sufficient to have that man dismissed)? Another objection to the clause is this, and I think some of the ministers in the House will confirm what I say. You proceed under summary conviction and go before a justice of the peace. Now I know how these gentlemen are appointed, and I am free to say that if there was a Conservative Administration in the province of Alberta they would probably dismiss every justice of the peace and put their own people in.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Why?


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: Because it is done in practice, the same as it is done in all the provinces of Canada.


Rodolphe Lemieux: That is a reflection on the Minister of Customs (Mr. Sifton).


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: The Minister of Customs would not do it himself personally.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It would be done by others more criminal still.

i
Mr. H. A. MAiCKIE: It may be more criminal. However, it is a fact, as the hon. member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Le-mieux) knows, that this practice pertains not only to the province of Alberta but also to the province of Quebec.


Jacques Bureau: Oh, no.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: Then I should like to live there and learn the political ethics of that fine province.


Jacques Bureau: You would learn to put in more of your friends but not to dismiss the old ones.


Mr.  H. A. MACK IE@: I am not going into any vicious practices in Alberta. But from my experience there, the justices of the peace are all good politicians, and I fancy you would have to take appeals in all of these cases and go before the district court. I think the section is a little too drastic. And if the public servant does anything politically which he ought not to do, under this section, it seeme to m.e, that he has a fairly gocfd punishment if he is put out.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: What is thq old law?


Jacques Bureau: The old law had no sanction at all.


Charles Murphy: No penalty?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: There is no penalty in the present Act.


Jacques Bureau: I move that the words "be [DOT]guilty of an offence and liable, upon summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding five. hundred dollars or imprisonment for [DOT]any period not exceeding one month and to" be struck out. Under the Elections Act a penalty is provided for certain offences. The fact that a man is a civil servant does not prevent his coming under that law, but here, because he is a civil servant, we make a further punishment. We all know that in an election feeling runs high. If I saw a civil servant running against me, while I might not personally say anything, my political friends will say: "I will have this fellow fined. " That is not fair.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Is dismissal sufficient? .


Jacques Bureau: Certainly. I think it is
the only power we should exercise.


John Allister Currie: Why put impossible and
sumptuary legislation such as this on the statute books? We all know very well that when an election takes place in some quarters of the country feeling runs high and hot, and men have been taken and locked
up in jail, habeas corpus and everything else forgotten, simply because they have been found as strangers at a hotel. We should put an end to that kind of nonsense, and clearly define in this section what partisanship shall consist of. I would like the minister to have inserted after the words " shall engage in partisan work" the words-"such as canvassing, speaking" and so on, or put in the definition which is in the Elections Act as to what constitutes agency. In that way the public servant will know exactly what he can be convicted of.


Georges Henri Boivin: Shall this clause stand?
Progress reported.
On the motion of Hon. A. K. Maclean the House adjourned at 11.58 p.m.
Monday, May 13, 1918.