On the Orders of the Day:
Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):
Mr. Speaker, may I ask
if the tariff commission, or whatever it is called now, has yet been appointed, or if the government has changed its mind?
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):
The tariff advisory board
is what I presume my hon. friend has reference to. The order in council appointing the board has not yet been passed. I hope that will be done in the course of a day or so.
Mr. MEIGHEN:
Has the government reconsidered the personnel at all or does it intend to appoint those gentlemen named last week?
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:
The government still has the personnel under consideration.
Mr. MEIGHEN:
In reference to the statement of the Prime Minister, I desire to ask another question, and before doing so to quote his words in an answer given on 25th March, as follows:
The Right Hon. Mr. Graham will, as I have said, be chairman and the other two members will be Mr. Joseph Daoust, ex-president of the Chamber of Commerce of Montreal, and Mr. Donald Gordon McKenzie from Brandon.
In the face of this statement, does the Prime Minister still persist that the personnel is under consideration?
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:
If my right
hon. friend will look at the concluding words of the statement I made and from which he has just quoted he will observe that I said that I hoped to be able "on Monday" to lay a copy of the order in council on the table
Civil Service Committee
giving the personnel and the powers of the board. He will likewise observe that I was also about to mention the name of another gentleman- [DOT]
Mr. MEIGHEN:
The secretary?
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:
The secretary, and I was informed that he had not formally given his consent to become a member of the board. I was answering my right hon. friend's question just at the moment without having had any previous notice of it, and I learned after I had announced the personnel that the other two members of the board also had not formally signified their acceptance, but that the matter was still being considered. I admit that I was a little premature in the statement, but subject to that I hoped to be able to make a full announcement by to-day.
Mr. MEIGHEN:
May I ask, has the interview reported to have been given by one of the members had any effect on the reconsideration of the question?
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:
Well, it undoubtedly would be taken into consideration along with other circumstances.
Mr. MEIGHEN:
May I ask: Does the
statement of principle made by the member in question represent the views of the government on the subject?
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:
The views of
the government will be expressed in the order in council which deals with the matter.
Mr. MEIGHEN:
When may we expect
the order in council?
Mr. LAPOINTE:
Well, well!
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:
I hope before
the House adjourns at Easter.
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. H. H. STEVENS (Vancouver Centre):
I desire to bring to the attention of the government what is described as a protest and an appeal of the Amalgamated Civil Servants of Canada. The document is issued by the local council, and based on it I wish to ask a brief question. I presume the government have received copies of this appeal, but I will briefly refer to it instead of reading the whole. It refers to the report of the parliamentary committee of 1923, and then goes on to say:
Though ithese recommendations were concurred in by parliament in the year 1923, we find in 1926 that no action has been taken.
And so on. Then follows this paragraph:
On behalf of our membership we emphatically protest against this most unsatisfactory method of dealing with staff side civil service problems. It is neither just nor in the best interests of the service, the servant or the public. As an elected representative of the people of Canada we appeal to you to do your part in assisting the civil servant to get some measure of fair treatment. Surely three years' delay is not the best that we may expect (from those who are elected by the people of Canada to attend to its public affairs.
Based upon that quotation I would like to ask the government if any steps have been taken to carry out the recommendations of the parliamentary committee of 1923, which included a permanent revision of the salary schedules and the adjustment of other matters which, I may say, were in dispute between the government and the Amalgamated Civil Servants at that time. I presume the government have copies of this circular, but I will send over the copy which I now have.