Mr. ANGUS McGILLIS (Glengarry) moved:

That the petition of Arthur Edwin Hall of Cornwall, Ontario, and others of elsewhere praying to be incorporated under the name of the "Ontario-Quebec Canal and Power Company," which was presented to the house on the 17th instant, together with the report of

the clerk of petitions thereon, be referred to the select standing committee on standing orders, for the purpose of considering suspension of standing order 92 in relation thereto.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

Explain.

Mr. BENNETT:

This is a very short bill amending the company's act of incorporation and amendments thereto, permitting the company to increase the membership of the central council, to create an executive council to remove doubt as to their right legally to mortgage and alienate property that they have acquired.

Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

Explain.

Mr. GAGNON:

The bill which I have the honour to sponsor speaks for itself; it needs no explanatory remarks. I feel, however, it is my duty to the house to say that I have studied the various questions involved, free from party prejudice and without the exaggerated zeal of a would-be reformer, but with a true desire to interpret the wishes of numerous people in Canada as well as of a great number of the members of this house, who contend that the Civil Service Act ought never to have been made to apply to the outside service, and that in the public interest reforms are urgently needed. Long before I had the honour of being a member of this house I had heard eloquent members of parliament denounce the Civil Service Act of 1919 as being inconsistent with the elementary principles of responsible government.

I have read the voluminous report of the Malcolm committee which was appointed by this house in 1923, and have studied the valuable recommendations made by the committee that wras appointed by the Senate in 1924. A good deal of evidence was adduced before the special committee appointed by this house in 1923. The deputy ministers' of

Civil Service-Outside Service

all departments appeared before the committee and made valuable suggestions. Amendments were contemplated, but no serious action has been taken. I venture to say that public sentiment in my province is strongly in favour of removing the outside service from the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Act. The people realize that the civil service commissioners, whatever may be their qualifications, cannot find the best possible candidates for all positions. It is indeed amazing to expect the same three men to find the best possible candidates for positions as varied, for instance, as a caretaker in the port of Vancouver, a customs agent in Gaspe, a director of expositions in London, England, and a postmaster in the district of the Yukon. It is amazing that the government of the day must rely entirely on these three men, who therefore must be practically encyclopedists of science to determine the qualifications required for such diversified positions.

As one may easily imagine, a great many mistakes have been made. The civil service commissioners cannot act alone. They have to ask for the assistance of employees of the departments, and in many instances appointments have been made by an employee of tbe department. On the other hand, the Civil Service Act prevents the ministers and deputy ministers from making appointments. The situation indeed is intolerable and ridiculous. This Civil Service Act subjects parliament to the authority of a kind of bureaucracy, which Lord Hewart of Bury, Lord Chief Justice of England, has happily called the New Despotism.

I might give instances to show that the operations of the civil service commissioners are frequently long drawn out and are therefore prejudicial to the best interests of the country. During the month of January notices wrere sent out throughout Canada that applications would be received to fill the position of director of expositions in London. Applications were sent in in the month of February. The examination was held on the first of May, and even yet, on the 20th of July, the director of expositions has not been appointed. During the month of March in Quebec city applications were called for the position of immigration inspector or guardian. Examinations were held in the months of April and May, and a report has not yet been made by the Civil Service Commission, and the Department of Immigration has therefore been obliged, pending a decision by the commissioners, to hire temporary inspectors, or guardians.

I need not go further to show that amendments to the act are necessary. As I said

before, in my humble judgment the time has come for a change. During the month of January I happened to express my views on this question in a public meeting, and immediately afterwards most of the newspapers of the city of Quebec, both French and English, and even the Montreal Gazette, approved of my humble views and stated that amendments ought to be made to the act, and that the somewhat kaiser-like powers of the commission ought to be at least curtailed. Being a new member I appreciated that I ought to avoid any hasty action, and therefore I consulted with a great number of eminent members on both sides of the house, as well as studied the valuable reports of the Malcolm committee and of the Senate committee. I realize, of course, that the Civil Service Act cannot be amended without the concurrence of both parties. The other day an interesting debate was held in this house, and I am very grateful to the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Mackenzie King) for the views that he then expressed on this very question. May I ask you, Mr, Speaker, to give me leave to quote a few extracts from that speech, which really expresses the views shared by a great number of members on this side of the house. Speaking in this house on the 24th of June, the right hon. leader of the opposition said-

Mr. SPEAKER:

On a motion for leave to introduce a bill it is not customary to make a long speech on its merits, but merely to explain its purport. I think the hon. member has made a sufficient explanation.

Mr. GAGNON:

Being a new member I

gladly bow to your decision, Mr. Speaker. I shall confine myself to explaining in a very few words the purport of my bill.

First of all, I want to exclude the outside service from the operation of the act. Secondly, as to appointments, I am asking the house to approve of the recommendation of the Senate committee in 1924, that in making appointments the Civil Service Commission ought to cooperate with the ministers and with the deputy ministers of the departments, and if both parties could not agree the matter ought to be referred to the governor in council for decision. Thirdly, I desire to amend that act. with regard to dismissals by substituting the words "head of the department" for the words "governor in council."

Mr. LAPOINTE:

May I ask my hon.

friend why he waited until the last days of the session to introduce this bill, when, as he must know, it has no chance of reaching second reading?

post Office Act

Mr. GAGNON:

I gladly answer my hon. friend, the former Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe). I have already stated that no hasty action ought to be taken in this matter.

Mr. LAPOINTE:

Hear, hear.

Mr. GAGNON:

Because I understand fully that the act cannot be amended without the concurrence of both parties. I think that all members of the house, now that the right hon. leader of the opposition has expressed his views, feel that parliament has gone too far in putting the outside service under the Civil Service Act, and I think that the time is ripe for a change.

Motion agreed to and the bill read the first time.