Mr. Angus Maclnnis (Vancouver East):
Mr. Speaker, following the point raised by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) I wish to protest at having a resolution in these terms placed before us. There is nothing in this resolution to indicate what the legislation to follow is to be. If we are not told that in the resolution, we may as well have no resolution at all. How are hon. members going to be able to prepare themselves to debate the substance of legislation if there is nothing in a resolution to indicate what is going to be done? To use the vulgar term, in the sense that it is common, a resolution like this is merely making monkeys out of hon. members. The Civil Service Act is to be amended in a very important way and there is no indication whatsoever in the resolution as to what is to be done. Surely the house is entitled to more respect. What was referred to the governor general? What was he told? The resolution reads:
That it is expedient to present a measure to amend the Civil Service Act in respect of the tenure of office and salaries of the commissioners.
I know what I would say if I were the governor general. I do not think I would
take it under consideration when I was offered a resolution like that. I would tell the fellow to bring me back a resolution that meant something, that I could understand. There is nothing in this resolution that indicates anything. The government may be going to abolish the Civil Service Act altogether. They may be going to pay the civil service commissioners $100,000 a year instead of $10,000 or $12,000, or they may be going to reduce them to $1,000. It is just the sheerest nonsense, and I am surprised that the Secretary of State (Mr. Bradley) should offer so little explanation when asked to explain the resolution.
Subtopic: AMENDMENT RESPECTING TENURE OF OFFICE AND SALARIES OF COMMISSIONERS