Mr. POULIOT (Translation):
I wish to
thank the hon. minister for his explanation. He first stated that the hon. members for Laibelle and Beauharnois had not grasped the purport, of the measure and further that I had not followed his argument. Then, we are all in the same class. He stated that it was legislation aiming at cutting down expenditure, I rather think that it is a measure of petty savings. That is not a distinction so very subtle that it may not be understood except by superior minds; it will appeal even to the uneducated. And this is why: Last year, at a time when the crisis was being felt and when the then Minister of Labour (Senator Robertson) had stated that there were 540,000 unemployed in the country, and at a time when the revenues of the country were decreasing owing to our imports having materially decreased, at a time also when our trade was threatened, the government advocated economy, we shall practise it ourselves and the first step we shall take to carry out this program will be to have a yearly amount of $2,000 voted to each minister of the crown to replace the cost of an automobile.
You are, sir, no doubt aware that each minister is entitled to a certain amount which is known as contingencies-
Subtopic: SPECIAL TAX ON INCOMES OP JUDGES AND MEMBERS OF MILITARY, NAVAL, AIR AND POLICE FORCES