Erhart REGIER

REGIER, Erhart, B.A.

Personal Data

Party
New Democratic Party
Constituency
Burnaby--Coquitlam (British Columbia)
Birth Date
January 15, 1916
Deceased Date
October 22, 1976
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erhart_Regier
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=0f707426-6e3c-403c-94d9-40582b5df2f4&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
teacher

Parliamentary Career

August 10, 1953 - April 12, 1957
CCF
  Burnaby--Coquitlam (British Columbia)
June 10, 1957 - February 1, 1958
CCF
  Burnaby--Coquitlam (British Columbia)
March 31, 1958 - April 19, 1962
CCF
  Burnaby--Coquitlam (British Columbia)
August 3, 1961 - April 19, 1962
NDP
  Burnaby--Coquitlam (British Columbia)
June 18, 1962 - February 6, 1963
NDP
  Burnaby--Coquitlam (British Columbia)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 417)


April 18, 1962

Mr. Regier:

I want to thank the other members of the New Democratic party who have again asked me to be their spokesman on this particular occasion. There is some honour, loyalty and appreciation of each other in our group, and I wish to say that I am proud of each of the seven other members in our group.

It used to be said that there was honour even among thieves, but I am dismayed to note that the Liberal party cannot even be classed in that category. I have noted with dismay the absence of the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River in recent days. He has been re-elected to this house on many occasions as a Liberal-Labour member and has

always been regarded as the financial spokesman or financial critic of his party. His responsibility has been to watch daily the financial affairs of our country, and especially the financial activities of our government. Yet in the interests of political expediency he was most unceremoniously and mercilessly dumped by his political party. By contrast, I am very happy that neither my national leader nor my house leader are so anxious for publicity that they would thus violate the ordinary rules of honour and decency, and I am also very proud at this moment that I do not belong to the Liberal party.

In this resolution we are being asked to vote money to the government of the day, but history has a way of taking many turns. The very origins of parliament were to provide a voice for the taxpayers in determining how the money necessary for the maintenance of law and order should be collected, but look how this has worked out. Under our rules we have now established an allocation of six days in which to debate the budget. We agree we ought to spend no more than six days debating how the money is to be collected; yet all of us know, and many of us regret, that we spend six, seven and eight months of the year discussing mere details of governmental expenditures. Readjustment of that situation is badly needed. We all know that a government requires at least minimum funds in order to sustain our society; yet under the existing situation we allocate only six days to a debate on how the money is to be collected and, as I have just said, we spend six to eight months of the year niggling about details of particular expenditures.

Looking at the financial policy of the government, I am afraid I must come to the conclusion that the government has no policy. Its financial policy is neither fish nor fowl. It is neither hot nor cold; it is lukewarm. It is something to be spewn out of the mouth as distasteful, and I expect the electorate of Canada will agree with me in that regard on June 18.

I was very disappointed with the attitude taken by the official Leader of the Opposition during his television appearance on budget night. The leader of the Liberal party in his television appearance on budget night really found nothing to complain about in the budget as it had been presented, except that it had arrived many years too late. I believe that the Canadian people will by now have noted that the leader of the official opposition has yet to present a real alternative to the financial policies of this government. Perhaps I am saying too much when I call them financial policies, because in my opinion the

Ways and Means

actions of the government in the field of finance are very contradictory and I believe they can best be described in the quotation "John versus Don".

Last fall we read some rather interesting newspaper speculation to the effect that John was about ready to fire Don and move him into some other field of responsibility. However, I understand that St. James street and Bay street made adequate representations and Don managed to retain his present office. I was pleased-

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Full View Permalink

April 18, 1962

Mr. Regier:

Mr. Chairman, in essence this group agrees with the statement that has been made by the hon. member for Laurier. However, in the past, especially in 1958, extensive use was made of governor general's warrants. I regret very much that after that time the Financial Administration Act was amended to grant even more discretion and authority to the government of Canada with regard to the possible use of governor general's warrants in order to carry on the business of government. I should like to ask the minister this question. If approval is given now to this interim supply measure, does he see any possible need to exercise the prerogative of the government of using governor general's warrants before parliament is again called?

Topic:   INTERIM SUPPLY
Full View Permalink

April 18, 1962

Mr. Regier:

If I may rise on the question of privilege I, appeal to you, Mr. Chairman, to explain how we can call a time five o'clock and then, one hour later, refuse to call it six o'clock.

Topic:   BRUCE REID CAMPBELL
Full View Permalink

April 18, 1962

Mr. Regier:

I should like to appeal to you, Mr. Chairman, to deal with my question of privilege and not permit a minister to brush it away arbitrarily.

Topic:   BRUCE REID CAMPBELL
Full View Permalink

April 18, 1962

Mr. Regier:

And you.

Topic:   BRUCE REID CAMPBELL
Full View Permalink