James CLANCY

CLANCY, James

Personal Data

Party
Conservative (1867-1942)
Constituency
Bothwell (Ontario)
Birth Date
July 21, 1844
Deceased Date
January 10, 1921
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Clancy_(politician)
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=810f1560-ae39-4550-9aa9-e6033adb2404&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
farmer, lumberman

Parliamentary Career

June 23, 1896 - October 9, 1900
CON
  Bothwell (Ontario)
November 7, 1900 - September 29, 1904
CON
  Bothwell (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 667 of 668)


February 19, 1901

Mr. CLANCY.

I would like to ask if the vote of last year for this service, $60,000, was all expended ?

Topic:   SUPPLY-THE RAILWAY QUESTION.
Full View Permalink

February 19, 1901

Mr. CLANCY.

Does any of this increase arise through the issue of new denominations, to which we have seen some references in the public press ?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE No ; there has been no change in that respect; we are not issuing new denominations.

Topic:   SUPPLY-THE RAILWAY QUESTION.
Full View Permalink

February 19, 1901

Mr. CLANCY.

I would like to ask the Minister of Finance where he expects this thing to end, of refusing those in the civil service their promotion, or rather the statutory increase to which they seem to be entitled. I am not going to argue the question upon the ground that has been discussed here on many occasions, whether they were legally entitled to it or not. The government have contended from time to time that they were not, while others have taken the opposite ground. But, I want to point out that we are constantly met with difficulties from that system being carried out. There is gross favouritism appearing upon the surface; I will not say that it is so in reality, but, I say the hon. gentlemen expose themselves to fair criticism when they do that kind of thing. Instead of laying down one rule which should be carried out in every instance, we find this exceptional treatment from year to year growing worse. We have estimates filled with that saving clause ' notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act to the contrary.' I will venture to say in looking over the estimates that it will be found to occur oftener than last year, for the simple reason that hon. gentlemen have taken it into their own hands to set aside the law. The right hon. gentleman seems to be amused at it. It is not a matter of amusement. If he were in the position of these gentlemen who have to live at the beck and nod of their superiors, with their merits no longer an element entitling them to receive what the law allows, he would not be amused. I say it is not fair, it is dealing unfairly with the civil service and putting them in an unfair position. The end can only come when we have adopted a system that the civil service of this country should be entirely independent of any government. We are now entering upon a

Topic:   SUPPLY-THE RAILWAY QUESTION.
Full View Permalink

February 19, 1901

Mr. CLANCY.

What is the reason of this increase of $800 ?

Topic:   SUPPLY-THE RAILWAY QUESTION.
Full View Permalink

February 19, 1901

Mr. CLANCY.

Can the hon. minister explain the very rapid increase in the vote for printing Dominion notes ? The estimate for 1899-1900 was $40,000, and it is now increased to $60,000. There may be a good reason for it, but the increase is a large one.

Topic:   SUPPLY-THE RAILWAY QUESTION.
Full View Permalink