CIHM Microfiche Series (Monographs) ICIVIH Collection de microfiches (monographles) Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de mtcroreproductions historiques 1 Technical and Bibliographic Notes / Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming are checked below. D D D D n D D D D D D Coloured covers / Couverture de couleur Covers damaged / Couverture endommag6e Covers restored and/or laminated / Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul^e Cover title missing / Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps / Cartes g^ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black) / Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations / Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material / Reli^ avec d'autres documents Only edition available / Seule Edition disponible Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin / La reliure serr^ peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge int^rieure. Blank leaves added during restorations may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming / II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas ^t^ filmies. Additional comments / Commentaires suppl^mentaires: L'Institut a microfilme le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exem- plaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibli- ographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^tho- de normale de filmage sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. Coloured pages / Pages de couleur I I Pages damaged / Pages endommag^es D D D D Pages i«. lored and/or laminated / Pages restaur^es et/ou pellicul^es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed / Pages d^color^es, tachet^es ou piqu^es I I Pages detached / Pages d6tach6es I v/| Showthfough / Transparence I I Quality of print varies / Quality in^gale de I'impression Includes supplementary material / Comr)rend du materiel suppl^mentaire Puges wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image / Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6\6 film^es k nouveau de fagon k obtenir la meilleure image possible. Opposing pages with varying colouration or discolourations are filmed twice to ensure the best possible image / Les pages s'opposant ayant des colorations vahables ou des decolorations sont filmdes deux fois afin d'obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below / Ce document est filrn^ au taux de rMuction indiquA ci-dessous. lOx 14x 18x 22x 26x 30x 1 1 J 12x lex 20x 24x 28x 32x Th« copy filmed h«rt hat b««n r«produc«d thanks to tha ganarotity of: National Library of Canada L'axamplaira film* fut raproduit grica * la gAnArosit* da: Bibliotheque nationale du Canada Tha imagaa appaaring hara ara tha bast quality possibia considaring tha condition and lagibility of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha filming contract spacificationa. Original copias in printod papar covars ara filmad beginning with tha front covor and anding on tha last paga with a printod or illuatratad improa- sion. or tha back covar whan appropriata. All othar original copiaa ara filmad beginning on tha first paga with a printed or illustrated imprea- sion, and ending on the last paga with a printed or illuatratad impression. The laat recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^»> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"). whichever applies. Mapa, plates, charts, etc.. may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one expoai... jf9 filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les images suivantas ont «t« raproduitas avac la plus grand soin. compta tanu da la condition at da la nattet* da I'axemplaira film*, at an conformlt« avac les conditions du contrat da fllmaga. Lea axemplairea originaux dont la couvartura an papier eat imprim«e sont film«s en commandant par la premier plat at en terminant soit par la derniAre paga qui comporta una amprainta d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par la second plat, salon le cas. Tous las ai'tras examplairas origmaux sont fllm«s an commanpar.t par la pramiAre page qui comporte une ernprainta d'impraasion ou d'illustration at en terminant par la derniAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles sjivants apparaitra sur la derniAre image de cheque microfiche, salon le cas: la symbols ^^ signifia "A SUIVRE", la symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartaa. planches, tableaux, etc.. pauvant atre filmAs A das taux de rAduction diff Arants. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seul clichA. il est filmA A partir de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, at de haut en baa. en prenant le nombra d'imagea nAcessaire. Las diagrammes suivants illuatrant la mAthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 MICROCOPY MSOtUTION TIST CHART (ANSI and ISO TEST CHART No 21 ^ APPLIED IM^GE I S^ '55.5 Cost Main Street ^■ST ^ '■^'^«3ter. New Yorli M609 uSA .^aS ■ '■^> *8^ - 0300 - Phone ^S£ ( ' ' ' 288 - 5989 - Fqk The Machinery of Government By The Hon. J. S. McLennan The Senate March 20th, 1919 Ottawa, Canada THE HONOURABLE J. S. MCLENNAN ON THE DE- SIRABILITY OF BETTERMENT IN THE MACHINERY OF GOVERNMENT It is not necessary to take up the time of this Honourable House by any exposition of the gravity of the circumstances in which we are placed. The burdens of taxation which must fall on the present and coming generations, the depletion of the intellectual and the productive power of those generations, the inevitable results of the strain placed on Canada, as well as other nations of the world during the four years which have just passed, the problems to which these conditions give rise, are not only more important, but more complex, than those which have had to be solved by any previous generation. Their difficulties are recognized almost universally; but there is one difficulty which faces the present government and will face any govern- ment which succeeds it, which is less often recognized, viz.: That more people are thinking about the great matters of life in every department than ever before. If it were only the student, this would be important, for what the student thinks to-day, the .nan in the street will think to-morrow. There are others, many of whom have been untrained to think; all of them are people who have been under great streiin, and this strain shows in impatience, in hasty judgments, in magnifying the importance of the particular problem which concerns the in- dividual. Thousands of men every month are coming back to Canada, who h" Uvn face to face with grim realities, and it is more " lat they will come back to Canada looking to five-y phase of our life, as they have seen them 'landers. They have there seen how grievous . followed mistaking painted canvas for real trees, and they will, as I have said, carry this tendency to distinguish between realities and shams when they return to civil life. This makes a new factor in the situation which concerns a government, for if history tells us anything with certainty, it is, that what a free people wants, that people will get. The government of the day, therefore, has to face, not only difficulties of the utmost gravity in the problems with which they have to deal, but this additional difficulty — the temper of the people for whom they are carrying on the govern- ment of the country. than see ' in F; consei^ The object of my addreswinK the House to-day is that I have formed the opinion that, however sound may be the aims, however high the ideals of the Ministry ,n power, that at a time when more is demanded of them than of any of their pie- deccMors, the Ministry is forced to produce its resulu by a pohtical system which had shown signs of weakness before the war, but which also is as inadequate to Ci.rry on the government ma time of reconstruction, as it was to carry on the government without patching up and supplcmenung during these recent years of war. No one can fairly look at what has been accompliriied dunng the war without recognising that what has been accom- plished IS magnificent, and far beyond what the most optimistic before the war would have considered as possible to the people of Canada and to their government; but the point I make is that the highest degree of success is important in the times that await us. Conditions demand the moet effective dealing with every problem of policy or of administration, the raising of every doUar of revenue, which can be done with equity and without check'ng production, the spend- ing of every one of those dollars so that for each one of them the government of the country will get a hundred cents worth of labour or of material by the same standard as is applied by the most successful of our private corpora- tions-and the settling of problems which now seem ominous, so that the countt.- can devote itself as soon as possible with confidence and security to production. It is usual in dealing with the defects of any political system to dip one's brush in lurid colors, but for the sake of brevity. I forego the picturesqueness which this method makes possible If anyone likes it, I would refer them to the political novels of Mr. H. G. Wells, or to something nearer, various speeches which are quite as much works of fiction as the novels of that brilliant author. The improvements that I would suggest for consideration fall into two classes with the two phases of the functions of a Ministry. One of them is Deliberative, the shaping of policy the other— the Executive— the carrying out of that policy if it receives the sanction of Parliament. Let us take the first- DELIBERATION. We have a cabinet of twenty-one. It has been known ever since men took counsel together that this was too large a body for sound de- liberation. A score of men, under any circumstances, waste their time or reach unsound conclusions if they attempt to take 0951^55(1 Il il up matters which require full information and delilieration. This evil has been recognized for it long time. Even in commer- cial affairs, companies which find it necessary to have direc- torates numbering ten or twelve invariably have executive committees of three or five, whit h in reality carry on the business of the company, and ther= is no business enterprise which deaU with so widespread, so intricate a number of administrative questions as docs the Government of the Dominion. Consider the work of a M litt r holding an important portfolio. He attends Council daily probably over two hours or more on the average; he spendspart of his time there in passing routme ordirn-in-council. He attends meetings of committees- he carries on the work of his Department— there is scarcely any caller to whom he can deny him.self. He has to look after the interests of his district and his constituency and the applica- tions of ever>one therein who wants anything from the govern- ment. He has his Parliamentary duties. The day for the Minister, as for ordinary people, is only twenty-four hours. Where in it then is time for deliberation ? Sir John A. Macdonald on the lOih of June, 1887, in dealing with the reconstruction of his government, spoke as follows:— "This will add a Minuter to the present list. On the other hand we consider that the two Departments of Customs and Inland Rcwnue are administrative only. They are not suggMtlTe hut adminUtratlTe and after the policy of the Government, with respect either to Interna! Revenue or Customs, is settled, the Ministers at the head of these Depart- inents will «e that the aw is carried out. It is propo«rd. therefore, that when the re.nard Cartwright), who suggested that it would be well to intraluce this system as soon as might be, and the system of having political secretaries and important officers of the various Departments who would be Ministers and yet not be. of necessity, members of the Cabinet. It la of con- •Idefable importance that the number of Cabine Ministers should not be increMed, that is to «iy, that every member holding a political office in Parliament should not ex necessitate, be a member of the Cabinet. 1 at would overload a Cabinet, and in that regard would not p.-omote promptness of action A similar proposition wa.c, I think, made qur d the Pepartment of Justice years ago, when my honourable friend fror.East York was at the head of 3 the (■ovrrnmrnt. and it wm propiMrct the Drparttnrnt o( Juttice wouUI \ out with the (kivernment, and they will b« political peraoniges a* much ai if they were memtiera of the Cabinet." Si« KiruARD CAiTWWciHT.— The honourable gentleman pHrticularly intinuited that it wa» his wiih to promote riaing talent and give the young men a ihanre. In that I entirely concur, (or my part. I have alwaya »x-lieved that i( wan a ilefect in our nyiitem, teeing that younger memheri o; either |>olilical party could har«lly expert to reach on one Imund, the po«,iic(>silion. I think that thirteen or fourtMn ?1intoi«ra arc too graat ■ number for thto country Sir John A. Macdonald, later in the debate said: — "We desire to have a Minister of Trade and Commerce whose atten- tion will not lie given to mere pound-shillinxH-and-pence matters, which belong to the duties of the Minister of Finance, but whOM mind will be devoted to contlderint the varloua meaiu of developing and citendlng, and protecting our commerce." As I read the debates, his idea was concurred in by Sir Richard Cartwright. The latter certainly was emphatic on the fact that large cabinets were a mistake. Honourable Members will see that it was the opinion of the Leader of the government and the Leader of the opposition of thirty years ago, that a small Cabinet was desirable. The tendency of events has been to have Cabinets constantly enlarge in numbers, and that tendency will increase as the duties of government l)ecome more multifarious. Nothing in the course of oMr constitutional development has secured the division of the work into its two pha.ses, the shaping of policy, or, to use Sir John Macdonald's phrase, suggestive work and administrative duties, although not only in thiscouniyf -tin Great Britain, there has existed "the proved impracticabi' ' devoting the necessary time to thinking out organization and preparation for action in the mere interstices of the time required for the transaction of business." We caii now pass to the administ. \tive side of the functions of the government, viz.: the efficient carrying out of policy, 4 function* which arc administrative and executive. It han long been recoKnixcd that there is room for improvement. There wu a Civil Service Commiwion in 1892; there «.»« another commiMiion which pre^tented itn report in 1908; i . 191J there wan again preiientetl to parliament a report by a diittinKuinhed BritiHh Administrator on the Canadian «ystem of car-ying on Kovernment, which NuggeAted vital and far-reaching changes. The Miniatcrfi of the Crown during this long |x-riod mu.st have l)een familiar with the defects of the system. At II events, these reports brought to their attention conditions which nee' for War, inaug- urated a military system in 1908, which only required expansion to turn the small standing army of Britain into the milh'ons of men who did their full share in the defeat of the Central Powers. Mr. Montagu had occupied most important positions in the Government. Mr. Thomas was a member of the government with the weight conferred on him by his chairmanship of the National Society of Railwaymen. There were two officials, men of great experience in departmental work— one of them, Sir George Murray, who made the report on Canadian Adminis- tration to which I have referred. Another member was Mrs. Sidney Webb, a lady whose attainments as an investigator have caused her to be on five or six of the most important Commissions established by the Imperial Government in the last ten years. I shall not attempt to summarize the findings of this report. This wou'd be a difficult task as it is written in a very concise form anfi great restraint of language, but I shall merely call the attention of the House to certain of their remarks which deal with the question in hand. The report says: — "The main functions of the Cabinet may, we thinic, be described as; — (a) The final determination of the policy to be submitted to Parlia- ment. (b) The supreme control of the national executive in accordance with the policy prescribed by Parliament, and (c) The continuous co-ordination and delimitation of the activities of the several Departments of State. For the due performance of these functions the following conditions seem to be essential, or, at least, desirable: — (i) The Cabinet should be small in number— preferably ten or, at most, twelve; (ii) It should meet frequently; (tii) It should be supplied in the most convenient form with all the information and material necessary to enable it to arrive at expeditious decisions; (iv) It should make a point of consulting personally all the Ministers whose work is likely to be affected by its decisions and (v) It should have a systematic method of securing that its decisions are eiTectually carried out by the several Departments concerned." It quotes the report of the 1917 War Cabinci which says:— "The most important constitutional development in the United Kingdom during the last year has been the introduction of the War Cabinet system. This change was the direct outcome of the War itself. As the magnitude of the war increased, it became evident that the Cabinet system of peace days was inadequate to cope with the novel conditions." On which the Committee makes the following comment: — "But we think that a rearrangement of the supreme direction of the executive organiiation as it formerly existed has been rendered necessary, not merely by the war iteelf, but by the prospect after the war." 7 And in answer to the question as to whether it is possible to return to the old order of things (which I take to mean those before the war) the Committee states we feel confident that the latter question must be answered hi the negative. "12. Turning next to the formulation of policy, we have come to the conclusion, after surveying what came before us, that in the sphere of civil government the duty of investigation and thought, as preliminary to action, might with great advantage be more definitely recognized. It appears to us that adequate provision has not been made in the past for the organized acquisition of facts and information, and for the system- • atic application cf thought, as preliminary to the settlement of policy and its subsequent administration. "13. This is no new nction .... The reason of the separation of work has been the proved impracticability of devoting the necessary time to thinking out organization and preparation for action in the mere interstices of the time required for the transaction of business. "14 "But we urge strongly (a) that in all Departments better provision should be made for enquiry, research, and reflection before policy is defined and put into operation; (b^ that for some purposes the necessary research and enquiry should be carried out or supervised by a Department of Government specially charged with these duties, but working in the closest collaboration with the administrative Depart- ments concerned with its activities: (c) that special attention should be paid to the methods of recruiting the personnel to be employed upon such work; and (d) that in all Departments the higher officials in charge of administration should have more time to devote to this portion of their duties." The report states that the Commission did not feel called on to consider whether the new type of Cabinet should consist of Ministers in charge of the principal Departments, or of Ministers without portfolios able to concentrate their whole attention upon the problems submitted for their consideration. This I regret, for it will be seen that I have not foregone entering on territory where these angels of the Imperial Parlia- ment have feared to tread. I hope, therefore, that the following suggestions I lay before the House as to the changes proposed in the form of government without any sacrifice of the essential principles of constitutional government, may be considered by the House, not as rashness, but as springing from a wish to give some constructive value to my remarks. On the Deliberative side I propose (and it will be noted that I propose it in harmony with the earlier quoted statement of the British Committee) that we should have a small Cabinet, say six, charged with the duties indicated in the British report, viz.: Policy, Control of Executive, and Co-ordination 8 and Delimitation between the different departments of State. Preferably, the members of the Cabinet should not hold Port- folios, in order that they may have full time for these most important duties. All the Ministers should have a right of access to the Cabinet, and naturally, all Ministers njight be summoned individually or collectively to confer with the Cabinet. Mr. Lloyd George took the ground that it was a great advantage in the form of government which he inaugurated in 1917, that he was able to secure the services of men of adminis- trative ability but without parliamentary exjDerience. It is probable that in Canada there are a larger proportion of men who have acquired sagacity, whose counsel and advice would be most useful to a Prime Minister, but who are debarred from giving it because it is too difficult for them to acquire parliamentary experience. It might be considered advisable that one or two of such men should find a place in the Cabinet. Individuals now are undoubtedly consulted by Prime Ministers and the Government, but in private life we know the difference between the value of advice given on a special case, and that given by a person familiar with the whole course of events. Such individuals could have their status "legitimised" by making them members of the Privy Council. This, however, is no essential part of the scheme I am proposing. The essential part is, and it is not new, that a Cabinet responsible for Policy, should be a Unit and that for successful work it should be few in number. The Cabinet thus devoting all their time to deliberation and supervision, the executive work of the government falls on the MINISTRY. The number of the Ministry shall be sufficiently large to give a proper Head to each Department of the work of the State. They go in and out of power with the Cabinet but are individ- ually responsible to Parliament for the way in which they carry out the directions of the Cabinet. A concrete case will perhaps make my meaning more clear than any general exposition. It has been represented, for example, to the Government, that it is desirable to improve the Harbor of Kingston. The facts laid before them (and shortly I shall suggest a method by which the facts bearing on all such questions can be better obtained than they are at present) justifies, in their opinion, this expenditure on the Harbor of Kingston. The Cabinet decides to go on with this work, so an item is placed in the estimates appropriating money for it. If it should happen that the item was challenged 9 in the House, and an adverse vote was cast, the Government would go out, and with it, the Minister. In these points. Cabinet respo.isibility does not differ from present practice, but in the carrying out of the work, its design, the way the contracts are given, the prices, the manner of execution, there is no Cabinet responsibility. The responsibility is on the Minister of Public Works in carrying out the work allotted to him. He stands before the House as an Executive Officer charged with carrying out certain work, not as one member of a Cabinet who stand and fall together, and who can call, when any of their acts are challenged, on the party loyalty of all their supporters in the House. I venture to think, and I trust some of those who listen to me, will agree that no better system could be devised to heighten Ministerial responsibility and to make easier the control of parliament. These are both things recommended by the British Com- mittee as highly desirable in quite different circumstances from those of Canada, where expenditures on Public Works, using the term in a wider sense, are about the only expenditures which can be curtailed, and so make it peculiarly desirable that the shields of a diluted respfrsiibility and of Party loyalty should not protect extravagance and inefficiency. Another point on which the English report dwells is the importance of full examination and research before action is taken. Outside the sphere of their own immediate personal knowledge. Ministers have to act in many cases on information which they know is prejudiced and interested. The bettering of the machinery of government which we are considering, would involve laying before the government, and, therefore, parliament, information as full, as accurate and as independent as is possible. I propose the setting up of two agencies. One of them is in existence elsewhere; the other, I think, will be new. The first of them is the Tariff Commission. It would deal with all facts connected with production, transportation and living conditions, both in Canada and other countries. This matter has been so much discussed that I shall only touch on it in the briefest way. Its advantages have recently been set forth in the press. Sudi a commission would give on this questkni, which, as we all know, excites the liveliest passions, and threatens to make sectional divisions in a country which requires to be united, facts, insofar as the facts can be ascer- taiaed as they actuaUy are. It would leave to the govemiaeat 10 the whole question of policy but the government would lay before parliament the facts on which their fiscal policy was based. This is not quite the same as the United States Tatiflf Commission. The United States Tariff Commission was created by an Act of Congress during 1916 and consists of six members, of whom not more than three should be members of the same political party. Section 702, ch. 463, defines their duties, further amplified by Section 704, and these read as follows: — "Sec. 702. That it shall be the duty of said commission to investigate the administration and fiscal and industrial effects of the customs laws of this country now in force or which may be hereafter enacted, the relations between the rates of duty on raw materials and finished or partly finished products, the effects of ad valorem and specific di ties and of compound specific and ad valorem duties, all questions relative to the arrangement of schedules and classification of articles in the several schedules of the custom law, and, in general, to investigate the operation of customs laws, including their relation to the Federal Revenues, their effect upon the industries and labor of the country, and to submit reports of its investigations as hereafter provided." "Sec. 704. The Commission shall have power to investigate the tariff relations between the United States and foreign countries, com- mercial treaties, preferential provisions, economic alliances, the effect of export bounties and preferential transportation rates, the volume of importations compared with domestic production and consumption, and conditions, causes and effects rel? ' ig to competition of foreign industries with those of the United States, including dumping and cost of pro- duction." The information it obtains is to be transmitted to the President, and to the Committee of Ways and Means of the House, and the Committee on Finance of the Senate, and for the President and either of these committees they shall make such investigations as they may be directed. The machinery of other departments of the government is placed at their disfxtsal. They havp large powers as to the summoning of witnesses and there is in the Act a quite proper provision that it shall be unlawful for any of the commission or of its staff to divulge know- ledge of the trade secrets or processes obtained by them in the course of their investigations. Already the scope of their enquiry is wide. There is in the Ubrary of Parliament a full report of theirs on free zones in ports of the United States, which deals exhaustively with that important subject. I would call the attention of the Members of this House to that document as illustrating the thoroughness cf their treatment of a subject which might be considered only 11 indirectly concerned with the general questions with which this commission has to deal. This report on free zones was taken up through a reference to the commission of two bills dealing with the establishment of free zones in the ports of the United States. It gives the history of such ports, their progress in Europe, suggestions as to the betterment of the submitted bills and evidence from various individuals and bodies as to the desirability of their establishment, so this report makes possible . .. intelligent dis- cussion of such a subject, which would otherwise have entailed much labour on the part of those called upon to vote. Similar reoorts of the tariff commission proposed for Canada, would give to Canadian Ministers and Canadian Legislators equally valuable service. The other Commission to which I refer, may be described as the Public Works Commission, to which would be referred for report as to the facts, all proposals to the government which required expenditure They would examine into these proposals and would give findings as to the national importance of each, the importance to the community immediately to be benefitted, and both these findings in relation to the cost. They should be empowered to suggest -.Itemative schemes, and their findings should be in the hands of Parliament before proposals of expend- iture would be brought down. ilecurring again to the example which I gave, the Harbor of Kingston — if proposals were made by any government, for example, to make a harbor which would take vessels of 24 feet draft at Kingston, while the river below had a draft of 12 feet, and the Welland Canal a draft of 18 feet, the report of the com- mission would kill the project. In the same way the fi.idings of the commission would be a safeguard to a Minister or to a government. They are bound within limits to please constitu- encies. They do not desire to alienate the sympathies of any of their supporters and yet pi posals are made to them which arc preposterous and would be killed by the plain statement of tiio actual facts in the case. It would also give the Minister independ- ent information, and I am sure that the present Minister of Public Works or any of his predecessors has fo\md that the most difficult thing was to get accurate information on the various projects which are presented to him. Sir John A. Macdonald once said that the most valuable legacy from Mr. McKenzie's government was the Auditor-General. It put him in a position to point out that the Auditor-General could not pass any expenditure not authorized specifically and that much 12 T T i as he would like to oblige his friendB. he was sure on his side that they would not wish to injure the government by asking for ex- penditure which the Auditor-General did not consider author- ized by action of Parliament. The advantages to Sir John, which every other Prime Minister since has found, was that this enable*! him to reject improper proposals without creating ill will. The Public Works Commission would serve the same purpose to protect Ministers, for many requests made to a government would appear absurd and unjustified when examined from the standpoint above indicated, but their absurdity does not prevent the applicants from urging them with ferocity and submitting with rancour to their rejection— a rejection which is seriously imperilled on the approach of every election. I would regard it as essential that at least one member of the Public Works Commission should lie a man of vision, of wide information and with a belief in the future of Canada, for such a Commission would fail if it did not build for a future, which we are bound to believe, should be one of regularly expand- ing prosperity. These commissions should be small, permanent, with members of the highest class. We have now three Commissions which S3 discharge their duties that the presumption is in any particular case, that their decisions are sound. Their duties are both to collect facts, and to give decisions on those facts. I refer to the Railway Commission, the Purchasing Commission and the International Joint Commission. The two new Com- missions which are now proposed, would have a less difficult task, viz: of accurately ascertaining facts and clearly expressing them. I trust I have established that we would reach by such a system as this proposed, increased efficiency on both sides of government. I am aware that it attacks the solidarity of the government. It preserves solidarity in the Cabir°t, but it dissolves the solidarity of the executive ministers' responsibility. The solidarity of joint ministerial responsibility covers more sins than t'.o mantle of charity. This is in outline the scheme I submit for the consideration of the House, as a matter for dis- cussion. I may point out certain effects it should have beyond those already indicated, viz: the opportunity for constructive legis- lation given to the Cabinet, the placing of ministerial responsi- bility within its departments at its highest degree, and increasing parliamentary responsibility and parliamentary control. It would inconvenience a Cabinet, for the more the actions of any 13 Cabinet are taken on trust, the better pleased its members are. But the days of "Short's your friend and not Codlin" are passing, and Cabinets of the future must for their own stability and the good of the people, submit to this inconvenience. On the other hand, the system wouk. be an advantlls. I think it will so shape itself that the people will den .«nd competence from a government and in return will give confidence to a government if they are satisfied that it is doing the best it can under circumstances of which they are fully and fairly apprised. This has been the his- tory of the last four years— indeed as far as I know, it has been the history of the last forty years. I have taken upon myself to suggest various means by which I think this condition of mutual confidence and of greater effectiveness can be brought about. It is only mechanical. If they are good at all (to quote the British report): "Their practical efficiency will depend upon the zeal and discretion with which they are applied from day to day by Parliament, by Ministers, and by the offic;rs of Depart- ments, the living forces whose spirit U essential to any form of government that Is more than a machine. The old leaven will continue to work, human nature will not change materially, but the peoples of the Allies have shown that they can respond to a (jreat call. In the conditions which the people of Canada will ave to meet, there will be a great call, for failure to deal with critical problems which are pressing for solution, means dNvSter. and indifferent success or deferred sue- cess will mean much material loss, and in addition, an impair- ment of the reputation which this country has won. The people of Canada are accustomed to united action, to organization in their social, their political, their business life. I feel ceruin, therefore, that whether the suggestions I have made, meet or do not meet with approval, that the time will come when the people of Canada will not tolerate in its government a degree of efficiency falling far below that to which V are accustomed in any other form of corporate action. 16 miKiVim s'W t ^