4
213
ven.
move as 11.17
present practice of Council, which has been in existence for many years, and which was unanimously approved by the Council in 1884" The COLONIAL TREASURER-I beg to second the amendment of the Acting Attorney-General, and I would desire to say in doing so that I voted for the motion of my hon. friend on my left (Hon. A. P. MacEwen) when he brought it forward in Finance Committee simply wishing that this subject should be ventilated, that no desire should be shown in a somewhat thin meeting to stifle the question, and with a view of bringing the matter to a head. As Treasurer of the colony I have always been opposed to any change being made in the present practice with regard to the Finance Committee. It seems to me our unofficial friends might well accept the compromise which is put before them, or rather the compromise of which they are reminded-for it is an existing arrangement and not anything new-in the amendment of my hon. friend opposite. It is possible for any member who wishes the discussion should not take place in Finance Committee but in Council, when the Colonial Secretary proposes that the matter be referred to the Finance Committee, to amend that the matter be discussed in open Council, and I do not suppose that in any case such an amendment would be opposed. It is perhaps unfortunate that two matters of very exceptional importance were referred to the Finance Committee without its occurring to any hon. member to take this course. And I must remind my unofficial friends that Government officers after all—exposed to suspicion though they be, as Mr. MacEwen has said-are pretty much like other people: when they find an easy way of doing things they will go on in that way; if others wish trouble to be taken they must at least take the trouble themselves of suggesting the course which they wish to be adopted. If your neighbour has found some easy way of conducting his business which is an annoyance to you, and you won't take the trouble to tell him you can hardly expect him to desist. Well, the Finance Committee has been found so convenient that it would not have occurred to the Government to take any steps to interfere with the ordinary procedure in respect of these votes, but it is perhaps a pity it did not occur to the unofficial members to take another course, and that these matters were discussed in a way which, though eminently satisfactory to those admitted to the discussion, may have been unsatisfactory to those who were not present and did not know what was going on. At the same time I may point out that a great deal of it was confidential and could have been discussed in no other way.
I am referring to a meeting we had here when Colonel Walker explained at great length the nature of the fortifications. That meeting was an intellectual treat to every member who was present, I myself have seldom enjoyed anything more than listening to that explanation by a gentleman who understood his subject so thoroughly and explained it with such lucidity as Colonel Walker did. But had reporters been present Colonel Walker's mouth would have been shut and we should not have heard anything of that information which we listened to for two or three hours. Then another thing. Great stress has been laid on the practice of the House of Commons. Now, in the somewhat meagre discussions which take place in the House of Commons on the estimates people are referred to by classes, as the Customs Officers, or Excisemen, or perhaps Postmasters, and if those are spoken of as villains the lash falls very lightly on the individual; he has always the pleasure of thinking he is an exception to the general rule; but here the class consists perhaps of one man, and if I were to take up the time of the Council I could refer to many cases where remarks have been made with regard to individuals which would have been most cruel to those individuals had they been published next morning in the newspapers. It may be very well to say a thousand men are not worth the salary they are drawing, but it is a different thing to say that one man, whose sole offence is that he is a harmless nincompoop, is not worth his salary. Then my hon. friend has made a great deal of the vote about the Loan, but that simply amounted to this, we did think, and do think, that a local loan would be preferable, but the points in discussion had been reduced to so small a margin that they were no longer worth fighting for. And with regard to that discussion...
...I must say there was a good deal that could not conveniently have been made public. I would only refer to one other matter, and that is the discussion on the Stamp Ordinance. Considerable classes of this community are in the habit of evading the Stamp Ordinance, I do not refer to people of any particular nationality, but there is disposition to evade the Stamp Ordinance which runs more or less through the less scrupulous of all classes. Now, when we discussed the Stamp Ordinance we had to make some very plain and outspoken remarks about these people who are in the habit of defrauding the Government whenever they have the opportunity of doing so, and I do not hesitate to say a great deal of what was said on that occasion would necessarily have been left unsaid had there been shorthand writers here taking down the remarks. The hon. member in moving the original resolution has introduced an entirely new feature into the case. I never heard that publicity was objected to because of any one talking to the press. Nor do I believe for one moment, sir, in the alleged discontent on this matter. That, I think, is entirely a figment of the fancy. There will always be in every colony a certain amount of discontent. It is the nature of an Englishman to grumble about something, and whatever is done discontent will continue. At the same time I have only one argument against the motion of my hon. friend, and that is that it is not for the good of the public service. I hope hon. members of the Council will not think I use discourteous language when I say our convenience and comfort are nothing, the inconvenience to the Executive is nothing, the loss of the public time even is only a minor consideration. We are, as my hon. friend opposite (Mr. Ryrie) said, the servants of the public, and only the consideration that this is not for the public advantage and for the good of the public service, by which I mean in its best sense the welfare of the community, induces me to oppose this resolution. All other considerations of expediency or convenience ought to give place to that. As to the statement of my hon. friend opposite (Hon. P. Ryrie), who says he was coerced on the vote for the fortifications, I will only say any one who has had any experience of trying to coerce my hon. friend into any course of action whatever will see the absurdity of that remark.
Hon. P. RYRIE-(laughing)-Coerce is a little strong; you might use the word cajole, perhaps. The CHIEF JUSTICE-I don't remember your making any objections.
Hon. P. RYRIE-Oh, I did. I wanted certain conditions before we voted the money.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—I might, perhaps, make a few remarks on this subject. This has been put forward as if the Council were in the habit of voting large sums of money without the general public knowing the reasons why they were voted. But that is not the fact. The sums of money voted, apart from the estimates, excepting in the past year, have been comparatively small. The estimates are framed on the expenditure and receipts of previous years, and the increase in the estimates, if there is any, is explained in papers which are put before the Council and the same is the case if there is any diminution. If there is an increase the reasons for it are pointed out if there is a decrease the reasons for that are also stated; and these papers are furnished to the members, and are published in the newspapers; so that in regard to the bulk of the money voted for public purposes during the year the public have every information. But when the Council is not in Session there are or may be certain matters of pressing importance in reference to which the Government must take some steps. For instance, a heavy flood comes, and perhaps $20,000 or $30,000 are wanted at once. Is it preferable that the Officer Administering the Government should allow that expenditure on his own responsibility, or is it not better he should have a committee of the whole Council to advise him and say it is necessary to expend this money? With regard to other matters, when the Council is sitting, invariably a minute explaining the reasons why the Government requires the money is laid on the table, and it is referred generally to the Finance Committee. It is then open to any hon. member to move that it be discussed in public. But if it was discussed in the Council, according to our rules, and the rules of most legislative assemblies, if it was considered a matter that ought to be dealt with privately...