No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Select Committee on the Civil Service, 1938
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
Extract
The reform of the Canadian civil service in 1918 largely destroyed the influence which the members of Parliament had been able to exert on the administrative personnel; but it apparently did not diminish their interest in the subject. Some wanted to keep in touch with the service because they hoped to discredit reform and abolish the merit system; others wished to assure themselves that their relinquishment of power did not result in its unfair use by someone else; others desired to improve the service by studying its faults in order to provide remedies which would make it more effective. The result of these mixed and even conflicting motives has been that the members have been unusually sensitive to the faults and needs of the service, and unusually desirous of keeping themselves informed of its condition. The obvious device for carrying out this purpose has been the parliamentary committee, and this form of collective surveillance has been used no less than seven times since 1918. The Royal Commission, which used to be the recognized instrument for conducting enquiries into the service, has at the same time fallen into desuetude, only one, the Beatty Commission of 1930, having been appointed in the past twenty years.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science/Revue canadienne de economiques et science politique , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , May 1939 , pp. 179 - 194
- Copyright
- Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 1939
References
1 1919; 1921; 1923; 1932; 1934; 1938; 1939. These do not include Senate Special Committees or Special Committees of the House on particular aspects of the civil service, such as superannuation.
2 Canada, House of Commons Debates (unrevised), Feb. 21, 1939, pp. 1252–70.Google Scholar A second committee of the House was also appointed in 1938 and 1939 to deal with the Civil Service Superannuation Act.
3 Ibid., Feb. 22,1938, p. 681. Cf. statement of the Hon. F. Rinfret (ibid., unrevised, Feb. 21, 1939, pp. 1269-70).
4 This is admittedly difficult to grasp, and it becomes even more difficult when it is followed up. In 1939 Mr. Pouliot disclosed that Lord Stamp's speech had dealt with the British civil service, and the Committee, having obtained permission to print it in its report, omitted to do so (ibid., unrevised, Feb. 21, 1939, p. 1253).
5 Ottawa Citizen, May 28, 1938.
6 Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence, p. 444.
7 Ottawa Journal, May 28, 1938, edit.
8 Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence, p. 136.
9 Ibid., pp. 677-80; Ottawa Citizen, May 28, 1938.
10 The testimony of C. H. Bland, the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission, for example, occupied (with interruptions) over 300 pages.
11 Canada, House of Commons Debates, Jan. 31, 1938, p. 15.Google Scholar
12 Ibid., March 18, 1938, pp. 1485-8; Statutes of Canada, 2 Geo. VI, c. 7.
13 Mr.Pouliot, , Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence, p. 919.Google Scholar
14 Ibid., p. 418.
15 The relevance of many of these questions as affecting conditions in 1938 was, however, repeatedly questioned by a number of the members of the Committee.
16 Ottawa Citizen, May 30, 1938, edit.
17 The entrance examination to the service cannot come under this rule, for there has not been and cannot be the personal contact with the candidates and the consequent facilities for forming a sound judgment on their ability. Even here, however, the personal factor can be given some recognition in the viva voce.
18 Churchill, W. S., The World Crisis, vol. I, p. 72.Google Scholar
19 The Chairman of the Commission seemed confident that they had kept favouritism under control, and the Committee unearthed little evidence to disprove this conclusion (Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence, p. 1172).
20 Ibid., pp. 802, 1506.
21 Ibid., p. 1002.
22 Quarterly Journal, Royal Meteorological Society, 1924, vol. L, p. 78.Google Scholar
23 Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence, pp. 1379-81.
24 The “experts” who drew up the unworkable classification in 1919.
25 Ibid., pp. 914-15.
26 Ibid., pp. 1094, 1141-2, 1154.
27 Ibid., p. 1552.
28 Ibid., p. 1068.
29 Ibid., p. 307.
30 Ibid., p. 1306.
31 Ibid., p. 1362-3.
32 Statutes of Canada, 8-9 Geo. V, c. 12, s. 3.
33 Ibid., 22-23 Geo. V, c. 40, s. 13.
34 The 1932 Select Committee recommended ( Canada, House of Commons Journals, 05 10, 1932, p. 426 Google Scholar) the appointment of a Select Committee of seven members. In 1934 Mr. Bennett, in moving for the appointment of a Committee on the Civil Service, announced that he was doing so in order to carry out this recommendation ( Canada, House of Commons Debates, Feb. 16, 1934, pp. 640–1Google Scholar; Canada, House of Commons Journals, 06 25, 1934, pp. 493–5).Google Scholar
35 The Rinfret, Hon. F., Canada, House of Commons Debates (unrevised), Feb. 21, 1939, p. 1269.Google Scholar
36 Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence, p. 525.