APPEAL BOARDS

Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 23919, 10 April 1943, Page 4

APPEAL BOARDS

CONSTITUTION CRITICISED VIEWS OF R.S.A. CONFERENCE The present constitution of Armed Forces Appeal Boards and methods adopted in accepting evidence for their consideration were criticised at a conference of delegates from Canterbury branches and sub-branches of the Returned Services’ Association, held m Christchurch last evening. The president of the Christchurch Returned Services’ Association (Mr C. Miln) reported on replies received from Dominion Headquarters of the Returned Services’ Association to resolutions carried at the previous conference. Referring to a resolution asking that no evidence should be received by appeal boards except by statutory declaration, Mr Miln said that in many cases, primary production councils were consulted before appeals came up for hearing. Information from this source was not made available to appellants, , _ “The information from production councils does influence the decision on appeals,” said Mr Miln. "The desire of the previous conference has not been fully recognised by headquarters.” It was moved by Mr S. de Grut (Wal. mate) that the conference should reaffirm its previous resolution urging that only evidence on oath or by statutory declaration should be accepted by appeal boards, "Our headquarters seems to have got out of touch with the affairs of today,” said Mr.de Grut, when delegates were considering a reply to a resolution advocating the previous publication of details of appeals to be heard by boards. The reply indicated’ that the only objection to the proposal was that .“it would further delay the hearing of appeals.” It was decided that the meeting’s dissatisfaction with the reply should be recorded.

Men of Military Age

. The inclusion of men of military age in the personnel of appeal boards was severely criticised by delegates. "The opinion of our last meeting was that such a scandal as this is something we shouldn’t stand for,” said Mr J. K. Moloney. “We should re. affirm that it is high time that this should be*stopped. The Government should take heed of the opinion of this representative meeting.” Mr Moloney moved that the meeting reaffirm its opposition to men of military age holding positions on appeal boards or primary production councils. Mr D. W. Russell said that the Crown representative on the No. 1 Appeal Board at Christchurch had resigned in October, 1942, and although nominations had been received for the position, no appointment had yet been made. “This means that there is now no Crown representative on the board,’’ continued Mr Russell. “Things happen where a man with proper legal knowledge should be present to see that justice is done. I suggest that why the requirements are not carried out is that the Minister concerned (the Hon, A. McLagan) hasn’t seen any war service.

“We’ve got to go straight at these Ministers, and we will go straight at them,” continued Mr Russell. (Applause.) “There’s too much of this ‘Tom, Dick, and Harry’ business today—that’s what is wrong with the position.” (Hear, hear.)

Delegates discussed at length the methods of making appointments to primary production councils and committees.

Mr C. G. Abbott said that before the war 15 per cent, of the population of the Dominion were farm workers; today the number had been reduced to 10 per cent. Production committees realised the need for keeping up primary production, and were advising appeal boards accordingly. “The need for primary production does not countenance men avoiding military service altogether,” said Mr de Grut.

Mr Moloney’s motion was then put to the meeting and carried.