The Press FRIDAY, MAY 29, 1964. "Very Stimulating” At 12s 6d An Hour

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30453, 29 May 1964, Page 10

The Press FRIDAY, MAY 29, 1964. "Very Stimulating” At 12s 6d An Hour

It is good to know the Prime Minister is happy at his work and finds it “very stimulating”. He is paid £4750 a year for this, which at first glance seems a fair rat£ It may not be unusual for him to work 15 hours a day, six days a week; he begins early in the morning and often is working at home in the small hours of the next day. We suppose his P.A.Y.E. tax code is Ml, and that his £9l a week is reduced by about £35 tax. This means he is clearing 12s 6d an hour for answering the “highest calling “in the land”. It must be just a quirk of our tax system that a man paid much less by the hour than a Prime Minister, and working less than half the time, can realise a higher hourly rate after tax. But answering a call for more than 4000 hours a year is quite demanding, even if stimulating; and demands are heavy on Ministers, too. Members of Parliament should be well paid; but pay alone will not attract the talents that are needed in government. The House of Representatives is well named; it is not, and need not be, a house of supermen. The requirements of Ministers, however, are rather different. Administrative ability, political discretion, and working efficiency are called for on a much higher level. If working hours for Ministers are long and crowded they should at least be efficiently spent, both in the interests of the Minister, whose capabilities and judgment should be directed where they are most needed, and in the interests of the country. Mr Nash, for whose attention no matter seemed too slight, says he does not know what all the fuss is about. Certainly, he worked indefatigably as Prime Minister and in other offices. The fuss is about efficient government—about getting decisions without undue delay; about ensuring that the right people are doing the right job; about ensuring that men with lively and orderly minds, not tired minds, are running the country; about time and effort being spent to the best advantage. If Mr Holyoake is satisfied he is getting the results he wants from his team —taking account of their personal welfare—and Parliament is satisfied with their account of their work, .then all is well. But it is a question to which al! Prime Ministers and all Parliaments should be alert. Mr Nash, in spite of his puzzlement, and Mr Holyoake, for all his stimulation, know this. Care With Poisons It has never been sensible to store poisons in food or drink containers; it is now illegal to do so. Of the several provisions in the new Poisons Regulations which came into force last week, this is the one that most closely affects the public; and it should be welcomed by the public. Most persons—including those with no children of their own—are conscious of the dangers of leaving poisons within reach of active and inquisitive youngsters, whether trespassers on their property or legitimate visitors. The poison put away in a “safe” place but in a misleading container is a more insidious danger. It may entrap old as well as young, and frequently has done so. Not infrequently the victim is the careless person himself. As the supervising inspector of health (Mr J. B. Snoad) indicated last week, it will not be practicable to enforce this new regulation by sending inspectors into homes and other premises. The regulation should not be any less effective because of that. No-one lightly courts the danger of poisoning by keeping noxious materials where they may be mistaken for food. But it is done—usually in a moment of stress and hurry when no other receptacle is at hand, and often with a mental promise to transfer the poison to a more suitable container at the first opportunity. Too many such promises are never kept. In future if this remissness leads to tragedy it will not be dismissed as misadventure or bad luck; it will be recognised in law as the predictable consequence of an illegal act.