PARLIAMENT.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1204, 12 August 1911, Page 7

PARLIAMENT.

THE • HOUSE. CIVIL SERVICE REFORM BILL, ' FIRST READING CARRIED. 'After dealing with questions and formal business yesterday afternoon tho House . Tesumed the debate, upon Mr. Hcrdinan's motion for leave to introduce the Civil Service Reform Bill. The non. T. MACKENZIE, Minister for Agriculture, said that from his experience of tho civil servants they had considerate masters now. Mr. Herdman's statement that civil servants wero not justly treated by Ministers of tho Crown, was a very serious allegation. Charges of this nature should he specific. One discharged civil servant had come to him and said that unless ho was reinstated he would expose all tho trickery of his (the Minister's) Department—that he would go to Mr. Herdman. "I told him to go to II.," said tho Minister. Mr. Mackenzie denied that political considerations wero allowed ;to intervene when appointments were being made. He contended that it was ability and merit, and not sycophancy that had gained prominent civil servants their advancement. Tho Minister read a . list of names of the more important civil servants, sprinkling his reading with eulogies of those whom he successively named, and claiming that New Zealand had an honourable and capable civil service. It was true that some of tho officers were not as highly paid as they should be, and good men were sometimes lost because they could get more money elsewhere. Promotion by seniority was not likely to prove satisfactory. It was necessary that tho services of capable officers should be' secured while they were in the full vigour of their intellectual prime. If a board were set up people having access to tho commissioners would get a preference, and there would not be that measure of justice to the community which it at prc?ent enjoyed. There- were two classes of Ministers. First came those who were largely . ruled by their . Under-Sec-Tetaries. This meant government by the. civil service. Another Minister strove to obtain the grasp of his work and to labour in harmony with bis officers. This involved a great deal of work. The provision made by Ministers in the case of sickness, deaths, and ■retirements was based upon the utmost possible consideration consistent with the public interest. It would free Ministers from a great responsibility if the Civil Service Board existed as a buffer, but there would bo a loss of efficiency.

Club Influence. Mr. J. C. THOMSON (Wallace) said that what might be called . "club influence" appealed to dominate control of the public service by boards in the sister colonies. He believed in direct control. The ■ board proposed would usurp the functions of the representative's of the people. - Mr. Herdjinin asked the House to bring in a condition that the Old Country was rapidly getting out of, and which bad caused intenso ; dissatisfaction whilo it lasted. Mr. J. P. LUKE (Wellington Suburbs) remarked that ho was rather surprised at the introduction of this Bill by the member for Wellington North. The proposal was undemocratic. Tho establishment of . the Railway Commissioners had proved a failure. The Government, in his experience, had never heen guilty of favouritism in making appointments to the Civil Service. He had as many Civil Servants in his electorate as anyone, and had never heard one, of them express a desire for -' the change proposed bv Mr. Herdman. Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) said Mr. Herdman had not made out his case, as he had not given, .. specific .instances in support of his arguments..' He had never had; ono charge of ' favouritism brought him, ,npr,;Jsd''he hptrd 'a; single.' request for such ii/Biir.asf'tnis.' '"If any member thought tnat favouritism was in operation', let him. suggest to the authorities, that "Number 50" should be promoted... The answer would be that "Number 50" '.'.'could 'not be moved up "until those with a'prior claim had been promoted in their turni

A Matter for Inquiry,

Mr. Hardy: "I will state a case in whrch\'so' did not get on, and '160' did." •

Mr. Russell said that possibly "160" might have been the son of a widow, or there might have been rame other special circumstances which amply justified some cha-nge being made from the order. It would be a fair thing for the member for Selwyn to state a question, and havo the matter gone into. ! The Hon. D. BUDDO said he had risen only to deal with the remarkable statement of the member for Selwyn. It was a matter well worthy of being inquired into. It would be a most damaging thing if it went forth that a boy . Mr. Hardy: "It was not a boy; it was a man, an old member of the Civil Service."

Mr. Buddo said he knew nothing of the circumstances of the case. The point which had appealed to him was the allegation that the Civil Service List was being interfered with. As a .fact, the Secretary for Internal Affairs had nothing further to do than supply the names of Civil Servants next on the list. As to tho general question, he had never'heard of Civil Servants asking for the Bill, nor had he ever heard of any public demand for it. He could assure tho hon. geutleman who sought to jntroduco the Bill that Ministers would be very glad to get away from tho responsibility of making appointments. Mr. C. A. C. HARDY (Selwyn) declared that there was a great deal of dissatisfaction among Civil Servants.. They hated the Classification Act more than ho could express. Mr. Laurenson: "What would you substitute fen: it?" Mr. Hardy: "I would substitute: something better for it or I would not uso that." Some little time ago lis had been asked to get a person who was not one of his constituents appointed to; a position in Canterbury. Ho saw a Classification List in Christchurch, on which tho applicant in . question was numbered between GO and 70. It was pointed out to him that promotions must be made in order of priority.' Soon, afterwards a Civil Servant 100 further down the list was appointed. He went down to interview the officer who had shown him the list, and was told; "It is not my fault.. It is these fellows in Wellington. 1 ' There really was great dissatisfaction in tho Public Service. He would send a letter to th« Minister for Internal Affairs explaining the position. (Hear, hear.) A Ministerial Denial. The Hon. R. M'KEXZIE' said lhat.no officer in Christchurch could deal with the classification of the Civil Service Tho L l }, Su 'P CB , Classification List was kept at the head office in Wellington. Tho Classification List was kept in the same place. Mr. Hardy had no ca;o at all. He should state the exact position. The Minister ventured to say that nothing of the kind suggested could happen in this country. ' Mr. HARDY said he did not desire to name the Department concerned. Ho was riuito certain as to tho position he had taken up, and at tho proper time ho would prove his case. The officer in Christchurch had told ,him that theso appointments were made in Wellington. That officer wa6 as much dissatisfied with the appointment of Civil Servants as anyone conld be. Mr. J. STALLWORTHY (Kaipara) twitted Mr. Hardy with having tned to get a billet for someone to oblige a friend. Mr. Hardy: Not a friend. I did not know him. Mr. Stallworthy: For a constituent who applied on behalf of somebody who was not a constituent. Mr. Hardy: That's right. Mr. Stallworthy said Mr. Hardy, in complaining to a subordinate officer, had gone about the matter in a wrong way. Ho (Mr. Stallworthy) had a grievance in his own constituency, but ho did not go to a subordinate official. When the Minister in permanent chargo of tho Department concerned had returned to tho colony, he (Mr. Stallworthy) would ask him what had been done, and if ho did net get satisfaction he would appeal to the House and knew that the House would do justice. He strongly opposed the Bill. The Mover in Reply. Mr. HERDMAN, in his reply, repeated that the fundamental principle of the Bill .was that it would transfer the power of

dealing with tho Civil Service to Parliament, and tako it out of the hands of Ministers. The hon. member for Avon had S-aitl that there was no evidence ot discontent in the Civil Service. It was useless to say that. Did they expect a deputation of Civil Servants to approach one of the Ministers—say, the interesting, charming, and' benevolent Minister for Public AVorks—and tell him, "Wo are absolutely dissatisfied, and we want you to hand over the control to somebody else, who will treat us with justice and fairness." Mr. Knssell: They don't come to us. Mr. Hcrdman: "Your experience is unusual." Ho would not give instances of political influence. Ho would not follow the example of bad taste set by theMinister for Agriculture in dragging the names of high public officials across tho floor, of the House. All those mentioned by tho Minister were men of high character and ability. It was well known that therq wero abuses under tho system of appointing temporary clerks anil experts. Mr. T. Mackenzie had supported him in a motion in favour of a Public Service Board in 1901. It 'Was wonderful how times changed and opinions with them. AV'e were now spending =£1,700,000 a year more on the Departments than we wero five years ago. Ho asked that tho Public Service should be placed under the control of someone as able, conscientious, and independent as General Godley, for the result would be that the whole service would bo improved as General Godley would improve the Defence Department. The Hon. T. MACKENZIE said that Mr. Herdman had accused him of a breach of good taste in naming Civil Servants. What ho had done was to give tho names of people who had been appointed and to defy the member for Wellington North to show him tho names of those who had been wrongly treated. Tho first reading was carried on tho voices.

A GOVERNMENT REVERSE. TOWN PLANNING BILL. "GOVERNOK-IN-COUNCIL". STKUCK OUT. The House went into committee on the Town Planning Bill (Hon. G. Fowlds). Section 3, Subsection (D), provides that after considering a scheme tho Town Planning Board shall report upon it to tho Governor-in-Council and malio recommendations. V Mr. James ALLEN (Bruce) objected to this as dual control. He was prepared to trust the board, .and thought the reference to tho Governor-in-Council should be deleted. Mr. A. M. MYERS (Auckland East) supported the objection. ■ Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) suggested that final authority in the matter should bo vested in a body answering to tho English Local Government Board. The Minister might be president of this body. The Hon. G. i'OWLDS stated that tho board, as ho proposed it, answered to the expert officers of the Local Government Board at Home. He defended the clause as it stood. An Amendment Moved. Mr. C. J. ANDERSON moved an amendment providTng that the board, after coneidering a scheme, may, instead of referring it to the Governor-in-Council, approve it with such modifications as it thinks lit. Tho Hon. G. FOWLDS contended that to make a permanent official board the final authority would be un-British. The outcry against the Governor-in-Council was part of tho prico New Zealand had to pay for the. continuance in power of the Liberal party for twenty years. There was nobody on tho other side of tho House who had had the responsibility of administration, and therefore nobody who knew the value of the Govcrnor-in-Council. Really the Governor-in-Council was a democratic authority, because tho Ministers were amenable to tho pressure of public opinion, which could not be said of the board. . Mr. J. ALLEN pointed out that most of the protests against the. Governor-in-Council had conio from,.the, 7 Gpvernment side of the House. The'rMinister's agreement, therefore, amounted 'to an assertion that nobody but the Ministers knew anything about the Governor-in-Council. The board would be answerablo to Parliament at the close of its term of office, and tho Bill could be amended to make it annually responsible. After further discussion, Mr. Anderson s amendment was considerably altered, Us final form being suggested by Mr. G. M. Thomson, and being as follows:—

"After considering' the scheme and all obieotions thereto as aforesaid, the board'may cither approve of the same or it shall refer it back to tho Council for further consideration." THE DIVISION. - ADVERSE MAJORITY OF FIVE. The amendment was carried by 3-1 votes to '29. ... Following is the division list:— For the Amendment (M). Allen' Jennings Anderson Luke Arnold Malcolm Buchanan Slander Buick Massey Ciaigi© M.™rs Davoy Iscwman Pi ve Nosworthy J. Duncan VoaTce Fraser Phillipps Glover Russell Graham Scott Guthrie fc'dcy Hanan G. M. Thomson Hardy AUtty Hevdman . AVright Herries Hino Against the Amendment (2D). Buddo M'Kenzie, RBuxton Mackenzie, T, Carroll M'Laron Clark Millar , Dillon J'arata Duncan, Hon. T, Poole Ell Ranguuroa Field F.eed Forbes Ross Fowlds Seddon Hall Smith Hogan Stallworthy Laurenson Taylor Lawry • Thomson, J. C. Macdonald Section 3, Sub-section 10, providing that the Govornor-in-Couricil,might either approve or disapprove ot tho scheme, or approve of the scheme with modifications, or refer it to tho board for further inquiry, was then struck out, on tho motion of tho Hon. G. Fowlds. Further references to the Governor-in-Council in subsequent sub-sections wero also struck out on the motion of the Minister, the words, "the board," being substituted in each case. At 11.50 p.m., it was' agreed, on the motion of tho Minister, to report progress in order to get portions of tho Bill redrafted'in accordance with the amendments. The Houso rose at 11.55 p.m.