SHOULD COMMISSIONERS BE REMOVED?

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 9, 11 January 1912, Page 8

SHOULD COMMISSIONERS BE REMOVED?

The New South Wales State Treasurer (Mr. Dacey), replying to a deputation of railway workers, made significant remarks last week in regard to the system of railway control in New South Wales. , The .Minister did not straight-out declare that the present system — administration by commission — should be forthwith abolished, but he declared that it was for the people 'to say how long the system of administration by a Chief Commissioner was to continue. v Furthermore, he made it clear that he Vas tired of existing conditions. ' The deputation which waited upon the Treasurer consisted" of -Messrs. J. Ivory, J. Dawson, and J. Leahy, representing the Railway Workers and General Labourers' Association, arid it asked for the redress of grievances. ' The members of the deputation explained that some time ago, when Mr. M'Gowen was Minister for Railways, heads of certain departments were, called together in conference with a view to putting men engaged in similar work on an equal footing. This conference had met, but there were matters of vital importance to the association that had not been dealt with. There was, first, the question of continuity of employment. It sometimes happened that members of the association, on finishing a job, w«re told that if they weSt to another job some distance away work would be available for them, but they had to go at their own expense, whereas in other cases assistance was granted in moving on to where work was to' be had. ¦ Another complaint was that on some lines men had to shift camp about once a fortnight. This meant they had' to maintain wife and family elsewhere, and while in some cases an allowance of Is 6d a day was granted towards meeting thie extra expense, in other cases there was no allowance at all. This, it waa contended, was an unfair arrangement. Then, in regard to holidays. The promise that men would be paid for holidays occurring during their period of employment had not been strictly "kept. The men had received payment for Eight-hour Day after waiting six weeks for the money, but they had not yet received pay for the Christmas and New Year, holidays. Finally/ the deputation drew the Minister's, attention to the practice that obtained in the Works Department of ! granting full holidays after twelve months' service, and ,to the practice in the Tramway Department of giving one week's leave and a special pass after six months' employment. ' • , MINISTER'S REPLY. The Treasurer, in reply, said that as to payment for holidays, the Chief Commissioner had agreed to > fall into line with' the Works Department. This ro quest on behalf of the association wa< a fair and reasonable one, and in strict iccordance with the policy of tho Government. It was the desire of the Government that, as far as possible, conditions enjoyed by one class of men in Government employment should be enjoyed by all Ethel's similarly circumstanced. Parliament had put the Chief Commissioner in such a position that he could snap his fingers at the Government, and apparently men were afraid to approach him, or for some other reason they came to tho Minister , He (Mr. Dacey) was- tired of receiving deputations on matters that solely concerned the Chief Commissiouer, and he was tired, too, of being called upon i/O act as a go-between; The administration of railway policy was in tho uands of the Chief Commissioner, and it was for tho people to say how long the/ wished that system to continue. Hinder present conditions' he could only approach Mr. Johnson with more or less humility. So far as the Government was concerned, the requests of tho deputation were reasonable and should be granted, but they could not expect the Government to say that they would be carried out' by a department over which the Cabinet had no control. He sympathised with the association, and so far t as it was in his power^ne 1 would help them. It was generally supposed that the will of , the people of a self-governia; community expressed through their representatives should be paramount, but Parliament in its wisdom had placed the Chief Commissioner in such a po. u i tion with Tegard to matters, of administration that the Executive was practically powerless. He promised to place the requests of the deputation before tie proper authorities.