PUBLIC SERVICE

Evening Post, Volume XCIV, Issue 41, 17 August 1917, Page 3

PUBLIC SERVICE

TO WHOM SHOULD BONUS

BE PAID?

RECOGNITION OF DOMESTIC RESPONSIBILITIES

PLEAS IN PARLIAMENT.

DEBATE ON COMMISSIONER'S

REPORT.

Most of th'V time of "the--Houee of Representatives yesterday afternoon was occupied in. discussing various aspects of the administration of the Public Service Commissioners. Incidentally, the debate harked back to the end of the session of 1916, when certain Public servants in receipt of high salaries' were voted bonuses for special services.

The discussion was opened by Mr. H. 0. Ell, who wanted to know what the attitude of the Government was in regard to the employment of returned soldiers. Complaint was made, he said, that young people had been employed where older men, returned soldiers, should have been found positions. As to the war bonus, he said the difficulty that arose last year was because of the fact that the limit of salary was fixed at £316. That caused a great deal of discontent in the minds of the men whose salary was just over £315, as they had reached the extra amount by working overtime. Sir Joseph Ward said that the war bonus of £400,000 paid last year, and which it was proposed to pay again this year, was based on :the definition that it should be confined to; men in receipt of a salary or payment amounting to not over £315 a. year. . A married man would receive £15, arid a single man £13. That was considered'by the Government to be a fitting amount by way of increase to supplement the increased cost of living: i . . ■ MARRIED MEN SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. Sir John Firidlay expressed the opinion that a married man- with four or five children should receive more consideration,'than a man with a wife, and only one child. • There should- be differentia» ! tion.' The necessity > for. keeping", the cradles full was- being impressed upon the people, but they should also see that the owners of the cradles were kept in reasonable comfort. ■ ' . Mr. E.. A. Wright contended that ■what a Public 1 servant earned by overtime should not be treated as part of his salary. Only something in the direction of the differentiation suggested would give satisfaction to 1 the whole service.'-.,. . .■_■ Mr. Wilford wanted, to know how many years' the Public Service Commissioners had to run? His personal opinion was that they had been a,failure., Also, he considered that the" war bonus -should be paid to "casuals." ■ Hon. -W. Fraser replied that the casuals got.the same war bonus as the other hands. ■.. . ■'' .'■•■. Mr. Wilford: "I am sorry, to contradict the hon. gentleman. The Commissioners don't pay it to casuals." Further, he asked, if the bonus was to be paid to men on accound of .special service, who was to decide what ,was special service? The man who was earning £600, £700, or £1000 a year could easily do extra work without being paid for special service r . .». • ■ Mr. ,C. H. Poole said the members of the House would raise a protest; if it was. known that any of the '. £400,000 would be paid to highly-paid officials. . Sir Joseph Ward: None of it will^be I paid to them. : .''■'• Mr. Poole said the public expenditure. . /as being carefully watched. Many, jaople could scarcely make ends meet, and yet they had to pay their share to.yards the cost of! living, and public servants who, in some cases,-.were far.'better oDE than.themselves. '-.'■. : . Mr. J.T. M. Hornsby condemned the idea of paying special emoluments ■'to-i al-ready'highly-salaried-officials..' Mr. G. J. Anderson agreed that there should be no more of that sort of : thing. What he wanted was ; to increase the lodging allowance of cadets. 1 (He was 'going to enter a protest against anyone receiving the bonus .whose salary . was over £200 a year. The young people in the service could not keep themselves, ;md they should receive'more cpnsidera- . Lion than those, who were; in receipt of larger incomes. • . . '.'■ .- •' . ; BONUS IN FAIR PROPORTIONS. ; Mr. C. J. Parr'urged that the .bonus should be distributed among: public servants in proportion to .the size of their families. (Hear, hear.) V That was the only course that would give satisfaction, to the country. . ' ■ '. Mr. L.. M. Isitt expressed the hope that unmarried people without responsibilities should not be placed on _ the same level as married men with families. ■ The Right' Hon. W. F. Massey referred to the- special bonus paid to some officials last year...'. When the. subject was before the House then he had urged that any/person who built up^a new industry, as the men concerned had done, were entitled to special consideration. In one case the officer broke down, and had; under medical advice, to be sent away on holiday. If such a man had not been available, the. Government could not have got anyone to do the work for £1000 a year. ; .- A member: What ' was his.salary? ,

The Prime Minister : £1000 a year. A member: That ought to be enough for any man. . . Another member : What becomes of the war sacrifice? '-.-,■

Mr.' Massey : He was the best man available ■ for the purpose-—the only one available. •-,'«.

A member: What would have happened if he had, died? . , Mr. Massey : We would have had to take the next best, mani He took, the fullest responsibility for the bonus paid to Mr. Triggs and. Dr. Reakes. _' The whole amount of the bonus paid for special services was only £2385. Regarding the claim that a married man should receive special consideration, lie said they would be faced with the posiT tion- that the men without responsibilities had to be paid less. / Members: Certainly. Why not? 1/ Mr. E. M'Callum said that if the Prime Minister had wanted to pnt Mr. Triggs on to special work, he should have taken him from the Commissioner's staff and put him on to special duty. > To pay_ the extra money placed the members in a. false position. TREATMENT OF HIGH-SALARIED> OFFICERS. Mr. J. Payne wanted to know whether, in business circles, big-salaried people were not expected to do extra duties when the pressure took place. In firms where bonuses were paid the bonus was not paid to the high-salaried officers. Parliament should dear with business matters on business lines. There was no difficulty about paying public servants a bonus according to the size of their families or. responsibilities. The bonus was given to make up for the, increased cost of living, and the only way to pay it was to base it;oil the family. The Minister of Defence (Sir James Allen) pointed out that the vote last year appeared on the main Estimates. Mr, Payne : Did anyone know that it was to be paid to the high-salaried officials? . . . ; The Minister: Yes. Members: We didn't know. The said the responsibility of

the vote layc on Parliament and not on the Government; . ■

Mr. Forbes contended that the Government had not made sufficient use of the Public Service Commissioners — that, after five years of office, 1 they had not done sufficient to justify their appoint-, ment. That was shown by the Commissioners' report recently published. For five years the Commissioners had been hammering at the doors of the Government to get something done, and now they reported that if their recommendations had been carried out defalcations to the extent of £14,000" would have been saved to the country. The Govern--ment should turn its serious attention to placing the Public Service on a proper basis, so that the people should get full value for the money that was, spent. Mr. A. H. IJindmarsh said the idea appeared to be that the only sacrifice to be made should be made by soldiers. Nothing should be done by these highlypaid men. He contended that the head of the Mental Hospitals Department should be held to account for the' lack of system under which recent defalcations had taken place. The same remark applied to the head of the Mines Department in connection with a recent case.

Mr. Payne: It's the system of auditing and bookkeeping. . Mr. Hindmarsh went on to urge that the Government, should have done everything possible to carry out the recommendations of the Commissioners, and see "that the heads of Departments put their houses in order.' ■„..-. ■

Mr. G. R. Sykes agreed, with previous speakers that the war bonus should be distributed on a basis of domestic responsibilities as well as of salaries.; It was to be regretted that in the past the State had done nothing in regard to domestic responsibilities. Only the other day a woman with three children came to Wellington to say good-bye to her soldier husband. She could not get hotel accommodation. He refused to believe that it was right that a bachelor in receipt of £300 a year should receive as big a bonus as the married man with a wife and several children. (Hear, hear.) Mr.' T. A. H. Field stated his experience was that the Public Servants were in favour of the married men with families receiving a bonus, even at the expense of the single men and of married men without children. ;

Mr. P. C. Webb said he /was fully convinced that' the time' would come when the House would insist on the' responsibility of the conduct of depart-; ments being placed on the Ministers in charge. He could not say that there was 'no political influence under the present system; he was sure there was, but it was of a less direct and more harmful character than that exercised before the Commissioners were appointed. He urged the ! necessity of giving a, wax bonus to all pensioners, most of whom were.in, sore need.at present. MINISTER'S REPLY,. The Hon. G. W. Russell, in replying to the criticisms levelled agaihet the Department, stated that an' 'enormous amount of work was being done for returned soldiers in regard to positions in the Public Service. The . educational test and the age .limit.had been abolished, and, everything possible was being done for returned soldiers. As many as 398 returned men were employed in the Service. 'He was 'of opinion that the people should recognise their responsibility, that £300 without any war bonus was not sufficient for members, and should increase their emolument. Members who were drawing, only £300 were exceedingly kind-hearted when they got up and said that men who ,were drawing £315, and whose salary with their bonus amounted to £330, should receive overtime. As to differentiation'in thebonuses between married men with children: and men without children, he quite 1 agreed that if a sound scheme could be devised it would be a good' thing. If any member of the. House could devise some scheme whereby differentiation could be obtained, he would be only too pleaded to lay it before the Government. ..'■■•■ The Minister continued that, in regard to the Public Service Commissioners Act, he was placed in a somewhat awkward position, because he had previously opposed it. Because of his position, however, he felt he should sink his feelings and predelictions in order to carry out his,duties.. While the Act had not accomplished all'that its supporters. had claimed., he did not think it would be possible .to restore the administration to the Ministerial heads. Before the seven years for which Jkho Commissioners were elected had elapsed there would/be an election, and it would .be for the people of this.country to' say how the Public Service was to be carried on after thait election. His opinion was that a Minister of Public Service should take over ; control of, the service and be responsible for its administration. There was. a good deal of unrest in the Public Service, and the employees had applied ito the Supreme Court for a declaratory judgment asking for interpretations on forty points of the Act, but the Government had taken up Ithe attitude that it could not be dictated to by its servants. Matters between the Department and Civil; "Servants, however, were now working with smoothness, except for an occasional appeal. As far as the bonu3 for l casual employees was etoncerned, the casuals in the Railway Department, the Public Works .Department, the Public Health, and other departments received ,a bonus as long as they were married men.' •• ■ ..•■■■.' ■■„•,•.■

. Referring Ito defalcations, the Minister said that when it was considered that the revenue of the country was eighteen and a-half millions, and that thousands of Civil Servants were handling money, it iraiist be admitted that the acfrninistration of the department was sound. As to the Porirua case, .Silsby was . the last man Mirough whose hands th» documents passed, and he had forged documents, sent on the vouchers, and drawn the money from the Treasury. As to the Invercargill case, the man was supposed to be of unblemished reputation, and yet he had "got away" with £,790 from, the Stamp Department' „' Tlie report was laid on the table.