Evening Post. THURSDAY, AUGUST 15, 1918. DEFENCE ADMINISTRATION

Evening Post, Volume XCVI, Issue 40, 15 August 1918, Page 6

Evening Post. THURSDAY, AUGUST 15, 1918. DEFENCE ADMINISTRATION

In dealing with the administrative side of. the Defence Department, the Defence Expenditure Commission made one main recommendation: the appointment of a General Officer in Charge of Administration, under whom would come all administrative branches —(a) those hitherto under the Quartermaster-General, 1 (b) the administrative branches now under the Adjutant-General. The Commission -could find no room for an Adjutant-Gen-eral's branch.

" Let there be no nervousness about departing from customs obviously faulty," wrote the Commission. " The excuse that ' Grandfather did it' is very leaky nowadays. When a high officer, after admitting that certain designatic-ns were misleading and conveyed no 'meaning, was asked why a new departure could not be made and common-sense titles substituted, which tho world might follow, he said that New Zealand is too small a country to start innovations. It would not be the first time that New Zealand had struck out on new lines, which tho other parts of the Empire had gradually followed wHh great benefit."

While the Commission's recommendations concerning administration and the business side of defence generally give evidence of capacity and clear sight, there may be noted occasionally a tendency to avoid old methods and means, ■which suggests a fear of being like "grandfather"—with an initial condemnation of the old gentleman and only a cursory examination of his reasons. For example, the radical alteration suggested in the abolition of the Adjutant-General's branch overlooks the fact that the New Zealand Defence Organisation was fathered by Great Britain, and is still interlocked with and dependant upon the British Army. In the beginning of our present system we had British officers to initiate the scheme; we still have- some occupying" high positions, and many of our own officers received an important part of their training under the aegis of the War Office. This was done and is being continued in order that something approaching Imperial uniformity may be attained. New Zealand would lose more by breaking or straining the link with the Imperial organisation than she would gain by being the first to adopt some new method of doubtful value. The matter of titles is of little importance, but a sweeping change in administration would result in endless confusion when New Zealand soldiers were required to cooperate with the forces from other parts of the Empire.

.Giving due consideration to these facts, however, there is yet every reason for the Defence Department seeking to apply the principles upon which the Commission base 3 its recommendation. These principles are simplicity of administration and improvement of service. With the formation of new branches for war service, and an enormous expansion of staffing, it would have been strange if the organisation of the Department had been perfect. There is probably great room for improvement, and a most careful examination should bo made of the Commission's suggestions as indicating the lines on which better organisation should be sought. " Administrative appointments have often gone to combatant' officers," states the Commission, "and it would seem that when certain offices were to be filled a man was chosen more because of his military rank than because of his knowledge of and fitness for the duties required to be performed." This would naturally lead to anomalies in pay and wasteful administration, unless by some fortunate chance the good combatant officers should all prove good administrators.

The Commission is critical regarding over-staffing in administrative departments, both at the camps and in the head offices. The excuse for this probably lies in the fact that there has been little opportunity for a selection of personnel by the officers responsible for the efficient conduct of the various branches. Were these officers given a voice in the choice of their staffs, and the power to reward merit, without regard to previous mili,,taix,iank, ß Ijt,.aei^dis(3..-,d,ouhJt1jt,.aei^dis(3..-,d,ouhJt $>e> found.

that they would be able to reduce their staffs and attain a higher degree of efficiency. Such power of selection and promotion would naturally be subject to the approval of an officer who would fill the role of the Public Service Commissioner in holding the balance between the branches. As some sections of the Defence Staff are already under the Commissioner, it would possibly be found advantageous to transfer all who are performing purely clerical work to the same control. It must be noted that though the Defence Commission finds a war excuse for over-staffing and wasteful administration, such an excuse cannot be regarded as a reason for a continuance of the same deficiencies.