IS THERE UNREST?

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 28, 1 August 1929, Page 4

IS THERE UNREST?

LABOUR DEPARTMENT

FAVOURITISM ALLEGED

SHARP EXCHANGES

An allegation that an officer of the Labour Department had received favoured treatment, and that in consequence there was considerable unrest in the Department, was made from the Labour benches in the House of Representatives yesterday afternoon, the incident leading to somewhat heated exchanges between the Minister of Labour (the Hon. \V. A. Veitch) and the member for "Wellington South (Mr E M'Koen). The matter arose out of a reply given by the Minister to a question asked by Mr. M'Keen. Mr. M'Keen asked the Minister whether it was a fact that an olßcer in charge of the Wellington Distnct Office of the Labour Department was recently disrated for committing a grave breach of duty, and that the same officer was given minor duties to perform in the same office at the same salary (£470) which he had previous to being disrated. ' Mr. Veiteh replied that the officer in question was disrated by the Public Service Commissioner for certain irregularities, and his salary was reduced. Mr. M'Keen strongly criticised the reply. He stated that while a man who committed a similar offence in another Department would be instantly dismissed, in this case the man was given an office boy's job, but his salary was retained. Other officers in the Department were awaiting promotion, and why should they have, to lose that opportunity because this man was in their road? Mr. M'Keen said that he would not. state what the naturn of the offence was that the officer committed. A WARNING. Mr. E. J. Howard (Christchurch South) said the Minister need not expect the matter to end with the reply that he had given. The matter would be'raised on the floor of the House on every possible occasion. The Labour Department was a splendid institution, but at the present time it was in a state of unrest owing to the fact that favouritism had been practised. Unless the Minister took the Department in hand—and he was well qualified to do j that in view of his association! with the Labour movement—it was quite possible that it would bo wrecked. Mr. Howard warned the Minister that unless he took the matter up and settled it the whole- facts would be brought to light. ' The Minister said he would like to reply to the criticism that his answer had aroused. Mr. M'Keen: "Was it your answer or the Department's?" Mr. Veiteh: "It was my reply. It was drafted by me, recommended to Cabinet, and approved by Cabinet. The reply was not placed into my hands by an,officer of my Department at all. I want to draw attention to the fact that the member for Wellington South has completely changed his ground in connection with this matter. The charge trade was that this officer had been disrated at the same salary as he had before he had been disrated." Mr. M'Keen: "That was a mistake." The Minister: "My reply is that he was disrated by the Public Service Commissioner, who is the only person who has legal authority to deal with the matter. His salary has been reduced. This answer was a direct contradiction of the charge levelled at the Administration' by the member for Wellington South. Now Mr. M'Keen a,dmits that the salary wes reduced, but he says the man was given a boy's job in the office instead of a man's job. Well, I want to assure the honourable member that the work being done by this man is not a boy.'s job by any means." Mr. M'Kceu: "The person who aid it before had a boy's wages." SERIOUS CHARGES. The Minister: "His :is quite a. responsible and important function within the office. Quite serious charges have been mado by the honourable me"mber, and they are charges that havo' not been brought under my notice." Mr. M'Koen: "You knew about them." Tho Minister: "But the honourable goutlcman suggested that I knew nothing about it." Mr. M'Kceh: "You will hear more about it." Tho Minister: "Thero is no reason why I shouldn't hear more about it. The honourable gentleman has every right to level charges at the Govern^ meut. lam defending my own answer and my own position, and that I am fully ontitled to do. I will see that the new charges are investigated. If somo impropriety haa taken place thero is no reason why it should not be put right." Mr. M'Koon: "Do you submit to this House that you are ignorant of what took place?" Tho Minister: "I knew." Mr. M'Keen: "Are you stating the position fairly now?" Tho Minister said he was ontitled to take up the attitude he had taken up, and repeated that the charges would be investigated. Mr. M'Keen: "What is the reason why this man was put into a' job at £495 when the maximum for the job is. £445?" Tho Minister: "That is a fresh charge, and I will have it investigated. If the honourable gentloman can bring any more cases before me I will have them investigated." Mr. M'Keen: "Doal with one at a time. This is the first one." The Ministor: "That is only rudeness, and it isn't-worth answering."