A LIVELY DISCUSSION

Evening Post, Volume CXXII, Issue 14, 16 July 1936, Page 20

A LIVELY DISCUSSION

education board Meeting

AUTHORITY FOR SALARY INCREASE

. Consideration of-a letter from the .CohtroUer; and General (Colonel G. F. C. CampbeU);^^^^ reason fqr;,^ iii^ creased amount being charged for ' auditing '.the board's accounts for the year ended December 31, 1935, opened, up a discussion which lasted for several hours at the meeting: of- 'the ■■..Education. Board yesterday afternoon. During the discussion Colonel T.-W. McDonald questioned the authority for the increase in the salary of the secretary of the board. At the May meeting of the board, from which Colonel McDonald was absent, a memorandum was produced by the secretary to refute statements which he claimed had been made against him by Colonel McDonald. It was pointed put at that time.that the memorandum was in Colonel McDonalds handwriting, and that one of the sheets of-paper on the back of which the memorandum was written wasj from, the report; dealing with salary increases which Colonel McDonald claimed had 'not been before the board. The board decided:t6 ask 'Colonel McDonald to make full retraction of all. statements against the secretary, but at yesterday's meeting of jhe hoard he gave .notice of his intention to move that this resolution be rescinded. . . .

. In the.discussion which followed the reading, of the correspondence between the board and the Auditor-General there were some lively exchanges between Colonel McDonald ' and other members. No resolution was passed. ■■. .:• . .. •

Colonel McDonald said he was not bringing the matter forward because he wanted any resolution in particular.

Mr. A. Donald raised a point of order. Was there not a resolution on the books, he asked, to the effect that the correspodence on the matter should be read and dealt with?

■ Colonel McDonald claimed that he could not proceed until the correspondence .had been read. At the May meeting of the, board when he was absent and was in hospital to the knowledge of the board'and the secretary, a matter had suddenly been brought up before,the board in respect of which he was one of the principal parties and the secretary was the other. One side of the case had been presented and a conclusion arrived at without his having had the opportunity of being heard or to cross-examine the secretary, and give the other side.. :Reports of the proceedings had been broadcast .throughout the Press of New Zealand. He wanted the right every Britisher, had to put the other side. That was all he was aiming at. ;

The secretary,' Mr. E. S.. Hylton, read the.'correspondehce between the board and'the Audit Department as to the increased charge for auditing the board's books'for the year ended December 31/1935, coming eventually to a letter dated June 9, 1936;' from the Controller and Auditor-General. (Colonel G. F. C. Cajnpbell). .. J; , AUDITOR-GENERAL'S LETTER. This letter stated ■ that of the increased .charge .approximately £9 -9s represented: the fee charged for additional, tithe-. occupied -on -the - normalwork of auditing the board's accounts. The, balance ;6f. the increase represented -the.fee^'charged for the time occu- . pied .'; by i the audit; inspector in his investigation ?ofa^matter brought before, the noticefof Ahe -'Audit Office ■ ; by. Coloiielj^W. Mcljonald concerning.the authority for the increase in the salary of the secretary from £600 per annum to £750 per annum.

"I may say, however," continued the Auditor-General, "that owing to the publicity given to this matter* by the

Press in its .reports, of the board meetngs it. would have been; necessary for the audit inspector to have made the investigation, even if Colonel McDonald had not made the representation to the Department. The investigation disclosed that ; a sub-committee, had been set up to dear with an application by the board's supplies officer for an increase in salary. That that subcommittee, without any direction from the board, had dealt also..with ;the question of increasing■" the salaries of the secretary and another officer of the board, and that the report of that sub-committee recommending that the salaries be. increased,...- which was claimed to have been brought' before the board at a meeting.held.in June, 1933, was not entered in the minute. book until after the July meeting and after the June'minutes had been confirmed by the; board and initialled by I the chairman- at metieng.

"The investigation entailed considerable inquiry.;; and '<- search through the ■minute:books and records of the board, and the result discloses that the manner, in /which the report of the subcommittee was recorded in the minute book* wais'such as would justify a member of the board drawing the attention of the TAudit Office, to the matter. . . .

In view, however, of the fact that the action of the. sub-committee .was subsequently : ratified. ;by the board ■; and that,.;the board- is satisfied 'that- the report of the sub-committee, although being entered in the minute book subsequently to the confirmation of. the minutes of the meeting' held in June, 1933, • was actually brought before that meeting, the Audit Office does not pro-pose-to--take any-further- action--in- the .matter. May I point out that the ! making; of entries- in the' minute ■ book after :minutes-had. been, confirmed and without the board's, knowledge was on ,a,-previouS.i occasion in: another part 'of : : the"^l>ominibn y-the niethod adopted fe'cbnceirMh^appiroprratibn'of board funds by the secretary, and I trust that I may rely on your board to take such steps as will ensure that the. minutes' are correctly recorded' in future.

After the correspondence had been read, Colonel McDonald said that his

object was that the board and public should know that what he had been "slathered up" for in his absence at the May meeting of the board was completely justified. The letter from the Auditor-General was in his opinion the most scathing indictment of the administration by a highly-paid-public official in a public body that had ever come under his notice.

Naturally he had taken strong exception to the resolution^passed at the May meeting, and to the circumstances leading up to the passing of the resolution. Since then he had written three letters to the secretary requesting the secretary to tell him what exactly he w,as asked to retract, but the secretary had not had the courtesy to reply to any one of the three letters. Accordingly he had written to the secretary reminding him of what he (Colonel McDonald) had said.

• Colonel McDonald proceeded to read passages'from-a copy of the letter.

Mr. C. H. Nicholls: Point of order. Mr. Chairman. . Colonel, McDonald keeps mentioning. "a false document." Does this board consider, or do you consider it a false document?

Colonel McDonald: I am going to prove it. ■

The chairman (Mr. W. V. Dyer) said he did not think Colonel McDonald was out of order.

In subsequent remarks. Colonel McDonald used the word "tampering" several times, which caused Mr. Nicholls to object again.

Mr. L.; J. McDonald (to Mr. Nicholls) You are cramping his style.

■ Mr. Nicholls: Yes, but I want to protect.him : against himself. He is now accusing an officer of the board of inserting a bogus document in the minute book.

Colonel McDonald: I say that that has been inserted. I never accused anyone of inserting a bogus document. The chairman pointed out that what Colonel McDonald contended was that the authority for the increase in salary was bogus.

. Colonel McDonald contended that the board had not set up a special committee to consider staff salaries, and that being so, he claimed there could be no report and that no such report had come before the board for approval. He alleged that the only authority that could be found in the minute books for an increase of £150"in the secretary's salary was a bogus authority that had been improperly inserted in the minute book after the minutes had been confirmed;

Colonel McDonald had been looking over towards Mr. Nicholls a good deal while he had been, speaking, and this eventually drew from Mr. Nicholls the observation that he did not want i Colonel McDonald looking at him. "Yes, but I must have a look at you," smilingly replied Colonel McDonald before taking up the line of his argument again. A little later he broke off to say that he was glad to see that the secretary was present, because he ■ would, hate to be attacking the other party if he were not present. Mr. Hylton: I am not the other party. Colonel McDonald claimed emphatically that no one ever had any authority to consider an increase in salary

for the secretary. He went further,

and alleged that neither the board nor any committee of the "board had ever brought - any recommendation before the board for an increase in the secretary's salary, and that the board had not grar/ed the secretary an increase. He issued the' challenge that if anyone could show him a minute of the brfard setting up a special committee to consider -,- staff, salaries. or a signed report -f f om: that committee recommending an increase in salary or a resolution of the board approving the salary increase direct, he would make the most humble apology to the secretary for every word he had said. Mr. Nicholls: And burst into tears at the. same time. •

"MIND THE INK!"

Colonel. McDonald: I deny that.

The secend thing he would do. coninued Colonel McDonald, would be to .ender his resignation.

"Mind the ink!" cautioned My. Nicholls when Colonel McDonald proceeded to bang the table in front of him.

"I don't care for the ink," retorted Coloned McDonald. "I have spilt a lot in my time and I'll spill a bit more yet."

Mr. Nicholls: Yes, but to no purpose.

It was up to those who said there was .authority for the salary increase to supply the goods, and he would stak"e his life on it that it could not ba done, said Colonel- McDonald. '

Colonel McDonald next referred to the document that had been produced by the secretary of the board at the May meeting. Continuing, Colonel McDonald said he had wanted to find out from Australian States the costs of their centralised educational system. He had seen Mr. Hylton, in his office, about it, and Mr. Hylton had suggested that Ihe letter be drafted there and then and had handed him two sheets of paper. When paper was given blank side up he suggested no man would bother about the other side.

Mr. Nicholls: I don't believe you. Colonel McDonald declared he was telling the truth. Afterthe letter had been drafted Mr. H>lton had made certain alterations, and had arranged to have the letter typed, the'draft being left with Mr. Hylton. While he (Colonel McDonald) had been- in hospital Mr..Hylton had gone bravely and courageously to the pigeon-hole where he knew the document was. At this point Mr. W. H. Jackson asked leave to retire from the meeting. He was sorry, he said, he was unable to see the farcfe through.

"A COMPLETE REFUTATION."

Mr. Dyer said he would state in a tew words the actual position. Colonel McDonald had gone to the AuditorGeneral after the sub-committee set up by the board had entirely exonerated the secretary, and the investigation by the Audit Department which had followed had cost the board a lot of money. The result of the investigation was that the Auditor-General did not think there was anything in it. •

"Allow me to make my statement," retorted Mr. Dyer. The board, he said, had got back its balance-sheet without a tag on it. The omission of the report on salaries from the minute-book was due to the inadvertence of the officer responsible for stencilling the minutes. The omission was noticed by the indexing officer after the July (1933) meeting, and* the report, which had been circulated to all members, was typed in the minutebook to complete the: record of business transacted at the June ' (1933) meeting. The chairman of the board in office at the time had stated that the report as it appeared in the min-ute-book was absolutely correct and that it was very likely that he was asked to certify the report, but that the matter was overlooked in the press of business. It was quite clear that

the minutes of June, 1933, w^ould have

been incomplete .without the report in question. Three officers "were af-

fected by the report in question and there would have to have been collusion on the part of the accountant.

the officers concerned, and the auditor

for anyone to receive payment in excess of the amount authorised by the

board. The Audit' Department's letter and certificate were a complete. refutation of Colonel •■ McDonald's absurd statement. •■'•■• -'•:.'" ;:

As the mover of the motion asking Colonel McDonald to make retraction oi his statements, .Mr. P.' Robertson said that after hearing Colonel McDonald he would still ask the Colonel to retract. He did not think Colonel Mc-

Donald had proved what he had set out to do, that the secretary had fraudulently altered the minute-book. He was firmly of the opinion that Colonel McDonald was under a delusion. He suggested that the Colonel drop the whole business.

H Colonel McDonald had an unprejudiced interest in the matter, why had he fastened on to one of the officers when there were three officers who had received increases? asked Mr. L. J. McDonald.

Colonel McDonald: Because he, was the responsible officer of the lot. "

Mr. McDonald contended that the whole thing was nothing more than a mare's nest in respect of which Colonel McDonald was actuated by his man-hunting expeditions. He was asking the public to believe that he was a sounder guardian angel of the public interest than the Audit Office. He did not think it was likely that Colonel McDonald would be able to "put that over." Members of the committee who had dealt with the salary question in 1933 said they remembered the procedure and it was exactly as recorded. He thought the integrity of the secretary had been established over and over again;

Mr. W. R. Nicol said that when Mr. Slonehouse produced from among his papers at home a copy of the report which Colonel McDonald, declared had not come before the board he was quite convinced that everything was in order. . .

"RELIGION AND RECREATION."

Colonel McDonald had kept on referring to an increase of £150, said Mr. Nicholls, but the recommendation had been that he get three annual increments of £50 each which was a different story. The board had listened to. a long diatribe by Colonel McDonald. There had not been a fresh note in" it; it had been stewed up from meeting to meeting. It was the sort of thing that seemed to be the colonel's religion and recreation. The colonel was never so happy as when he had some poor devil on the grid. His hisj tory showed that.

Colonel McDonald said he was proud of his history on the board, not of Mr. Nicholls's.

Mr. Nicholls: The taxpayers are paying for some of your work today.

"Spleen and spite," interjected Colonel McDonald a little later while Mr. Nicholls was speaking. "Are you the secretary's detective?" the colonel inquired.

Mr. Nicholls said he was standing up for the secretary, and was proud of it. "Spy," called out Colonel McDonald. Mr. Nicholls contended that Colonel McDonald had written to the secretary in the building and had then rung up a local messenger service to have the letter delivered. He had also opened the secretary's door arid tossed a letter in.

: Colonel McDonald: What has that to do with you? :

"I do say, emphatically, that for two years he (Colonel McDonald) has been trifling with this board, and wasting our time . . ." continued Mr. Nicholls.

Mr. J. Storehouse said he had been unable to understand why, after three years, this matter had been brought up. He had no hesitation in saying that the papers to which Colonel McDonald referred had been given to every member of the board.' ■

Mr. Hylton referred to the appointments committee order'paper .of June 20, 1933. That order paper, he said, would be issued to/members about June 14 or 15 for the" meeting to be "held on June 20. That y?as the date before the board meeting/; Mr. Forsyth, the then. chairman pit the board, would say that he raised :the question of his (Mr. Hylton's) salary being increased by three annual amounts, each of £50.' ■ , ■-. :-:;Vv ■ }^'$S\ ■ ■ .• . Mr. J. J. Clark said'he.knew quite well that a special committee had been set up to go into-the question of salaries, not only of. the secretary, but

TASMANIAN LETTERS,

also of two other .officers of the.bpard. He was quite sure that it was agreed to pay Mr. Hyllon first £50, and it was clearly understood that the secretary's salary would eventually be increased by £150. • Mr. Hylton said he did not do the stencilling of any of the minutes nor did he insert them in the minute book. It was true that he was the custodian of the minute book, under the law. but when the Colonel raised the question originally instead of trying to discover where the fault lay, he in\ mediately started attacking him. Mr Hylton added that he never gave any instructions as to the amount to hxi paid members of the staff. He had always left that to the accounts stall, and the amount paid out was checked by the Audit Department. If one penny had been paid out wrongfully it would have been discovered.

At this stage Colonel McDonald produced from his papers a letter from Tasmania on the cost of the centralised educational system. This letter, lit* said, referred to a letter of his of August 1, 1933, which, he contended, showed that he could not have written on the back of the report which it was alleged had been before the board in .lune of that year.

Mr. Hylton was absent from the room for a time, and when he returned he said that the first letter from the Tssmanian Department was dated Hobart, July 15. The letter acknowledged rnreipt of a letter from Colonel McDonald of the 28th ultimo, which was .fune 28.

Colonel McDonald thereupon alleged that the secretary had been opening his correspondence and seizing his lptters.

"In your own words, you were my greatest friend at that time," said Mr. Hylton. "You left this (the letter) with me."

After a little more discussion, the meeting passed on to the next business, the chairman stating that lie thought the questions asked had been definitely answered.