DEFENCE EXPENDITURE.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume LXXVII, Issue LXXVII, 3 August 1918, Page 4

DEFENCE EXPENDITURE.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION. The report of the Special Commission., consisting of »Sir itobert Anderson (chairman) and Messrs JPeLir Ban- and Charles Rhodes, set up to enquire into and report upon the efficiency and economy of the financial administration of the Defence Department and of other departments connected with the defence administration has been published. The document is bulky, containing (j6 pages, and can only be briefly revieweu. The Commission states that in ito enquiry no hindrance of any kind was experienced, but mentions that the position was awkward in that the scope of enquiry embraced only the administrative, portions of the Defence Department, and had nothing to do with training; but the two seemed often inevitably to overlap. "Broadly," continues tiie report, "our opinion is that a great work has been well done. Errors were bound to occur under the conditions in which the Dominion suddenly found its-elf called upon to wage war, without warning and with scant previous preparation," "With special satisfaction we desire to emphasise the fact that, with an expenditure of £40,000,000, #we have discovered no case of fraud, embezzlement or collusion, which, as far as we can ascertain, is a, unique record." In dealing with headquarters and other administrative branches of the service, the Commission criticises tht> combining of the positions of General Officer Commanding and.OjuartermasterGeneral, adding: "It is clear to us that the combined duties of General Officer Commanding and QuartermasterGeneral could pot have been performed ! had the work buen entrusted to a less practical man than the General Officer Commanding, and had he not had the energy and sustaining power of such a man as the present Minister of Defence . behind niui, Uie wiioie administrative I system would have been, in our opinion, I in serious jeopardy, instead of navmg achieved, as it has done, a great masure of success. We are of tne deliberate opinion that this 'is largely due to the General Officer Commanding'^ clos application to his work, his wide practical knowledge or local conditions, his sympathy with the officers under him, and his long experiences as a soldier." The report pays a tribute to officers in charge of tne brancnes, and the Commission ■snys that "in adversely criticising some of those officers it will be understood that they nave tailed not in will, but in skill." In dealing with the foiir chief military districts, the Commission found that there were too many officers on the pay roll, especially in view of the reduced Territorial training ill October of last year a conference ol! •officers commanding districts and the i General Officer Commanding discussed the question of reduction of staffs, and ' made recommendations, some of which ' were carried out. "it is amusing to ': note, however, that the suggestion of the Officer Commanding the Wellington ' district, pointing out where savings 1 could be effected amounting to £17,01)0 ■ a year, was coldly received and com--5 mented on by the Adjutant-General— 1 not so much because he doubted the > possibility of making this big saving,

but because the Officer Commanding tile district had gone 'beyond the order of leave,' as it were., and suggested the j lopping off of excrescences which had not ' been included in the subject matter of the conference!" Along such lines did the Commission proceed to analyse and to sift the evidence before it, and criticised the lack of encouragement shown to subordinates, many suggestions of probable value being coldly received by headquarters. "It would be well if a more judicial frame of niiiid could be «a---isumed, so that suggestions" coming along would be treated on their merits, and not as 'piffle,' because originating from a person lightly regarded or of humbler rank." The Commission considered "we have been too prone in the Dominions to copy English army , methods because they are Englisn aruij ; .methods." !In analysing accounts the Commis-sion-found that "the total amount overpaid to troops up to 28th February, 1918, was less than £14,000 (mainly in Egypt and Gallipoli), of which one-half will ultimately have to be written off— a. very small; sum indeed, considering '■ the magnitude of pay transactions and ! the difficult conditions attending the Gallipoli campaign. All , S uch losses seem to have definitely ceased some time ago.'' The cost of maintaining New Zealand troops abroad was shown to be: Un Gallipoli, 6s per day; in Egypt, 3s; in France, ss. Gun and howitzer amrounition is charged for, in addition to capitation, at a daily rate per head on quarterly basis: June quarter 191g, 2s 3d; September quarter, 1916, 7s lid; December quarter, 1916, 4s 9d. Certain credits are allowed New Zealand, .such as free ordnance stores issued from New Zealand stocks. "The audit of expenditure incurred in connection with the Expeditionary , Force work in Egypt and Em-ope does , not seem so satisfactory," and the ! Commission recommends that a branch jof the Audit Department should be es- | tablished in London to pre-audit and j post : audit all expenditure. The sug- : gestion is made that instead of payment being made for each calendar j month, calculated on the varying numj ber, of days from 28 to 31, it would be easier and cheaper to pay either for four week* (28 days) or one-twelfth of the total annual payment monthly. The cost of audit of the Defence Department's transactions for last year j was about Is per cent. "The officer .in charge of war expenses has done ex- { cellent work, and has had a hard ro» jto hoe," states the report. The en- ! quiry found much complication in the | system of pay and allowances owing to i differential rates and seeming anomI alies. and were constantly met with cases of lieutenants drawing larger in- , coni&s than captains; captains moro i than majors and even lieut.-colonels : majors more than colonels; and camp I commandants received more than their : superior officer; while the money re' ( ceived by non-commissioned officers sometimes exceeded that paid to con) i missioned officers. Such vagaries aroso | chiefly out of the system of allowances ; that had been introduced from time to i time. The annual total .salaries to all ; officers at present employed in New ! Zealand is £110,139, and allowances add a further £38,239 to their income, I allowances bearing to pay being 34.7 per cent.; but officers on camp staffs draw allowances equal to 59.6 per cent of their pay. The Commission considers that though precedents die hard, New Zealand might well apply its own common sense and abandon professional pay and decide on one common field service allowance for all officers actually in the field and affirm a camp allowance for those in barracks at a standing camp. "This would certainly eitect a considerable economy and sweep away a system that has been flagrantly abused." The system in military stores, equipment and supplies is similarly reviewed at great length, also the training camps, hospital ships transports, Military Service Boards, etc., much of the evidence haying been telegraphed during the. sittings of the Commission. In conclusion, the Commission states"ln our opinion the organisation of the Defence Department, on its administrative side, is faulty. The trouble has come about through the casual addition

of branches necessitated by the Depart- 1 ment's growing activities and require- J ments, without a guiding hand to eco- < nonucally fit them in. The motive was really economy, and the reluctance to create a new office which would necessarily command & fairly liberal salary. Parliament and "the man in the street are rather to blame for this timidity; for the tendency of a democratic community is to think that new appointments carrying a salary of £1000 a year or mor e are unnecessary or extravagant. . . The fact is that the appointment of such a man would have I saved in every week the yearly salary of himself and his necessary staff. "Our recommendation is that there be a general officer in charge of Administration, under whom will come all administrative branches. . . 1 'We can find no room in the Defence Department for an AdjutantGeneral's Branch; but in saying this we wish it to be understood that no reflection is intended on the AdjutantGeneral, who has 'scorned delights and lived laborious days' since the war commenced, and has done a huge amount of war work, to the total neglect of his private business. If the Government see fit to adopt these recommendations the Adjutant-General's Branch, and the present occupant of that office is prepared to do further military service, ample opportunity awaits, him elsewhere for his ability and zeal.

The following recommendations made throughout the report can safely be carried out.

Audit: Establish a branch in London. Appoint a representative in each military district. Camps: Change brigade system for battalion system. Reduce establishments.

Medical Examination Boards: Reduce lay staff of each to three persons. Gazette names of men reclassified as C 2, giving reasons. Pay and Allowances: Payment of allotments, separation allowances, etc., should be lunar, or for one-twelfth of a year, instead of by calendar month. Abolish groomage allowance. Abolish professional pay in certain cases. Abolish field-service allowances in standing camps. Establish camp allowance and field allowance on flat rate. Increase pay of lieutenants on staff work in New Zealand. Increase travelling allowance of captains and lieutenants. Reduce fees of chairmen of Military Service Boards.

Stores: Brand clothing and equipment to prevent pilfering.

Sir James Allen adds a memorandum to the report stating that "the Government appreciates very much the suggestions and recommendations set out in the report. These will be given every consideration, and where not already in operation will be adopted, if found economical and applicable in principle."