PUBLIC SERVICE

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume 80, 30 August 1945, Page 5

PUBLIC SERVICE

question of Appointments POLITICAL FOLLOWERS OPPOSITION ALLEGATIONS (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) Wellington This Day In the last decade there had been so much political chicanery and so much of the back-door method in the making of appointments to posts that should have gone to regular members of the Public Service that there was a tremendous spirit of unrest throughout the service, said Mr. K. J. Holyoake (National, Pahiatua) in the debate on the Imprest Supply Bill in tht House of Representatives last evening. Such Tammany Hall methods, he said, must cease in the interests of the country generally and particularly in justice and equity to the Public Service.

The Public Service should be above and beyond party politics, but it was questionable whether that standard had been maintained in recent years, said Mr Holyoake. With the advent of the Labour Government there was a considerable increase in the number of new Departments, and bureaux, tribunals, licensing authorities and commissions were set up—set up by a Government which said it would have no more boards, that Ministers would have absolute control and that no control would be delegated to anyone outside the House. One of the main causes of unrest with the new bodies and new Departments was that the chief executive officers in the main had been political appointments, not of public servants but of political servants. That was a matter that rankled in the mind of the public servant. The genuine public servant had almost invariably been passed over, and the new political servants wielded tremendous power. Not the only, but the main qualification was that the applicant should have either been a trade union secretary of long standing or a staunch supporter of the Government. One of the most pronounced appointments was that of the president of the Labour Party (Mr James Roberts) as a member of the Waterfront Control Commission. From what was known of the industrial strife and the cost of loading and of turning ships around, he could not see that there had been any change of a revolutionary nature in the handling at the waterfront. The country of course, should be grateful to Mr Roberts for accepting ths position at a miserable £25 a week. That was purely a political appointment. The Prime Minister (Mr Fraser): And a very good one. Mr Holyoake continued that the Waterside Workers’ Union had released quite a number of its executives to take up positions that ranged from £BOO to £9OO a year. It might have been just coincidences that they had good standing in the Labour Party, but it was a coincidence that rankled with the public servants. Mr Fraser interjected that if a man with knowledge of the waterfront were required the right place to find him was on the waterfront. TRANSPORT APPOINTMENTS Mr Holyoake countered by referring to the Transport Licensing Authorities and asking what experiences in transport matters they had had before their appointment. They wielded the power of economic life and death. An Opposition voice: Commissars. Mr Holyoake; They are at least deputy dictators in the world of transport. Why in the name of iutsice were public servants thoroughly experienced in transport passed over in those appointments? continued Mr Holyoake. What did Mr Phelan, who controlled transport in the northern part of the North Island, know about transport? He was a trade union secretary. Mr Skoglund, the authority in the southern part of the island, was a town clerk from Stratford but he had stood for Parliament as a Labour candidate and perhaps that was sufficient qualification. Mr Langford, the Transport Licensing Authority controlling northern South Island, was a country storekeeper in Winchester Canterbury. It might be just coincidence that he had been defeated twice of three times as a Labour candidate. For each of the four particular jobs he had mentioned the Government should have gone to the legimate public servants who had given a lifetime of loyal service. The establishments of Land Sales Committees under the Land Sales Act was another splendid opportunity for appointing defeated Labour candidates and trade unions secretaries. TAMMANY SCHOOLS METHOD There was little enough opportunity in the large Departments of State, as there were so few posts at the top said Mr Holyoake. Referring to what he called Tammany Hall methods, he said he understood that Tammany Hall in America was a political organisation outside the actual Government which wielded such power that it could demand position and favour; and in New Zealand there was an organisation that had sufficient power to say to the Government that certain men must be appointed because of their service to the party. The Public Service must be restored to its original place and carry its traditional function in the public life of the Dominion. WARM EXCHANGES Warm exchanges between the Minister of Finance (Mr Nash) and Mr G. H. Mackley National Master ton) ensued when Mr Mackley referred to the case of Mr John Reid, First Secretary at the New Zealand Legation in Washington. He said Mr Reid had served Mr Nash in a private capacity for a long period, subsequent to which he was placed in the Public Service and today has superseded men of long experience. He would challenge Mr Nash to deny that Mr Reid served him when he was a resident of Lower Hutt. Mr Nash: Never. Mr Mackley retorted that it was wellknown to the residents of Lower Hutt that that was the case. Following on the association of Mr Reid with the Minister he was appointed to the position in the Government service and today occupied a most important position in Washington, superseding officers with long and creditable service. That was one instance of Tammanyism so far as the present Government was concerned. Mr Mackley went on to refer to the case of the appointment of the inspector of Government motor vehicles. That was an appointment made purely out of consideration for the service rendered by that individual to the then Prime Minister, he said. There were sufficient appointments made from outside the Public Service at the behest of the Government to indicate clearly that the Public Service Commissioner did not have any say in regard to them. Earlier in his speech Mr Mackley, former General Manager of Railways, said he had been in the Public Service for 40 years and from his experience the position for the Public Service was more unsatisfactory under the Labour Government than under any other previous Government of which he had experience. MR SEMPLE’S REPLY The Minister of Railways (Mr Semple) said that no doubt Mr Mackley would deny that at the beginning

of his experience as a Minister, Mr Mackley said to him, “Thank God the Public Service can now breathe freely.” Mr Mackley: I deny that absolutely. Mr Semple continued that Mr Mackley was a member of a committee appointed by the Government to bring down proposals in connection with control of transport and he was one of the most indefatigable foes of road transport operators. He wanted them all off the road. Mr Mackley: That is not true. The Minister replied that he had records showing that Mr Mackley appealed against licenses being given even to operators not competing with the railways. N The Transport Licensing Authorities had done great service. Why should public servants holding permanent positions be taken out of their jobs for a temporary job such as that held by the authorities? The Prime Minister: And at less salary.

Mr Semple added that the gentlemen who held the position of transport authorities had the confidence of the complete transport system of the Dominion. As for the political opinions of any of them, his reply was thai a man’s opinions constituted no reason for barring him from any position. Mr Holyoake (National, Pahiatua): The sole qualification? Mr Semple asked why Government servants should be required to monopolise all the positions which had to be filled. The Minister of Justice (Mr Mason) said Mr Mackley had spoken of how distressed the civil servants were under the present Government. He would remind him of the picture he painted when the Government first came into office. Mr Mackley, as General Manager of Railways, was his second visitor when he was appointed Minister. It was an unforgettable experience, because he cojld not remember meeting a man under such great emotional stress. He told of the appalling oppression and iniquity that had been inflicted upon him through the medium of the Railways Board, which, he said, had regard for neither the men nor the public. So great was Mr Mackley’s emotion and so great his relief at the change of Government that he (the Minister) feared he might be on the verge of a mental breakdown. How could Mr Mackley reconcile that attitude with the opinions he had expressed in the debate? MR REID’S POSITION Replying to the debate, Mr Nash said he might have given Mr Reid a job to do as a lawyer, but apart from that he had not employed him privt ately. When he became a Minister in 1936 Mr Reid came to him and said he would like to work for him, and he was appointed as a secretary at £3OO a year. He applied for admission to the Public Service and was accepted. When he (Mr Nash) went to Washington, he understood that Mr Reid applied for a position in the Treasury and was appointed as a member of the Public Service. Mr Mackley had attacked the character of one of the cleanest men who had ever worked for him. Mr Reid’s appointment to the Treasury was appealed against, but the Appeal Board dismissed the appeal, confirming his appointment.

Mr Mackley: Who appointed him to Washington? Mr Nash said he could not do that. Mr Reid had been appointed to Washington on his recommendation. It was necessary to determine in connection with overseas diplomatic appointments whether a man were particularly fitted for the job. The appointment had been made according to the standard procedure of the public service. The member for Masterton should ask the Leader of the Opposition and Mr Doidge whether they thought Mr Reid was competent. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Holland) said he would say without hesitation that Mr Reid’s work was of a high order. Mr Nash said that Mr Holyoake had stated that the Public Service should be kept outside party politics. There was a lot to be said for that but also a lot to be said on the other side. There were about 70,000 Government employees. Was it suggested that they ought not to have any thinking capacity that they could use for the benefit of the country? Mr Holyoake: I didn’t use it in that sense and the M/nister knows it. I said the question of the administration of the public service should be outside politics. * ’ Mr Nash said he agreed with that. The inference he had taken from Mr Holyoake’s statement was that public servants should keep out of party politics. He agreed that there should not be any discrimination in favour or against a person because of the party to which he belonged. Dealing with the question of appointments to the public service, Mr Nash said it would have been impossible to run the country during the past five years without outsfSe appointments. It had been necessary to have men who understood textiles, oil, engineering, purchasing and so on. Every public servant ought ta have the right to go from the bottom to the top, but to say that no one outside the public service should be appointed to a job requiring a certain competency was entirely wrong. On the other hand, if there were someone inside the public service who could best do the job he should be appointed. The test should be who best could do the job. with preference always to the public servant if he measured up to, that requirement.