PUBLIC TRUST OFFICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIV, Issue 16656, 28 September 1917, Page 4

PUBLIC TRUST OFFICE.

NEW CLAUSE IN BILL.

MINISTERIAL AUTHORITY. [by TELEGRAFH.—SPECIAL correspondents ' WELLINGTON. Thursday. The Public Trust Amendment Bill was further considered in Committee in the Legislative Council to-day. Sir Francis Bell said that clause 13 had been postponed in consequence of a weakness, to which attention had been diia,wn by Sir William $all Jones. It appeared : that under the clause, as originally j adopted, the two Assistant Trustees could ! over-ride the Public Trustee at a meeting of the board. It was proposed now to add the following new provision:—"lf tho Public Trustee dissents from any determination of the board on any matter he may suspend the operation of such determination, and may refer such matter to the Minister for Finance for decision. The derision of the Minister for Finance in anv matter so referred shall be final, and shall take effect in lieu of such deterruination of the board." The Hon. J. T. Paul said he regarded the proposal with some misgivings. It seemed to open the door to political influence of an undesirable land. Sir Walter Buchanan said the two Assistant Trustees might differ from the Public Trustee on many points, and reference might have to be made to the Minister very frequently. Many difficult i points of policy came forward for coni sideration. I Sir Francis Bell said there had always been a board, and the Public Trustee had never had unfettered authority. The Milllister for Finance was chairman of the ! board at the present time, and on the board were the Public Trustee and various State officials. The veto of the Minister had always existed, and was being retained. Now that a. Public Trust Board was being constituted within the ■Public Trust Office, the new clause was J added to the Bill. W. Earnshaw said it was a grave mistake to take a member of the I Public Service Board and place him in another high office. The Government was ; interfering with a board constituted '' ostensibly to prevent political interference ■■ with the public service. The Hon J. T. Paul said that the promotion of a public service commissioner was an incident that might sap the independence of the Public Service Board. It might serve the interests of the supposedly independent commissioners to nave the goodwill of the Government. The Hon. A. T. Maginity said the placing of final power in the hands of the i Minister for Finance was not desirable. The Supreme Court would have made a better arbiter. Sir Francis Bell, in reply, said the only effect of rejecting the Bill would be to leave the appointment in the hands of the Government. The Bill was read a third time and