CIVIL SERVICE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22489, 5 August 1936, Page 17

CIVIL SERVICE

POLITICAL BIGHTS DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE SUBSCRIPTION TO PARTY FUNDS [I)V TELKGRAI'H—SI'KCIAT, IIKI'OHTKR] WELLINGTON, Tuesday The wisdom of granting lull political rights to civil servants was discussed at length in the House of Representatives to-day when the second-reading debate on the Political Disabilities Removal Hill was opened. Apart from a clash between the .Minister of Public Works, the Hon. I'. Semple, and .Air. K. J. Holvoake (Opposition—AlotuekiO reKai*(linix the former's actions in dealing with the public works dispute at Alotueka some weeks ago, 11 w discussion proceeded on fairlv academic lines the debate opened with a brief second-reading speech by the Prime Minister, Mr. Savage, who said the bill only proposed to give the civil servant the same political rights a.s anyone else. Beciui.sc a man was a civil servant that was no reason why he should be disqualified irom the ordinary civi' privileges that others enjoyed. ''lt has been argued that there is nothing at present to prevent a civil servant from standing for election to Parliament, ' the Prime Minister continued. " but 1 know that some of them have been disqualified. We are going i to see to it that they do not forfeit | their rights just because they are emj ployees of the State." Money for Political Purposes Referring to the clause empowering : associations of civil servants and trades and industrial unions to make contributions to political funds, Air. Savage said lie knew of quite a number of other organisations which made such , payments. There was no reason why civil I servants or union members should be | debarred from employing funds for ! political purposes, and the proposal was in no way revolutionary or destructive of democratic rights. " Under this bill," the Prime Minister added, " any individual or association of individuals inside the civil service or outside of it will have ordinary civil rights. 1 have sufficient confidence in members of the civil service to know that they will use their political rights just as intelligently as anyone else. Perhaps that is the reason why they have been denied them in the past." Opposition's View The Loader of the Opposition, the Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes, said it had always been a tradition of the public service that its members refrained from taking one side or another in politics. At the same time, there had never been any difficulty in the way of a civil servant becoming a candidate for Parliament, provided that he resigned before taking part in an election campaign. The practice in the civil service of Great Britain was that an officer of the State relinquished his position at the outset of his electioneering. The Chancellor of the Exchequer in the first Labour Government in Britain, Mr. Philip Snowden, had declared that no civil servant should take an open part in political affairs while retaining his official position, and the majority of civil servants in New Zealand were also of that opinion. The bill now before the House enabled a member of the public service to contest a seat for Parliament and still remain in the service. "Impartiality National Asset" There was no desire on the part of the Opposition to exclude civil servants from Parliament, said Mr. Forbes, but it was in the interests of the service that they should resign before taking part in an election campaign. Their impartiality was a valuable national asset. Air. Forbes said the Opposition had no objection to the repeal of section 59 of the Finance Act, 1932, which provided in effect that no civil servant had a right to do anything that would bring the Government into disrepute. At the time it was placed on the Statute Book there was a good deal of unrest and disorder. Several other speakers took part in the debate, which was interrupted by the adjournment at 5.20 p.m.