THE SECOND “CUT”

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11250, 30 June 1922, Page 7

THE SECOND “CUT”

EMPLOYEES OF THE STATE ■'CLASS PENALISATION IN ITS WORST FORM.” “AN INTOLERABLE POSITION.” To a “Now Zealand Times” reporter Mr F. W. Miliar, general secretary of the Public Service Association, which has combined with the Am alga mated Society of Railway Servants, the New Zealand Post and Telegraph Officers’ Association, and the New Zealand Railway Officers’ Institute, for the purpose of ’ exhausting every constitutional means of opposing any further encroachment on public service salaries, stated, on behalf of the four organisations concerned, which represent over 27,000 public servants throughout the Dominion, that if at the present stage tho Minister for Finance exercises his powers under the Public Expenditure Adjustment Act, and imposes a second salary cut on public servants as from July Ist, ho is taking a stop which is class taxation in its worst_ form, and is neither morally nor logically justified, particularly when the cost of living, as disclosed to the recent Arbitration Court’s finding, is still three points higher than it was in 1920, when the last cost of living increase in wages was granted. BELOW THE OPTS IDE WORKER. “Since that time,” continued Mr Millar, “the public servants have suffered an average reduction of 6s to 8s a week in ivages by the operation of the first salary cut as from January Ist last. The public service wages position to-day ia, therefore, considerably below that of the outside worker, and t® penalise the service further creates an intolerable position, and incidentally places thousands of public servants who are receiving the bare basic wage considerably below the bread and butter line. It is hardly necessary to point out the feeling which is already running high in all branches of the service on this question, which will he accentuated by a further salary attack, as has aptly been pointed out by the New Zealand 1 Welfare League this morning—an organisation which, surely, cannot be accused of undue leaning towards the public service. “We maintain that the imposition of a second salary cut even violates the principle of the Public Expenditure Adjustment Act itself, which states that before the Minister for Finance gazettes any further reduction in salaries the matter shall be referred to tho president of the Arbitration Court, who shall compare the cost of living figures as at March 31st, 1920, and at May 31st. 1922, and that any further salary reduction shall bear relation so far as practicable to any further fall In the oost of living. COST OF LIVING. “There is no further fall in the cost of living, as I have already pointed out. Apart from this, so fax as my own association is concerned, we had a definite understanding with the Government that there should be no eeoond salary cut until the cost of living had touched 42 per cent, above pre-war level, andi last month it was at 65 per cent, above pre-war level, with soma of the food groups still rising. ‘Tf the cost of living figures are to be ignored, then nothing but the fact that the country waa on the verge of bankruptcy could justify the suggested 1 action of the Government. Whatever the financial difficulties the Government may have to contend with, the Prime Minister must be convicted out of his own mouth if he maintains that the country is in that position. Just a few weeks ago he stated in the South Island thiat he and a few others could see the sun behind the economic clouds. Our position can best be expressed by stating that if the Prime Minister expeots the sun to burst into full radiance at the expense of the public servants, then he must reasonably expect that every public servant will be up in arms if his fair share of that Bun’s br-vr.v* Is not forthcoming. We recognise that no statesman should shrink from what he conceives to he his duty because of that fact, but we maintain that it is utterly unstatesmanlike to impose a special tax on public servants. We Toalise the necessity for economy and every public servant, we are sure, is prepared to suffer gladly any hardships that necessary reduction in expenditure may impose, provided that the burden is borne equally by every other section of the community. ECONOMY COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATIONS. “When representatives of the four organisations recently interviewed the Prime Minister on this subject he asked ue a question as to the manner in which he could increase his revenue, which justifies ub In pointing out that the Government is still silent on what was recommended by the Economy Commission of last year, and how many of those recommendations have been carried out. We believe that there is still room for increased revenue amongst some of the departments. As an instanoe, let me refer to the Marine Department and the fact that the fees far surveys of ships have not been Increased since 1882, the inspection of machinery fees since 1908 (except a minor amendment in 1914), nor have the lighthouse dues been altered since 1895. DOMINION’S FINANCIAL POSITION. “As to the financial position and tothe faot that last year’s finances showed a deficit of £330,000, we would like to remind the public of the fact that foi the year ended March 31st, 1921, there was a big increase in the Customs revenue because of the abnormal imports in that period. It was known by the Government at that time that there would be a corresponding decrease for the year ending March 31st-, 1922, and we maintain that in the circumstances that part of the accumulated surplus which we must assume prudent finance has kept in liquid form, should be used to make up the deficiency. SALARIES NOT TOO HIGH. “Apart from the cost of living increases, which, as has been pointed out, are considerably less than those granted to outside workers, it cannot be maintained that the rates of salary payable in any branch of the public service are too high, for in the railway

service wages were within the last two years the subject of review by special boards set up by tho Government, on which business interests were fully represented, and in the general public service they have been fixed by the Public Servico Commissioner after rigid investigation and inquiry, arid also bv appeal boards on whk-li business interests are again represented.”

IN PARLIAMENT QUESTIONS RAISE!) IN HOUSE OF HEPR ESENTATIVES. WHAT OF THE COURT? The Leader of the Opposition (Mr T M. Milford) raised the question of the cost of living in the House of Representatives yesterday, when he caked whether the Minister for Finance had applied, under section 7 of the Public Expenditure Act, 1921, to the judge ol the Arbitration Court for a report in regard to the cost of living; whether he had received a reply; and, if so, would he lay tho reply on tho table of the House, so that members might have a chance to discuss it before tho “cut” in salaries actually was made? Mr Massey said he would like to remind members that it had been usual, when they intended to ask questions without notice, for members to notify the Minister concerned before noon. He had not been notified of this quea tion, and would content himself with saying that the reply to the first portion of the question was in the affirmative. To the second part he could only say that he had not got the report in a form in which he could lay it before Parliament, but probably, in due course, he would be able to comply with that request. As to the third part of the question, he was going to abide By the law. He was going to tell the House exactly what the financial position was, and it would then be for the House to decide what to do. ANOTHER PETITION

SUPERANNUATED PUBLIC SERVANTS. “AN ARBITRARY DEMAND.” On behalf of the Federated Association ot Superannuated: Public Servants of New Zealand, Mr W. A. Verboh, M.P., presented to Parliament yesterday a petition protesting against a bonus “cut.” , There appeared, argued the petition, to he more than grave doubt whether the recent retrenchment in public expenditure really applied to the boons granted to superannuated public servants, to the widows of public servants, and: to their children of school age. It also pointed out that at present the widows and children of railway servants received no allowance under the railway superannuation system, that the insistence :by tho Finance Department that ap.nJdcants for the bonus for the year ending March 31st, 1922, must conform to an arbitrary demand for particulars of livelihood, “S, procedure at once degrading and unwarranted-, ’ ’ and that in ocmsequemOQ many superannuated public servants have been and are still penalised and deprived of the bonus; and the petitioners pray for an inquiry by the House of Representatives into the facts o$ the case, for the hearing of evidence, and for such relief as it deems fit.

QUEBTIONS IN HOUSE

Notioo of the following questions was given:— Air C. E. Statham (Dunedin Central) to ask tho Prime Minister whether, before coming to any decision with regard to the second oat in the public service salaries, he wifi give the House an opportunity of discussing the whole question? Mr T. B. Y. Sodden (Westland) to ask the Minister for Finance whether, in view of the continued high cost of living, he will refrain from mmlring any further reduction of salaries of civil servants, as provided in the Public Expenditure Adjustment Aot, 1921-22 P Mr S. G. Smith (Taranaki) to aak the Minister for Finance whether, in any further cats in salaries under the provisions of the Public Service Expenditure Act, it is proposed to exclude pu-blio school teachers? Mr Horn (Wakatipu) to ask the Minister for Finance whether, considering the report of the Arbitration Court and the cost of living generally, he will see that no reduction takes place in the salaries of any married men in the public service? " Air J. Edie (Bruce) to aak the Minister for Finance whether he will refrain from making any further cut in salaries of £320 and under?