PUBLIC MONEYS

Southland Times, Issue 19256, 21 June 1921, Page 5

PUBLIC MONEYS

DEFALCATIONS BY OFFICIALS PROSECUTIbNS IN ALL CASES STATEMENT BY ACTING-PREMIER. (Per United Press Association.) WELLINGTON, June 20. In the past there has been doubt whether the Finance Act makes compulsory the prosecution of all public servants guilty of misappropriation of public money. The point has now been settled definitely. Prosecutions will follow in all such cases. This fact was mentioned by the Acting-Prime Minister, Sir Francis Bell, when speaking at the opening of the annual conference of the executive council of the New Zealand Public Service Association. It might interest them, he said, to hear of some circumstances which had lately arisen between the Government and another authority charged with the control of the finances of the Government. No doubt they knew that the Auditor and Con-troller-General and all his staff were Parliamentary officers not under the control of the Government, and in many cases having authority to refuse money for purposes required by the Government because the money was not voted by Parliament. Illustrating the power of this authority he said it had been desired by the Imperial Government, with the approval of the New Zealand Government, to give the late Governor-Gen-eral three months’ leave of absence on full pay. The New Zealand Government desired to pay that amount out of unauthorised expenditure. The Auditor-General, however, would not allow the Government to draw a cheque, quite properly so far as the money was required for the administration. The Governor-General was head of the administration, and it might have been for the amusement of a member of the Government. The result was that a special Act of Parliament had to be passed to make provision for the very small sum involved. He had mentioned this instance to show the tremendous power of this Parliamentary body, and then to tell them that there did not appear in some respects to be a quite sufficient guard set to the door of the store-room as well as a guard to the Treasury chest. “Mind you,” he continued, “I want you all to understand that I do not share in suggesting that there has been an increase in the number of persona having charge ol either money or stores who have failed in their trust. I do not think that at all, but there have been large numbers of additional helpers appointed to the public service, and naturally there have been added men who were not trained in the strict sense of accounting and more than that in the strict sense of honesty which are the guiding principles of the service.” There was no doubt that in the interest of the public servants and the name of the service, as well as for the credit of the Government, which was of secondary consideration, these safeguards should be increased. Public stores and all public property were in future to be under a new control under very definite regulations. Discussion had arisen as to whether the Finance Act imposed upon the auditors, the servants of Parliament, the duty of prosecuting in every case where there had been defalcation in connection with public money not a mere mistake. Nobody had a right to prosecute for’mistake, but for the failure to account for public money expended for private purposes. The Finance Act required the Audit Office to prosecute in all such cases, but there had been misapprehension as to whether this was limited to discoveries by the Audit Office itself. That point had been settled definitely by legal interpretation, and the position was now, and he was sure it would have the approval of the service, that no public servant who was actually guilty of misappropriation of public money could escape prosecution. He was sure that that would be received by the members of the public service as a safeguard of the honour and credit of the service. The president of the Association, Mr W. M. Wright, said it was some years ago since the executive of the Association had recoriimended certain steps to give effect to the ideas conveyed in the Minister’s remarks. Owing to pressure of business during war time the matter had not received definite consideration, but it would arise in the course of the business of the conference. The executive hoped it would be given an opportunity of discussing the question with the Minister at a later stage.