DISMISSAL OF APPEAL

Southland Times, Issue 24986, 24 February 1943, Page 4

DISMISSAL OF APPEAL

Mr C. G. Scrimgeour To Serve In Amy

(P.A.) WELLINGTON, February 23. An appeal against military service on I the grounds of public interest and I hardship made by Colin Graham Scrimgeour, Controller of the National Commercial Broadcasting Service, was dismissed today by the Arrped Forces Appeal Board, Wellington. In respect •of hardship, Mr Scrimgeour asked only for an adjournment of service to settle his personal affairs and make certain arrangements for his recently widowed sister with four children. The board directed, in dismissing the hardship ground, that he be not called up before May 15, 1943. Four witnesses were subpeonaed by Mr Scrimgeour, including the Minister of Broadcasting, the Hon. D. Wilson. Mr Scrimgeour conducted his own appeal. _ The Crown representative, Mr C. O. Bell, said the appeal was lodged by the Director of National Service to give Mr Scrimgeour an opportunity to place his case before the board and so prevent any injustice or apparent injustice. Mr Scrimgeour was grade 1, aged 40, arid was posted to camp last Thursday week. No appeal had been lodged for him by the Director of National Service or the Minister. Mr Scrimgeour said the then Prime Minister by the Broadcasting Act 1936 excluded him, not at his request, from Public Service Commissioner control. He appeared before a committee which examined cases for appeal and thought a full adjournment was recommended for him. When the mobilization order arrived for him it was his first knowledge that no appeal had been lodged.

MOBILIZATION ORDER He communicated with the National Service Department, as a result of which the appeal now being heard was arranged. He also telephoned Captain Howlett, of Area 5, who signed the mobilization order and who said the order had been cancelled pending the appeal and that since the order was issued all mobilization orders had in any case been cancelled. Therefore, an appeal seemed unnecessary. Mr Bell: You think you were particularly singled out? Mr Scrimgeour: It would appear so. Mr Scrimgeour put his own case, which was that in his opinion the work he did for the State was of an essential nature.

In reply to Mr Bell, Mr Scrimgeour denied that Mr Wilson told him on November 17 that there would be no appeal for him but that he had his own rights of appeal. He joined the Auckland Waterside Workers’ Union when Mr Wilson told him the National and Commercial Services were going to be amalgamated and that he would be made second to Professor James Shelley, Director of the National Service. He said then he would rather go on the wharf and Mr Wilson said he could not. He accepted the challenge and was admitted to the union.

Mr Bell: Are you a Communist? Mr Scrimgeour: Certainly not. APOLOGY TENDERED.

Mr Parlane, a member of the board, said that the question should not have been asked. The board was not concerned with political beliefs. Mr Scrimgeour replied that if political matters were going to be introduced he would ask permission to make a statement about certain political aspects which had put him in the position he was in today. At the end of the hearing Mr Bell apologized to Mr Scrimgeour for asking the question, saying it was done in the heat of the moment. In a statement Mr Wilson said that on November 17 Mr Scrimgeour called. He told Mr Scrimgeour he would not appeal for anyone. It was painful to hear Mr Scrimgeour suggest there was something behind the failure to appeal for him, but it was the policy of the Government and Ministers not to appeal for their subordinates. He had advocated reorganization and amalgamation of the broadcasting services for some time and thought a directorgeneral should be appointed. He knew of a suitable man. He would say that if Mr Scrimgeour went into the armed forces it would not affect public interest, the war effort or broadcasting one iota, and he might get more willing and loyal service from his successor. This closed the public interest side of the appeal. The hardship evidence was simply that Mr Scrimgeour’s bro-ther-in-law had been killed in an accident, leaving no estate of consequence, and he wanted time to assist his sister as well as arrange his own affairs. It was his duty to serve. He did not want unduly to delay doing so. He was married himself with three children aged 16, 14 and 10 respectively. This closed the appeal after 90 minutes. The board gave its decision after a brief adjournment.