SALE OF ARMY VEHICLES

Southland Times, Issue 25546, 14 December 1944, Page 3

SALE OF ARMY VEHICLES

Procedure Reviewed By Committee (P.A.) WELLINGTON, December 13. The disposal of army vehicles was discussed in the House of Representatives today when the Public Accounts Committee presented a unanimous report on the annual report of the Controller and Auditor-General. The report made particular reference to the sale of the vehicles and the administration of the Ministry of Supply. . The report stated that the committee agreed that the comments of the Controller and Auditor-General were substantially in accordance with the facts as he found them. In extenuation the committee found that there had been considerable difficulty in obtaining sufficient and trained staff, and also in improvising methods of dealing with sudden emergencies. VALUERS’ METHODS Referring to the disposal of army vehicles, the report said it was evident that all valuers appointed to value vehicles did not follow the same procedure on all occasions, and the officials acting as disposal officers did not always have written authority to act. Many of the arrangements for valuing and disposal were made in discussions and over the telephone, and as the conversations were not confirmed in writing confusion arose as to the precise arrangements made. The official who acted for a period as disposal officer in Christchurch on behalf of the Ministry of Supply exceeded his duties by granting price concessions to two army officers without proper authority and also supplied petrol to purchasers of motor vehicles in excess of the authorized quantity. Administrative difficulties were created by the failure of the then chief valuer to cooperate with the Army Vehicle Disposal Board, to which he was attached as technical adviser. This attitude of the officers referred to towards those in authority was responsible for the work of disposal being temporarily disturbed and also for the development of unnecessary friction. With the exception of those cases where the disposal officer exceeded his authority by granting special allowances, cars were sold in accordance with the then policy of the Ministry of Supply at values supported by a competent valuer. Proceedings were taken against those involved in the handing over and acceptance of non-army or Government petrol, tor breaches of the Oil Fuel Regulations. In addition, army officers had now been surcharged for work done on the cars after the valuation, unauthorized running on private occasions by army vehicles and for discounts. given in two cases which were, not in accordance with the regulations. The surcharges amounted to £142/16/10, of which £127/7/- had been paid into the Public Account to date and the Audi-tor-General stated that arrangements had been made for the recovery of the remainder. Further inquiries were being made to see if other action was warranted. ARMED FORCES’ ACCOUNTS “In view of the investigations made by the committee last year into the accounts of the armed forces, the report adds, “the committee is pleased to note that this year the Auditor-Gene-ral reports that substantial improvements have been made though matters are still not wholly satisfactory.” The chairman of the committee, Mr T. H. McCombs (Lab., Lyttelton), said matters had not been completed These had been referred to the Controller and Auditor-General for investigation, with a request that he report back. to the committee if necessary. The inquiry had been a long one and the evidence taken filled about 800 pages. He moved that the committee’s report lie on the table. In reply to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Holland, the. Prime Minister, Mr Fraser, said the debate on the report could go on to the tea adjournment and could be resumed tomorrow morning, as he proposed to ask the House to meet at 10.30 to enable them to finish the business of the session by Friday morning. Mr W. J. Polson (Nat., Stratford) said the evidence indicated some of the things that had been wrong. The evidence showed that there had been political patronage, which had led to men outside the Public Service being appointed to responsible positions. The system of selling used army vehicles had been so haphazard that the valuing officers were appointed by the Government and the Commissioner of Supply had no control over them. The Commissioner of Supply had stated in evidence that while the valuers were supposed to be working for him they were a “law unto themselves.” The result of this was that the country had been put to the expense of an inquiry. The Government must be held responsible for that, because it had appointed the men and given them the power that they had.