CIVIL SERVICE CONTROL.

Taranaki Daily News, 5 September 1930, Page 6

CIVIL SERVICE CONTROL.

The discussion in the House of Representatives in regard to the dismissal of certain officers of the Post and Telegraph Department involved a very .important principle. The ” debate arose over the recommendation of the committee to which had been referred a petition for reinstatement made by one of the dismissed officials. The committee was of the opinion that the punishment of dismissal had been unduly harsh, and recommended the appellant’s reinstatement in the service. There may be strong differences of opinion in regard to the seriousness of the offences which led to the officers being dismissed, but that does not seem to be the most important question raised in the debate. Parliament may be trusted to see that no injustice is inflicted upon any public servant, and the men who are appealing may be assured of a patient and fair hearing. It would probably come as a surprise to the House, however, to find that as the law stands at present the Minister in charge of the Post and Telegraph Department cannot dismiss an officer nor reinstate one whose services have been dispensed with. That power has been given by statute to the permanent head of the department and was exercised by him in the ease brought before the House. At first sight it looks, as though this were an anomaly in a country that is governed democratically. On the other hand, it was the Civil Service itself which worked hardest for its reinoval from political control and for conditions that made progress in the service dependable upon skill and efficiency rather than upon the personal favouritism of someone in authority. Long before, the service generally had been placed under the control of the Public Service Commissioner the Post and Telegraph Department had practically been removed from political control, the Minister responsible for this sound administration being the late Sir Joseph Ward. Legislation providing for certain methods of entering the department’s service was passed, and the control of the staff was left to the permanent head. On the whole, the system has worked well, and though there may have been occasions when the 1 decisions of the chief executive have been questioned, they have certainly not ben frequent enough to warrant a return to the old system of direct Ministerial control. It may be that wider opportunity for appeal in cases such as those under review should be given, and that appeals should be heard by an impartial board outside the department concerned. But what postal officials must realise is that they cannot have it both ways. They cannot have non-political control when it suits them best and the exercise of direct Ministerial authority when they prefer that form of control. There was some talk of amending legislation being introduced to restore to the Minister the right of reinstatement of dismissed officials. It is a question that must be very fully considered before action is taken or the officers of the department may find political control with all its opportunities for abuse has once more been brought into force.