PUBLIC SERVANTS’ RIGHTS

Taranaki Daily News, 16 February 1933, Page 7

PUBLIC SERVANTS’ RIGHTS

REPEAL 1932 ACT REFUSED RAILWAY SERVANTS AND POLITICS. ADVANTAGE OVER PRIVATE MEN. STANDING FOR LOCAL BODY POLLS. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. A request by' a depution from the Amalgamated Society. of Railway Servants for full political rights and repeal of section 59 of the Finance Act of 1932, which gives the Government the right to dismiss public servants for subversive conduct, was declined to-day by the Prime Minister (the Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes). In his reply the Prime Minister said it had to be realised that the Public Service had certain privileges, including the right of appeal against dismissal, which were not enjoyed by private employees. The private employer could say that a man was not suitable, and dismiss him summarily. If a member of the Public Service were hostile to the policy the Minister was carrying out the position would become unworkable and the result would be that the Minister would take full rights and surround himself with men who were sympathetic to his policy. Such • practice would be a vicious one and detrimental to the welfare of the country. No private employer would allow an employee to act detrimentally to the welfare of his business. They had an instance at Thames, where Public Servants had attempted to boycott. These men were not d ism issed, but would have been had they been in private • employment, Mr. E.' J. Dash asked whether Public Servants would be allowed to stand for 'local bodies as in the past.

Mr. Forbes said he did not know howthat would work out. Even in local body elections feeling was high at times. Mr. Connelly asked whether in view of the fact that the railways had been depoliticalised the Prime Minister would give the Railways Board power io grant leave/of absence to men who wished to stand for an election. Mr. Forbes did not think it would be right to give the board that power. The relationship between the railway service and the public had to .be safeguarded. “If you came out and belted me for all you. are worth,” he said, "do you think I would take you back? Not on your life’”- ' , , * ' . RELIEF WORKERS’ POSITION WAGES "PAID” BY LOCAL BODIES. INELIGIBILITY FOR AN ELECTION. Wellington, Last Night. Mr. F. Jones (Lab., Dunedin South) asked in the House of Representatives this afternoon whether relief workers were eligible to stand for any position in connection with the forthcoming local body elections, and if not, provision would be made to that effect. The Prime Minister (the Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes) said a person was not ineligible for election to a local body by virtue of the fact that he was a relief worker, but relief workers were riot eligible to become members of local bodies by which they were employed., Mr. W. Nash (Lab., Hutt): Does not that debar all relief workers? Mr. Forbes; It will debar relief workers from election to those local bodies from which they draw pay. Mr. P. Fraser (Lab., Wellington Central): Bui does their pay come from the local bodies? Mr. Forbes; The position M I have explained it is the law. Mr. Forbes added that the money was drawn through the local bodies and wm held to be paid by them.