The Timaru Herald WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 1936 FUNCTIONS OF BOARDS.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLI, Issue 20340, 12 February 1936, Page 8

The Timaru Herald WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 1936 FUNCTIONS OF BOARDS.

Although it inav be the policy of the Labour Party to take full control of the affairs of the State, as Mr Sullivan stated in the course of an address in Christchurch ou Saturday, it is doubtful if some modification of this policy will not be forced upon the new Government before Mr Semple’s “running shoes” have been presented to all and sundry boards. Some support of this contention lias already been furnished by Mr Sullivan himself, in his capacity as Minister of Trade and Commerce, in the creation of a Committee with considerate powers to administer the Government’s new policy which provides for the fixation of the prices of wheat, flour and Ivead. Moreover, the Governm&nt has already expressed Its conviction that the Dairy Board will not find it impossible to co-operate with the Government in implementing its policy in relation to guaranteed prices for dairy products. Having threatened to issue “running shoes” to the Railways Board, Mr Semple has now turned to the Transport Co-ordination Board, which has been ordered to suspend its activities pending authority being given the Minister by Parliament to present the members of this Board with “running shoes.” Mr Semple attempts to justify his decision on the ground that the Transport Co-ordination Board is all powerful, and that the Minister’s status has been reduced to the rubber stamp grade. This statement is hardly fair to the Board because its functions have been definitely outlined in the legislation which brought the Board into being. The functions of the Transport Coordination Board are: “From time to time, of its own initiative, or as and when directed by the Minister, to hold such inquiries, make such investigations as it or the Minister deems necessary or expedient and to report to the Governor-General though the Minister the result of such inquiries and investigations with such recommendations as it thinks fit for the purpose of securing the improvement, co-ordination and development, and better regulations and control of all means or and facilities for transport and all matters incidental thereto”:

To make in each year a report to Parliament “which shall Include all the board’s recommendations made pursuant to the last preceding paragraph”; To hear and determine appeals from the decisions of transport licensing authorities: and To consider applications for, and to grant, aircraft-service licenses. No one could read into these legislative provisions the right of the Board to frame the policy of the Government. It may be timely to recall that the Transport Coordination Board was established by the Transport Law Amendment Act, 1933. The board consists of three members appointed by the Minister of Transport for a period not exceeding three years. The objects of the then Government in setting up the Board were explained by the then Minister • of Transport (the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates), in moving the second reading of the Bill on December 9,1933. Mr Coates said: The Board, while carrying out the functions of the Transport Appeal Board, would have further duties cast upon it—namely, to recommend to the Government from time to time as to the effect (economic and otherwise) of all forms of transport, including rail, road, sea, and air. The Board would have no power to take action, but it would make recommendations to the Government, and the facts, as they were revealed, might lead to legislation. “I believe that it is essential that we should take a very wide view and have a very open mind on this question,” said Mr Coates. “It is a difficult one, and one that is engaging the attention of some of the very best brains.

It is quite competent, of course, for the Government to abolish all the Boards in existence, but the new Ministers ought at least represent the position clearly and without any suggestion of unfairness to their political opponents. Moreover, if this policy is carried to its logical conclusion no extraparliamentary authority of any kind would be tolerated by Ministers who are pledged to take full control of all affairs of state.