THE CIVIL SERVICE

Observer, Volume XXIX, Issue 43, 10 July 1909, Page 2

THE CIVIL SERVICE

Scope for a Royal Commission

IT has been placed on reoord by Sir Joseph Ward that, by means of the retrenchment policy that is at present being actively pursued in Civil Service circles, a sum of nearly £250,000 will annually be saved to the country. This is a colossal total ; and it stands to reason that if this amount can be saved in the future, it could have been saved in at least the immediate past. The inference is that there has been an unjustifiable leakage of public money for a good many years. Assuming £250,000 to be the maximum annual leakage, and going backwards on a sliding and descending scale, it is safe to assume that since the inauguration of the Seddon regime (perhaps it would be better to call it an autocracy) the total amount thus wasted would not fall far short of £3,000,000. Truly, so far as the Civil Service is concerned, both the Seddon and "Ward Administrations have been liberal by nature as well as by name.

. To this liberality a sudden check has been put, and retrenchment is the order of the day. Incidentally, by admitting that retrenchment to such a huge annual amount is possible, the Government acknowledge the existence of needlessly prodigal administration. That, however, is really only a minor feature of the matter. The chief point to be considered is the fact that, in their investigations as to what officials it is possible to retrench, Ministers are reported to have come across many instances in which grave abuses of the system have been i>erpetrated by Civil Servants themselves. Cases have, recently been quoted where men have kept their wives and families oil their travelling allowances, and have banked their salaries. Then there was the case of Chief Drapery Expert Shannon, who for a number of years drew 30s a day travelling expenses all the year round, whether he actually travelled or not. In. this no sharp practice can be imputed to Mr Shannon. He was engaged by the Government of the day, and the arfrangement was included in the articles of -agreement. It was the Premier that made the terms who was blameable.

Another factor that has made for corruption in the Civil Service is the lever of political influence. Men — in many instances totally unfitted for the work — have been pitchforked into snug Government billets, simply because they or their relations or friends possessed a political pull on a Minister or Member of Parliament. This is one of the greatest and mlost intolerable abuses to which the Service has been subjected. Also, it is essential, now that the cutting down process is in operation, to make sure that such individuals are the first to receive their conge. Apparently, there has been room in the Service for incompetents in the past. There should be no such room m the future. Political influence or no political influence, they should be ruthlessly rooted out, and left to sink or swim by means of such talent as Providence may haply have endowed them with.

In view of the grave abuses that are alleged to have existed in the Civil Service for some considerable period, and in order to ensure against the recurrence of these abuses in the future, it seems to us that a proper course for the Government to pursue would be to set up a Royal Commission to carry out a comprehensive investigation into the whole administration of the Service. The scope of such a Commission would necessarily be both retrospective and also deal with the present time. Such a proposal may be objected to on the score of expense. It would probably be found, however, that the resulting benefits would more than counterbalance the expenditure. Other Royal Commissions have been set up for which there was not half the justification that there is for the one we suggest. Retrenchment is all very well in ii> self, but retrenchment combined with reorganisation, based upon judicious and impartial investigation, would be better still, and for that reason, if for no other, a Royal Commission is desirable.