POST OFFICE BILL

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19142, 27 October 1927, Page 9

POST OFFICE BILL

SECOND READING DEBATE

OPPOSITION MEMBERS CRITICAI

irRSSS ASSOCIATION TRI.KURAM.) WJ3 LLIN G T OX, October 2.". The Postmaster-General moved the second reading of the Tost and Telegraph Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives to-day. He said that the Bill had been rendered necessary by the gradual commercialisation of the Department. This made it advisable that its accounts should be separated from the Treasury, and this was being done with the consent, of the Treasury, and the approval of the Minister for Finance. Another clause determined the capital liability of the Post Office on the date of separation of its accounts from the Treasury. In the past, apparently, no charge had been made against Government Departments for the cost of flotation of loans, nor for the cost of administration of the Public Works Fund by the Public Works Department. Such cost was now to be taken into consideration in arriving at the capital liability of the Post Office at April Ist, 1928. ' The Minister explained the other clauses in the Bill. At present, he said, the four senior officers of the Department were appointed by the Governor-General, and tho others by the Public Service Commissioner on the recommendation of the Promotion Board of Senior Officers. It was now propoat-1 that all senior officers—those in receipt of over £760 a year—should be appointed by the Governor-General. This followed the precedent set in the Railway Department. It was proposed to increase the penalty for using fraudulent or cleaned stamps from £SO to £2OO, or to imprisonment for three months.

Promise by Prim# Minister? The Loader of the Opposition (Mr IT. E. Holland) said Clause 20 was a serious alteration of the Post and Telegraph Act, and ho did not think the Minister fully understood the clause when he explained it. It was a breach of faith with the Post and Telegraph Officers' Association, to whom the Prime Minister had given a promise that no higher-salaried officers would be appointed until the Association had heen consulted. Th,e appointment of higher officers by the Governor-General (which meant the Minister) was opening the door to political preferment, and was contrary to the whole spirit of the Public Service Act. Any junior could be taken by the Minister and put over the heads of his seniors. The Prime Minister: That can be done now. Mr Holland said that if this were so, it was contrary to law. He read a letter sent by the Prime Minister to the Post and Telegraph Officers' Association on November 22nd, 192J, to show that a promise was made that before such changes were made the Association would bo approached by the head of the Department. Yet a change was going to be made which would take away promotion by niorit, and the Prime Minister's promise had not been honoured. Four officers could now be appointed by the Governor-General, but this clause meant that every officer could be so appointed, and no attempt I had been made to consult the Post and Telegraph Association. He suggested that Clause 20 should be withdrawn or delayed until the Post and Telegraph Association could be consulted. But even if the Association agreed to it he would not, because it did away" with promotion by merit. The Promotion Board was to be superseded by the Minister, and he ventured to think the Board was better qualified to deal with it than the Minister. The change was in the wrong direction, and should not be sanctioned. The Hon. Mr Nosworthy said he knew nothing of the Prime Minister's letter of November 22nd, 1921. Mr Holland said he thought that must have been the case, and he doubted if the Minister knew of the clause. He also thought the Prime Minister must have forgotten about his letter., , The" Prime Minister: Not necessarily so. *

Mr Holland said that surely the Prime Minister would, not accuse himself of a deliberate breach of faith.. The Prime Minister: No, I won't do that. „ Mr Holland said the Prime Minister must admit that Clause 20 was a breach of faith with the Post and Tolegraph Officers' Association. Concluding, ho advised the Government to withdraw Clause 20, and to re-draft the clauses dealing with wireless.

Whose Bill? .Sir Joseph Ward (liivercargill) said he would like to know who was responsible for suggesting this Bill. It. was most revolutionary, and it should not be allowed to pass until it had been before the Public Accounts Committee. The Prime Minister said he would be glad to refer the Bill to the Public Accounts Committee. Sir 'Joseph Ward asked how long would the Prime Minister give for its consideration? It was extremely technical, and he ventured to say the Minister did not understand it. The Bill was revolutionary, and should not be allowed to pass this session. With the exception of three or four minor matters there was nothing in the Bill necessary to the good government of the Post and Telegraph Department, for which he had great admiration, and he did not like to see these revolutionary proposals in a Department which hitherto had been extremely efficient.

Reasons for the Bill. The Prime' Minister said the position was that four officers at present might be appointed by the Governor-General. Clause 20 meant that three more might be so appointed. Mr Holland: At present, but it opens the door to other appointments. The Prime Minister said that if he had promised to consult the Post and Telegraph Officers' Association, that would be done, but he did not understand why they had not come to the Government.

Mr Holland: Why should they? They did not know about il.

Mr Coates: They must have known about it. It has been discussed by heads of Departments. Mr Holland: 1 did not know about it till last night. Continuing, the Prime Minister said they were endeavouring to co ordinate this Department with other big Departments, and it gave men a much greater right of appeal. The Bill .was based on recommendations of heads of Departments, and thev were now seeking to establish in the Post and Telegraph Department the same system of accountancy as prevailed in the Railway Department, which system had done no harm to the Treasury. Very few people realised the rate at which this Department was growing. .Its turnover was enormous, and it was not advisable that it should have to rely on the Treasury. The Bill proposed to make the Department self-reliant so far as its accounts were concerned, and in this course the Minister for Finance concurred. All accounts would be audited in exactly the same manner as formerly. The

proposals were the same in every respect and would be more satisfactory to the staff. He would have no objection to the Bill going to t.h# Public Accounts Committee. Poßt Office Savings Bank. Mr Savage (Auckland "West) said that the present trend of the Government's legislation was such that Parliament might as well go home and leava everything to the Government: The Bill was introduced only last night, and to-night the House was engaged in its second reading. Members knew noth--1 ing about it till they saw it in print this morning, and yet they Were ex- - pected to get up and speak intelligently on a measure they had no opportunity to Understand, for certainly the Minister had not explained it. He critioised Clause 16, concerning the rates of interest to be paid by the Post Office Savings Bank.' This clause was, he said, dictated by thb Associated Banks. Mr Nosworthy: Why make that suggestion t - Mr Savage: Because, it is obvious. The Government had declared their intention of reducing the amount of money on which interest would be paid by the Post Offico Savings Bank, and Clause 16 was how it was being done. It was suspiciously like the influence of the Associated Banks. The Bill should not be pushed through, and if it were put off till next session tho Government would be well advised. , /

Mr Forbes (Hurunui) said the Government's procedure in Tushing this Bill to its second reading the day after it was introduced was not fair to members, and was not Parliamentary gov. eminent. If it had first gone to th« Public Accounts Committee; then members would have had confidence that it had been thoroughly examined, and that its provisions were in accordance with Government policy.- Ho agreed with the policy of large Departments producing commercial balance-sheets, ' Glaus# 16 gave the Minister a free, hand to fix the of interest to bo paid by "the Post Oflice Savings Bank. The Minister said that this was neiessary to compete- with- the Associated Banks when they raised their rates of interest, but experience had shown that the Government was very tender about opposing the banks. He, however, was favourable to any course that would attract monoy to the Post Office Savings Bank.

Wireless Penalties. Mr Howard (Christchuich South) criticised the penalty of £SO for a breach of the wireless receiving clause, contending that receiving was so simple that boys with inventive minds had only to get a piece of wire and an empty*beer bottle. Even bird-cages could bring in messages. This elaus* would make criminals by the potful.

Competition for Money. The .Minister for Finance said that Clause 16 was self explanatory. At present the Minister was limited by, the maximum rate of interest when competing with the trading banks for deposits. What wan now. being sought was greater flexibility, so that wluftt they were competing for deposits they would not be fighting-with their hand* tied. They thus required j>ower to pay 'higher rate interest it' it were necessary to do so. They were anxious to attract money to the Po6t Office, and so they had devised Post Offic* certificates, whieli were proving very' popular, ft was true they did not want to encourage large deposits, which were at call, because that wa» not the business of savings banks, but having begun it they could not withdraw from it at a moment's notice, and so it would be done gradually. Until Mr Lee spoke, he had not suspected that anyone thought there was a sinister motive underlying tha clause. He therefore wished to make it clear that the sole purpose of the clause was to give them greater elasticity in fixing rates of interest, so as to attract small deposits to the Post Office. Any further assurance to this effect could be given when the Bill went to tiie Public Accounts Committee.

Mr Jordan (Manukau) said his complaint was that Clause 16- had not been introduced'long ago. The Posti Office, Savings Bank was losing its deposits. while private savings? bank* were increasing theirs. It was time the Similiter woke up and took power to pay higher rates of interest, and so' give a lead to private savings banks, and not follow two years behind them. The Bill was rend a second time an«J referred!' to the Public Accounts Committee.