Civil Defence

Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 23974, 15 June 1943, Page 4

Civil Defence

As was shown in a report in “ The “ Press ” on Saturday and a Wellington telegram printed yesterday, the Civil Defence Regional Commissioners for the Northern and Southern Military Districts will shortly return to their civil occupations, continuing, however, to act as commissioners part-time. Their associates will continue to act as before. The Civil Defence Regional Commissioner for the Central District will remain; but his associate may be retired. These decisions are hard to understand. They were suggested by the commissioners, it is true,, on the ground that their fulltime services were not required, the war situation in the Pacific having improved and the civil defence organisation being “ practically “ completed.” It may be agreed at once that the war situation in the Pacific has improved. Nevertheless, it is the Government’s view, and a rational one, that risks have diminished but have by no means disappeared; and this, of course, is the main reason why the civil defence system has been reorganised on a basis providing for a smaller personnel but for its thorough and specialised training. The original process of organisation was impeded by many causes —conflicts of authority, loss of personnel, technical change, and so on. He would be a bold man who would say that all these checks and delays were overcome and the organisation brought to full efficiency. The process of reorganisation has followed hard upon the first. Its problems are in some ways simpler, if only because much work has been done already and because smaller numbers, more carefully chosen, are easier to train. But two factors tell the other way. Reorganisation has not yet been completed. The time lias been short. What is “ practi- " cally completed ” is practically never completed. The reorganised services have not been fully tested. They have certainly not yet shown that they can and will hold together and maintain their efficiency while weeks and months go by without an emergency to prove the need for it; and this is the severest test of all. Now if their official chiefs, the commissioners, assume a part-time function, which must

mean that, as commissioners, they will see less, know less, and do less —and less may mean very little—then it will hardly be possible to prevent the spread, through all ranks, of the feeling that to do less is to do enough; and that means that less and less will be done. Second, the commissioner system was introduced for reasons which weigh as heavily to-day as they weighed then. As the Hon. D. Wilson restated them in December, they still exist. But if the commissioners hold their office without fully discharging its function, those reasons are neglected. The truth really reaches further than that. The essence of the reorganisation is to make fewer serve where many served before. The demands on efficiency are harder than before. It is a bad time to relax responsibility at the top.