PUBLIC SERVICE REFORM.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1542, 11 September 1912, Page 8

PUBLIC SERVICE REFORM.

SECOND READING DEBATE. SPEECH BY THE HON. A. L. HERDMAN. The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN (AttorneyGeneral) moved tho second reading of the Public Service Bill. The Bill was not unfamiliar to the House in that it contained many of the provisions which had been contained in the Bill which he had introduced from the other side of the House, since 1901. The main object-of the Bill was. to alter the method of administering the Civil Service. What had , been the conditions under the old regime? • There had been inquiries made, men had been dismissed for misconduct, there had l>een retrenchment, and last of all.there had been the appointment of a Royal Commission. All the time there had been discontent, and dissatisfaction excited by tho injustice done to men in the Public Service. It. could not be said that tho reign of the Mackenzie Government had I been, marked by any great event, but ) they had at least set up a Royal Commis : r sion of three gentlemen to inquire into t tho Public Service. s Mr. Russell: We did more good work s in three months than you havo been able 5 to do. II Mr. Herdman: Then all I can say is 3 that' it was not evident to anybody but > the honourable gentleman. However, said j Mr. Herdman, he did,give the Mackenzie s Government credit for setting up the Civil ■Service Commission, and the nndings of i that Commission formed tho strongest a possible indictment of the existing state i of affairs. o t A Valuable Report. J He believed that the report of the Pub- " lie Service Commission was one of the '• most valuable reports ever presented to '■ Parliament. Tho amazing thing about " it was that it condemned from top to '" bottom the system whioh obtained in New a Zealand, and bad been defended by the '~ member for Avon. The Mackenzie Gnv|y eminent, of which the member for .Avon '[ was a distinguished ornament, had yield- " ed to great public pressure in setting up '§ the Commission. In reference to Public " Servico reform New -Zealand- alone hnd stood still and done nothing. Members on the other side of the House had defended the- existing system with it? attendant evil*. The members of the prei) sent Government, stood for a system unatidsr ,-srhioh. the Eablic S£ryi.rA..w>uld. ba.

controlled by Commissioners responsible only to the representatives uf tin; peoplo and not to Ministers. II was curious that the member? who opposed granting to tho peoplo the rights to which (hey were entitled were lion. Kentlemen o»" the oilier side of the House. Civil. Service reform dated back to the lime of Magna Charta. Mi'. llerdumn cited instances of abuse in tho administration of the English Public Service which hud occurred under tho administration of the Duke of Newcastle and of Sir ltobert Walnole. In 1835 public opinion became so incensed that Lord Palniorston had to appoint Public Service Commissioners. Thai great and lasting reforms bad resulted was undeniable. The Public Service Commission was- still in operation in I he Old Country and was giving satisfaction. The Bill he was introducing was modelled iipun Australian legislation. Striking Testimony. Since drafting the Bill he had written as Attorney-General to the various At-torney-Genorals in Australia asking for information in reference to Civil Service control. Two of theso Ministers, Mr. Herdman pointed out, were membors of Labour Governments. In each case ho asked:— Whether the system of commissioner control worked satisfactorily. Whether it, did away with political influence. "Whether it promoted efficiency, uniformity in the working of Departments, and contentment among public servants. Whether experience went to prove that control by n board was more satisfactory than Ministerial control. Whether control by a-board lessened the detail work performed by Ministers. AYhcther there was any substantial body of public opinion which would rather have Ministerial control than control by a commissioner. Mr. Russell: Itather like leading questions. Mr. Herdman: Absurd! I sent out honest questions and believe I got honest information. He wont on to detail the replies which he had received. The replies of tho Attorney-General of the Commonwealth (Mr. Hughes) were all favourable to the commissioner system. He stated that it worked satisfactorily on the whole, and undoubtedly did away with political influence. There was no substantial body of public opinion opposed to the system. Tho Tasrnanian AttorneyGeneral replied in an equally favourable strain towards the commissioner system, stating that it worked satisfactorily and absolutely eliminated political influence. All the replies, Mr. Herdman stated, were favourable to his views expressed in the Bill save in the case of Queensland and South Australia. From West Australia ho had not yet .received a reply. The replies from New South Wales were favourable in every case. The only doubtful reply was to the question about a substantial body of public opinion. To this Mr. Holm an had replied: "I do not think so.". The Victorian replies were that the system of commissioner control worked satisfactorily and did away with .political influence. Further amendments were required to make the system tend in a greater degree to promote efficiency, uniformity, and contentment. In. Queensland and South Australia the commissioner system had not beeu established, but the Ministers questioned in Victoria, New South Wale 3, the Commonwealth, and Tasmania were unanimously in favour of tho proposition contained in his Bill. ..The reply from South Australia stated that officers in the higher branches of the' Service upheld the existing system of Ministerial control, but that the junior members of the Service preferred control by a board. Abolishing Political Influence. ■ Mr. Herdman said that he thought the members of the Public Service Commission had done .their work exceedingly well. On three different' matters his views and those of the Commissioners were at variance, but in many other respects the Bill anticipated tho report. The Bill would make it impossible for a Department to glorify itself. It provided for easv transfers from one Department to another. It made the "back-door evil" (condemned by the Commission) absolutely impossible. It provided for uniformity of promotions and salaries. He and his friends had contended time and again that political influence' had been used to affect appointments, transfers, and promotions. This Was what the Commission had found. Referring again to the "backdoor" influence and the legislation of 1007, which had made 637 temporary clerks into permanent officers, when there were only 2000 clerks in the Service, he _ declared that this was one of the most disgraceful Acts of the late Government. How could clerks entering the Service in the regular way take any interest in their work under such circumstances?. The army of Civil Servants had increased in the last five year's by 4955. and this in spite of retrenchment. In the same period the amount paid in salaries had swollen bj .-13714,000. The Bill Explained. He went on to explain the provision; of the Bill.. It would apply, he said, tc all the Public Service, excluding Judges, Magistrates, the Auditor-General, officer; and members of the Defence Force, anj person paid by fees or commission. th< Police Force* officers of Parliament oi employees under the control of tbi Speaker, and persons employed in tin Government Railway Service. The Com missioner to be appointed would hole offico under the control of Parliament The Public Service Commissioners liar suggested that a Board of Control shouh bo set up to administer the.Civil Service but that in regard to promotions, appoint ments, and removals, Cabinet should havi the right of veto. This would mean tha they would be wholly under tho d'ominanei of Ministers. This was a ]most amazjni proposition, incompatible with everythini else in the. report. The members of tin Board could be dismissed at the behes of a Minister of tho Crown just as now : permanent head of a Department could if ho displeased a Minister, be dismisse( on three months' notice. He emphasise: the importance of the clause making pro vision for appeals. The remedy was read; to hand for an officer who was dissatisfied or who thought he had been dealt wit! unfairly. With the tribunal hearing tb appeal the Commissioner would hav nothing to do. Temporary officers could be employed foi any period not exceeding three months and with the sanction of the commissions a temporary officer could bo employee for a further period of three months, bu in no case could an officer be appointee temporarily for more than three period: of three months in succession. He pro posed to ask the House in Committee oi the Bill to modify Section 52,' or tha portion of it relating to. promotions, oi 1 the ground of "fitness and seniority." Hi 1 would propose that all reference to senior ■ ity be struck out, so that ■promotion: ; should I)o'made on fitness alone. [ Mr. Russell: Then fidelity counts fo: nothing? ! Mr. HeTdman insisted that fidelit; ; counted a great deal, and was a featur' • which' would bo taken into account whei I promotions were being made. ' When Mr. Herdman sat down, Si Joseph Ward and Mr. T. M. Wilford boll I roso and addressed Mr. Speaker, but Si > Joseph Ward was called. THE MEMBER, FOR AWARUA 1 DEPENDS THO\OLD SYSTEM. t Sir JOSEPH WARD (Awarun) con ■ gratulatcd Mr. Herdman on his consist ' eney concerninj; the subject of the Hill which showed beyond doubt that he wa c sincere in what he was ngitating. H 3 did not agree with the honourable gentle man, however, for to suppose that th ' Civil Service administration could b t completely changed by the appointmen 1 of- a Civil Service Commissioner was t & suppose that the whole course of hums J nature could be changed. Ho argued tha f the Minister's quotation of the mere nun 1 ' ber of C 37 temporary clerks absorbed int e the service was altogether 'misleading, i that no account was taken to the growl' of the services. The position was, in fac' that all the applicants on the exnmim i. tion list were absorbed every year, and i e was necessary to appoint temporary clorh o to get the work done. One would suppos t that under a commissioner no such thin o would occur, but. in Victoria, in tho onl ,v yenr for which ho could get tho figure, e 1010, there were 1002 temporary hand •- of whom 810 were appointed in that oi n year. And the total number of permauci 1- officers appointed was 2SO-1. Under p Commissioner in Victoria also the nvcrni c wage was .£ll7, much lower than,it w: d in New Zealand. As a Minister'of 11 :s Crown, the Attorney-General ought to 1 »- very glod to he able to pass over 1.1 1- control to one man independent ot ever e- body except Parliament. Why, the coi 1- missioner would have so much power tli nUto te!)ij)£i, cent, aduitiou el iks c

Atkinson Government was nothing to what a might happen under the commissioner's 1 rme. t ilr. Herdman: Didn't you retrench yourself. Sir Joseph Ward: T did, but I had to. but then we were responsible to Parliament. Omitted-Why? , It this principle, he went on to say, were ' a right principle, why was the ijctenoe c Department omitted, why were the rail- •' ways omitted, why was the Legislative De- ' uiuimcnt omitted from the scope of the 1 Uill? When the railways had been under j control of commissioners the whole t-oun- i try had risen u-p against the system, and : demanded that the railways should he re- I stored to Government" control. If vlio i Minister for Railways believed iiu the I principle, why did lie not propose thai ' railway commissioner's should be appoint- f ed instead of "a. general manager? lie ex- < claimed that the autocracy which was '. created by the handing over of railways to ' a commissioner was awful! (Government l members laughed.) What was the truth < about tho making of appointments by commissioners? Would not the commissioner belong to every leading club iu the. Dominion? And though a man was disqualified from being appointed to the service, if a member of Parliament spoke to the commissioner ou his behalf, things i would be said within the walls of those < places where all confidences spoken were ■ sacred. He argued Hiat the -Public Ser- i vice' Commission's report had not wholly ' oondemned the present administra- '■ tion. It was, in fact, d those high up in tho Public Service who really ' wanted the Public Service reformed, and not the rank and file. He predicted that ' before it had been in operation for three ' years the rank and file would be agitat- ', ing to have the Bill repealed. He'recognised that the Bill could be passed ljy tho Government, and he for one would not offer factions opposition to a Bill which they thought was a reform. But he was sincere in his opinion that it was a retrograde step. MR. FISHER ASKS QUESTIONS. ON-PRESENT ABUSES. The Hon. F. M. B. FISHER (Minister for Customs) said that the Royal Commission's report had shown that our Service' was a good Service, in spite of the present method of political control. What was the position? Promotions were not made by merit, salaries were not fixed according to merit, the. amount of salary was not according to value, increases were not given where they'ought to have been given, and increases had been given where they ought not to have been given; certain servants could get longer periods of leave than others. And why? Did the honourable gentleman suggest that the Administration of which he was a member had been impartial in the administration of the. State services?. Civil Servants had seen these wrongs committed year in and year out, and they had never hod a chnnce to have them put right.. They disliked the present system as much as it was possible for them to dislike anvthing. Every member in tho.House knew that Civil Servants recognised that the iiKst effective way to get leave or some other favour was to bring political influence to bear. The effect of political control had been to bring everybody under the thumb of the Ministry. Heads of Departments, good as they were, had been shorn 7 of authority, and all the real power was wielded by the Minister. At a recent social function, held by Post Office employees, it had been stated that of 5000 employees in the postal service 8000 had been appointed by the then Post-master-General, Sir Joseph Ward, and it was safe to assunio- that he had promoted more than half of the others. Was. this a right state of affairs? What, had happened in connection with increases of pay for railway . servants prior to the last general election at Parnell? What had happened at other elections? Whv was it necessary after the election of 1008 to put 1000 men out of the Public Service of this country? A saving had been effected of practically .£IOO,OOO by one decision of tho Cabinet, and yet tho -Public Service was larger now than then. There was no .limit to it, for the House had no control.-'He looked upon the increasing number of civil servants n« a menace to the community, while the Executive could Temain in power hy some improper exercise of administrative functions, and by bribing the enormous Public Service. One of tho great issues on which the. referendum fight was fought in the Commonwealth was that if carried it would bring under the control of the .Cabinet -SOO.OOO State Employees. It was regarded as dangerous that so much power should be vested in the Ministry. In Australian States in K;hie.h the commission system had been tried no attempt had been made to revert to the old method of political control. The Man With "Pull." Was there anything to justify the state of affairs under which of two men applying for position in tho Public Service one should have a better chance than another because he knew a member - of Parliament? He cited a' case of a member of the railway service who was bound •down and under a hardship by reason of on unfair regulation. Mr. Russell: Why don't yon bring the 1 Railway Department under it? Mr. Fisher: The honourable gentleman wants us to bring about all our reforms ■ in five minutes. He must possess his soul in patience for a time. And he is in a very comfortable seat; I know, be- ' cause I sat in it myself for a number of ■ years. The tendency of the present method, i he said, was to stifle effort and ambition : throughout all the services; and many I young men were neglecting their work in I tho 'service to study for examination, not : to enable them to get on in the service, > but to get out of the service. It was not : to be wondered at that capable young i men in the public service were anxious , to leave the service when they saw inferior I men taken from outside and given prefer--1 ment over the heads of the regular staff. • He quoted a case which he knew of somo ■ years ago, of a man who addressed , envelopes all day, who came to tho office i when he liked, >who received X 275 a year, ! whose real work was done by a cadet rei reiving .650 a year. Yet nothing could get that man out of the service; the power behind him was too great. It was urged against the Commissioner that ho ■ would have too much power in his hands. That was admitted as a valid objection, : but no perfect system could be devised. 1 Nothing could be worse, however, than i the present system, by which the servico ■ was used by Ministers as,a general dump-ing-ground for their friends. Examples ; of this wero to bo seen oven in Parliai ment Buildings. : Sir Joseph Ward, in personal explana- • tion, said that the retrenchment in ISIOB i was duo to a financial panic in tho oountry, and a considerable reduction in • the consolidated revenue necessitated the retrenchment. ■ MR. WILFORD'S CRITICISM. ■ "THE GOVERNOR-IN.-COUNCIL." ! Mr. T. M. WILFORD '(Hurt) said the hon. member in charge of the Bill had one ideal—commissioners.' Some men collected postage stamps, some made a hobby of autographs, but the hon, gentleman in charge of the Bill had one ideal, and that ideal was commissioners. He deprecated the sotting up of a conservative authority. It would be good for the head men in the service, but very bad for ;the men lower ; down. The Bill would require that ' the temporary clerks in tho employ of 3 the Government were not adequately prol vided for under the Bill. If this Bill " wero passed, all the temporary clerks in t tho servico would have to leave it, and their places would be taken by cadets, , and he would maintain, in spite of all l tho authorities that might be quoted, that this would cause dislocation. He critil cised adversely the method provided for ~ appeal, and questioned the adequacy of , the methods provided for relief from the Commissioner's autocratic rule. "The I Governor" loomed very largely iu tho t Bill. Who was the Governor in Couns cil?—the Ministry of the day? And the d Government of past days had heard „ ; many speeches from the Opposition y benches about the iniquity of "the GoverI nor in Council." Ho admitted that it ;', would be well for (he service and well lC for Ministers and members if political [I patronage could bo removed, but. lie a doubted whether the Bill would not bring ;c about equally vicious patronage. The |j re.isnn why a change was necessary in ic the Public Service, was that tho services ,c had grown. The proper thing to do was io io reduce the number of Departments by r- half, so I hat the Ministership charge i- could come before the House and answer ii for the wrongdoing which il w«» claimed liiili .??JsJ«._ T * e Commissioner. ssJame xaj

a bad scheme, and ho appealed to the t! Prime Minister not to put tho Bill C through. t: MR. G. M. THOMSON. \ ' (| THE CURSE OP EXAMINATIONS. fi Mr. G. M. THOMSON (Dnnedin North) \ urged that if the Bill were passed, nu x , men already in the service, except youngor men should be required to pass ex- 9 animation.' It was ono of the curses . of the Public Service that too much importancc was attached to examinations. '] He was not. sure of the wisdom of bring- ' ing the Post and Telegraph Service under a Commissioner, recognising as he did that the work in certain branches of f these Departments was specialised and arduous. He did not think length of ser- » vice ought to be taken into consideration in making promotions, unless length of service meant increased experience. , Ho approved the Bill generally, and ho f would support it, but he would in Com- • mitteo suggest modification in a few de- j tails. • ] MR. HANAN'S VIEWS. 1 INFLUENCE NOT ELIMINATED. j Mr. J. A. HANAN (Invercargill) .dis- j cussed Civil Servico Commissioners gen- j erally, and ho found them utterly bad. | He was opposed to the handing over of any portion of our State services to a j commissioner. If there was one system , against which the people of tho country , would be ready to protest vigorously it was that of centralisation of' authority, , which would obtain if the commissioner wero appointed. How was it that in Australia more Royal Commissions were set up to inquire into-tho working of public Departments than in New Zealand? Ho urged that it was becauso they were very much better conducted in New Zea- , land under the Government than in Aus- , tralia under commissioners. He had not the slightest doubt that under the com- ' missioners' rule in Australia political' in- ' fluence, Departmental influence, and so- . cial influence was freely used. It w.as ' well known in fact that the Civil Service Boards were buffers between Government and the people. Tho setting up'Of any- [ thing of the sort hero would weaken the : principle of responsible Government. Barriers should not be set up between the Government and the peoplo whom they ought to govern. Nor was there, ho maintained, proper recognition of merit in the Public Service under the Boards in Australia. He did believe however that a great deal of good could lie done to tho servico in this country. More recognition could be given to • merit, but this could bo done without diverting the control out of the hands of Ministers. SPEECH BY THE PRIME MINISTER. A REPLY TO CRITICS." . The Hon. W. F. MASSEY (Prime Minister) said the Minister for Justice had no reason to bo concerned about the reception given to his Bill. The last speaker had, unintentionally no doubt, used somo arguments in'favour of the measure. Tho speeches on the Bill had" been in the main fair, moderate, and reasonable. The member for Awarua had thrown a fair amount of energy and volubility into his speech, but ho had not attacked the principle of tho Bill. The member for Hutt had said that the rights of temporary clerks were not safeguarded under the Bill. If such a defect existed it would be remedied. Mr. Wilford had also said that the'Bill made no provision for appeal. Section 31 of the Bill made clear and ample provision for appeal. He ventured to say that if any member of the Public Service were refused a hearing of his appeal, he could go to the Supreme Court and.apply for a mandamus/under the provisions of this Bill, with.a certainty ot getting it. . Ho believed that a' very largo majority of the peoplo employed iu tho Public Service were anxious for the passage of the Bill. The evil of patronage must be eliminated if the country was to have a satisfied Public Service. Another point made by the member for Awarua. was that one or tho Public Service Commissioners in Australia insisted on being addressed as "Sir." Did the humour of tho statement striko the hon. gentleman, coining from him ? Sir Joseph Ward: I don't care personally what anybody calls me. ' Mr. Massey said that he certainly felt ■ no Icontotnpt for those whom tho King : delighted to honour, but if that was tho ; only fault that could be found with tho i commissioner system, it did not amount ' to much. i Commission's Report Praised. . He thoroughly agreed with the opinions that had been expressed about the : report of the Public Service Commis- ' sion. He believed that it was ono of the most valuable reports ever submitted to Parliament.in this country. It would be valuable to Ministers and members and i to peoplo outside of Parliament, The • report had this special value, that ■ tho members of the Commission i were not appointed by the pre- : , l w° re rnment. Ho knew nothing • about the politics of members of tho { Commission, and did not want to, but it [ certainly could not be said that they wero biased in favour of the men ou the i Treasury benches. Tho report disclosed the want of organisation right through 1 the Public Service. It disclosed extravas gant administration, and ho was sorry ' that ono of the Departments under his control at the present time was specially ■ referred to. The report disclosed an un- ' satisfactory system of promotions. The > Commissioners stated that men of ability J were allowed to remain for years at a J time in an inferior position, The pub- , lie could not receive satisfactory servico from the Departments under these con- ' ditions. What was the remedy? It was J a most extraordinary coincidence that this ' report should have come down at a timo :. when the Houso was considering tho Public Service Bill. The Commission vactu- ." ally recommended that a Ijoard of man- • ngemont should be set up. It was a weaki ncss of the Commission's proposal that they proposed to place the board of management under the control of Cabinet. • This would leave it open for political ini fiuenco to be brought to bear by Minise tors of the Crown, just as political ins fiuenco could be brought to bear upon a Ministers of the Crown by the rank and . file in Parliament. Ho had heard exception taken that night to the statement ) made by the Minister for Customs, but j there'was a paragraph on page 19 of the 0 report which said, in other words, exactu ly_ what the Minister for Customs had 9 said. The paragraph in question ran: . "One of the great difficulties of the-pre-sent condition of affairs according to the . testimony of responsible officers is that g influenco is constantly being brought to 0 bear through members of Parliament, in n connection with the appointments, reraov. e als and promotions. . . ." The Comhiis. sioners said that-their fear was that the creation of a board responsible to Cabinol would not remove political influence. Their hope was that it would. The objects set forth by the Commission were worthy, but they could only be attained under a board responsible only to Pnr- ? liament. A good deal had been said about 1 strong exception being taker, in Australia ' to the Commissioner system. Strong evi--1 dence to the contrary was to be found in :" the fact that, with the exception of '" Queensland, no State in Australia that e had adopted the Commissioner system had •" gone back on it. People in this country ? knew in their inmost hearts that in some . things it was behind other British couni tries. In tho matter of Civil Servico f control it was miles behind Australia. Progressive and democratic people in and i out of the House should support this J Bill: On the previous day he had looked \ at tho report of the Public Service Board of New South Wales. The report was a I splendid argument in favour of this Bill. } He hoped that before many days were over the Bill would be passed into tho j Statute Book of New Zealand. I MR. RUSSELL OPPOSES THE BILL. 0 "A REIGN OP TERMOR." ■ Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) said that 1 he'was totally opposed to the Bill. I\e ' l believed that the setting up of tho pro- " posed Bill would inaugurate such a ' reign of terror in this country as had , never been known before. '} Mr. Herries: Is the Committee of Pub- '' lie Safety going to set up a guillotine? 0 .Mr. Russell said that the real increase " in the number of civil servants in (ho e last five years was 101. Of the total of " -10.).3 quoled, -Ufii were made up of cma ploycoii whose work must in the nature s of lliiliss be temporary, for included J" among them were' workers in the Stale o coal mines and co-operative labourers on r railwav construction. Could the Minister d for Jujtice-JUSTICE-daughtor) juM.ifr ftiite sto-sylls.fe'i sw4a & sh.s2' tHftt_

these people would all ba affected by a fc Civil Servico Bill? The men who con- c trolled the Civil Service were not. the, C politicians,. but the permanent heads of h Departments. The present Ministry would have a short and a merry run (laughter). In twelve months they'would find themselves in difficulties (more, laughter). Inferring to the commission ho paid i that the Mackenzie Cabinet had decided f that the evidenct| taken should be put v on record and be available to the people, j But the commission, once >set up, had taken the advice of Mr. C. P. Skorrott, and on thai advice had treated the evidence as confidrnli.il. If there was dis- ] content in the Civil Service, how had it ] never been shown to members of Parlia- J ment? All over the country there were \ Civil Service Associations; had a single •> ono of them asked for a change, asked ] for the Bill to be brought down? •; Mr. Hordroan; They daren't. ( Mr. Russell wanted to know also why it wos necessary that commissioners should ie appointed for such a long period as seven years. The object of tho , Bill was to abolish political influence, ] but the Bill in fact reeked with political ; influence, ft was laid down that tho i Governor, and not the Commissioner, \ should dismiss persons from tho Civil Service. Was there not room for political influeneo there? For tho Governor for this purpose would be the Minister ] for Internal Affairs, and behind him, ] perhaps, tho Cabinet of the day. The Opposition were prepared to let tho Bill I go on the Statute Book entirely as it ' stood, and the people in tho Civil Servico could see then that they had a crowd , in office who would whip them with scorpions. FURTHER CRITICISM. AGAINST THE AUTOCRAT. •Mr. J. PAYNE (Grey Lynn) thought the different Departments of State ought to be controlled directly by the people, and the more direct the control was made the better tho possibility of healthy change. Ho would opposo the Bill because ho was opposed to autocratic control. Mr. G. LAURENSON (Lyttelton) said that this was an iniquitous Bill. .He had never in his twelve years' experience of Parliament, seen a moro bare-faced attempt to filch from the people the power that belonged to them. Ho considered that tho report of the Public Servico Commission was of value, but this report- was opposed to the Bill in its most vital recommendation. Tho report had not disclosed any scandal 'but oiilv such defects as arose inevitably. Tho" Commission recommended that the Board of Commissioners should be responsible toC'lhinet. The Commissioners v whom the Bill proposed to appoint would bo responsible only to Parliament. Mr. Laurenson characterised as outrageous tho proposal to abolish patronage bv members of Parliament. Members of local bodies were deemed competent to appoint, promote, and pay their public servants, and why not members of Parliament? Tho commissioner to bo appointed would bo a wealthy gentleman and a member of , the 'Wellington Chili. Mr. Hemes: Put a clause in to prevent his being a member of the "Wellington Club. Mr. Laurenson: Keep him; we don't want him. The Bill, he continued, was an impudent, wicked attempt to take out of the hands of the representatives of tho people control of their own public service. Ono Man Control, Mr. G. WITTY (Riccarton) opposed tho Bill, stating that it would practically mean handing over control of the public service to ono man. The Bill would introduce graft and palm-greasing. . ' Mr. T. H. DAVEY (Christclmrch East) defended the system under which members sought appointments for their constituents. If tho Minister in cliargo could show a single case of nepotism he would change tho position he proposed to toko up. He had received numerous letters from Civil Servants opposed to the Bill, and not one in favour of it. He did not think the Bill ought to be passed, but, liclieving that it would be, ho would do his best to improve it in Committee. Mr. W. A. VEITCH (Wauganui) said ho was opposed to tho handing over of any part of tho public service to commissioners, but he believed the Minister lrad been honest in his advocacy of the Bill. No law could prevent Civil Servants from appealing to Parliament, and he would advise' Civil Servants .who had been wronged to follow that course. He would oppose the Bill. 'OTFIER. SPEAKERS. A LABOUR SUPPORTER. At 12.33 a.m., Mr. 11. M'CALLUM (Wairau) moved the adjournment of the debate. i A division was called, but tho Opposi- ! tion gave way and allowed tho debate to proceed without going to a vote. , Mr. A. E. GLOVER (Auckland Central) ; said that the Bill was not regarded with favour by himself or in his constituency. ! He had never brought political influeneo , to bear, but ho contended that it was a duty incumbent on a member of Parliament to do what ho could for any un- , fortunate person in his constituency. Tho , Government would bo unwise to persevere with this Bill, for before long a reaction would set in against tho provisions it '. contained. Ho assured the Minister in . charge of tho Bill that when it got into , Committee its borquo would be in trou- . bled waters. • . Mr. A. H. HINDMARSH (Wellington , South) said that ho always tried to vote , with the democrats and ho would vote t with the Government on this occasion bc- , cause ho believed that they were trying , to separate tho executivo train tho poli- _ ticnl side of the Government machine. , The Liberal party could not be expected ? to support this Bill. They had opposed } the Bill Ajr years and must, to be'consistent, go on opposing it, no matter how liberal and democratic it might be. There " had undoubtedly been Government patronage. In his experience with the Lar oour party in Wellington ho had seen men seduced by the promise of a Government billot. Where there wero only ; hundreds of billets to confer thousands of men could be influenced by promises. If he wero a Civil Servant ho would " sooner have his case heard in an orderly J way before an Appeal Board, such as was proposed in tho Bill, than depend on . what a member of Parliament could do ? for him. DEBATE CONCLUDED. ; THE MINISTER IN REPLY. B The Hon. A. L. HERDMAN rose to t reply at 1.5 a.m. He failed to under--3 stand certain of the objectors to the Bill, , who had openly advocated the continua- . tion of the old spoils system. 'The mem- • IJ-m for L >' tteltol i had characterised tho 3 Bill as "iniquitous" and. "impudent"— I, two such epithets as might be expected . from tho lips of tho hon. gentleman. No- . thing could be more impudent than his e suggestion that if the Bill was carried 1 his power of dispensing patronage would . bo taken away. He ha'd said that tho t Commissioner would be an autocrat. Did a tho hon. gentleman suggest that a Judgo . of the Supreme Court was an autocrat? ! Mr. LaurcnsOn: Yes. f Mr. Herdmaiv. Did h© suggest that a t Supreme Court Judge ought to he re--1 moved from office? y- Mr. Laurenson: No. & Mr. Herdman mentioned that it was tho . fact that Supreme Court Judges were im--0 immc from political control that had . made British justice famed the world 1 over. . lhoso. lion, gentlemen who voted s in lavour of an elective executive must, 1 to be logical, vote for the principle which I his Bill contained. Ministers of the i Crown had been tho autocrats in the . past. Ministers of tho Crown now were s asking the House to clip their wings. 3 Ministers of the Crown had in the past been absolute monnrchs. Tho Ministers of tho Crown of to-day were asking th 6 House to make them limited monar<-hs It had been said that tho Public Service Commission had omitted to make any reference in their report to discontent iii ,t the Service. Ho quoted from the report e to show that there had been emphatic i- reference to discontent. Not only had tho a word "discontent" been used freely, but d they had spoken of the existing feeling as amounting not to "discontent" but >- 'distrust." Most of the arguments that had been used in regard to public inc fluence were ridiculous. The very object o of having a Public Service Commission f was that a man should have a fair clianro t- whether he were prior or rich. The onlv o inference to bo drawn from what some d critics of the Bill had said was that 9 only a man with political influence could n succeed us things now stood. He was iur formed by the Government Acru'arv. who y had carefully investigated the matter, ■ijjnri is ny salaries on the ecale, son.

tcnjplatcd in the Bill' would entail an [ expenditure of J53500 a year for five years. On tlio other hand, the State would have ■fell efficient and contented Public Service. THE DIVISION LIST. Tlic Minister concluded his speech at 1.33 a.m., the Bill went to a division a few minutes later. The second reading was armed by 36 votes to 25. Following is the division list:— I Ayes (30). ) Allen, Anderson, Bell, Bollard, R. P., J Bradney, Buchanan, Campbell, Coatcs, t Dickson, Escott, Fisher, Eraser, Guthrie, t Harris, Herdman, Herries, Hindinarsh, <i Hunter, Lang, Malcolm, Mander, Massey, ] Newman, E., Ngata, Nosworthy, Okey, 1 Poarce, Pomare. Rhodes, 1?. H., Rhodes, 1 T. W., Scott, Slatham, Sykes, Thomson, t G. M., Wilson, Young. t 1 Noes (27). 1 Atmoro, Buddo, Carroll, Craigie, Davoy, Dickie, Ell, Forbes, Glover, Laurenson, M'Callum, Macdonald, M'Kenzio, Myers, Ngata, Pnrata, Payne, Poland, Ranphiroa, Robertson, Russell, Seddon, Sidey, | Veitcli, Ward, Wilford, Witty. , '. PAIRS. | Aycs:-F. H. Smith, J. B. Hine, D. ' Buick, J. Bollard, V. H. Reed, A. K. New- ' man. [ Noes:—T. Buxton, R. W. Smith, J. ' Colvin, J. A. Hanan, A. T. Ngata, J. C. : Thomson. The division list was announced as 36— 25. The actual tale above counts 36—27.' AfterwawJs Mr. Ngata explained that he had unwittingly broken his pair and that ho had, according to tho rule in such cases, voted "Aye," haying been paired as a "No." Ho had in tho meantimo been counted in the "Noes," for which side he was nominated as a teller. The final division was, therefore: Ayes, 36; Noes, 26.