EFFICIENCY BOARD

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3167, 18 August 1917, Page 9

EFFICIENCY BOARD

FAULT IN THE SYSTEM "MUST LEAD TO FRICTION" SUGGESTIONS BY MR. PARR

The Efficiency Board and iU activities wero discussed in tho House of liepresontativee yesterday by Mr. C. S. Parr.

"In tho first place," ho said, "ivo owo a debt of tltanks to these men, who are men of leal business ability and who have given their valuable services to this country without l'eo or reward of any kind. With regard to their reports, all I wish to say is that some of them are, in my opinion, valuable and eoino I do not consider valuable I consider that tlu; creation of this Efficiency Board in tho way it has been done was a mistake. I grant that tho Government should obtain for itself the fldyice of business mon and tho benefit or their business and organising experience in regard to carrying on tho business and industry of this country, but I don't think tho Government went the right way about' getting it by sotting up a boaTd of this sort—an independent entity—to give advice. The Government is anothor body which says we shall toke or reject that advice, and we are tho only authority that can carry out the advice. This arrangement must inevitably lead to friction; it never could be successful." Mr. leitt: Why should not the public know what the advice was? Mr. Massey: Nothing wns suppressed. Mr. Parr: That is exactly what happened. If the Government accepts a report nothing is heard about it, but if the Government rejects it there is friction. But if the Government has to accept all the Teporta, they might aa well get off the Treasury benches and let the Efficiency Board run the country. Supposing tiio Govornment say they decline to accept the Teport, what do we find? Wo find members of tho board going to the Prees, giving reasons for their report, and attacking the Government policy. That is an impossible state of affairs. The system is unworkable. It will lead to friction, and no goo(l can come of it. You can't understand a eelf-res-pecting Government permitting itself to be attacked for refusing to accept advice from a Iwly set up for tho purpose only of giving advice. "The remedy to my mind is a simple cne. The suggestion I make is that tho Government should do as Mr. Lloyd George has done. If tho Government needs organising experience and ability, then the Government ehquld appoint to tho Cabinet gentlemen .with this ability and experience. I am not one of those who thinks that this Houso is so barren of organising ability that the Government cannot find in it some men of ability, but if tho Government thinks

otherwise, lot the Government appoint tho inoii to tho Upppr House." Sir John Pindlay: ! .l'liey can appoint them to tho Executive Council without putting them into tho Cabinet. Mr. Parr: Very -veil, let them bo put in tho Executive Council. . . . This

is my view of how the Government should yet tho benefit of business experience. Tliid is the course that hasbeen adopted in England, and in uiy opinion it is tho only course that will lead to unanimity and a proper and comi'ortablo way of doing things. Tho present separate board and Cabinet system is unsatisfactory to ibe Government, and equally unsatisfactory, I 6houlc! think, to the Efficiency Hoard. In tho interests of both of these parties, I think the present arrangements should bo suspended, and suitable mon should bo associated with the Government m this particular work of organising tho country in tho next years of the war. NO UNDERSTANDING YET RESIGNATION NOT WITHDRAWN. A conference between the Prime Minister and the members of the National Efficiency Board took placo yesterday. Tho whole position was discussed at considerable length, but no definite understanding was reached. The members, of the board gave expression to their dissatisfaction owing to the manner in which their recommendations had been treated by tho Government. They contended* that it would be useless for "them to continue their work if the Government failed or declined to give effect to the suggestions contained in "their reports. Mr. Hassey assured tho board that the Government recognised that they had done much valuable work, andthat their recommendations had been given, and would be given, raroful consideration, lie was desirous of the continuance of harmonious relations between tho Government and the board, but he felt it necessary to point out that no self-respecting Government could allow .my outside body to dictate its policy. ■ It was impossible for the Cabinet to divest itself of its responsibilities. He hoped the board would endeavour to understand tho Government's point of view and to realise that it was not always possible to give effect to their recommendations. It cannot be said that the conference has removed the causes of friction between tho Government and the board. The board did not display any disposition to retire from the position it has taken up, and their resignation, or conditional resignation, has not been withdrawn. Tho members have stated their case and heard what tho Prime Minister has to say in reply. It seems that the noxt move must now come from them. They will probably consider whether they can accept tho limitations suggested by the Prime Minister. If they can they will no doubt go on with their work. If they cannot—if their conditions cannot bo complied with—their conditional resignation will no doubt become absoJiite. A definite announcement may ba expected at any ; moment.