THE STATE MACHINE

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 161, 2 April 1919, Page 8

THE STATE MACHINE

OVERLAPPING OF FUNCTIONS IMPORTANT REFORMS SUGGESTED Tlu- report of the Machinery of Government Committee of tho British .Ministry of Kecoiislriiclion was recently issued as a Parliamentary paper. A bulky document Tunning lo eighty pages, it covers nearly till Departments of Government, and recommends principles which ought, in the committee's opinion, lo be adopted to secure t'hc smooth; and effective working of Government machinery. Lord H;tldane presided over the comuiitlee. the otlier members of which were Mr. il. S. Montagu, Sir Robert Monint. Sir George. Murray, Sir Alan Sykos, Mr. J. H. Thomas, and Mrs. Sidney Webb. They were appointed in .Inly, ll'li, "to inquire into Die responsibilities of tho various Departments of the central executive Government, and to advise in what manner ;t,!ie exercise ami' distribution by the Government of its functions should be improved."

The report is signed by nil the members of the committee, subject to a reservation by Sir George Murray on the nifstioii of the employment of women in Ihe Civil Srrvic*. Tt i* divide! into two parls, the fir=t dealing with the general principles which the committee suggest, for adoption.in Government JTepartments generally, the ■■-ennd coi!s ;c '~- ing of Kenani*" clviplcrs illustrating the aonlicatioii of tVss priuc'plcs to ten of Hie main brantdir;- of the bus'ws of Government. Jiamplv. Finance, National Defpii('», External Affairs, Research. TYo-V.-nplnynient. Supplies, Education, Health, and Justice. Confusion at Present.

The committee do not spare Hie present regime. Thus tihey state: Our investigations 'have made it evident to us. tliat there is much overlapping;, and cnii.eemipnt ©.bsciivih- n."d eon-»iif»-on. in the functions of the Deparlments of executive (invernmpiit. This is largely due to the fact that many of these 'Deoartmente -have betoi gradually evolved in compliance with cuvreiit niwß and that the purposes for which they were thus called into bei".' have [rradually 'S3 altered flint the latter stages <>f the process have not accorded in princinle with those that were reached earlier. In other .instances Deparimrit* >mnfs.r to liave Ijren rapidly established without ureliminary insistence on definition of and precise assignment of resnoT.siWlity. Beginning boldly with the Cabinet, the committee suggest that it should consist of ten or twelve member?, meet frcrpiently, and be snnplied in the most convenient form with all the information nectary to enable it to arrive at expeditious decisions, and have a systematic method of seciu-im; that its decisions are effectually carried out by the several Departments concerned. One feature in the nrocedure of the War Cabinet, they think, might well nwiime a permanent form—the Secretariate to the Cabinet. More Thought and Research Needed. In the matter of'formulation of policy the committee express the opinion that the duty of investigation and thought as preliminary to action might be more definitely recognised. "It appears to us," they- say, "that adequate provision has 'not beon made in the past for tho organised acquisition of facts and information, and for the systematic 'application of thought, as preliminary to the settlement of policy and its subsequent administration." So they urge strongly a better provision for inquiry, research, and reflection in all Departments, and tho supervision or carrying out of the necessary research by a Department of Government especially charged'.with such duties but working in close collaboration with administrative Departments. They draw attention to the importance of what has been achieved in war-time by the organisation set up,by the Privy Council, and foreshadows the extension of this form of organisation in other fields of research, notably that of medicine. No Departments According to Classes. Upon what principle, the committee proceed to ask, are tho functions of Departments to bo distributed and allocated? They answer: "There appear to be only two alternatives, which may bo briefly described as distribution according to the person or classes to bo dealt with, and distribution according to the services to be performed. Under the former method each Minister who presides over a Department would be responsible to Parliament for those activities of tho Government which affect the sectional interests of particular classes of poisons, and there might bo, for example, it Ministry for Paupers, a Ministry for Children, a Ministry for Insured Persons, or a Ministry for the Unemployed. The inevitable outcomo of this method of organisation is a tendency to Lilliputian administration. The other method, and the one which we recommend for adoption, is that of defining the field of activity in the case of each Department according to tho particular service which it renders to the community as a whole. Thus a (Ministrv of Education would bo concerned predominantly with the provision-of education wherever, and by whomsoever, needed. Such a Ministry would have to deal with persons in so far only as they were to be educated, and not withparticular classes of persons defined on other principles. Division According to Nature of Service. This method cannot, of course, be applied wth absolute rigidity. But notwithstanding qualifications, we think that uiu-h would be gained if ■ the distribution of Department-it duties were guided by a general principle, and we havo come to the conclusion that distribution according to the nature of the service is the principle likely to lead to the minimum amount of confusion and overlapping. . In this way such divisions of the business of government its Health, Education, Finance, liesenivh. .foreign Affairs, and Defence would each be under separate administration, the Cabinet being in a position of supreme executive direction and Parliament holding the various Ministers directly responsible to it for the elliciency of the service, with which thev were respectively charged. The Committee point out that 111 the case of services widen are national in the full sense (Navy, Army, Air Force, Post Office, and in future, perhaps railways and other systems of transport) the ctliciencv of the service and the organisation of the personnel employed ill it can only be secured by putting the responsibility both for tho- service and the persons in tho hands of the same Minister as the head of tho separate Denortment to which the enterprise as a whole is entrusted.

Watcr-tinht Severance Impracticable. The report also lays stress upon the fact that final and water-tight divisions of business between Departments cannot be made under the complex conditions of modern government: "Work which is of primary inlc-rect to one Department may well be within the province of that Department,'even when sonic portion of it is undertaken as a secondary interest by Departments devoted to other ends. If, as we suggest, there should bo one Ministry of Education, of Health, and of Finance, in which functions relating primarily to those ends should m each ruse be 'concentrated, there must, at the same time be, within other Ministries, special branches devoted to educational, hygienic, oc financial work lis rfeeoiuliiry interests of the Ministries witlui. -Inch they lie. ,' ' "Yet neither the Ministries ot the primary interests nor the branches dealing with the secondary interests can operate with full effect unless they aio in close and constant touch with each other. Sometimes this communication will need to be so close, that there will have to bo standing joint bodies ot the Departments concerned. Sometimes regular or informal communication will suffice. But contact of some sort is vital. Danger of a Bureaucracy. Among the recommendations of the oommittee is one to the cQect that in the

organisation of Departments special importance should be attached to securing proper consideration of proposals for expenditure, unimpaired Ministerial responsibility, co-operation with advisory bodies', and the extended employment of qualified women. On Hie matter of women's employment Sir George Murray dissents. In another recommendation tho committee emphasises tho danger of a moro efficient public service exposing tho Statu to tho evils of bureaucracy, a danger only to lie prevented if the reality of Parliamentary control is so enforced as to keep pace with any improvement in departmental methods. In this connection they allude.to tho recommendations of tho recent Select Committee on National Expenditure, which aims at restoring and *lrengthing the control 'of Parliament ever finance, and to the suggestion that Parliament should maintain its survey ot departmental activities by means of a series of committees of members, . each watching a particular branch of affairs. In dealing with finance and recognising the Treasury's right to its premier position, the committee recommend a change of spirit on the part of tins 1.0partincnt: "Wo think that the traditional altitude of antagonism between the Treasury and other Departments, which so often manifests itself, might be substantially modilied if the officers of the Treasury could establish closer personal relations with tho several Departments wilhwhieli I hey deal, and acquire 11 fuller knowledge ,01 their work and their difliculties. Tho information at our disposal suggests that if a new situation in this respect is to be brought about the obligation upon spending Departments to formulate , a full ami reasoned statement of their proposals must be recognised as placing upon <the Treasury a corresponding obligation not to assume a negative altitude in. the first instance towards, suggestions for improving the qualify of a service or the efficiency of the staff which administers it." , A. further recommendation injjonnectio" with the Treasury is the lollowing: "There should be a. separate branch specialising in 'establishment' work, and studying all questions of staff', recruitment, classification, etc., and routino business generally. Such a. branch would bo in close touch and constant communication with the officers m other Departments charged with the duty of supervising the 'establishment' work. Tho committee definitely recommended the extension of the Privy Council organisation to other fields of research.

A Ministry of Employment, The committee favours warmly ■. the establishment ot a Ministry of Employment, its junctions being fixed as Urn ascertainment and regulation of the conditions of emp.oym«nt, especially as regards wages, conciliation and arbitration, hours of labour, sanitation, and solety, and special provision relating to young persuus and women; the cooperation of tho State with employers' associations and trade unions in tneir functions connected with conditions of employment; tho administration of any provision made by the State for tne unemployed; advising tne appropriate authorities as to the prevention of unemployment by the postponement or loiestalling of works an<r contracts. The Ministry, they suggest, sliould become the centre repository of' information about rates ot wages and scales oi salaries in all tho various employments.

Ecplying to objects raised by other Departments, the committee say:— "The plea for the privilege ui exclusive dealing with its own employees, even when made on behalf ■of so important an employer as the Ministry, of Munitions or the future Ministry' of Supplies, is seen to bo untenable when reviewed in conjunction with the similar pleas of otlier Departments, it ie, in elfeet, a survival u-oin the time when there was. no'. Ministry of Labour (or Employment), and when Parliament took no cognisance, of the matters now properly failing to lie dealt with by tliis Ministry.- Eacii Department then claimed, not unrensonnb.y, to. bo as tree as a private employer. The relation of the Ministry ot Employment to the employing Departments snoukl be analogous to its rektiou to private employers."