The Dominion FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1919. PUBLIC SERVICE CONTROL

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 298, 12 September 1919, Page 6

The Dominion FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1919. PUBLIC SERVICE CONTROL

When he was asked in Parliament the other clay whether thero was any hope of the Public Service Commissioners being allowed to retire on superannuation, the Prime Minister made a somewhat open reply. He said ho did not think he would be justified in answering such an important question without consulting his colleagues, these words carry a fairly plain suggestion that Commissioner control of the Public Service is not by any, means the firmly-established instifutiqr its advocates hoped it would become when .it was inaugurated more than six ■ years ago. Whether or not the Prime Minister's remark was intended to carry any such significance, there seems to lie a distinct danger that Commissioner control may be discarded before long rather on negative than on positive grounds, and before due thought has been given to the consequences its abolition would entail. _ Already the responsibilities originally entrusted to _ the Commissioners have been whittled down to some extent. The Post Office has been removed from their control, perhaps justifiably, since it is a highly-specialised Department, with its ow* .classification. A more serious blow was struck at the authority of the Commissioners, however, when the Public Trustee (Mr. 11 Triggs), himself an original member of the. Public Service Commission, recommended last year that his Department also should be removed from the control of the Public Service Commissioner. No publie announcement in regard to his recommendation was made by the National Government, or has been made up to the present by the Government in office. It may be noted, however, that the vacancy left by Mr. Triggs when he went to the Public Trust Office has not been filled. Colonel Esson, who was appointed temporarily as an Assistant Commissioner, has since returned to the Treasury. On the it seems not a little doubtful whether the Government intends to maintain the Commission in its present form. The outlook is hardly improved by the opinion regarding the Board of Appeal which is expressed in the Public Service Commissioner's latest report. "After an experience of more than six years," he- observes, "the Commissioners are convinced that the system of review by a Board of Appeal of the decisions of the Commissioner is not in the best interests of the Service, and renders difficult the proper carrying out of the work of the Commissioners." It may be taken for granted, that the favourable verdict which the Public Service Association pronounced sonic time ago upon Commissioner control would be speedily reversed if any attempt were made to abolish the Board of Appeal. _

The existing position seems to be that, non-political control of the Public Service as it stands is threatened from within and without. As tn the latter point there is undoubtedly a general feeling that the present Commissioners have been in some respects wanting in (initiative and resource in developing the reforms and improvements made possible by non-political control, and that they have fallen into a habit of routine procedure, particularly in regard to promotions, which largely robs of its value the system they were appointed to administer. It is only fair to say that during the greater, part of their term the Commissioners have been working under exceptional difficulties. They were expected, foj' instance, to effect 'economies, but in their influence on prices, and therefore on wages and salaries, and in other ways, war conditions have made it very difficult either to effect or measure economics. The main point to be made, however, is that even if it were shown that the administration of the present Commissioners is seriously open to criticism, it would not by any means follow that the abandonment of the Commissioner system is warranted or advisable. New appointments in any case a.rc inevitable if Commissioner control is to continue. Already there is a vacancy for an Assistant Commissioner, and not long ago it was reported that Mr. Donald Robertson, the Chief Commissioner, would retire when the Prime Minister and Sir JosEpn Ward returned from their mission

to Europe. There should he no thought, however, 'of abandoning Commissioner control wii\ ihe whole position has been considered carefully and impartially on its merits, and certainly full weight ought to be given to the fact that the conditions this form of control was intended to remedy were in the highest degree unsatisfactory. It may bd opportune at this time Id recall some of the findings of the fioyal Commission set up by the Mackenzie Government in 1912 to investigate the management of the Public Service. The members of the Commission were Messrs. W. I>. Hunt, James Macintosh, and Peter Barr. Amongst other things the Commission stated I hat: "One of the great difficulties of the present condition of affairs, according to the testimony of responsible officers, is that influence is constantly being brought to bear through members of Parliament in connection with appointments, removals, and promotions, and any. Minister or Cabinet must Snd it difficult to resist such influences." Then again it was stated that there was no. uniform system throughout the Service of making promotions and increases of salary, and that serious anomalies resulted.' The Royal Commission found also that owing to the tendency of each head of aDepartment to run its affairs as a separate concern, the freedom of transfer from one Department to another which would make for economy and for the general efficiency of the Public Service was restricted to a minimum, and able officers found their promotion blocked because of their _ ability. It may be argued that it is in this last matter, where they had the greatest scope for useful effort, that the present Commissioners have failed most obviously to_ improve materially on past practice, but it is or. ought to be equally clear that this in no way warrants reversion to the conditions which obtained before the- Public Service Commission was established.

_ The fact which needs to be kept in the foreground is that under a system of centralised non-political control ■of the Public Service conditions of economy and efficiency l and _of justice to its members are attainable which arc incapable of being attained in any other way. It is plain enough that these benem, f a ? ot ' to bc attained easily. I lie (service is perhaps nearly as far ciway as when the Hunt Commission reported from the ideal condition in which each of its members would miivo easily and irrespective or Departmental considerations into the position his abilities qualifiedhim ;to fill. . Biit it i 5 at least to he claimed that under the Pub-, lie bervice Commission many minor abuses and anomalies have been corrected, and that, it is quite as necessary as it was in 1912' to aim at the comprehensive 'organisation of the Public .Service which would give taxpayers the best return possible for their outlay, and assure to Public Servants an unimpeded scope of promotion by merit. The Hunt Commission, while it urged strongly that the. Public Service should be controlled by a Board of Management, recommended that it should- be under Cabinet, and not rcsDonsible. to Parliament only, find that its actions should be subject to review by Cabinet. Apparently if. was considered that the stipulation that "a single Minis'-' tor should not bc able to interfere in any way with the actions of the board, but should have to carry Cabinet with him," was a sufficient safeguard against the exercise of political influence. In the condireached this alternative, to the cxistinsr. system may command consideration. It ought to be recognised in ail"' cppo that centralist control of_ the PublV S->rvic and tht-, exclusion of nol't-Wl influence are essential to its efficiency and to the just treatment of its members.