CLERK OF THE HOUSE

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 46, 24 February 1930, Page 11

CLERK OF THE HOUSE

PROTEST KAISED

METHOD OF APPOINTMENT

The following stiitcment. was telegraphed to "The Post" to-day from Motuuka'by Mr. G. C. BluJk, United M.P. for Motuekn:— "I wish to take this opportunity of dissociating myself from the appointment to-the Clerkship of the House of KepresentativcS as announced by the Government," stated Mr. Black. "It lias been the custom during llie whole history of the New Zealand Parliament to promote officers who have, rendered service in the several junior offices to the position next above them when any vacancy has been caused, either by resignation or death, Such offices, each of which demands a knowledge of forms, procedure, and administration which can only be acquired by long experience, are those of Committee Cleric, Record Clerk, Accountant, Header, and Cleric of Bills and Papers, Second Clerk, Assistant Clerk, Assistant and Clerk.of the House of Representatives, which office is also that of Permanent Head of the Legislative Department. Let me emphasise that this system of promotion ,has been operative since the days of Major Campbell, whose appointment" as Clerk of 'the House was gazetted on; 21 st July, ISO 4 unmindful of the fact that Mr. James Coates was its first Clerk. OTHEES PASSED OVER. •'At once the obvious question' is ja.sked: Why lias 'he system or" seventyj'.six years' .standing been abandoned? Why has an officer with thirty-eight and a half years' service, and the,other officers, not been given pro,motion'.' The people of the Dominion, and most decidedly members of the House of Representatives, are entitled to a full and adequate reply to that query. So much for the practical phase of the question. "I desire .to 'place another aspect before' my. constituents" and the public generally, . and that-.-is in regard to the ' constitutional position. Mr. Speaker is ' appointed by the. House of Representatives and not by the Government, to safeguard all the privileges of the House, its members, and its officers. It is wellknown that there have been many controversies in the past regarding this control, and the House, through its members, has always guarded with jealousy the rights of Mr. Speaker as custodian of its own rights. Since the passing of'the .Public Service Act, 1912, bureaucracy.has had a great impetus in the Dominion,, but, when that Act was being passed members saw to it .that! the privileges of Parliament, and particularly the,control of its officers, were safeguarded, for, by its terms, it expressly excludes the Public. Service Commissioner from interfering in any way with the officers of Parliament or. the Legislative Department. My authority is section 4, Public Service Act, 1912. I want to know whether the Public servant who has been appointed was the nominee of the Public Servico Commissioner.' Standing Order No. 461 states- that the appointment of Clerk shall Ijo made on the recommendation of Mr. Speaker, and by the same Standing Order, it 'follows from the reference to expenditure that with the Government rests the decision. ■ ■ .

"I want to know, did the Speaker abandon his privilege of recommendation and leave the' appointment to Cabinet? Did Cabinet.come to a decision, and did it review it at the request of Mr. Speaker? Can it bo considered that those .-.officers of the Legislature,'..who have so .loyally fought for the. supremacy of Parliament and the recognition of the Speakership have been treated fairly, for it has to bo. remembered that every officer in tho Department has been deprived of' the rise which would have ; been his had the hitherto procedure,been adopted. CLASSIFYING OFFICERS.' "I understand, further, that there is a proposal that the Legislative /Department shall lie classilied by the Public Service Commissioner, SSuuh- interference.by this official, whether ho be so invited by the" Speaker, the Government, or otherwise, is directly contrary, to the provisions "of the Act constituting "liia office, which states: 'Nothing in this Act shall apply to any officers of either Houso of Parliament, or to persous employed in either of the Departments of the Legislature,' and involves, the privileges of Parliament. An evidence of this proposed classification is the Statement made by a then responsible officer to the Sessional Committee clerks of 1929 that they will next session nppoined by the Public Service 'Commissioner.

• "Government by officials has been protested against by many members. 'If the Commissioner is allowed to interfere with the officers of the Legislature, officialdom will be supremo. I am opposed to any such' interference, and in any case, it is contrary to law."