PUBLIC SERVICE BILL

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 363, 26 October 1932, Page 5

PUBLIC SERVICE BILL

BEFORE THE HOUSE GOVERNMENT AGCUSED OF DEFAULTING IN PAYMENTS ALLOWANCES REDUCED ("Post" Special Commissioner) Wellington, Monday. The Public Servjce Amendment Bill AYhich will ,g'ive effect to the ~ recomxnendatiqns . of the National Expenditure . Commission regarding suiperannuation and which is expected to prove one of the main stumbling bloclss of the session, was Introduced into the House of Representatives this afternoon. With one important exception, which relates to the method of assessing s^perannuatipn payments, the Bill follows. closely the recommendations of the commission. The commission reeommended that payments should be computed on average salary over seven years prior to retirement but Cabinet has fixed this period at ten years. This provision will be made retrospective to 1921 so that all eivil servants who have retired during the last decade will be drawn into the net. This will result in drastie reductions in the payments at present being received by a number of retired civil servants under the bill.. Retiring Age Male civil servants will have the right to retire at 65 years of age or at 60 years if they have completed 40 years' service. At present, they are. permitted to retire after 40 years' -service irrespective of age. In the case of women, the retiring age will he fixed at 60 years or at 55 after 35 years' service. Explaining the measure in the House this afternoon, the Prime Minister (Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes) said that the Bill followed the lines of the report of the commission with one exception — that relating to the assessment of superannuation. The question of inserting a hardship clauae would be a matter foi* j investigation by a select committee. Everybody would have an opportunity of being heard. Mr. M. J. Savage (Labour, Auckland West): There won't be much of the original bill left. Mr. Forbes: There will be a good deal left. A Labour member: Just a. shell. Past Govts. Remiss Mr. Forbes said that not only had past Governments been remiss in reference to superannuation funds, but certain eoncessions had been granted to superannuitants. Those henefitting from the fund would be able to rest assured as to the future. Mr. J. A. Lee (Labour, Grey Lynn) said that the Bill was but another act ; of repudiation by the present Government. The Bill was denying to public servants what they were 'entitled to. He hoped that party pressure would not be exercised on the committee considering the bill. Mr. Forbes: Have you been on any committees on which that has taken place ? Mr. Lee replied that committees had brought in recommendations which the Government had ignored. Party divisions had taken' place on committees. He asked whether a time limit was introduced in the Bill in the same way as a period had been fixed for the reduction of interest. Mr. J. McComhs (Labour, Lyttelton) suggested that a more appropriate title for the bill would be the "Wh'olesale Repudiation Bill" or "Government Defaulting Bill." Brieaking Faith Were foreign bondholders the only people with whom the Government would not break faith? he asked. If an insuranee company had defaulted in the same way as the Government intended to defanlt, the matter could have been taken to the Sunreme Court.

"I want to protest against the State using its power in the fraudulent manner proposed," said Mr. MeCombs. Mr. W. Nash (Labour, Hut), said the Government had no right to do itself what it would not allow another party to do. Rights under the superannuation legislation had been paid for. The proposal of the Government, if placed in a court of equity, could not stand and equity was the thing they should go on. There might he something said for the alteration of the terms for future contributors, but there was nothing which could defend repudiation of. an existing agreement. Mr. P. Fraser (Labour, Wellington Central) asked whether the Government proposed, as reeommended hy the commission, to abolish the £300 limit of superannuation. Mr. Forbes. Yes. Mr. Fraser: Then it is most illogical. It appears the commission is only concerned with the tribulations of the rich. In consequence, there will be more superannuation for higher paid men and less for lower paid. Have Free Hand Mr. Forbes said th'a committee would have a free hand. It was not a question as to whether a Government was going* to default or not. It was a question whether the Government should shut its eyes to the position. If the Government had allowed the matter to drift, a time would have arrived when the funds would have broken down. That fear would have been constantly in the minds of members of the civil service. He welcomed the fact that steps were being taken to place the funds on a sound basis onee more. On the bill being read a first time, Mr. Forbes moved that the measure be referred to the following committee: Messrs Ansell, Bodkin, Diekie, Hargest, Savage, MeCombs, J. A. Nasb, W. Nash, Yeitch, Wilkinson, Sir Apirana Ngata, and the Prime Minister. Labour members protested that the committee was unduly loaded in the Government's favour ahd that the public service could not exp-ect justice from it. Mr. Forbes replied that the committee- cotxld he trusted to do its duty to the country and to the service.