Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PARLIAMENT.

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 25. house of representatives. 'Wellington, September 25. The House met at 2.30 p.m. ROYD GARLICK. The Committee appointed to enquire | into the appointment of Royd Garlic! ! ,id Director of Physical Training reThnb there was n 0 evl ~ fence to show improper motives on die part of the Minister; (2) that in making the appointment the Minister relieved that he was acting in the pub-, he interest; (3) that Mr Allen, acting m advice, Relieved Mr Garlick qualified. to fill the position when he made the appointment;, (4) that Mr 1 other hade no' direct ‘charge against ! the Minister; and there was no evidence io support the suggestion that the appointment was; due to political i in 'dttbttc© i'(s) that' the statement made jjy; Mr’. Laitrenson, ;that < the; Minsiter a f ppquit?d a personal friend,; was.' without justification, ahd f was incorrect; (.6) that the salary was not excessive for a thoroughly-competent man, but it would have been advisable to invite applications for the position, both within and without the Dominion. Mr T. M. Wiiford said that the re- , port! was a complete vindication of his charges; The Committee was emphatic that applications should have been advertised for.. He did not take back one word of what he had said, because hd was satisfied that the evidence before the Committee proved every word he uttered up to. the hilt.

Mr Allen drew attention to the fact that the report was unanimous. He vvas prepared to take the responsibility of making the appointment without advertising, which was not an unusual proceeding, and he felt confident that he had got the best man available.

Mr T. K, Sidey drew attention to the discrepancy between the evidence of the Minister and the letter from Dr. Hardwicke-Smith as to the negotiations regarding the appointment prior to the conference of experts. It was most improper that Mrs Garlick should carry on a school for physical training while her husband was Director. Mr L. M. Isitt said the position was a most improper one that Mrs Garlick should continue a school for training instructors who would subsequently look to her husband for appointments to the Government service. All through the affair the Minister had shown gross carelessness and want of consideration. Mr J. 0. Thomson entered his'protest again: l the payment of so large a salary to the Director of Physical Training, while other important officers were getting less. Mr G. Laurensou said he accepted the Minister’s denial that he appointed a personal friend, but he still criticised and condemned the appointment. Mr R. McKenzie pretested against tiio appointment of Mr Garlick on behalf of the taxpayers of the country. Tlie appointment was the most scandalous and unjustifiable ever made in this country, and the pay was quite out of proportion to the services to be rendered. Mr G. M. Thomson said that Swedish drill had as much relation to Sweden as swede turnips. The drill had been devised by the Army and Navy authorities in England. Mr Will’ord seemed to be obsessed by the idea that all that was required of the instnicj lor was a knowledge of Swedish drill. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m. The debate on the Garlick report was continued by Messrs J. C. Thomson and E. Newman. Mr G. W. Russell moved an amendment: “That, in the opinion of the House the appointment of Mr Royd Garlick as Director of Physical Education in the primary schools should not have been made, the position not having been advertised. Mr Garlick was not qualified for the position, and the salary was too large’; that it was unfair to many school teachers and others holding high positions in the Public Service. That it was unfai”

that Mr Garlick’s business in Wellington should be continued with the Mininster’s consent, in defianceof the regulations applying to all Government servants.". Again he asked what the Minister had had placed before him to indicate that Mr Garlick possessed such superlative, such pre-eminent, ability as to warrant him appointing him over the heads of everyone in New Zealand and Australia to establish a system of physical culture in our schools? “And yet,” ho added, “Mr Garlick could not produce one certificate a* to his efficiency or qualification.” The thanks of the country were due to Mr Wilford for ventilating the matter, and he ventured to say that never again would the Minister, nor would any other Minister, dare to make, any appointment without advertising it. ■ j

Mr A. L. Herdman said that it ( had been proved that Mr Garlick had nothing to do with the business now carried on by Mrs Garlick. He contended that all the evidence brought by Mr Wilford before the Committee was irrelevant. None of the witnesses know Mr Garlick or his work. In his opinion Mr Garlick had been pursued with relentless fury.

Mr J. A. Millar saiu that he wanted to state publicly that he was not in favor or the appointment of Mr Garlick. He exonerated the Minister from any improper motives. He was led into wiiat had been done by his advisers, and the one most to blame was the Inspector-General of Schools. It was through taking that advice that the Minister had got into trouble.

Mr Massey said that he had never before heard of a Committee bringing down a unanimous report. That proved there was a strong case on one side or the other. The effect of the finding was that Mr Allen had been exonerated from the more serious charges preferred against him earlier in the session. They could rest assured that no more appointments would be made outside the Commissioners.

The House divided on Mr Russell’s amendment, which was lost by 37 votes to 81, and the report w 7 as adopted. IMPREST STTpPLl r . The Imprest Supply Bill was introduced by Governor’s Message. Mr Massey said that the Government was, lending money as rapidly as possible. The; money was being spread over a period until the next loan money was available. Money was easier. , t He had heard cf a local body’s loan redently being raised at 4} per cent. If the season turned out as they anticipated, money would become easier. ;; .The Bill passfed 'and th? 6; House rose at 2 a m.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/STEP19130926.2.4

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 22, 26 September 1913, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,051

PARLIAMENT. Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 22, 26 September 1913, Page 2

PARLIAMENT. Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 22, 26 September 1913, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert