CIVIL SERVICE REFORM.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10311, 11 August 1911, Page 5

CIVIL SERVICE REFORM.

BILL PROPOSED BY MR HERDMAN. STRENUOUSLY OPPOSED BY LIBERALS.

(By Telegraph—Press Association.)

WELLINGTON, Last Night.

Speaking in the House of Representatives this afternoon, on the Civil Service Reform Bill, which he moved for leave to introduce, Mr A. L. Herdman, M.P., said New Zealand was behind the times so far a the management of its Public Seivice was concerned. There was a considerable amount of discontent existing in the •various branches of the Civil Service. He considered thero was ample justification for the- attitude ho had taken up in regard to the reform of Service. The system in Australia of olacing the affairs of Civil Servants in the hands of three Commissioners was infinitely better than the state of affairs existing here. The control of large bodies of servants was becoming a science. Ho had provided in the Bill for a Chief Commissioner and twi assistant Commissioners outside th«» Service, and thoroughly competent business men who shall be appointed by the Governor-in-Council. Tho Commissioners would assume complete control of Public Servants; fix their salaries, and arrange promotion. Provision was made for prohibiting Servants from canvassing Ministers or members of Parliament, under a penalty of dismissal. Likewise, a similar canvass would disqualify prospective* Civil Servants. The fundamental principle of the Bill was that .the Commissioners were responsible to Parliament and not to the Ministry solely.

Mr Hanan said the system advocated by Mr Herdman for the control of Public Servants had not been a success in New South Wales, wher the. service was seething with discontent. He had made enquiries in Australia, and had been assured that political and outside influence were used there, notwithstanding the Public Service Boards, and merit was not always recognised. He would like to see periodical Departmental tests apnli°d right through the Civil Service. Tests were applied in the Post and Telegraph Department, and worked very satisfactorily there. MerH and length of service should count in promotions. The best brains should br available* for the tops of Departments. Commissioners were not a .success. There must be some one who wa*. resronsible to Parliament and the people. It would be a violation of democratic principles to establish Commissioners in connection with the Public Service. Mr W. F. Massey said there was no parallel between the Railway Commissioners (which he opposed) and Public Service Commissioners. The Hon. Mr Millar had informed the House once that one-seventh of the total population of New Zealand depended upon the Government for its support. He did not know quite how many people there were in the Public Service, but a Board of Control, consisting of Commissioners, was very necessary for controlling the Public Service of the country. The appointments were far from sound. Mr Jennings said that on democratic principles he would oppose the measure. Commissioners, he said, were not satisfactory. If members were prepared to surrender their rights as full representatives of the people, they had no right to bo In the House. Mr T.Y. Duncan was opposed to Public Service Commissioners in any shape or form. Mr McLaren said it was a sham and a pretence of reform to exchange one boss for another. Mr Hogg failed to see how the present system, of control of the, Public Service could be very much improved. Mr Laurenson was sure these were very few appointments made to the Public Service by political influence. The appointment of a Public Service Board would be a distinct reaction. Mr R. B. Ross opposed the Bill. Mr Ell said if the affairs of the Public Service were handed over to a Board of Control there would be more discontent than ever. The debate was adjourned until tomorrow.