CIVIL SERVANTS’ FEARS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 3317, 8 September 1911, Page 7

CIVIL SERVANTS’ FEARS.

WHY A WORKER WAS DISMISSED TALKING TO THE OPPOSITION. “A REIGN OF TERRORISM.” (From Our Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, Sept, 7. ‘ ‘Many employees in the Government Departments do not deem it safe to be seen talking to members of the Opposition,” said the member for Wellington Central in the House this afternoon. Thomas Willason, who was employed as a gardener at Government House was dismissed, and he petitioned for an inquiry into the circumstances of his dismissal, but the Public Works Petitions Committee reported that it had no recommendation to make. Mr. Fisher said that a representative of the Public Works Department had written a letter to a solicitor containing a somewhat remaiKable statement that threw an interesting sidelight on the methods of some employees of the Government Departments. The man who was the supervising overseer, had been required to write apologising for having cast aspersions on AVillason’s character, and in his letter he stated: “If I am rightly informed, Willason has himself chiefly to blame for not getting employment with the Public Works Department. He has been interviewing prominent men on the Opposition side of Parliament, and has, perhaps, let his tongue run away with his discretion.” The Prime Minister: It is nonsense. We have heard this old story until we are tired of it. Mr. Fisher: You have never seen it in writing before. There are certain employees in the Government service in Wellington who do not deem it safe to be seen talking to Opposition members. The Prime Minister : We can say that with equal truth of the Opposition supporters who are in the Government employ. Both would be untrue. A reference to the writer of the letter as a gardener drew an interjection that the man was a chemist. Mr. Fisher: Being a chemist, it is very likely he would be appointed to the* position of head gardener at Government House. Continuing, Mr. Fisher said this was the first time the House had been given written evidence of the feeling of insecurity which existed, among civil servants. He did not think there was any justification for tlie impression so far as members of the Cabinet were concerned, for he believed that they knew nothing about it. He suggested that the civil servants should be given a reasonable amount of freedom, and that some of the restrictions now imposed upon them should be removed. There were many men in the employ of the Government who believed that the only way to obtain justice from the Government was to enlist the assistance of members, and in doing so they were careful to ask that care would be taken to protect them from punishment for going over the heads of Departments to members of Parliament. Mr. D. Buick (Palmerston), said he could entirely endorse Mr. Fisher’s remarks. There were men m the seivice who hoped to curry favor with the Government by carrying tales about fellow employees, whom they had seen talking to 'Opposition members. The Minister of Public Works ( I lie Hon. R. McKenzie), said Willason was a laborer, employed in the gardens of Government House . The man had no legitimate complaint, because lie was dismissed with the other men when the work was finished. He had never heard of any objection to Government servants conversing with Opposition members, and, in his opinion it w as useless to parade such petty grievances on the floor of the House,. There were members on the other side who were continually on the look-out for imaginary complaints which were found, when an investigation was made, to be absolutely without foundation. He (the Minister) had Mr. Merryweather before him and made inquiries, and was satisfied that Willason had no legitimate complaint whatever.. He had never heard of any objection to any Government servants speaking to any member of Parliament. ' Mr. Forbes (Hurunui) said that if Mr. Buick went down South he would find that Government employees there were quite free to speak to any member of Parliament, but it appeared from what had been said that the civil servants in this district were frightened of their own souls. He was surprised to hear that there were civil servants who would crawl to members in Wellington. Mr. Arnold (Dunedin Central), said it was all very well for Mr. Forbes to talk as he had done, but there were very few civil servants in his district. Mr. Forbes: You have never been there. Mr. Arnold: But I nave received an invitation to go ; which I shall accept as spon as possible, and before thei election, too.” (Laughter). Continuing, Mr. Arnold said there could be no doubt that there were men whp were afraid that they would be marked mem if they were seen speaking to a member of Parliament; not by'the Minister but by their superior officers. This was because the Ministers of today had not got that command over these who were under them that they should have. (Hear, hear.) While some of the present day Ministers, were able to command the whole of their Departments, that did not. apply to everyone who sat upon the Ministerial benches. Members of the police, servants in the asylums and a large proportion of those referred to as civil servants, had the feeling, rightly or wrongly, that if they were too familiar with a member of Parliament they would be punished in some way. A Government supporter: How can they be punished? Air. Arnold: The Minister for Internal Affairs can tell you how, because I have brought the matter under his notice. Within the last few weeks a man in this Department who was friendly with a member of Parliament was under the impression that he had been punished in consequence. He, (Mr. Arnold), was convinced that Mr. Fisher was right in his statement that a feeling of unrest in the civil service existed, and something should be done by the Ministry of the day to remove Mr Glover (Auckland Central), admitted .that he had been interviewed by large numbers of men in the_ service. He had been interviewed by more men than any member of the House • bv more even than a Cabinet Minister. (Laughter.) They had also come at night, only because they weie at woNc in the daytime. If it was tne case that civil servants were airaicl to come to a member, of the Opposition in the daylight it was a condition o» things; that should not be allowed to eX fk Hon. D. Buddo, referring to the case cited by Mr. Arnold, said the .man

referred to was shifted from one part of a Department to another. -He believed that this had been done in punishment for speaking to the Hon. member, but on inquiry, he (Mr. Buddo) found that the officer had been shifted because lie was not wanted in that part of the Department. He had been moved into another branch and his salary had not been affected. Mr. Luke Suburbs), challenged the statement of Mr. Forbes about the “crawlers” in the Wellington civil service. He denied that and thought they should be cleared from the charge that had been made against them that day. Mr. Pearce (Patea) denied the statement that this man Merryweather was not an educated man, as he had had college education. What he had said was, that it might have been indiscreet for him to write the letter.

Mr. Poole (Auckland West) said he did not believe that Mr. Fisher’s complaint was general, . and he did not believe that the majority of the men and women in the service were afraid to face the music. He had been interviewed by hundreds of civil servants and had never heard such a complaint as had been made.

Mr. Dillon (Hawke’s Bay) objected to these principles, and said he felt annoyed that men were getting up in the House as wet nurses for the men, on the eve of an election. He felt ashamed and he would not stay in the House one month if he had to crawl to the working men. (Ironical Cheers). Mr. Hardy (Selwyn), said the complaint was undoubtedly true. He knew there was a reign of terrorism amongst the civil servants. Mr Russell: Stuff and nonsense.

Mr Hardy said lie had been told repeatedly by men: “I should not be seen talking to you because you are a member of Parliament.” He repeated that the civil servants were afraid to speak to members of the Opposition. Mr Russell (Avon) charged Mr Fisher with posing for votes, and ridiculed Mr Hardy’s statements. He admitted that no one could keep Mr Hardy out of Parliament, as lie was an adept at electioneering methods and at systematically carpet-bagging a district. Mr Hardy said this statement was incorrect. He was non a carpet-bag-ger, and did not put in 365 days a year electioneering. Were lie gifted with speech as was possessed, by the member for Avon he would be able to fool those he represented, but he did not attempt that in Selwyn in the way that the Hon. member did in Avon. (Laughter). Mr. W. F. Massey, leader of the Opposition, said lie had heard that a man with whom he used to shake hands when lie met him on the railway station, had been discharged because of his friendliness with the Leader of the Opposition. He did not know whether it was true or not, but there was, however, that feeling of fear among persons in the public service. The Hon. D. Buddo-: I don’t tliink there is any such feeling. Mr. Massey: There is such a feeling, and it is the duty of the Government to do anything it can to dissipate it. Mr. W. C. Buchanan (Wairarapa), said the feeling of insecurity prevailed throughout the public service. The Minister of Agriculture (the Hon. T. Mackenzie) said there was not a member of the Cabinet wlio would treat a public servant unjustly because he stated his case to a member of Parliament. The position described, by Mr A.rnol"d might be correct,, and lie declared that investigation would be made into any case of unjust treatment that was brought under the notice of the Minister in charge of the Department, [t was not with his knowledge that any advantage had ever been taken of any representation made by a public servant through’ a member to the Ministry. The chairman of the committee, Mr J. Craigie (Timaru), said that the gardener Merryweather was apparently a very good worker, but ho was rather indiscreet. The report was received.