47

R. W. MCVILLY.

I.—6a.

34. 1 understood you to say the previous day that the £220 was the side-track. What did you mean by that?— Here is a man at £230 maximum: that is more than £220. What I mean by "side-track" is this: where officers in the service joined the Department prior, I think, to 1890, those men do not have to pass the senior examinations, but, although they do not satisfy this requirement of the Department in that respect, they may, nevertheless, go up by increases to £220 if the head of the Department is disposed to let them, and that is their maximum. They can never get past £220—they are side-tracked; but the maximum is not £220 a year, but any rate either higher or lower than the head of the Department fixes. 35. I will go back to Schedule 1! later on. I understand that your point is that the remuneration of officers should depend on the percentage of the net earnings to the gross earnings, is that so?—My point is that the remuneration of an officer should be reasonable for the services he performs, that the Railway Department should be the judge as to what is reasonable, and that the working-expenses of the Department must bear some reasonable ratio to the revenue in order that the public interests may be protected and the general taxpayer not be called upon to put his hand in his pocket to make up large deficiencies brought about by paying the Railway men an unreasonably high rate of pay. 36. That may be so, but you recognize this : that the other Departments lean to some extent on the Railway Department?—l do not recognize that, and I do not know where such an erroneous idea came from. 37. Put it this way: members of Parliament 'ravel free?—l am not discussing members of Parliament. 38. I want to show that it is not fair to take the percentage of profits to earnings when you do not take into consideration the many privileges that other members enjoy at the expense of the Railways?—My reply to that is that it is not fair for the institute or yourself to put the position the way you are puting it and at the same time to discuss the pay of Railway men independent altogether of the privileges that the Railway men enjoy over and above the privileges of other members of the public service and the general community. 39. That is not my point? —But it is mine. 40. I want you to answer my question. My question is that certain privileges are enjoyed not only by members of Parliament, but by the public, for instance, and you must take that into consideration. For instance, is it not a fact that the Railway Department is often required in the interests of the public to carry grain free? —Not often; no. 41. It has been, has it not? —I cannot recall any case. 42. It was done in Central Otago?—Yes, feed for starving stock —not grain. That is a matter of public policy. lam not discussing policy. 43. That is not taking into consideration your argument. The fact that the Railway Department do certain things for nothing is not taken into consideration in arriving at the profits?— Well, a little more knowledge of the working of the Department would have prevented a question like that being put, because, although it may not be known to the staff generally that payments are made for those things, the Railway Department has lots of ways of getting payments apart altogether from the station accounts. There are such things as head offices dealing with head offices. 44. You mean, lots of ways in which to get payments? —What I mean is this : that the head of the Railway Department claims on the head of another Department for certain services rendered, and those adjustments are made in the Railway Accountant's office, and the value of the services rendered is put in the Railway receipts. 45. What has that to do with it? —That has everything to do with it. The services rendered are put in the Railway receipts and appear in the revenue. 46. What I understand is this: that if you carried food in Central Otago for nothing, to overcome a drought or something like that, the value of those services would be credited in the public accounts? —I am not discussing Central Otago in particular. 47. Where food is carried free to a certain place, is credit taken for that in the Railway receipts?— Yes, it has been done. 48. The Chairman.] It* is debited to another Department ?—Yes. Generally we arrange it here in Wellington. 49. Mr. Ramsay.] Have you got the amount of the revenue for the last time?—l have not for the last time—that is only a few months ago. 50. No, I mean years ago?—lf you are talking about years ago, then we have the amount. 51. Then you carry racehorses and charge carriage only one way? —I do not think that enters into the matter. That is a service that is performed for the British public the same in this country as in any other country. There are certain concessions given on certain classes of traffic which induce a larger number of people to travel, and thereby brings to the Department business which it would not otherwise get. 52. That is done elsewhere? —Yes. 53. We do not disagree with the practice, but we want to know whether consideration is taken for this or not. Then there is another important aspect where the railway precedes settlement : you cannot in a case like that expect the railways to make a fair return on the capital Coß i i —Well, my view of that matter is this: that if you are going to eliminate—and this is the line of argument you are taking up—that you must eliminate the profitable from the unprofitable lines, and must base the pay of the Railway servants on the profitable lines and must not take into consideration the unprofitable ones at all, but let them live on the fat line all the time. I want to know if that position is going to be followed when we are going to have railways in some of the outlying districts. In dealing with a railway system you have got to take the system as a whole. You cannot adopt a principle such as you are advocating without adopting the principle