10 August 1972
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
(Thursday, 10 August, 19721 212411 The Attorney-General replied to the sec- to guarantee the sum requested by the and part of my question as follows- U.F.O.A.-T.L.C., he will submit the project (2) It has not been considered neces- to Parliament for ratification. in that sary to conduct any inquiries. In- ease we will have ample chance to discuss formation has been received that it here. all persons who have subscribed Mr. Jamieson: He has been very f air. in the terms of the "Prospectus" have been admitted- Sir CHARLES COURT: From the smile on the Premier's face I have an idea that And this is an interesting thing. I do not my guess is right. know whether the people concerned realise this, but they had the privilege of being Sir David Brand: It is a smile of relief. admitted- Mr. Nalder: We will possibly read the -as members of U.F.,A. and the answer in the Sunday Independent. moneys have been paid to that body. Sir CHARLES COURT: Yes. I believe That answers partly the question raised the member for Wellington has done a by my colleague as to what happened to service to the Parliament by bringing those people. They now have the privilege forward this motion. I am sorry the of being classed as members of U.F.O.A. Minister did not see fit to take us into his Sir David Brand: A very poor return, confidence and let us have a look into the future, and at the planning he has under- I should say. taken. Sir CHARLES COURT: it was admitted by the Attorney-General that those people Debate adjourned, on motion by Mr.. were not in the venture, the subject of Runciman. the prospectus, but were now made mem- House adjourned at 10.00 p.m., bers of the body known as X.F.G.A. Sir -David Brand: They have been harnessed with a liability. Sir CHARLES COURT: My third ques- tion was as follows:- Ticgwstatint Aqirmtb1 (3) Is he satisfied U.F.O.A is properly Thursday, the l0th August, 1972 incorporated and carrying an within the terms of the appro- priate Statutes? The SPEAKER (Mr. Norton) took the The answer is very significant. The Chair at 11.00 am., and read prayers. Attorney-General said- STATE GOVERNMENT INSURANCE (3) U.F.G.A. is not incorporated but OFFICE ACT AMENDMENT BILL the necessary certificate to enable incorporation has been granted Third Reading by me. MRt. TAYLOR (Cockburn-Minister for After all these months. They were still Labour) [11.03 a.m.]: I move- not even incorporated at that stage, when That the Bill be now read a third they were taking the money and people were being admitted as members. Part time. (4) of my question was as follows:- MR. O'NE[L (East Melville-Deputy (4) Is he satisfied U.F.G.A.-T.L.C. are Leader of the Opposition) 111.04 a.m.]: seeking to raise funds for the I1 cannot let the third reading of this Bill abattoirs project within the teriiis pass without making further comment. of the appropriate Statutes? There have been occasions, even as late as last evening, when an accusation was I think the answer to that part of the made by the Government that the Oppo- question is the "daddy" of them all: it is a sition was not sincere in its opposition to real "daddy". It was as follows- a Bill: and that was accepted because no (4) I am unaware of any statutory comment was made on, that Bill in the breach committed by U.F.G.A. In Committee stage. The Opposition, did, the raising of funds. in fact make a protest in respect of a In other words that is the "classic" legal particular clause of the Bill in the Com- man's way of saying he was doing the mittee stage. I do not want to have the Nelson trick as far as that particular as- accusation, that the Opposition is not sin- pect is concerned. I think I can leave that cere when it does not take the opportunity now. to protest, levelled at us again. Mr. Graham: I should think so. There are a number of matters which I did not cover in the second reading de- Sir CHARLES COURT: It would be bate. They came about as a result of quite wrong for the Government to back answers given to questions asked by me this venture. Of course, the Premier has some time ago relative to the operations undertaken that if the Government agrees of the State Government Insurance Office. 2412 2412[ASSEMBLY.] One of the matters related to the use Mr. Jamieson; I remember an incident of Government officers as agents for the at Damnpier, and you should also. State Government Insurance Office. At the time I asked a question of the Minis- Mr. O'NETL: There have been many in- ter as to whether he condoned the practice stances which I have forgotten, and many of officers of the State canvassing for busi- others of which I am not aware. However. ness for the State Government Insurance one cannot say that these two cases are Office. We were told there were officers parallel. The practice which I queried is of the State who were appointed to act the Practice of, say-I am not naming the as agents, and that they were paid a fee people-a clerk of courts who uses the in respect of the business they managed facilities of his office, the official station- to attract. ery and the like of his department, and perhaps the stamps of his department to I think the fee Was 5 per cent. of the send out letters canvassing for business value of the business obtained, and it was for the State Government Insurance Office. a once-only payment. No remuneration was Paid to a State officer who continued I want to make It clear that we do not to act as agent in respect of that business. condone that practice, although it is fair I asked the Minister whether he would to say that whilst we were in Govern- condone the practice of an officer of the ment the Public Service Commissioner did State, in fact, canvassing for business for authorise civil servants who acted as the State Government Insurance Office. agents for the State Government Insurance His answer was to the effect that this office to receive some remuneration. That Practice had been condoned by the urevi- was Probably so. o"ss Government; that Is, when we were in office. Possibly the Minister might have There are, of course, many circum- misinterpreted my question. He answered stances under which officers of the State it on the basis that the Public Service and school teachers are allowed to operate Commissioner of the day had authorised outside the normal area of the Govern- State Officers to act as agents for the ment service for remuneration. In fact, State there are many senior officers of Govern- Government Insurance Office, and ment departments who lecture in public in that he saw our Government condon- ing the practice of having State officers administration at technical colleges and the like. Mostly they lecture to public as agents. servants who are endeavouring to improve My question was related to the query as their qualifications for the job. Of course to whether he would condone the practice this is condoned, and approval has been of State officers cavassing for business. It given by the Public Service Hoard, as it is had been btought to my notice that a par- known, for these officers to undertake ticular officer of the State was using the that task. I can see no objection to it. facilities of his department and his office to circularise the business people in the However, a civil servant who Is in fact area in which he was operating, with a view earning a commission on his own in re- to attracting some business for the State spect of an agency-the commission being Government Insurance Office. This was for new business written-should not use the Practice of which I was critical. I am the facilities of his department and the not certain whether it occurred during the Public Service in order to do this. Mem- period when we were in office. bers of Parliament have been criticised for having used parliamentary stationery for Mr. J. T. Tonkin: As a point of interest, purposes other than those related to par- what would be the difference between what liamentary business; we can all recall this. You have Just said and the R. & I. Bank specifically getting assistance from State I wanted to dlear up that particular officers? matter and I have taken this opportunity on the third reading to do so. I want to Mr. 07NEIL: I think there is a great indicate quite frankly once again that any- deal of difference. The staff of the R. thing I have said has been no criticism at & 1. Bank are not public servants, but all of the officers of the 8.0.1.0. They are the staff of the State Government Insur- all skilled and dedicated officers trying to ance Office are. The R. & I. Bank does do the job the best they can. It is simply not use clerks of courts, policemen, school that we do not believe the Government has teachers, and the like as agents for the a right to extend its entry into fields which bank; but the State Government Insur- are, in our view, the prerogative of private ance Office does.