- 6-
the Commission, and would delay submission of the Report to Executive
Council for many months. The Government took the view that such a
delay would not be in the best interests of either the Civil Service
or the community. Accordingly, I announced on 27 October that it was
proposed to submit the Report to Executive Council with a recommendation
that the revised pay scales should be generally approved, but (and this
is the point I wish to stress) with the recommendation also that the
Standing Commission should be asked to include in its future programmne
of work those matters in the Report which staff or management consider
merit re-examination.
20.
Disagreement with some of the Commission's recommendations
was to be expected, particularly from groups whose representations
were not accepted by the Commission. It was also to be expected that
public interest would focus on those groups who have threatened or
taken disruptive action.
21.
But it is necessary to see things in perspective. The
number of grades who have threatened or taken disruptive action is a
small minority. Many others, although disappointed with some aspects
of the Report, have acted responsibly and decided to pursue their case
further by making fresh representations to the Commission. They
include the various staff associations in the disciplined services, as
well as the three Main Staff Associations which comprise the Staff Side
of the Senior Civil Service Council. The Staff Side did have
reservations about certain aspects of the Report and I have undertaken
to refer these back to the Commission for further study as part of its
future programme of work. But, and this is significant, the Staff Side
of the Senior Civil Service Council agreed that because of the
interlocking nature of the recommendations on pay scales, any amendment
/now
+Page 46