CO885-(11-12) — Page 516

436

PECORD OFFICE

Reference

TANAC.O.882/12

π T T T T T T T T H I Į

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BF REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC – COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT 10|

94

reference to the Board of Ministers and the State Council. Then again in April last on a resolution passed by the State Council and on the advice of the Board of Ministers His Excellency the Governor appointed a Salaries and Cadres Commission, and this Commission issued an Interim Report in July last and the Final Report in October. The Governor, without consulting the Board of Ministers or taking the Ministers into his confidence, referred the Interim Report to the Secretary of State and obtained decisions thereon. The proper constitutional course was for the Governor to address the Secre- tary of State after the Board had formulated its proposals and obtained decisions in the State Council. It is recognized that the Secretary of State is the final arbiter in all matters affecting the salaries, emoluments, and conditions of service of Public Servants. But his decision on these matters should be sought, not in advance but finally after the normal constitutional procedure had been followed.

The Donoughmore Cominissioners considered it important that all the Ministers should be made acquainted with the tenor of current correspondence with the Secretary of State, whether directly applicable to their departments or not."

This recommendation, however, is ignored and the Governor has thought it fit to communicate to the Ministers only the routine and unimportant corespondence between him and the Secretary of State. In the recent conflict between the Governor and the State Council on the question of the salary cuts of the Public Servants, the correspondence between the Governor and the Secretary of State was not placed before the Board of Ministers, and in spite of requests made, the right of access to the despatches on the subject was denied to the Ministers. Even in the matter of the Salaries and Cadres Commissioners' Report, only the bare communication from the Secretary of State conveying his decisions has been placed before the Board of Ministers.

13. Public Services Commission.-The fact that this body is composed of only the three Officers of State who themselves are in the position of Ministers administering certain departments of Government places the elected Ministers in an unenviable position in relation to the officers working under them. It is no doubt essential to protect the Public Service as far as possible from political or personal influences and to give it that position of stability and security so vital to its successful working as the impartial and efficient instrument by which the Governments may give effect to their politics. There are therefore undoubtedly advantages in having a Public Services Commission to deal with the recruitment and control of the Public Services. Its composition, however, should be entirely different. There is no justification in having as its members public servants who themselves being in charge of departments cannot be expected to take that independent and detached view in dealing with the many complex problems that arise for disposal by a Public Services Commission. It is of the utmost importance that the Commissioners should be men of the highest public standing unconnected with the Public Service and detached so far as practicable from all political associations.

Under the existing Public Service Regulations, recommendations for filling vacancies are made in the first instance to the Public Services Cominission and there- after reference is made to the Executive Committee for its recommendation. In order to establish a better liaison between a Minister and the Head of a Department and to simplify the procedure it is considered that the more satisfactory course would be for the Head of the Department to make his recommendation through his Minister.

14. Secretary of State. The remarks in respect of the exercise of the special powers by the Governor apply equally to the exercise of the corresponding powers by the Secretary of State. He has adjudicated on ex parte reports without hearing the Board of Ministers or the State Council. It is impossible for the Secretary of State to be the final arbiter in all matters if his powers are exercised prematurely on repre- sentations made by the Governor without having the considered views of the elected representatives of the people before him.

MR. PANABOKKO'S VIEWS ON THE METHOD OF ELECTION OF MINISTERS (vide paragraph 5).

I do not consider the present method of election of Ministers wholly unsatis- factory. While the Committee System remains an integral part of the Constitution, the present method of election of Chairman of Committees is, in my opinion, the least objectionable.

95

But if there is to be a change I prefer the proposal made by the four Ministers who desire to see a change brought about, to any other suggested methods, such as election by the whole House or of election by Committees by what is called an "absolute majority."

RIDER.

One of the distinct and outstanding features of the Order in Council of 1931 is the abolition of communal representation and the Donoughmore Commissioners them- selves recommended that His Excellency the Governor should be statutorily vested with powers to counteract any interest that would adversely affect the Minority Com- munities. Hence the inclusion of Sections 22 and 72 in the Order in Council. I reserve to myself the right to express my personal views if and when opportunity arose in the points raised in the memorandum of the Board of Ministers with reference to these Sections.

I have already expressed to the Board of Ministers my views relating to the present method of electing Ministers. This in my opinion is the only available means by which members representing Minority Communities can at least hope to be chosen to Ministerial office. Any change in the present method will I think be prejudicial to the interests of the Minority Communities.

19th April, 1933.

SIR,

Enclosure 2 in No. 40.

MOHD. MACAN MARKAR.

The Council Chamber, Colombo, 29th July, 1933. WITH reference to the various points raised by Your Excellency at the interview, we desire to state at the outset that our proposals for Reform of the Constitution were intended not to supersede but to supplement and amplify the resolutions passed by the State Council. It will be seen from the proceedings of the Council that Mr. E. W. Perera's motions were put forward, debated and voted upon as independent resolu- tions. Consequently they were incapable in themselves of being regarded as a complete scheme of Reforms. In these circumstances, the Ministers felt it their duty in forwarding these resolutions for the favourable consideration of the Secretary of State to provide the framework into which the resolutions passed by the State Council might be fitted. In doing so, they were obliged to make suggestions regarding matters which were not covered by the Council resolutions. At the same time, it was not thought necessary to state explicitly in each case their general agreement with these reso- lutions.

2. The last resolution of Mr. E. W. Perera, viz. :—

"This Council is of opinion that Government by Executive Committees of the State Council leads to divided responsibility, delays in administration, is unsuited for the Government of a country and recommends that the duties and responsibilities assigned to such Committees and Ministers should be assigned to Ministers responsible to the Council,"

was not accepted by the Council. But the trend of opinion both in the Council and in the country during the debate and afterwards clearly pointed to the necessity for modi- fication of the Committee System in some respects in order to render the working of the present Constitution less cumbersome and more efficient.

3. The duties of the Executive Committees fall in the main under four heads, viz. :-

(a) The preparation of the annual estimates of revenue and expenditure in respect of the departments under the control of each Executive Committee; (b) the preparation of such supplementary estimates as might be required from

-time to time;

(c) the consideration of such executive business as the Chairman might direct to be placed on the Agenda Paper or such as might be brought up by any member of the Committee; and

(d) the consideration of the proposed Legislative measures falling within the

scope of the Committees.