CO885-(18-19) — Page 724

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O.885

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

19 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

70

2 July 1968.

CROWN AGENTS' ENQUIRY COMMITTEE:

Major M. A. CAMERON, C.M.G.

1505. You are in point of fact flentified completely, because the whole of the profits of the oflice are drawn at the pleasure of the Secretary of State?-Certainly; that again is part of his control user the Crown Colonies, but still we are not directly identified and the .cretary of State is our critic now.

1507. Your view is that the connection. if made closer, would not tend to be less fixed, but more?—At presem the Colonies, if they are dissatisfied with us, can, and do, appeal to the Secretary of State, and in is very desirable that they should have that feelings and as long as we stand outside the Colonial Office the Secretary of State can judge us from outside. He is cur critic and can come to a perfectly independent conclusion, but if we were identifies with the Office the Colonies would then be appealing to luum against himself in fact. I think, perhaps, they would not appeal as much, which would be a pity, Icause it is very desirable that they should have the feeling that they can appeal to the Secretary of State whenever thy want to. They would hesitate probably if it was a Department of his own office that was concerned.

1508. That view was expressed by Sir Ernest Blake, who, as you know, holds your view very strongly and expresses it emphatically, but he did seem to show signs of seeing one fault in the arrangement; he said that the Crown Agents were tot lequately defended in Parliament when they were attacked, and so on-- that they had no official spokesman-they had neither official critics nor official spokesmen in his view. What do you say to that?- Personally the attacks in Parliament do not weigh much on my mind so long as I am satisfied that the thing is on a sound basis. and that there is no serious or real justification for them. If we were a Department of the Imperial Government, I am afraid there might be more difficulty in carrying on the work in the way in which we do carry it on. and a greater fear really that the attacks might occa- sionally be justified.

1500. You are aware, of course, that this is an arrangement which, as far as I have been able to ascer tain, has to exact parallel, on this planet at any rate; it is most peculiar, and the real status of the Crown Agents' fier is A most interesting study; it is a position of things which has grown up by degrees, and, of course,”in_other_Departments both in this country and abroad such offices as yours are much closer to the Civil Service; for instance, notably in the India Office. You are aware of the way in which they do their work, which we have found on inquiry is very similar in various points to your own?—Yes.

1510. What special reason do you give the Committes for thinking that what applies to the India Office dues not apply here, or for thinking that your plan is better-I should say that there is this great difference. that the India Office deals only with India, which is one Government under one control, and has one set of rules, so that many things can be enforce and Jone systematically which would be impossible when you are dealing with 50 or more Governments with different views and different circumstances, some of them not completely under control-1 am speaking of recent matters like the Central South African Railway, where the Colonial Office did not attempt to come in at all. and you get bodies like the Tanjong Pagar Dock Board, for instance, who do not work directly under the Government of the Straits Settlements but are rather affiliated with them. In the India Office, as 1 under- stand. they regulate their indents to a large extent; they can require a certain Department to send in cer- tain indents at certain periods and equalise the work in that way; they can-lay down patterns, rules and regulations that can apply generally; while in the Clonies that is not done, and I do not think ever can be done, for if the Secretary of State attempted to enforce uniformity on all the Colonies he would be brought up by so many geographical and other con. siderations that the thing could not work.

1511. Indian officials are more docile?--I would not say that, but there is a difference, and a very great difference, between dealing with one large service under central control and with 30 or more independent services. They could not be controlled in detail by the Colonial Office, and it is very undesirable that they should. and yet those details we have to do with. As to general questions they are under control, but

not when you cone to such matters as the purchase of stores; in fact, we have to study the idiosyncrasies of the Colonies very much. We use more discretion with one place than with another, because we know that is what they like. In some places we use very little, because they do not require us to; they like the letter of their indents carried out, and so all through. It makes it a very different state of circumstances.

1312. The last question, as far as I am concerned, is this: Of course, everything is criticised in this imper- foct world; nobody is ever contented, and we have had- n attacks at all but criticisms from the Crown Colonies brought before us from people who seemed to think that you were either too slow or too critical, and it has been pointed out by some of the witnesses that perhaps that was an advantage to the Colonial Office, because you acted as a buffer. However that may be would you suggest to the Committee any way by which the matter could be improved? You have shown that in your view a closer assimilation to the Civil Service is not desirable, from the Colonial point of view; is there anything you could suggest that would make the Crown Agents more popular-a Government Department, of course, can never be popular?--I am afraid the Crown Agents can never be popular. But with whom do you mean Are you speaking of the criticisms that come from Colonial Governments?

1513. Yes, you will see the whole of the evidence, and although there is nothing in the nature of charges, there is a general impression; for instance, one witness mplied that you were not sufficiently sympathetic !--- I think one answer to that is (and I have some materials for it) the amount of actual complaints wo have received from the Colonies. I am speaking of the stores work more particularly now. I heard that something was asked about it on Monday, and I looked them out as well as could be done in a short time. We note any complaint in the Works Department registers, anything that amounts to a complaint at all, and I find on looking back for the last 12 months that there have been, excluding such matters as packing and shortages, which are simply routine incidents, 4 complaints, mostly trivial and in severn! eases made under misapprehension. Of those only 17 amounted to what could be called complaints against the Crown Agents of things actually done in their office.

1514. Out of a possible how many?-I believe we have purchased about £2,000,000 worth of stores, and the whole number of requisitions received in the office has been nearly 9,000, of which probably half have been done by the Works Department, and those 4,000 requisitions mean a very much larger number of con- travty--i could not say the number, but I daresay 10,000 or 12,000 orders.

1515. In your Department you think your auswer to my question would be that the complaints were not by any means numerous ?--I should say having regard to the business that they are negligible.

1516. With regard to the staff, you have more to do with the technical side. I know, but still you could tell us from the point of view of the staff whether (first) you think you could get better men; and (seandly) whether the staff would be more or less enn- tented if they were brought more into conformity with the Civil Service? I am not quite clear as to how you mean to bring them into conformity with the Civil Service.

1517. At present they are appointed by you?---Yes. 1518, At present they are paid out of a fund which you control, subject to the Secretary of State, which is raised by percentages?— Yes,

1519. And the pensions are in accordance, more or less, with the Civil Service, but not precisely. In the other case, they would be recruited like the Civil Service, either in two grades or one, as the case may bo, and they would be paid on the Civil Service scale, and they would be part of the Civil Service, in the same way as nearly everybody at this table in?--The central point is the question of control over the staff. and the extent to which we are to be held responsible for what we do. I gather that the Committee is rather inclined to hold that we should be responsible for mistakes we may make ourselves, H we wen recruited from the Civil Service that could hardly be enforced. It is essential, I consider, that we should have complete control over our staff, and that if a man

work.

MINUTIS OF EVIDENCE.

Major M. A. CAMERON, C.M.G.

15 unsuitable we should be able to get rid of him. He may not misconduct himself, but he may not suit our If then we are bound to keep him, our respon- sibility goes, Take, for instance, the Jamaica case, that was referred to before. Something like that might arise in this way: We have got a man whom we do not think altogether suitable;" he may have passed the nevessary examinations, he may be an excellent man n many ways, but either he is inaccurate or he makes ccasional mistakes. We feel that he is a source of danger, and that it is better he should go, but thero is nothing against him; his character is perfectly good, and his work in other lines might be perfectly good, but if he was a Civil servant it would be, I am afraid, impossible to part with him in that way.

1520. Do you mean that your staff should be more in the position of the staff of an ordinary commercial establishment, and less in the position of the Civil Service? - Yes; 1 consider it is essential for the proper conduct of our business that we should have completo power to dispense with a man who does not suit us, It and, in fact, we have had occasionally to do that. does not happen very often. Supposing we have a man of that kind, and we think he ought to go if our fico, was under the Civil Service we should have to recommend to the Colonial Office in all probability that he should be dispensed with, and supposing they took the view, “Really we do not see anything against m; it is true you do not think much of him, but he has passed his examinations, he is a member of the Civil Service, he has a great deal in his favour, it is extremely hard, and we think you should keep him." Supposing then he makes a mistake like the Jamaica mistake, and it is a case of paying £600 or £700, who would pay! We could not be hell responsible, because wo had endeavoured to get rid of him."

1521. (Mr. Gibran.) You are referring to the technical staff rather than to the clerical staff! Yes; the same thing, no doubt, applies all through, but I am speak- ing specially of the technical staff now. That is a lithculty which seems to me to arise out of any arrangement which does not give us the power of dis- pensing with men who are not suitable..

1522, (Chairman.) Broadly speaking, your answer De both questions is (1 wish to be quite clear) that you think it would be inadvisable to assimilate your lie more clus-ly to the Civil Service ?--You; 1 should Her sorry to see it myself, certainly,

1523, (AL. Bailey.) You are aware, of course, that in the case of the ordinary appointments to the Civil Service a man has to serve a certain period of proba- tion?--Yes.

1521. Do you think that would not give you suffi- vient power of getting rid of your "bad bargains "?-- It is hardly a case of “bail bargains"; that cer- tainly wonbil, but you cannot always tell how a man will turn out when he gets higher up in the office.

1525. Do you not think before you would promote him you would be in a position to say whether he would be likely to turn out well when he got higher up"--You ought to be, but it is extremely difficult to judge of work you do not see yourself and some- timi hiss niors may be kind hearted. It does happen that you do not always get a full knowledge of a man and he develops differently to what you expect. 1328. Then with regard to the engineering technical staff, it is pretty obvious that some of these posts would hardly be best filled by the method of open competition or restricted compétition, but in the case of Certain of these appointments do you not think you would be at least as well served and at least as likely to get sustable men if you had recourse to the Civil Service Commusioners to find you a man from the open market' Certainly, we should be very glad andel for any assistance we can get from the Civil Service Commissioners.

to you as

11

1927. I am assuming that that would imply that your selected candidate would come fully equipped Civil servant, but on probation. D. you think "le would not be so suitable a man for you as a man selected as your technical non are now and on the tenure of your present staff * -1 am not sure that 1 quite understand the bearings of it, let our present staff are very suitable; we have an extremely good technical staff now. If we could through the

71

2 July 1908.

Civil Service Commissioners get a better one, of course we should be very pleased. All that I think is that it is necessary that we should have the power (it is not exercised, and I hope it will not be necessary) of dispensing with a man at any time if he proves unsuitable, short of misconduct, or anything Sluch would get rid of him necessarily.

1528. You would prefer to be established as what may be called a benevolent autocracy rather than as a constitutional monarchy ?-Possibly that is it. I might say that our work approximates to that of a emmercial house. The position in any bank or largo commercial house is that they do keep on their men, and where a man has been many years in your service you tolerate a great deal more from him than you would tolerate from a youngster, but there is always the power behind, to dispense with anybody, and that is a point which I feel strongly upon."

1529, (Mr. Harris.) Following up the same line of thought, and putting aside for the moment any ques tion of Civil Service, do you think, assuming that the

n

Secretary of State can secure to you full powers of dismissal, there is any reason why your staff should not be organised as regards grades of salaries and so forth on a definite system approximating either to the Civil Service or to Crown Colony Government Department? In other words, do you think the power of dismissal must carry with it the sole control of the whole lives of your staff?-With what object would you introduce that? Do you mean that their salaries shumll be laid down from the first

1530. Yes, by the Secretary of State.-With what object?

1531. With the object. 1 should presume, of giving them a certain sense of fixity of tenure, justice, uni- formity, and so forth. Are you prepared to give any opinion upon that--Decidedly, I see no objection at all to giving a man certain fixed prospects as a mini- mum, that is to say, that he will rise by so much a year, and then that anything beyond that will depend upon vacancies and on his own merits, I see no possible objection to that—in fact, it is a very good ihing, but I think that it ought to be open to the Crown Agents to promote a superior man quite irre- spective of seniority, and to reward merit either by personal allowance or in sune other form,

1532. That is the rule, is it not, in the Army and the Navy and the Civil Service generally ?—I am afraid not, is it?

153. I always understood that it was.--1 am afraid seniority comes in to a very large extent, and also the salaries are very rigidly fixed. It is true you get uniformity, but those things 1 regard rather as the drawbacks of a great service than as desirable things in themselves. When you have got a service of limited size like ours in which you can personally supervise the whole thing, seems to me that you get an elas- ticity which is very desirable, In the Civil Service you cannot have that, because there are so many people administering it, and it is so vast that you would have hopeless discrepancies. which would be a constant source of grievance questions in Parliament and every other sort of difficulty. It never occurred to me that the rigidity of the Civil Service was a gain, in itself; I look upon it as one of the drawbacks of it.

1534. Coming back to the power of dismissal, have you, as a matter of fart, within, say the last ten years, ever exercised the right to come down on a man?—Wa have certainly dispensed with some men, that is to say

we have told them they had better look out for employment elsewhere, and they have resigned.

1

1635. Was that on the ground that they were not efficient?—On the ground that they did not suit us. I cannot remember a case of dismissing a man; should not like to say that we have not done it, but I cannot remember a case. That, of course, we could give you, but upon that I should like to say that it is a very different thing possessing a power in the back- ground and exercising it.

1-538. You suggest by that then that the power in the background strengthens the efficiency of your staff? -I think it strengthens the position very much.

1537. There is one more question which has a special bearing up in your staff which I should like to ask you :

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO

BUSTOSCOAPHIC.I

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-