A.—l4

18S7. NEW ZEALAND.

LEGISLATIVE EXPENDITURE (CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE HON. THE SPEAKERS OF BOTH HOUSES AND THE HON. THE PREMIER RELATIVE TO).

Laid on the Table by the Hon. Sir B. Stout, with the Leave of the House.

No. 1. The Hon. the Premier to the Speaker, House of Eepresentatives. Sir, —■ Premier's Office, Wellington, Bth December, 1886. I have been requested by the Cabinet to bring under your notice the need, if possible, of reducing the Legislative expenses. You are aware that last session a Committee sat and discussed the subject, and that the Government promised to do what they could to bring the cost of the public service into smaller dimensions. In looking over the amounts voted, we think that, as far as the House of Eepresentatives is concerned, if the Committee reporters, who now obtain £600 a year, were to act as Committee clerks, a considerable saving could be effected. We also think that the four reporters should be sufficient to do all the reporting-work. This ought to save some hundreds a year. We also think that the whole of the salary of the Examiner of Standing Orders on Private Bills could be saved, or, at all events, by giving the Eeader an extra £50, he should be enabled to perform the work. The amount also paid for extra messengers and police during the session seems very largo, amounting to no less a sum this year than £1,000. Some saving might be made under this head. Then, as to the Hansard staff, the Eeporting Debates Committee recommended that the salaries of those who were taken on from date should be £250, and not £300 per annum. We think that this portion of the report should be given effect to; and it may be wise to consider whether the salaries paid to the Hansard staff could not be paid, say, half-yearly, one payment being made immediately after the session, and, perhaps, a reduction made in the general charges. Then we think that the Interpreters in the House should translate the speeches of Maori members from Hansard without any additional payment, as well as translate the Bills into Maori without any additional payment. If these suggestions were given effect to considerable saving would be made in the Legislative expenditure, and the Government is of opinion that the House requires it. I have written to you thus early in case any engagement may be made for next session, and in order that you may consider the matter fully. I intend to write the Speaker of the Council regarding the expenditure under the head of the Legislative Council, and as to the Examiner of Standing Orders for Private Bills. I have, &c, The Hon. Sir Maurice O'Eorke, Speaker, House of Eepresentatives. Eobbrt Stout.

No. 2. The Hon. the Premier to the Hon. the Speakee, Legislative Council. Sib,— Premier's Office, "Wellington, Bth December, 1886. I have been requested by the Cabinet to officially address you regarding the Legislative Council expenditure. I have written to Sir M. O'Eorke pointing out to him various items in which saving can be made so far as the House of Eepresentatives is concerned; for example, I have suggested that the Beader might bo appointed Examiner of Standing Orders on Private Bills, at an advance of £50 a year as salary. Perhaps, however, he might perform the work without any additional payment. I have also suggested that the Committee reporters should also act a3 clerks of the Committees, and I would suggest that the shorthand Committee reporter appointed by the Council should act as Clerk of the Committees, and thus save any need of extra clerical assistance

A.—l4

2

during the session, or at all events lessen the cost of such assistance and of the contingencies. Il> is also a question whether some of the extra messengers might not be reduced by employing fewer. I have made a similar suggestion in regard to the House of Representatives expenditure. You are aware that a Committee of the House of Representatives considered the question of expenditure and desired that it should be considerably reduced. Ido not know that 1 can make any other suggestion at present. I leave the matter to you, and bring it under your notice at this early period in order that the matter may be fully considered by you. I have, &c, The Hon. Sir William. Fitzherbert, K.C.M.G., Robert Stout. Speaker, Legislative Council.

No. 3. The Hon. the Speaker, Legislative Council, to the Hon. the Premier. Sib, — Legislative Council, Wellington, 4th January, 1887. In reply to your letter under date Bth December, 1886, relative to the Legislative expenditure under my control as Speaker of the Legislative Council, I have the honour to inform you that with regard to the permanent staff, viz., the Clerk, Clerk-Assistant, Second ClerkAssistaut, and Interpreter—whose appointment was rendered necessary by the Maori Bepresentation Act—l do not see my way to suggest any reduction if the work is to be carried on efficiently. The number of honourable members has increased considerably during the last twenty years, and the clerical work is nearly, if not quite, double what it was at the beginning of that period. For instance, the Journals of 1860 contain 138 pages of printed matter, besides the Appendix papers and tables, &c. Within the period referred to the clerical staff—all of whom were appointed by my predecessor —has increased by one person only, viz., the Second Clerk-Assistant, exclusive of the special necessary appointment of an Interpreter. Whilst, therefore, the amount of work performed has been doubled, the strength of the staff has only been increased by one. I think it creditable to the officers of the permanent staff that they have been able to keep pace with the work. With regard to extra clerical assistance, I have always been careful to avoid unnecessary expense. The onus of that class of expenditure rests, for the most part, with the Select Committees of the Council. If the Chairmen would content themselves with drawing up a draft report that could, as a general rule, be prepared in time for presentation to the Council by one or other of the permanent staff; but if they require, as is the case, minutes of their daily proceedings, and in many cases evidence, I do not see how, in reason —when there are three or four Committees meeting on the same morning, and often at the same hour—the permanent staff could attend them : and, supposing they did so attend, their offices would remain empty during the period of such attendance, which would cause considerable inconvenience to honourable members. For the last month of the session, as it is, I find it impossible to have the Journals always ready for my signature at tha time specified by the Standing Orders. With regard to the shorthand-writer, I beg to state that I at first declined to make the appointment. Subsequently a special resolution was passed by the Council, on the 2nd October, 1884, which I quote : " 'Resolved, That the Hon. the Speaker be requested to take such steps as he may think best to secure satisfactory shorthand-reporting at the Select Committees of this Council." The appointment was then made by me, at the urgent request of the Minister representing the Government, and also because I ascertained, after careful inquiry, that, on many occasions when 'a shorthand-writer was wanted, one could not be obtained, because the entire strength of the shorthand-writers was required in attending Select Committees in another place. As to their acting as Clerks of Select Committees, such a proposal would receive my approval, provided they were in no way connected with the Press. It will, however, be within your recollection that, on several occasions, important matters have been prematurely communicated to the newspapers, that grave inconvenience has in some cases arisen therefrom, and that strong animadversions have been expressed in Parliament. In the matter of the Examiner of Standing Orders on Private Bills, whose appointment is in the hands of the Speakers of both Houses, I am of opinion that that office might be reorganized, so as to secure a larger parliamentary responsibility in the enacting of these laws, and also greater economy. Hitherto their practical abstraction from the view of Parliament has operated injuriously to the public interests of the colony, and at the same time prevented Bills of this class from being treated on their merits ; and has, further, caused them to be regarded by honourable members as measures which do not concern them in their collective capacity, but only individually as members representing particular localities and interests. Should you concur in the opinion I have expressed, then I think the question could be solved by adopting a plan for the treatment of private Bills, after their due introduction into Parliament, somewhat similar to the course adopted by the Council with regard to local Bills, which, I may observe, has proved eminently successful in practice. With regard to the messengers, they have only been increased very slightly, as the number of honourable members has increased. We have had two permanent messengers and three extra ones during the session, which is at the rate of one to each ten members, a proportion which will be found to compare favourably .with arrangements elsewhere. They have to bo in attendance, so that one is always in the messengers' room at the entrance to the offices, and whenever the Council is sitting three are required in the Chamber. I have carefully perused the report of the Committee on Legislative expenditure, to which you have specially directed my attention, and I may add that I entirely concur in the recommendation

3

&.—l4

contained in the first paragraph of that report, namely : " Tour Committee are of opinion that the number of members in each House of the Legislature can be reduced with advantage to the colony both in the matter of good government and saving of expense." I respectfully submit that, if it is really desired to enter upon a system of effective Legislative economy, the suggestion of the Committee should be formulated and submitted to the consideration of Parliament. Any reduction made here or there in the officers and employes could be but small, so meagre is the establishment of the Legislative Council Department, and yet would, if made, tend to impair the efficiency of a service which is now carefully and ably performed. I have, &c, William Fitzherbert, Speaker of the Legislative Council. The Hon. Sir R. Stout, K.C.M.G., Premier, Wellington.

No. 4. The Hon. the Speaker, Legislative Council, to the Hon. the Premier. Sib,— Wellington, 28th January, 1887. In continuation of my remarks relative to the Examiner of Standing Orders on Private Bills in my letter of the 11th instant, I have the honour to inform you that the present juncture appears to me a favourable one for reconsidering the existing provisions for the management of private Bills, so as to secure a larger interest in this class of legislation by honourable members, and to afford greater publicity in dealing with these measures. I find that the English practice is to appoint an Examiner for each House. " The two Examiners appointed by the House of Lords and Mr. Speaker conduct for both Houses the investigations which were formerly carried on by sub-Committees on petitions for private Bills, and in the House of Lords by the Standing Orders Committee. The Examiners, therefore, acting on behalf of both Houses, now adjudicate upon all facts relating to the compliance or non-compliance with the Standing Orders, and the Standing Orders Committee in each House determine upon the facts as reported or certified by them, whether the Standing Orders ought or ought not to be dispensed with." These duties of the Examiners should be performed prior to the meeting of Parliament (say, any time within one month of such meeting), so that when Parliament assembles these Bills could at once be proceeded with, and at a time when more attention could be bestowed upon them than has been the case hitherto. In the meantime a temporary appointment of an Examiner could be made, so as to prevent any difficulties arising with regard to any Bills which it is proposed to introduce during the coming session. As the Examiner is appointed under the existing Standing Orders, it will be necessary either to amend them during the coming session in order to carry out the change I have suggested, or, possibly, it might be better to embody the appointment and duties of Examiners in an Act together with the laws at present on the statute-book relating to private Bills, and consolidate them. I quite agree with Sir Maurice O'Rorke's suggestion that for duties of so important and trustworthy a character the Examiners should be chosen from the higher officers of Parliament. Another point to which I desire to draw your attention is, that, in order to save time and facilitate business, the Commons House of England resolved, " That they would not insist on their privileges with regard to any clauses in private Bills sent down from the House of Lords which refer to tolls and charges for services performed, and were not in the nature of a tax, or which referred to rates assessed and levied by local authority for local purposes." If a similar course was adopted here it would tend to expedite business, as in that case private Bills could, as a general practice, be introduced into the Council, and be dealt with in the early part of the session, instead of their having to be hurried through, in the pressure of business, towards its close. With a view still further to economize time when the business is yearly increasing, and to allow the promoters of these measures ample opportunity to comply with the Standing Orders, it would, I think, be a convenient practice to divide the proceedings with regard to private Bills into two parts : the first to include all the preliminary steps necessary to be performed prior to the meeting of Parliament; the second, those which are to be undertaken after the meeting of Parliament. The directions should be clear and unmistakable, only to be set aside by special vote in connection with each particular case which may arise. The details could in due course be prepared should you agree with the opinions I have expressed, which would, I believe, meet with general acceptance. • I have, &c, William Fitzherbert, Speaker of the Legislative Council. The Hon. Sir R. Stout, K.C.M.G. Premier, Wellington.

No. 5. 'The Speaker, House of Representatives, to the Hon. the Pbemieb. SlB, — Mount Smart, Penrosc, 11th April, 1887. I have to apologize tip you for not having sooner acknowledged your letter of the Bth December last, offering several suggestions on the subject of the salaries and duties of certain officers of the House of Representatives, and the case of messengers and police during session, which I intended to have done last month when submitting the estimates of the departmental expenditure for the then ensuing year.

A.—l4.

4

I have revised that estimate with a view to such econony as could be effected without trenching upon the privileges of the House. I have given the whole matter my best consideration, and feel satisfied that the House would view with very great jealousy any interference with the right they have always enjoyed of determining the remuneration of their officers. These salaries the House revises from year to year, and if I am now to combine with the Government in recommending smaller salaries than have been fixed it would virtually be placing the salaries of the officers of the House at the disposal of the Speaker and Executive, instead of their being, where I think they should continue to be, at the absolute control of the House. I think that on reflection both the Cabinet and yourself will approve of this view of the matter, and that in any case you will not ascribe my disregard of their suggestions to any desire to be discourteous towards them. I have, &c, The Hon. the Premier, Wellington. G. Maueice O'Eorke, Speaker.

No. 6. The Speakek, House of Eepresentatives, to the Hon. the Premier. Sir, — Mount Smart, Penrose, 11th April, 1887. In reply to your letter of the Bth December last, in which the name of Mr. Bell is mentioned, I regret to have to say that I was unable to induce that officer to offer to undertake the charge of the Private Bill Office and the duties of Examiner. His reason for not accepting the position — namely, that a large amount of the private Bill business would probably be transacted by his brother, Mr. H. D. Bell, of Wellington—was sufficient to cause me to refrain from further pressing him to become a candidate for the office of Examiner of Private Bills. I was in communication in December and January last with the Speaker of the Legislative Council, Sir William Fitzherbert, on the subject of appointing an officer to the charge of the Private Bill Office ; but he expressed a wish that I should adhere to a suggestion I made when the office became vacant, and confer with him on the matter when I was attending the University Senate. To this I agreed; but on arrival at Wellington I found Sir William had left for England. In the absence of the Speaker of the Legislative Council, and in the uncertainty when there would be one with whom I could confer, I felt constrained to assume the responsibility of asking the Clerk of Parliaments, Major Campbell, to undertake the duties temporarily. This he has consented to do, so that no inconvenience will be sustained by the public. The Standing Orders relating to Private Bills do not provide for the amalgamation of the offices of Examiner and Clerk of Parliaments, nor is Major Campbell's appointment valid without the concurrence of the Speaker of the Legislative Council; but I think the Standing Orders Committees of the two Houses should be invited to deliberate on such and kindred matters. I hope that you, as leader of the House, may be on our Committee. I have, &c, The Hon. the Premier, Wellington, G. Maurice O'Rorke, Speaker. {Approximate Coat of Paper.— Preparation, uil; printing (1,275 copies), £1 12s. GdJ

Authority: George Didsbdby, Government Printer, Wellington.—188T.