§ MR. THOROLD ROGERSasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether it is an Instruction to the Civil Service Commission, in order to obviate suspicion of unfairness, that candidates for public appointments should be known to examiners by numbers only; whether it is the fact that persons appointed to examine candidates viva voce have asked candidates as to the place at which they have obtained their teaching, and as to the persons who have imparted that teaching to them, and have given the impression to the candidates that they were favourably disposed or the reverse, as the candidate has appeared from some school, or college, or private tutor, and whether this practice of examiners has had the approval of the Commissioners; whether the father of one candidate, in consequence of the treatment which his son received from one of the examiners in the particulars before cited, has complained to the Commissioners, and received an evasive or irrelevant reply; and, whether, in order to obviate a possible impression that the examinations on behalf of the Government are conducted unfairly, he will agree to an inquiry by Royal or Parliamentary Commission into the system of appointing examiners and setting papers at the office in Cannon Row?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this Question. I have referred it to the Civil Service Commissioners, with whom the matter rests; and they inform me, with reference to the first Question of my hon. Friend, that they do not think it would be expedient or practically possible to use numbers in all their examinations; but that they do so in. most of the impor- 1422 tant competitions, including such competitions, as that to which the next Question refers. As to the second Question, the Commissioners state that it has come to their knowledge that at a recent vivâ voce examination an examiner questioned some of the candidates as to the places at which and the persons by whom they had been taught; but the Commissioners have satisfied themselves by inquiry that whatever impression the candidates may have formed, the examiner was, in fact, in no way favourably disposed to them or the reverse in consequence to their replies on these points. The Commissioners do not approve of interrogating candidates in the manner described, and they have taken steps to prevent any repetition of the occurrence. As to the third Question, the Commissioners state that the father of one of these candidates complained to them on the subject, and requested that his son might be re-examined by another examiner. As the Commissioners, on inquiry into the matter, were satisfied that no injustice had been done to him, they did not consider that there was any ground for holding such re-examination, and the father was informed accordingly. Under these circumstances, I see no occasion for any further inquiry.