§ Sir WALTER MENZIESasked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the discontent with the principle of nomination for posts of mines inspectors at present under his patronage, he will withdraw the present nomination forms, issue new stringent and minimum qualifications; and acknowledge that every candidate fulfilling these conditions has a right to competitive examination upon payment of a fee to cover examination expenses; and whether he will consider if the expenses of a journey to London and hotel expenses would then be a sufficient deterrent to unsuitable candidates?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave him on 20th April. I have no reason to think there is any general discontent with the system of filling these appointments, which has worked well, and has secured for the competitive examination a wide choice of candidates, possessing suitable qualifications, for the work of an inspector.
§ Sir W. MENZIESMay I ask is the right hon. Gentleman aware that inferior men are taken and superior men refused nomination?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLam certainly not aware that my hon. Friend has proved that point. Obviously questions as to who are inferior or superior are matters of opinion.
§ Sir W. MENZIESIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have handed the Under-Secretary examination papers to prove that in one particular case at least the superior man has been refused nomination and the inferior has received it.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI shall be glad to be placed in possession of the data on which my hon. Friend bases his decision as to who is inferior or superior, as the data vary very widely.
§ Mr. WATTCan the right hon. Gentleman see his way to do away with the nomination principle altogether?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLNo, I do not think it would be a good plan. I cannot debate the question now, but I should be quite ready to do so. I believe it is a very good system that there should be nominations of persons who are suitable to compete, and that then there should be open competition amongst the selected class.