§ Mr. FIELDasked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that, on the score of maintaining administrative uniformity, there has been a marked transfer of authority and power of decision, especially during the past year, from the officials of the Dublin stores branch to the Birmingham and London offices; and whether, on the findings of the Hobhouse Committee, he will consider the advisability of reversing this policy?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELThe answer to both parts of the question is in the negative.
§ Mr. NANNETTIasked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that the staff officer at the Birmingham store depôt is now 1888W officially regarded as the immediate superior officer of the staff of the Dublin stores branch and, as such, will certify for their increments, make recommendations for promotion purposes, and generally deal with all disciplinary questions that may arise at Dublin; if he will state whether there is any other case in the Post Office service where the officer officially recognised as the immediate superior officer of a staff is stationed several hundred miles away from them; and will he say what steps he proposes to take to secure that in promotion cases the staff officer at Birmingham shall not give undue weight to the claims of the Birmingham staff, with whom he is necessarily in close personal contact during nine or ten months of the year, to the detriment of the Dublin staff, with whom he will be in personal contact for only one or two brief periods in the course of the year?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELIt is only in some matters of detail that there has been transfer from Dublin to the staff officer who is stationed at Birmingham; and there is no growing tendency to transfer to England stores duties which have been, and are being, performed in Dublin. The work which has been transferred from London to Birmingham was so transferred because of the local situation of Birmingham, and Dublin would have been even less suitable for it than London. I do not consider that the steps which have been taken are at variance with the recommendations of the Hobhouse Committee.
§ Mr. NANNETTIasked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that during the past year there has been a steady transfer of authority and powers of decision from the responsible officers of the Dublin Stores Department to London and Birmingham, and that concurrently with this transfer there is a growing tendency for stores duties formerly performed in Ireland to be transferred to England and for the Dublin branch to be shut out, as far as possible, from new developments in stores work, and that when stores work has been decentralised from London to the provinces it has all gone to Birmingham and none to Dublin; and will he say if this policy, which is opposed to the recommendations of the Hobhouse Committee on decentralisation, has received his sanction?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELIt is the practice at all the stores depots—those in London as well as those at Birmingham, 1889W Dublin, and Edinburgh—for the staff officer to be regarded as the "immediate superior officer," and as such to certify for increments and make recommendations for promotion. In some cases in the engineering department the "immediate superior officer" for the purposes of increment, etc., is stationed a long distance away. The existing safeguards appear to me to be quite sufficient to prevent undue weight being given to the claims of the Birmingham staff.
§ Mr. FIELDasked the Postmaster-General if the five men recognised as performing the best class of work at Dublin includes those unestablished porters who have been performing third-class storemen's duties for several months past; and whether he will state how many of the Dublin men's claims for promotion were considered before it was decided to import English officials to Dublin?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELThe fact is as stated. All the eligible officers at Dublin were considered in making the selections.
§ Mr. FIELDasked the Postmaster-General if he is still satisfied that no injustice will be inflicted on the Dublin stores staff if they are deprived of the right of succession to the storemen's vacancies in Dublin, in view of the fact that if the Government of Ireland Bill becomes law the Irish staff will not be entitled to compensatory appointments in Great Britain while appointments in Dublin will meanwhile be given to officers serving in Great Britain?
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELPending the passage into law of the Government of Ireland Bill the administration of the Post Office must proceed upon the existing lines.
§ Mr. FIELDasked the Postmaster-General, whether there is any other depot of the Stores Department where clothing, stationery, and engineering stores work are dealt with by an interchangeable staff; whether he is aware that each unestablished porter now performing third-class storeman's duties at Dublin has experience of each of these branches of work; what steps are taken to secure that the service of the depot shall not suffer if these men are displaced by English officials who are specialists in only one, or, at most, two branches of work; and was this circumstance taken into consideration when it was decided to refuse the appointments to the Irish staff?
1890W
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELThe Dublin depot is the only one in which clothing, stationery, and engineering stores are dealt with by an interchangeable staff; and it is practically correct to say that each unestablished porter now performing the duties of a third class storeman at Dublin has experience of each of these classes of work. These circumstances were taken into consideration in making the recent promotions, and I am satisfied that the work of the depot will not suffer.