Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 31 Mar 1971

Vol. 252 No. 11

Private Members' Business. - Local Government Services (Corporate Bodies) Bill, 1971: Committee and Final Stages.

Sections 1 and 2 put and agreed to.
SECTION 3.

(Cavan): I move amendment No. 1:

To add to the section a new subsection as follows:—

"( ) The Minister shall not make an establishment order in relation to an authority to which this Act applies unless he is requested to do so by (a) the authority in respect of which he proposes to make the establishment order or (b) the General Council of County Councils or (c) the association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland."

When I considered this Bill I became somewhat uneasy about it and I declined, at the conclusion of the Second Reading, to agree to all Stages being taken then. I requested, in conjunction with some members of the Labour Party, a Committee Stage in order to put down amendments for the purpose of clarifying, for my own satisfaction, at any rate, what exactly is behind this measure. I understand that there are negotiations going on between an undefined body known as the County Managers Association and certain bodies representing local government officials. The Minister told us that his object in bringing in the Bill was to give him power to incorporate the County Managers Association, provide it with a seal and authorise it to negotiate on behalf of local authorities with bodies representing the official side. I understand that and I have no objection to it, but the Minister in his Second Reading speech—I am speaking from memory now—said it would be foolish not to avail of the occasion to take the very wide powers proposed to be conferred on him by this Bill.

As I understand it, section 3 enables the Minister to make an establishment order to establish a corporate body to perform certain functions on behalf of local authorities. If I am right in my interpretation, the Minister has power to appoint the members of this body and, as far as I can see, this corporate body, when it is appointed and entrusted with the discharge of certain functions, need not refer back to the corporate body; it is not a sub-committee of it. If it were a sub-committee it would refer back and would be subject to the sanction of the elected representatives and, if that were the position, I would understand where we were going.

A county manager operates through managerial orders which come before the local authority, at least for discussion and criticism, and he is subject to section 4 of the Act of 1954, 1955 or 1956—I am not sure which year it is.

Not with regard to staff.

(Cavan): No, not with regard to staff but in regard to certain matters, excluding health and other matters. If I am right in my thinking, this measure proposes to give the Minister power to delegate local authority functions to some sort of puppet of his own and, if that is the case, then I am dead against it because it would be the beginning of an invasion of whatever powers are left to local authorities.

My amendment seeks to provide that the Minister shall not make an establishment order to establish one of these corporate bodies unless he is requested to do so by the local authority in respect of which he proposes to make the establishment order. That means that he cannot make an establishment order affecting Cavan County Council, or any other county council, unless he is requested to do so by the council or alternatively, he is requested to do so by the General Council of County Councils or the association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland.

As I see it, this Bill could pave the way for some of the ideas in the Minister's White Paper on local government. It could mean the beginning of the end of local authorities, as we understand them. I may be wrong in that and I hope the Minister will be able to convince me to that effect.

I must emphasise once again what I said on the Second Stage of the Bill, that is, there is no intention of detracting in any way from the functions of local authorities. I hope I will be able to allay the Deputy's fears in this respect and that he will accept my word as to my true intent. There is only one purpose behind this measure and that is to enable the Minister to establish a body to provide services for local authorities and health boards. Under existing legislation there is no method whereby these bodies can act collectively. This Bill will enable the Minister to set up a body to provide services which are deemed to be essential for greater efficiency in the running of local authorities and health boards. One immediate need is for a body to assist city and county managers in their dealings with staffs of local authorities and health boards on staff matters. Experience to date shows that there have been long delays from the time claims are originally made to the time when they are actually dealt with by the managers and decisions made. It is proposed under this Bill to establish immediately a body which will provide a service to the managers to enable them to deal more expeditiously with such claims.

To deal specifically with the amendment put down by Deputy Fitzpatrick, I must say at the outset that I am not prepared to accept the amendment. The purpose of the Bill is not in any way to detract from the powers of local authorities but rather to enable suitable machinery to be established to make available to them services which of their very nature need to be organised on a countrywide basis or which, for one reason or another, cannot be provided by the local authorities individually.

At this stage the only corporate body which it has been decided to establish, if the Bill becomes law, is the one to which I referred, that is, the one to enable the local authority conciliation and arbitration scheme to operate more effectively. We must recognise, however, that local government is constantly changing and evolving. It is inevitable that the need for new services will arise in the future. The central authority must be prepared and indeed, equipped to provide these services, either directly or through an appropriate body such as a corporate body of the kind envisaged in this Bill.

For this reason the Bill is framed in general terms. It does not give the Minister complete freedom to decide what corporate bodies will be established. Under section 7 the Oireachtas is given power to veto the creation of any particular body. In the case of the body to which I have already referred, that is the proposed Local Government Staff Negotiations Board, the intention is that the body will provide services for all local authorities and all health boards. The establishment of this body was decided on following consultations with the city and county managers who, as the Deputy knows, exercise all of the staff functions of local authorities, and also in consultation with the Irish Local Government Officials Union.

In the same way, I envisage that the establishment of any other corporate body would be preceded by appropriate consultations with the interests concerned. To make express statutory provision for this would not, however, be desirable, in my opinion. To limit the power to establish corporate bodies in the manner proposed in the amendment would not be desirable either because it would remove the power of initiative from the Minister who, after all, is responsible for the formulation of national policy in relation to the main local services and is also responsible for maintaining general surveillance over the whole range of local authorities' activities so as to ensure that problems and difficulties are tackled in good time.

I am not prepared to accept that the Minister should not be entitled, after considering the overall position, to establish a body to provide certain services without getting the consent of every one of the local authorities for whom the services are being made available, or of one or other of the local authority associations. I do not think that any Minister will set up a corporate body unless he is fully satisfied that there is a need for it and that its services will be utilised by local authorities.

As I have said, the Bill is not designed to transfer functions from local authorities but to make services available to them. It seems to me that the amendment may be based on the assumption that the Bill will interfere with or in some way detract from the powers of local authorities. This will not be the case. I would ask Deputy Fitzpatrick to accept it from me that there is no such intention. I cannot see how it would arise when the only purpose is to enable a service to be given to the local authorities and not to take powers from them.

(Cavan): I must confess that I now feel I was absolutely justified in putting down this amendment and that all my fears in connection with this measure are justified. The Minister has told us that the object in introducing this measure is to deal with this problem of negotiations between the City and County Managers Association and the staff. I know that. Will the Minister tell me what else he has in mind, what other types of functions he thinks it would be expedient to hand over to this body which is not accountable to anyone? It may be accountable to the Minister but I am now satisfied that it has not to report back to the elected representatives. It is not subject to their sanction.

As far as I can see, the Minister could entrust this body with the striking of the rates. He could incorporate a body and there is nothing in this to provide that it can deal only with managerial functions. If he even did that it would not be so bad. There is nothing in this Bill so far as I can see that does not authorise the Minister to set up boards on which there need not be one elected representative. Section 4 provides:

Every establishment order shall require the body thereby established to provide itself with a seal and shall contain, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, such provisions as the Minister considers appropriate in relation to the number of members of the body established by the order, the method, terms and conditions of their appointment...

I am aware of the James Connolly Hospital Establishment Order and I am aware that it gives representation to local authorities. This is the old idea of availing of any opportunity to get complete authority, to get a blank cheque. I do not say that the Minister has any sinister ideas in his head but he will not always be there. There may be another Minister and some bright people in his Department may be confronted with what they regard as a difficult local authority down the country and say: "We will deal with these fellows. We will make an establishment order and we will operate through this corporate body instead."

I do not think that the Minister could honestly tell me now that it is not possible under this Bill to incorporate a body and ask it to strike a rate, or to hand over to it the decision to take over or not to take over roads, or to discharge such other limited functions as are reserved at present to local authorities. That is why when I read this Bill I got this sort of feeling, and nothing that the Minister has said to date has removed that fear from my mind. Obviously he has no idea—or if he has he is not prepared to tell us what it is—what other functions could or should be transferred. Lip service is paid to local authorities in the White Paper and elsewhere but I believe this is part of the machinery to divest local authorities of whatever is left to them and to hand that over to the Minister.

If the Minister wrote into this Bill that a majority of the members of this corporate body, or some percentage of them, would have to be elected representatives, or that they would have to come back to the local authority for sanction, that would be an improvement but when the Minister and the Minister for Finance think it fit or expedient to establish such a body they can do so and between them they will decide who the members of this body will be, and not one, single, solitary one of them needs to be a member of a local authority, I think this is the most outrageous proposition that has come before this House or the Seanad during the past ten years and I am positively and definitely against it. It is dangerous; it is unnecessary; and as I say, all we know from the Minister is that somebody in his Department in their great wisdom thinks that some time in the future this sort of measure might be necessary: "We might be able to operate it and we might be able to achieve some of the unknown ends which we may at some unspecified time in the future have in mind."

Deputy Fitzpatrick continues to amaze me that he could draw all these conclusions from this simple Bill which does not provide the Minister with the type of powers which he is implying in his statements here. The Bill as it is drawn up simply enables me to establish a corporate body to provide services to the local authorities and health boards.

(Cavan): If I were satisfied about that——

It does not enable the Minister to take powers away from local authorities. The Deputy stated that I did not give any indication as to what other type of services might at some time in the future be required and which this Bill would enable the establishment of a body to provide. I did indicate on the last occasion in the House and when speaking in the Seanad that, though I have not any other type of service in mind at the present time, I do intend if and when the Bill passes, to make an establishment order to set up a body to deal with staff matters in local authorities. I have not made my mind up to establish any other type of corporate body, but I can give, and have given, examples of the types of service which may at some time in the future be necessary for local athorities and I mentioned specifically the question of a computer service. This Bill would enable such a service to be made available to local authorities and health boards. The Bill is drafted in a general way, because we do not know what types of service may be required in the future and it is as well to leave the Bill in general terms and to enable the establishment of bodies to provide such services as may be considered essential.

On this matter of saying that no publicly elected representatives need be on this body and that there is no referring back to publicly elected representatives, the Deputy is aware that when an establishment order is made, that order will be placed before both Houses of the Oireachtas and a motion to annual that establishment order may be made within seven sitting days. This does give the Oireachtas the final say in whether or not the order shall become law and the final decision in that way does, in fact, lie with the elected representatives.

I have not much more to say in regard to what the Deputy has been saying. I think it is quite clear and quite simple and I take it the Deputy will accept that there is no ulterior motive, no intention in any way to detract from the powers of local authorities and no intention on my part to seek at any time to take from local authorities functions which they are operating at present. I continue to be amazed at the Deputy's attitude.

I have no intention of prolonging this debate as I know the Minister is not in good form at present and I do not want to keep him any longer than is absolutely necessary. I am somewhat confused by Deputy Fitzpatrick's discussion of this matter because to me it appeared, when the Bill was going through first, that this was simply a method of enabling the County Managers Association to have the service which is normally available to every trade union in this country to prepare a case for the purpose of dealing in a reasonable way with claims before it, but Deputy Fitzpatrick has suggested, and I am afraid the Minister has not quite denied it, that there may be other uses to which the proposals would apply. I would hate to think that the original idea would be moved away from. The Minister has said that it must come before the House to be annulled or not, but we all know that there is no record of any motion moved by a Government being annulled in the House and that there will not be as long as a Government have a majority of the Members of the House, so that I think it is not the safeguard which the Minister tries to make out it is.

There is one question I would ask him. I am still quite happy that the Bill as it is will do a job which I think is required to be done because there have been far too long delays. It refers merely to "officer status" and I assume that the idea is to deal with officer status in local authority employment, because if it refers to "servant status" as well, there is the problem of who was consulted before the decision to bring this in in this way was taken. The union which the Minister has referred to have the right to negotiate for officer status and they were the proper people to be consulted, if officer status is covered by the Bill. Otherwise, it would be necessary at least to consult with the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, or some of its constituent unions, for the purpose of finding out what their views were; but personally I believe that if what the Minister says, that this is designed to give the County Managers Association the know-how which I am afraid we feel they have not got at present—otherwise, things would not drag on so long—if that is the only reason it is being set up, I could not agree with Deputy Fitzpatrick, particularly because of the fact that, as of now, the elected representatives have no say in the fixing of wages or the granting of working conditions. They do not come into it at all. The county manager is, in fact, responsible for staff matters and even section 4 cannot move him from that if staff matters like health matters are affected. I want to make that point and, perhaps, the Minister could clarify it.

The reason for the introduction of the Bill was to enable this service to be provided and to facilitate the effective and efficient operation of the local authority conciliation and arbitration scheme. The Bill is worded in general terms to allow for the establishment of other corporate bodies in the future, if it is found desirable to do so, and such future bodies, if they were ever established, would be confined as the Bill states to the provision of services for local authorities or for the health boards——

But you consulted the Local Government Officials Union with regard to officers. Did you consult any of the general unions?

There has been consultation in relation to our intention to establish a corporate body—the Local Government Staff Negotiations Board. There has been consultation in relation to that.

That is the officer status?

Do you intend to cover servants now or at a future date?

The conciliation and arbitration scheme covers officers only. This will be specified in the establishment order itself.

The Local Government Officials Union are competent to look after their own end of it and if they are satisfied that it covers them, I do not propose to press it further.

As a matter of fact, they are very anxious to get this Bill.

(Cavan): In one way I am amazed at Deputy Tully and in another way I can understand his attitude. He knows that the immediate objective of this Bill is to provide a body which will negotiate salary increases on behalf of local government officials. I am 100 per cent with him in that, but if he reads the Bill, he will find that there is not a word in it, from beginning to end, about local government officials or anything else. It is a Bill which will enable the Minister to establish authority to render services on behalf of local authorities. If it were a Bill to establish corporate bodies to render such services as they were requested to render by the local authorities or by the county manager then I would understand them and I would not be so much against them but this is a Bill to establish an authority to render such services as the Minister may determine, not as they may be requested to render by the local authority in such matters as are reserved to them to perform or by the county manager in the sphere of managerial functions. It is a Bill which will entrust to this body such functions as the Minister should think they should perform. The Minister has not denied that it is not necessary for this body which he will incorporate and which need not have as one of its members a resident within the local authority area concerned to report back or seek sanction from anybody. Certainly they will not have to seek sanction from the county manager or the local authority. The Minister has said time and again that what I say is not the intention, and that what I fear will not be done and that the sole object of the Bill is to establish a body to fix up salaries—a very laudable object but in my opinion it is the sugar on the pill. It is part of the package deal. I am asking the Minister now does he tell me that this measure does not contain the machinery to take away from local authorities powers which they have now, if the Minister for Local Government wished to do so?

There is no provision in the Bill to enable the Minister to take powers away from local authorities. It only enables the Minister to set up a body which will provide services. There is no compulsion on the local authorities to avail of those services.

(Cavan): If the Minister agrees to put an amendment——

There is no need for an amendment.

(Cavan): I do not agree. “Such services as may be specified in the Establishment Order” means that they can do these things on behalf of and for the local authority. If the Minister convinces me that is not so and puts provision into the Bill to make certain that it is not so I will be satisfied.

I have said to the Deputy that there is no clause in the Bill which states that the local authorities must avail of the services of a corporate body. There will be no compulsion on the local authorities to avail of these services. Instead, services will be offered to them.

(Cavan): If I was convinced that were so I would be quite at ease but I am not. Section 3 reads:

(1) The Minister may, whenever with the agreement of the Minister for Finance he determines that it is expedient to do so, by order (in this Act referred to as an establishment order) establish a body to provide for the Minister, the authorities therein specified, being authorities to which this Act applies, or the Minister and the authorities so specified, as the case may be, such services as may be specified in the establishment order.

and if added to that were the words "and requested by the local authority to perform", I would be satisfied but I am not satisfied.

I do not accept that the word "requested" should be included. There is no need for it.

(Cavan): Does the Minister agree that it is not necessary that the decisions arrived at by this corporate body would require sanction or approval by the local authority?

It is providing a service.

(Cavan): The first service which you are going to provide is that you are going to negotiate salaries. Will that have to be sanctioned by anybody?

In salary matters the Minister will still have the final sanction. They will only negotiate.

(Cavan): They come down in theory for approval by the local authority.

They cannot be paid until the local authority agrees.

That would not alter the position as at present. The county manager negotiates and it goes to the local authority for the money and to the Minister for sanction. On that basis I do not think there is any change which makes much difference. The only thing is if it does authorise the Minister to introduce some other system which is not covered and, having once got permission to set up such a body, he can set up one for a different reason. Personally I do not think it is so but Deputy Fitzpatrick seems to be under the impression that it is.

(Cavan): Has not the Minister set up an establishment order in respect of the James Connolly Memorial Hospital under a similar Bill?

That Bill is not drafted in the same way.

(Cavan): We were told that an Act had already been passed in rather similar terms in respect of the health authorities. If that is so—and I could not get the Act as I was coming in here—an order in respect of the James Connolly Memorial Hospital was made which really handed over the running of the hospital to a body set up by the Minister.

That Act is not worded in the same way. The Health (Corporate Bodies) Act, 1961, reads:

The Minister may from time to time by Order establish a body to perform functions in, or in relation to, the provision of a health service...

In the present Bill, we are only referring to the provision of services, not to performance of functions.

(Cavan): We could spend six months in the Supreme Court on that point.

If a statutory function were to be taken away from a local authority, I am advised that a Bill would have to be drawn up to state specifically the powers which were to be taken away in any particular case. It would require legislation to withdraw statutory functions from local authorities. The Deputy is being cautious in this matter and may be over-suspicious.

(Cavan): I am being both.

The purpose of the Bill hinges on the word "services".

(Cavan): I am sorry that we have not got much longer to deal with this. I do not want to be unreasonable. We have now reached the stage where the only difference between the Corporate Bodies Bill under the Health Act and this Bill is that the Health Act (Corporate Bodies) Bill refers to functions and this Bill refers to services. I think it is a very hairline distinction. I know, if I am correct in my recollection of the James Connolly Memorial Hospital Establishment Order, that that establishes a board to run the hospital, lock, stock and barrel. I understand the Labour Party are objecting to it.

The Deputy can be here from 1 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. tomorrow and he will hear it all and perhaps vote with us.

(Cavan): I cannot draw a distinction now between services and functions. I think it is too neat a distinction to put across. The Minister would have been much better advised simply to set up his negotiating body from a sub-committee of the City and County Managers Association—a body I am not in favour of—and I agree with the Minister that I am both cautious and suspicious. I believe that I would not be discharging my duties if I were not so. I am thinking that this invades rights of the local authorities. I cannot put it much further than I have put it. I say that it is at least arguable on the basis of the similar Bill under the Health Act and this Bill that this measure can be used to invade the rights of local authorities, to take powers away from the county manager in the first instance, which will then not come before the local authorities for discussion as a managerial order. If this was really a piece of machinery to enable the county councils to do something, like getting a sub-contractor to build a hospital, or getting somebody else to make a road, then they are still responsible for that; they must make the decision and the county manager must be satisfied that the work is done, but what I feel, and the Minister has not said that I am wrong, is that once these bodies are set up they render the service and that is that. Under the other thing they will perform the function. I do not see any difference between performing a function and performing a service. It is the same thing to me.

I am really and genuinely alarmed about this and I do not believe that Deputies realise what is involved or what this measure can be used to do. If they did there would be far more opposition to the Bill. The Bill was introduced in the Seanad, and I am glad of that because I like to see Bills being introduced in the Seanad, but it was introduced purely as a formal and non-contentious business, but as I say I think this is a typical departmental attitude—"when we are at this we will slip in a section which will deal with something else; we do not want it now but it might come in useful some time". That is what I am against.

On the question of the words "function" and "service". In existing legislation, the phrase that is used when referring to the powers of local authorities is "powers, functions and duties". In order deliberately to illustrate that this Bill in no way interferes with powers we have used the word "services". The Deputy is a member of a local authority and has had long experience of local authorities and he knows how they work. He must appreciate that at present there is no machinery by which a service can be provided for all local authorities. They have no power at present to act collectively in any matter and there is a need now to provide a service which will be of assistance to all local authorities. There may be a time in the future when some other service—and I might mention the computer service as an example—that could be beneficial to all local authorities would have to be run by a central authority. I am giving that as an illustration. I do not see any great difficulties in the Bill and I would ask the Deputy to withdraw his amendment.

(Cavan): I take it now that the Minister visualises that he will not be establishing a body to perform functions for individual local authorities, that the bodies that he proposes to set up will be available to all local authorities. Now if that is so——

To perform services.

(Cavan): Services, yes, for all local authorities. If that is so, why not accept this amendment which seeks to ensure that the Minister will have to consult the General Council of County Councils which is a body that if it has any functions, and I am sure it has, or can render any advice to the Minister, would be in a position to “vet” a proposal like this and say: “That is a good idea and we think this should be done” or “We think this is a bad idea and we are dead against it”? What objection is there to that? The only objection I can see is that it would take away some of the powers from the Minister and his Department.

What about health authorities?

(Cavan): This Bill does not deal with health authorities.

It does.

(Cavan): No, I do not think so. I would be happy enough with that proposal. Deputy Tully in his enthusiasm to get his wage agreement negotiated is prepared to give the Minister anything.

I do not think so.

(Cavan): I should like to know the Minister's objection to consulting the General Council of County Councils.

The difference here is that I have practical experience of this and Deputy Fitzpatrick, from another angle, has experience of something else. He parses and analyses words and perhaps spends quite a long time, as most law men do, finding out whether or not there can be a row over the meaning of a word. What I am talking about is whether or not this will assist the local authorities in negotiating with the trade union which represents the officers.

(Cavan): Of course it will.

If it does then it is a good idea because we have had experience at local authority level of negotiations going on for a long time in an effort to prove that something should be done and the reason it was not agreed to earlier was that the County Managers Association, acting as an ad hoc body, appointed a few people to act for them who simply did not have the know-how to find out what they wanted. As I see it, the idea behind this Bill is to provide the services which will allow them to have that know-how, to have the experience, expertise and knowledge which will allow them present their side of the case. If that is so I think it is a good idea. I would like the Minister to say that his Department have no intention of using this in the general way in which Deputy Fitzpatrick suggests it might be used.

(Cavan): I would rather he said that they could not use it in the way I suggested, that it would not be legal for them to use it in the way I suggested.

What is the Minister's interpretation of the difference between the words "function" and "services"?

The word "function" relates to the powers of local authorities and the word "services" relates merely to assisting them in the carrying out of their functions and powers. It is only to help them to do their work more efficiently and more effectively. I think I have explained it sufficiently now anyway.

(Cavan): The difficulty is that I am concerned that it will not be the local authorities who will decide they would like this service performed by this corporate body, it is the Minister who will decide it. The Minister will make the establishment order. The Minister will decide what functions or what services will be rendered and he will decide who will be the members of the corporate body. If it was beyond doubt that they could only do what they were asked to do, render such services as they were asked to do, I would be quite happy with that, but the very case that the Minister makes for introducing the Bill, to wit, that the body will negotiate on behalf of the management side of the councils in wage negotiations means that the Minister must be satisfied that he can say that this body have power to negotiate on behalf of all the councils.

That is a virtue that Deputy Tully sees in it, that he will have a blanket organisation here that will be able to negotiate on behalf of all the local authorities, that will bind them all and that he will know who he is talking to, and that when he has made a deal with them he will know that that deal is concluded and nobody can go back on it. There is a lot of virtue in that and if that was all that was in the Bill I would be in favour of it but if the argument which both Deputy Tully and the Minister make is valid, it means that the arguments that I have made against the Bill and the fears that I see in the Bill are also valid because it means that the Minister can say to this corporate body, "You go do it and do something on behalf of all the county councils in Ireland and they will be bound by it." Either that is right and that is what it means or it is useless to the Minister.

The Minister is bringing it in to negotiate wage agreements which would be binding on behalf of all local authorities. That is why Deputy Tully wants it. I can see that both from the Minister's and Deputy Tully's point of view it is a very good piece of legislation for this particular purpose because when the bargain is made and the deal concluded everybody knows where he stands and everybody is bound by it.

I do not like repeating myself but the Deputy seems to be repeating himself. Now he has gone farther away from the point. The body it is proposed to establish under this Bill will assist the managers in carrying out their functions in relation to staff and salary matters. It will not make any decisions which will be binding on the managers and staff or on the Minister or anybody. They will merely provide a service which will assist the managers when they come together, those of them who are selected, to carry out this function on behalf of all the city and county managers. This organisation will be permanent and will "vet" all the applications and will supply the managers with the necessary information when they sit down to discuss salary matters. It will only provide this service; it will not make any decisions on anybody's behalf.

It will not negotiate?

No, it will assist the managers to do the negotiation and whatever agreement is reached will come to the Minister for sanction after it is cleared by the local authority. This body will make no decisions binding anybody. They will have no powers or functions to make decisions of that nature.

They will ensure that the advice given to each manager will be the same so that one manager will not give one decision and another manager a contrary decision because he does not know the basis on which the argument was based.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.
Top
Share