§ 10. Mr. GALLACHERasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that J. H. Salisbury was discharged from Devonport Dockyard in 1933 with a gratuity of £34 4s.; that 14 days later he was re-started and, for the purpose of making his employment continuous, handed back to the cashier the sum of £34 4s.; that he was again dismissed in February of this year without any reason being given and was refused the return of his £34 4s. or the added gratuity to which his further service entitled him; and will he see that this money is paid back to him?
§ Sir S. HOAREJ. H. Salisbury was discharged from His Majesty's Dockyard, Devonport, on reduction of numbers in 1933 and received a gratuity of £34 4s. under the Superannuation Act, 1887. He 1741 was re-entered shortly afterwards and he refunded this gratuity, but was discharged again "services no longer required," in February last. The Treasury has no power under the Superannuation Acts to award a gratuity to a man discharged under such circumstances, or even to repay him the sum which he refunded on re-entry.
§ Mr. GALLACHERDo we understand from that answer that the Department are in a position to carry on a form of petty larceny, as the man was required to hand back the £34 in order that he might be considered as being in continuous employment; then, after a further two years, which should have been added to his gratuity, he is dismissed without reason given, and they refuse to give him back his £34?
§ Sir S. HOAREWe are bound by the Statute. The Superannuation Act is quite specific on this point. It is not possible for us to return the money.
§ Mr. GALLACHERThis man gets dismissed, and in 1932 gets £34 in gratuity; do you want to tell me——
§ Mr. THORNEWas the man aware, when reinstated, that he would not get his £34 back?
§ Sir S. HOAREI think that fact must have been known to the man. This is not a new kind of case, but we are bound by the Act of 1887, and the Act is quite specific.
§ Mr. MATHERSIn view of the hardship involved, is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to bring in an Amendment that will alter such a hard condition as this?
§ Sir S. HOAREThat is another question, which ought not to be addressed to me. I am not responsible for the superannuation.
§ Mr. BELLENGERIn view of the hardship which has been entailed by the Act, would the right hon. Gentleman consider some form of ex gratia payment?
§ Sir S. HOAREYes, I will do everything possible, but I have gone carefully into this case and I understand there is no further action we can take, because the terms of the Act are quite specific.
§ Mr. WATKINSIf it is established that this act of injustice has been done, is there no remedy at all?
§ Sir JOSEPH LAMBIn any subsequent case, will the right hon. Gentleman see that the matter is specifically explained to the man, in order that he may know that in these circumstances he would lose his money?
§ Sir S. HOAREI will certainly see whether any assurance of that kind is necessary, and if it is, I will see that it is given.
§ Mr. GALLACHERIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.