HC Deb 20 September 1886 vol 309 cc968-9
DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether it is the intention of the Admiralty to increase the pay and better the position of the senior Naval writers of fifteen years' standing; whether they are a class of public servants who perform important duties, and are directly and indirectly responsible for the correct keeping of accounts which deal with vast sums of the public money; whether their duties are identical with those of the senior accountant officers, and whether they are debarred from advancing to that higher position, no matter how fit or what superior qualifications they may possess; whether these grievances are now in existence for seventeen years; whether the Admiralty will recommend that, after such a long period of service, they shall either receive a grant of two shillings per diem, or else give them similar and corresponding rank and pay as received by the chief writers under the Army Warrant; and, whether an inquiry will be made into the present grievances arising from the system of having two classes of public servants, rendering the same services to the Crown, whose pay and prospects are alleged to be so unfair and dissimilar?


(who replied) said: It is not the intention to alter the position or pay of the Naval writers, for which position there is considerable competition. They are not responsible to the Admiralty for the correct keeping of accounts; neither are they entrusted with vast sums of public money. Their duties are not identical with those of the paymasters—the accountant officers of the Navy. Their examination, also, prior to admission into the Service, is of a very different order. The Admiralty are not prepared to advance the pay of Naval writers, or to considerably increase the Naval Estimates by making them warrant officers, and no inquiry is considered to be necessary into their position.