HC Deb 23 May 1895 vol 34 cc90-2
MR. ELLIOTT LEES (Birkenhead)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the duties to be performed by the Artillery officers whom it is proposed to place over the heads of officers now serving in the Ordnance Store Department are duties which cannot be adequately performed by the officers whom it is proposed to supersede; whether the War Office intend to recoup the increased expenditure involved in the appointment of these new officers at enhanced rates of pay, by substituting quartermasters for regimental officers in the junior ranks of the Department; whether it has been the invariable custom of the Department to allow all such regimental officers, if efficient, to re-engage in the Ordnance Store Department on completion of their term of service; whether such regimental officers have been debarred from competing for Staff College appointments during the period of their service with the Ordnance Store Department; and whether it is contemplated to extend the age limit during which they may be allowed to compete, so as to place them on an equality with other officers in their respective regiments?

*MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

The details of the proposed reorganisation of the Ordnance Store Department are still under consideration, but I may say that one great object in view is to bring the Department into a condition in which the most intimate knowledge of artillery details will be available in working it. With this view one or two experienced artillery officers may be brought in in the higher ranks, but as those ranks will be correspondingly augmented the promotion of officers below them will not be seriously interfered with. Although the reorganisation may cause some immediate increase of expenditure, the normal cost of the Department will be much reduced; and this reduction is effected—as suggested by the hon. Member's question—by substituting officers of the quartermaster class for regimental officers. As regards regimental officers now serving in the Department, those in the second period of seven years may, if thoroughly efficient, be selected for continuance; those in their first period, also, if found efficient, may be continued for a period not exceeding two years. In the past, an efficient officer might be continued, but he could not claim continuance as a right. While serving he was not allowed to compete for admission to the Staff College. It is not contemplated to extend the age for admission to the Staff College.

In reply to a further question by MR. ELLIOTT LEES,

*MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

said, it was a matter of policy interpreted by the Adjutant General and the Quartermaster General, who were the most competent judges. They considered it would be beneficial.

MR. ELLIOTT LEES

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the first part of my question?

*MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN

I have explained the reason why those officers should be placed over the heads of officers now serving.