POLICE RESERVISTS BILL. (Hansard, 5 June 1902)

§ (6.40.) THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. JESSE COLLINGS, Birmingham, Bordesley)
, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, said: With respect to the Reservists in the police force, as the law at present stands, the police authorities have no power to let the time which the Reservists have spent with the colours count for pension purposes. If they serve for two years with the colours that period is taken off their time for superannuation pay. In all private firms and private undertakings employers can give and have given to employees who go on military service certain advantages one way or another, but the local authorities have no power to do so. This Bill, therefore, is simply to empower local authorities to allow the period for which 1611 the police Reservists have served under the colours to count for superannuation. It is a discretionary power which they have not at present, and no doubt the local authorities will be glad, especially at the present time, to show their willingness to mark their approbation of the conduct of the Reservists. I do not think the Bill needs any argument in support of it, because it will commend itself to the good feeling of the House that such a power should be put into the hands of the local authorities.

§ MR. CALDWELL
said he quite approved of the Bill, so far as it went, but it did not go far enough. Reservists other than those in the police force should be included, and there should not be a limitation to the proclamation of 1899. He desired an explanation why a reference to the Royal Irish Constabulary was omitted. He thought it should be borne in mind that the Reservists were never called out except in cases of national emergency. He did not see why there should be the limitation proposed in the Bill, for the Reservists would be equally serving their country if they were called out by Royal proclamation at any future time. It made no difference to the men to say that this or that war was a small war, and they could not pass Acts of Parliament for every little expedition. Would it not be better to make it a matter of law that if a man was looking towards a pension under a local authority, and if he was called out by proclamation, his services under the colours should be counted for pension? What was the use of giving a discretion to the police authorities? If a man was working towards his pension he had a legal right to that pension, and if he were called out under proclamation to go out to a war, why should not his service count for pension without the will of the police authorities? Otherwise the local authority might reap a benefit, for if a policeman who was a Reservist went abroad and was killed, or died of disease, the Police Pension Fund would be relieved. Another point was whether a policeman who was a Reservist, was called out, under proclamation, to go to a war and was maimed or 1612 injured, would be allowed his pension under the Police Act, as if he had been maimed or injured while serving as a policeman. Again, the Bill limited the benefits to members of the police force, who were called out in the event of war, as Reservists. Why maket his limitation to policemen? There might be men in the employment of a local authority who were working towards a pension—clerks, or surveyors, or roadmen—and who were Reservists, and if they were called out, why should they be put on a different footing from policemen? The Bill ought to he widened to meet such cases, and to include all wars, as well as this particular war. He would not oppose the Second Reading, but he contended that its scope should he widened, and that it should not he made optional.

SIR JOHN DORTNGTON (Gloucestershire, Tewkesbury)
said he thought His Majesty's Government was a little generous at the expense of the local authorities. When Reservists were called out by special Proclamation, they no longer paid towards the Police Pension Fund, and, of course, did not render any service to the local authorities. He thought the Government ought to make some provision in the Bill for a contribution from the Treasury for recouping to local authorities their loss from the cessation of the Reservists' contribution to the Police Pension Fund during their absence.

§ * THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. RITCHIE,) Croydon
said that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tewkesbury seemed to think that a moral obligation lay on the Government to make up the loss on local finance in regard to pensions, made by the Bill. But he would point out that the Government already made an annual payment to the Reservists, as a consideration for the right to call upon them in case of emergency, and he did not think any further payment was called for. It was true that the men who joined the police force knew that they were liable to be called upon when any emergency arose, and that they had no claim on the local authority when called out. It had been represented to the Government, by more than one local authority, that they would be very glad to have the opportunity to allow Reservists who were called out, to count their time 1613 under the colours for the Police Pension Fund. In all quarters of the country it was felt that the local authorities should have the power to do so. It was for the local authorities to say whether they desired to take advantage of the powers given them by this enabling Bill. He did not think local ratepayers would be inclined to grudge the very small sum likely to be demanded by the operation of the Bill. The hon. Member for Mid Lanark wanted to give an extension of the purposes of the Bill, and to make it compulsory; but the result of that would be that the local authorities would not in future employ any Reservists at all. The hon. Gentlemen had said why limit the powers to the present war? but in drafting the Bill the Government had followed precedent. He did not think it desirable to widen the area of the Bill, or to make it appear more formidable than it now was.