§ 36. Mr. WRIGHTasked how many appointments from the officer grade to sur-veyorships have, since the amalgamation of the Customs and Excise offices in April, 1909, gone to the Customs branch and Excise branch, respectively?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGESince 1st April, 1909, 123 officers of Customs origin and seventy-six of Excise origin have been appointed to surveyorships or to corresponding posts which have since that date ranked as surveyorships. There are no longer separate Customs and Excise branches in the amalgamated Customs and Excise service.
§ Mr. WRIGHTIs it not the fact that during the last eight months over ninety were appointed to surveyorships, and is there not in consequence great dissatisfaction amongst the officers of Excise?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI cannot answer that without some notice. I see that 123 officers have been appointed since 1909. That is all I know.
Mr. POINTERSince a great proportion of the appointments are now going to the Customs, does not that affect the Excisemen?
§ 37. Mr. WRIGHTasked whether the work under the National Insurance Act is carried out mainly by officers of the Excise branch; and, if so, whether additional present remuneration is being made to these officers in respect of this new work, and, if so, at what rate?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second part, I beg to refer the hon. Member to the 2076 replies I gave to the hon. Member for Horncastle on the 14th and 20th November, in which I explained the conditions under which the new duties under the Insurance Act were entrusted to the Customs and Excise Service. There is no longer any separate Excise branch.
§ Mr. WRIGHTCan the right hon Gentleman say whether in fact any present increase of pay has been given to the officers or not?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI gave an answer to the hon. Member for Horncastle on that subject.
§ 38. Mr. WRIGHTasked whether in the case of Civil Servants from departments other than the Excise, who have been transferred to work under the Insurance Commissioners, additional present increases of salary have been granted; and whether similar increases have been granted to officers of the Excise in respect of their new duties?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThere is no foundation for the suggestion that the opportunities for transfer to the service of the Insurance Commission were less favourable in the case of the Customs and Excise Department than in that of any other department. As regards the second part of the question, I may refer the hon. Member to my replies of the 14th and 20th November to questions by the hon. Member for Horncastle.
§ 39. Mr. RUPERT GWYNNEasked if the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer has been called to the fact that, under a recent Order of the Board of Customs and Excise regulating the payment for overtime attendance, the surveyors formerly surveyors of Customs are called upon to give overtime attendance, for which they have hitherto been paid, without any payment, and to make night visits, for which they have hitherto been paid, without any payment unless the number of such visits shall exceed four per month; and whether, in view of his promise that members of the two services should not be made to suffer by the amalgamation of the departments, he will consider what compensation shall be paid to surveyors whose conditions of service are thus altered to their detriment?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe Order in question merely gives effect to the recommendation in paragraph 236 of the Amalgamation Committee's Report, which 2077 was issued in August, 1911, that the salary of surveyors should cover overtime, and that systematic night visits by surveyors should be specially remunerated. The Committee added the reservation that overtime by surveyors should not be allowed to become systematic. In any comprehensive reorganisation, such as the amalgamation of the Customs and Excise Services, the changes in the conditions of service must be looked at as a whole. The scales of the former classes of Customs surveyor have been improved, and arrangements for relaxing the requirements as to attendance are practically complete, and will shortly be carried out.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTIs the right hon. Gentleman prepared to say that the members of the Excise Service have not, in fact, suffered by the amalgamation of the two departments?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThat is my impression after going into the matter. I am quite willing to hear any suggestions of facts the hon. Gentleman may make.
§ Mr. WRIGHTIs it not the fact that in April of this year the right hon. Gentleman received a deputation from the Excise officers, and did he not admit that they were suffering great hardship?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEYes, I received a deputation; but, on the contrary, my recollection is—I had them there twice—that the Excise officers complained that they suffered and the Customs officers complained that they suffered. The complaint of the Excise officers was that preference was given to the Customs officers, and the complaint of the Customs officers was that preference was given to the Excise officers.
§ Mr. HARRY LAWSONCould not the Royal Commission now sitting to inquire into the Civil Service, examine into these alleged grievances?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI will consider that.
§ Mr. R. GWYNNEWill the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry in the meantime?