65. Mr. MONTAGUE BARLOWasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, prior to the amalgamation of the Customs and Excise Departments, Customs port clerks in Manchester, Liverpool, and else where were paid for overtime in excess of seven hours per day, irrespective of the total number of hours served weekly; and whether the conditions have recently been so altered that they are now made liable to serve forty-eight hours weekly before overtime becomes payable?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe answer to both parts of the question is in the affirmative.
66. Mr. BARLOWasked whether the work of the Customs port clerks has been recently increased by about 281 hours yearly; and whether the proposal of the 1502 Hobhouse Committee to pay compensation of £3 per annum, representing 63 hours' pay at the lowest overtime rate, is considered sufficient to meet this increase?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI am not aware that the work of these officers has been increased as stated. As regards the £3 allowance, I must refer the hon. Member to the reply given by the Financial Secretary to the hon. Member for Hammersmith on the 14th December, 1911.
Mr. BARLOWWill the right hon. Gentleman accept a statement from me that the hours have been so increased?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEIf the horn Gentleman gives me on his authority a statement which he has investigated, I will accept it.
67. Mr. BARLOWasked whether, in the case of candidates for port clerkships who, prior to 1908, were invited to compete for a situation as clerk, second class, lower section, for port service in His Majesty's Customs, it was ever mentioned that candidates would be liable, if successful, to perform duties not clerical, such as gauging of casks, examining and weighing: goods for duty, and the like?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI am not aware that the notice to candidates for these situations specified the precise duties which they would be liable to perform; but I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to a question put by the Noble Lord the Member for West Perthshire on 13th May last as to the duties of these officers.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGECertainly.
68. Mr. BARLOWasked whether, in view of the fact that the Customs port clerks are now required to work forty-eight hours per week, being six hours per week in excess of the hours when a number of them entered the service, there is any precedent for extra hours of service being imposed in this way upon officials in the employment of Revenue Departments?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEAs I informed the representatives of these officers in May last, clerical attendance is still being regulated on the basis of a normal day of 1503 seven hours, not eight. In 1888 the liability of attendance by Customs clerks was increased from six to seven hours a day.
Mr. BARLOWIs it not a fact that, whatever the normal day be, they are liable to serve for the extra number of hours per day?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI should not like to answer that without notice.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI shall be very thankful to the hon. Gentleman.
§ 82. Mr. CHARLES DUNCANasked the Secretary to the Treasury how many assistant clerks (new class) employed in the Statistical Office of His Majesty's Customs and Excise have been recommended by the Board of Customs and Excise for promotion to the second division or analogous grades since the institution of the class; how many have been recommended since 1st January, 1912; and how many of the recommendations made during these periods have been sanctioned by the Treasury?
§ Mr. MASTERMANI would refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on the 10th instant to the hon. Member for the St. Patrick's Division of Dublin. All the recommendations made received the sanction of the Treasury.