§ 8. Sir C. K1NLOCH-COOKEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can say how many dockyard pensioners over sixty years of age are in receipt of pensions from 10s. to £1 a week; and whether, seeing that these men have served their country from twenty-five to forty years in the Royal dockyards and have little else to depend upon but their pensions, and that the cost of living has gone up some 50 per cent, since the outbreak of war, he can see his way to deal with them in the same manner as has been done in the case of old age pensioners, and give them such additions to their pensions during the period of the war as will enable them to obtain the necessaries of life?
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara)The number of dockyard pensioners over sixty years of age in receipt of pensions from 10s. to £1 a week is, approximately, 1,200. As regards the latter part of the question, I can only repeat the information I gave my hon. Friend on the 26th October last, namely, that pensions to civilians employed in naval establishments are awarded by the Treasury under the Superannuation Acts, and the Admiralty has no power to augment allowances which are assessed in accordance with the provisions of those Acts. I would further add that the comparison which my hon. Friend makes with the old age pensioner is not altogether justified, because in the case of the dockyard pensioners the average pension enjoyed is about £40 a year.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEIs it not the fact that these men, in many cases, have worked upon large numbers of ships which are now defending our shores: is it right that these men should be left with 10s. or £1 to live upon?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThey certainly contributed their part in their day and generation to the building of our ships.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEThe rising generation?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAYes; certainly.
Mr. SHIRLEY BENNIf it is shown to the Admiralty that there are men unable to find the necessary means of subsistence on the pension allowed them by the Admiralty, will the Admiralty consider the necessity of seeing that these men get enough?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAIt would not be a question for us, but one coming under the Superannuation Act, which is administered by the Treasury. But if hon. Members will communicate with me I will consider the matter.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEDoes the right hon. Gentleman propose to take any steps in regard to the matter?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI do not know that I can take them in the absence of particular evidence such as that suggested by my hon. Friend (Mr. S. Benn).
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThere were some working at the outbreak of the War, but I do not think that many are so employed now.
9. Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether there are men of the Royal Naval Division now serving in France as soldiers whose wives receive a total separation allowance which is less in some cases by as much as 6s. a week than that received by the wives of private soldiers who are doing the same work; and whether he proposes to take any action?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAAll men of the Naval Division serving in France hold a rating not below that of able seamen, and so, from their ordinary pay, apart from additional allowances drawn in the field, could in every instance allot 8s. a week instead of 5s., the minimum allotment which carries separation allowance for a wife.
§ Dr. MACNAMARAOh, certainly!
§ Dr. MACNAMARANo.
Mr. SCOTTThen, in spite of the answer, they do get considerably less than a soldier if they have a number of children?
§ Dr. MACNAMARANo. I think my hon. Friend is under the impression that these men are the ordinary seamen that form the subject of a later question. They are able seamen, and their pay, against that of a private soldier of 7s. a week, is: Able seamen, 11s. 8d.; marine private, 11s 1d. Then there is a field allowance of 6d. a day if not billeted, and 4d. a day if billeted.
Mr. SCOTTWill the right hon. Gentleman say whether these men are prohibited from making an allotment larger than 8s., the result of which is that if there are children their wives get considerably less allowance than that of a soldier's wife?
§ Dr. MACNAMARANo, they have higher pay. The minimum allotment is 5s. Some of the men get higher pay, which enables them to make a larger allotment. The average allotment for the Navy is about 12s. 6d. per week.
Mr. SCOTTAre there men of the Royal Naval Division who are prohibited from making an allotment of more than 8s. per week?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThere is not a maximum of 8s.; there is a minimum of 5s.
§ Dr. MACNAMARAA minimum of 5s.; the maximum depends upon the pay.
§ Dr. MACNAMARAYes, Sir.
§ Mr. HOGGECan my right hon. Friend say, in considering these allowances, that it is the case that the difference in the pay is explained by the fact that the sailor has to keep up his kit, whereas the soldier gets his kit supplied by the Government?
§ Dr. MACNAMARANo, I cannot say that. The sailor gets higher pay, and my hon. Friend's point may possibly be one of the reasons for what has been stated. He has also greater opportunities for promotion. For these and other reasons the scale of the sailor is lower than that of the soldier.
10. Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked whether, under the conditions of this War, promotion is much more rapid in the Army than in the Navy; and whether the better prospect of promotion in the Navy can, therefore, be said to compensate for the lower scale of separation allowances in the case of men who have enlisted only for the duration of the War?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI am not aware that promotion is much more rapid in the Army than in the Navy. I would point out, further, that the initial rates of pay of men entered in the lower ratings of the Royal Navy for the period of hostilities exceed those of similar entries in the Army by from 1s. 9d. to 4s. 8d. a week in the case of the ordinary seamen and the stokers.
Mr. SCOTTIs it not the case that the Navy, having remained more or less of the same strength, promotion goes on at the same rate as before, whereas in the Army, which has enormously increased, promotion is much more rapid?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI am not aware that the promotion is much more rapid in the Army than in the Navy.
Mr. SCOTTAre there no examples of men in the Navy reaching the rank of petty officer within a year?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI would not like to say that.
11 Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked (1) whether in the case of a sailor who is prohibited from making an allotment from his pay of more than 5s. a week to his dependent mother, the maximum allowance which the Admiralty will add to it is 5s. a week even in the London district; whether, in the case of a wife in similar circumstances the allowance which the Admiralty adds to the salor's 5s. is 2s. 6d.; whether many sailors' mothers are thus paid a total allowance, including allotment, which is 6s. a week less than is paid to soldiers' wives in similar circumstances; whether he proposes to take any action; (2) whether he is aware that the total separation allowance, including allotment, paid to sailors' wives and children in the lower ratings is in certain cases 6s. a week less than that paid to the wives and children of private soldiers; whether Admiralty orders have been issued advising sailors' wives under such conditions to apply to 599 the Statutory Committee; whether he is aware that the Statutory Committee refuses to grant a supplementary allowance to bring Admiralty allowances up to the level of Army allowances; whether he proposes to take any action in view of this refusal; and (3) whether, in the case of a sailor who is prohibited from making an allotment from his pay of more than 5s. a week to his dependent mother, the maximum allowance which the Admiralty will add to it is 5s. a week, even in the London district, making a total maximum allowance receivable by the mother of 10s.; whether the maximum allowance, including allotment, receivable by a soldier's mother in the London district is 15s. a week; and whether he proposes to remove this disability imposed upon the dependants of men serving in the Navy?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThe answer to the first part of question No. 11 is in the affirmative. As regards the second part of the question, I think my hon. Friend has used the word "wife" when he meant to use the word "mother." The allowance made in respect of an allotment of 5s. to the wife of a sailor of the lowest rating is 9s. 6d. a week, if she is a London resident. The allowance made in respect of an allotment of 5s. in favour of the mother would be 5s. in the case of a Reservist or a man entered for the period of hostilities, and 2s. 6d. in the case of active service ratings, subject to the measure of pre-war dependence in each case. As regards the last part of the question—and, again, I think my hon. Friend intended to use the word "mothers" instead of the word "wives" —the situation he depicts here, and in question No. 13, depends upon the twofold considerations of pre-war dependence and allotment from pay. Given a fairly high standard of pre-war dependence, it would be open to the soldier's mother, in consequence of the scale of allowances, to receive 6s. a week more than the mother of the ordinary seaman whose level of pre-war contribution to his mother's maintenance was lower.
I am satisfied that our allowances are framed so as to secure for the Service, as a whole, and in its many grades, what it amply deserves, fair and adequate consideration. There may be individual cases of hardship, and it was for the very purpose of dealing with those cases that the Statutory Committee was set up. I gather from my hon. Friend's question, 600 No. 12, that the Statutory Committee refuses to grant a supplementary allowance to bring Admiralty allowances up to the level of Army allowances in these cases. I am communicating with the Statutory Committee, particularly with regard to the case of the ordinary seaman with children.
§ 52. Admiral of the Fleet Sir H. MEUXI asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Admiralty have stated that naval pensions for long service are in reality deferred pay; whether naval pensioners whose total earned incomes and pensions amount to over £120 a year and under £300 a year are at present taxed at unearned income rate upon their naval pensions; and whether, in future, naval pensions may be taxed at the earned income rate when the total income from all sources does not exceed £300 a year?
§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Bonar Law)Naval pensions are chargeable to Income Tax at the ordinary earned income rates appropriate to the total incomes of the pensioners.
§ 70. Mr. HOGGEasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether any decision has been arrived at regarding the stoppage of separation allowances to dependants, especially wives, when they are being treated for illness in a public institution?
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Forster)These cases must be considered on their merits, and may be dealt with better by the Statutory Committee than the War Office. We have been in communication with them on the subject, and I hope a decision may be announced shortly.
§ Mr. HOGGEIs the hon. Gentleman aware that he told me exactly the same three or four months ago? How are the wives of soldiers who are in hospital, and therefore deprived of separation allowances, to keep the houses going in which the children reside while they are in hospital?
§ Mr. FORSTERI told my hon. Friend three or four months ago that these men are being looked after either by the Statutory Committee, or the Soldiers' and Sailors' Families Association.
§ Mr. HOGGEIs my hon. Friend aware that they are not being looked after? The Statutory Committee has no regulations which deal with them, and it has 601 taken four months to do what my hon. Friend suggests now and they have not yet done it.
§ Mr. FORSTERPerhaps my hon. Friend will address his strictures to my right hon. Friend.
§ 71. Mr. HOGGEasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he can state the number of wives and dependants in receipt of separation allowances up to 31st December, 1916?
§ Mr. FORSTERIn rough figures, three millions.
§ 72. Mr. HOGGEasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he can state the annual cost of the recent in crease in separation allowances?
§ Mr. FORSTERApproximately twelve millions for the Army.