§ 16. Sir THOMAS BRAMSDONasked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that the recent advertisement of the Admiralty for naval schoolmasters is misleading and unfair to intending applicants in that it implies automatic advancement to £383 per annum, whereas the only assured maximum is £264 per annum after 19 years' service, while the majority can only reach a maximum of £319 after 28½., years' service; also, in view of the advanced and technical nature of the naval schoolmasters' work, the qualifications necessary for promotion, and that evening school work is compulsory and carries no extra remuneration as in civil life, their Lordships will consider the advisability of these officers being paid on a higher scale than technical school teachers ashore, and not less than other naval officers of equal rank?
§ Mr. LONGThe advertisement in question states that successful candidates become eligible for promotion successively to the ranks of commissioned warrant officer, lieutenant, and lieutenant-commander. This, I think, indicates clearly that the promotion to lieutenant-commander, and consequently the advancement to the pay of that rank are not automatic. As regards the rates of pay, I can only say that the rates of pay of all naval officers; including schoolmasters, were considered and fixed by His Majesty's Government as recently as July last, and that the Admiralty do not consider that the circumstances have so changed since then as to justify them in raising the question afresh.
§ Sir T. BRAMSDONIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that a schoolmaster of warrant rank only rises automatically from £173 to £264 after 19 years' service, whereas the lowest elementary school teacher reaches £300 after 14 years' service and does he see any reason why naval schoolmasters should not have the pay of their rank?
§ Sir W. SEAGERWill the right hon. Gentleman see that in future advertisements are so clearly put that they will bring the best class of men to this important Service?
§ Mr. LONGI was not aware that the advertisements had failed, but of course I will have the matter looked into. With regard to the other question, I could not say off-hand whether the figures are correct or not. I am quite aware of the difficulty with regard to schoolmasters, but I greatly regret, for the reason I have given, I am afraid it is impossible to reopen the question now.
§ Sir T. BRAMSDONWould the right hon. Gentleman promise to personally look into this matter, because if so he will be convinced of its seriousness?
§ Mr. LONGI have done so, and I fully appreciate the serious character of the situation as it is now. But I do not think I can raise the question afresh.
§ 17. Sir T. BRAMSDONasked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will consider the desirability of not continuing to withhold promotion to the-rank of senior master from naval schoolmasters of over eight years' service who are eligible for selection for this rank by reason of their having held the rank of 381 head schoolmaster or acting head schoolmaster, and who have for a number of years been successfully carrying out the work which would be covered by the advanced course; and whether schoolmasters also doing such work will be paid the extra Is. a day, in view of the fact that it is not the fault of the schoolmaster branch that an advanced course, to enable them to qualify nominally for special list appointments, has not yet been held since its inception more than twelve months ago?
§ Mr. LONGI would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which was given to him on 26th November, in which it was explained that a certain number of promotions to senior master have been made from among those who had completed eight years' service, although they had not taken the advanced course, but that it is not considered desirable to fill the whole of the vacancies in this manner. It was then stated that advanced courses would be instituted as; soon as circumstances admit, and I am advised that only in the event of it being found impossible to commence the advanced course in the near future will it be necessary to reconsider this question, together with the further question of waiving the advanced course to enable schoolmasters on the special list to draw the extra 1s. a day.
§ Viscount CURZONIs there any possibility of the case of naval schoolmasters being considered by the Naval Welfare Committee of the Admiralty?
§ Mr. LONGI do not think I could answer that question off-hand. The powers of the Naval Welfare Committee are de-lined and their duties are clearly laid down.
§ Sir T. BRAMSDONWill the right hon. Gentleman promise this advanced course under which they may be entitled to the sum named in the question and is it not unfair to withhold it from them now?
§ Mr. LONGI could not undertake offhand to snake any promise for the future. I do not think it is unfair. There are a great many conditions in connection with promotion and advancement in the Service which operate hardly in regard to certain individuals, and I am afraid it is impossible to avoid that. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that at the Admiralty we are daily engaged in considering these 382 questions as they affect officers of all grades, and to see if we can remove any injustices concerning them.
§ Sir T. BRAMSDONIs he aware this is the only offices of warrant rank who does not get the pay of it?