§ 20. Mr. LAMBERTasked whether an Army lieutenant receives £223 gratuity for service from August, 1914, to November, 1918, while a lieutenant, Royal Naval Reserve, receives £205, and then only if he has served thirty months afloat?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAMy right hon. Friend's figures are not absolutely correct, but they do not seriously depart from the fact. The statement that a Lieutenant, R.N.R., must serve thirty months afloat to receive full gratuity is, however, entirely incorrect. There is no such qualification. I may perhaps add that, as I said on the 19th February in reply to the hon. and gallant. Member for Antrim, East, the justification for the lower amount in the case of the temporary Naval officer is to be found in the fact that whilst the gratuity was part of the contract with the temporary Army officer, it was an addition to the conditions of service in the case of the temporary Naval officer, and it was held to be not inequitable, because of that fact, to fix it at the lower rate.
§ Mr. LAMBERTWhy should a temporary Naval officer be treated worse than a temporary Army officer?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAFor what it is worth, for the reasons given in the latter part of my answer.
§ Mr. LAMBERTThey are not worth much.
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThat may be; but a temporary Army officer has this as part of his contract, while a temporary Naval officer has it in addition to the conditions of service; therefore it was held not to be inequitable to fix it at the latter rate.