HC Deb 25 February 1920 vol 125 cc1663-4
22. Viscount CURZON

asked what is the reason for disregarding Recommendation No. 3 of Admiral Halsey's Recommendation with reference to the pay of officers of the Royal Navy and Royal Marines?

23. Rear - Admiral ADAIR

asked whether, when the present rates of pay of naval officers was decided upon, they were intended to be such as could stand being charged the full civil rate of Income Tax, and whether they exceed those recommended by the Halsey Committee, which were based on the service rate of Income Tax?


It was considered by the Government that there was no justification for treating naval officers, in the matter of Income Tax, differently from the rest of the community, and it was therefore decided that tax at the ordinary civilian rate should be charged as from the beginning of the ensuing financial year. The rates of pay approved are substantially those recommended by the Halsey Committee, and were deemed adequate, notwithstanding the Committee's Report that any increase in the rate of Income Tax would necessitate in creased scales of pay.

Viscount CURZON

Is it not a fact that, owing to the present position of naval officers with regard to Income Tax, and the withdrawal of children's allowances, the increase of pay will all be absorbed? And why is there a differentiation as compared with officers in the Army?


I can only say that that is not my experience. I have had a good many figures before me, and they by no means confirm what my Noble Friend suggests. With regard to Income Tax, the matter has been under consideration, and I consulted many naval officers, who held strongly the view that, subject to their pay being put on a proper basis, they would prefer not to have special exemption with regard to Income Tax.