§ 3. Colonel YATEasked the Secretary of State for India for what reason the first ordinary pension in the revised scale of pensions for officers of the Indian Army is given at the completion of 18 years' service, whereas in the British service, under Army Order 324 of 1919, it is given after 15 years' service, with an increment for each completed year over 15; and if he will have the officers of the Indian Army put on the same terms as the officers of the British service in this respect?
§ Mr. MONTAGUOfficers of the British service on retirement are required to join the Reserve of Officers, and by permitting retirements after short service the War Office obtain a number of comparatively young officers who are immediately available in a national emergency. An Indian Army Officer on retirement nearly always leaves India, and thereby ceases to be in touch with the Indian Army. His value as a Reserve Officer is thus considerably diminished, and for this reason it has not been thought advisable to encourage the retirement of young officers by reducing the period for retirement on pension below 18 years. But the pension which an officer of the Indian Army obtains on retirement at 18 years is £50 more than that for an officer of the British Army of equal rank and service.
§ Colonel YATEAs the Indian service is purely a time service, and promotion is given by years of service, is it not a fact that he is on the same level as officers in the British service?
§ Mr. MONTAGUHe is not on the same level; he gets £50 a year more.
§ Colonel YATEThat is only an Indian element, and a very small element.
§ 5. Colonel YATEasked the Secretary of State for India if he will say, considering that in the revised pension rules for British officers of the Indian Army an Indian element has been added to the rates of pension laid down for officers of the British service as recompense for service in India up to the rank of Colonel, for what reason has that Indian element not been granted to major-generals of the Indian Army for their service in India?
§ Mr. MONTAGUI would refer to the reply given to the hon. Member for the Abbey Division of Westminster (Mr. Burdett-Coutts) on the 11th August, of which I will send my hon. and gallant Friend a copy.
§ Colonel YATEWill the right hon. Gentleman state why the Indian element has not been granted?
§ Mr. MONTAGUIf the hon. and gallant Gentleman will read my previous answer to his question—I am only quoting one; I have given several—he will see the reasons given.
§ Colonel YATEMay I ask whether any one of those reasons has any foundation in it whatsoever?
§ Mr. MONTAGUAll that that means is that my hon. and gallant Friend is not satisfied. I am afraid that to satisfy him is a task to which I do not aspire.