HC Deb 17 May 1922 vol 154 cc331-2
4. Colonel Sir C. YATE

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what appeal tribunal will be available to hear the cases of officers placed on the retired list by the Admiralty under the Order in Council, recently issued, authorising the compulsory retirement of naval and marine officers for alleged peculiarity of temper or other defect not amounting to misconduct?

Mr. AMERY

All cases of officers who may be dealt with under this Order-in-Council will be considered by the Board of Admiralty, than whom there is no higher naval authority.

Sir C. YATE

Will there be no tribunal to inquire into the cases against these officers?

Mr. AMERY

In disciplinary cases of this sort we cannot have an independent and outside appeal tribunal. These matters will actually come before the Board of Admiralty itself for consideration.

Captain Viscount CURZON

Is it intended to keep this Order-in-Council as part of the King's Regulations? Is it intended to be a permanent Order?

Mr. AMERY

Yes, Sir.

Lieut. Commander KENWORTHY

Does it not put a stigma on these unfortunate officers?

Mr. AMERY

There is no question of a stigma at all. It provides in the Navy —as is already the case in the Army and Air Force—for dispensing with the services of officers who, without committing any gross misconduct deserving of a stigma, are not, on the whole, considered adequate to their work. No stigma attaches to them at all.

9. Viscount CURZON

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that the special scheme for the retirement of officers of the Indian Army has been published, he can now state how it is proposed to deal with officers of the Royal Navy surplus to requirements?

Mr. AMERY

Details of the scheme of retirement of surplus personnel were announced in Admiralty Fleet Orders, Nos. 1358 and 1359, dated 12th May, copies of which I am sending to my Noble and gallant Friend.

Viscount CURZON

Why does this Order apply only to captains and ranks below. Is the hon. Gentleman not dealing with the cases of flag officers surplus to requirements?

Mr. AMERY

I have already stated in answer to a question that we are dealing with the eases of flag officers.