§ 7. Captain BULLOCKasked the Secretary of State for War whether he has con- 716 sidered the pension claims of the ex-Army ranker officers and what action the Government proposes to take in the matter?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Walsh)I have carefully considered these claims, and much regret that cannot recommend that he existing Regulations should be amended. The claims now made are not consistent. with the recognised conditions under which these officers originally accepted their commissions—conditions acceptable to them at the time, and duly carried out by the State.
Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESSIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that when the recent Election was in prospect the. Prime Minister pledged himself in favour of all these claims of the Ex-ranker Officers' Association? How does the right hon. Gentleman reconcile that unconditional pledge with the present answer?
§ Mr. MACPHERSONIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that. officers similarly situated in the Navy are drawing a full pension and allowances?
§ Mr. WALSHI am aware both of the latter question and of the first one. The questions addressed to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister were framed in such a way as to leave the implication on his mind that people working under exactly similar conditions were receiving different treatment. That is not correct. Because of the implication his answer was framed as it was. I aquatinted my right hon. Friend with both the question and the answer I intended to give to the House, and he is in complete agreement with my answer. The mere fact that the Navy has taken a certain attitude respecting a comparatively few number of men whose conditions of work are. quite distinct does not in any way commit the Army to similar action.
Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESSAre we to understand that any more of these unconditional pledges are to be torn up?
§ Mr. MACPHERSONI beg to give notice. that I shall raise this question on the first available pportunity.
§ Mr. MILLSWill the right hon. Gentleman consent to receive a deputation on this subject, in view of the apparent recognition by the Conservative Government of these claims?
§ Mr. WALSHThat question seems to be a perfectly proper one, but inasmuch as the facts have been known for four years, that this particular matter has been raised in two distinct cases which have been brought before the House since 1919, and that it has been before successive Governments, I do not know that a deputation could elicit further information than already exists, and I do not know what useful purpose could be served by receiving a deputation.
Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESSIn view of the fact that this matter has been before the House for four years, was it not possible for the Prime Minister to make himself acquainted with the facts before obtaining votes on this question at the last Election?