§ 29. Lieut.-Colonel HODGEasked the Secretary of State for War if the proposed deputy financial assistant to the Permanent Under-Secretary of State is a chartered or incorporated accountant; if not, what his qualifications for the proposed appointment are; and what is the amount of the salary attached to the appointment?
§ Mr. WALSHThe answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the remainder of the question, the officer concerned was specially selected for the appointment, for which he is qualified by both exceptional ability and long experience. His salary will be at the normal rate of £2,200 per annum.
§ Lieut.-Colonel HODGEOught not this important position to be filled by a man holding the very highest accountancy qualifications?
§ Major MOULTONIs it a fact that £8,000,000 of public money passes through the hands of this official?
§ 31. Mr. GRAHAM WHITEasked the Secretary of State for War the reason why the lands directorate of the Under-Secretary of State, which had in 1914–15 a staff of 15 costing £5,505, has in the present year a staff of 47 costing £22,892?
§ Mr. WALSHThe pre-war staff were engaged only in the ordinary administration of War Department permanent estates. The present staff, besides performing that duty, have to clear up, on behalf not only of the War Department, but of several other Departments (notably the Air Ministry, the Disposal 237 and Liquidation Commission and the Office of Works), questions of compensation and other questions arising out of the temporary occupation and use of property during the war and during the disturbed period in Ireland. The increase in staff is temporary only.
§ Mr. WALSHAll I can say is that many of these matters for which the Department is responsible are being cleared up as quickly as possible, and the reduction is certain to take place, but how soon it is impossible to say at the moment.
§ Mr. REMERIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the work of this Department was practically completed two years ago?
§ 68. Mr. HOGGEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon what grounds a new contract of engagement was given to Colonel Cobb, as valuer to the War Office and Disposal Board, without permitting the Joint Substitution Board to decide the question of whether he was substitutable or not; what was the date when the new contract was made; what were the terms; and upon whose recommendation was it entered into?
§ Mr. WALSHI have been asked to reply. The grounds on which the Army Council made a new contract of engagement with Colonel Cobb were in order to avoid delay and loss in the settlement of outstanding cases and claims for the disposal of which his high professional attainments and unique knowledge of the circumstances peculiarly qualify him. The Joint Substitution Board does not deal with appointments of this character. With regard to the last part of the question, the date on which the offer was made to Colonel Cobb was 3rd December last. The terms are that Colonel Cobb should serve for a further and final period of 12 months, commencing on 10th January last, for a fee of 2,050 guineas. The appointment was made on the recommendation of the Army Council.
§ Sir JAMES REMNANTHad this gallant gentleman any qualifications at 238 all for this work before he was appointed?
§ Mr. WALSHI have already stated in the answer that his high professional attainments and unique knowledge peculiarly qualified him.