§ 59. Sir J. REMNANTasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that, by Regulations published on 29th April, 1919, the candidates who took the 1921 open competition for the administrative class of the Civil Service were promised all vacancies up to the date of the announcement of the result of their examination except such as might be filled under the reconstruction scheme. but that, according to the "London Gazette" for 6th June, 1919, three of these vacancies were filled by the appointment of men who took the 1915 examination and were not reconstruction candidates: and if he will state what compensation will be given to the throe 1921 candidates, two of whom were ex-service men, who have thus been deprived of appointments for which they were invited to compete at considerable personal expense, including an entrance fee of £6?
The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Guinness)The three appointments in question were made in fulfilment of an arrangement made some time before the Regulations for the open competition of 1921 were published. I am unable to agree that any of the candidates at the 1921 open competition have been deprived by this arrangement of appointments for which they were invited to compete.
§ 60. Sir J. REMNANTasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that six appointments from the 1914 and 1915 open examinations for Class 1 of the Civil Service, including that of a 1914 candidate who took nintyninth place, were announced in the "London Gazette" for 2nd May, 1919, and 6th June, 1919, as having been made nearly five and four years, respectively, after those examinations at which all the candidates were non-service men; and if 224 he will state why the 1921 candidates, the great majority of whom were ex-service men who in many cases had been given no other opportunity of competing for such appointments, were not given equally generous treatment, seeing that non-service men at the next examination would otherwise receive the privilege of obtaining vacancies which arose more than six months before the announcement of the result of their examination?
Mr. GUINNESSThe appointments of candidates from the 1914 examination to which the hon. and gallant Member refers were made in pursuance of undertakings given in 1915 that candidates who did not receive offers of appointment owing to absence with the forces and who obtained a higher place on the list than candidates who secured appointments would be appointed after the termination of the War. An analogous arrangement was applied to the competition of 1915. There is no parallel between these candidates and those unappointed at the open competition held in 1921.
§ Sir J. REMNANTIs it a fact that all these vacancies which were promised to the ex-service men have been given to them and not given to men who have not served in the War?
Mr. GUINNESSAt the open examination special arrangements were made under the reconstruction proposals for admitting ex-service men without this examination, and the ex-service men had the additional opportunity of going in for the 1921 competition, into which a small number went.
§ Sir J. REMNANTIs it not the case that, if the full number of vacancies had been given to ex-service men for whom these new regulations were made, next spring they would have been available for the vacancies which were remaining?
Mr. GUINNESSI think my hon. Friend misunderstands the conditions of that examination. There was no undertaking that special treatment would be given at this open examination of ex-service men, but the candidates at this examination had special advantages in that the list was kept open for vacancies which occurred, not only for the normal six months after the examination, but for 2½ years.
§ Sir HENRY CRAIKWas it not possible to have given some of the candidates, who were ex-service men and who had passed the examination in 1921, the advantage of vacancies which have since occurred?
Mr. GUINNESSThey had five years, that is, 2½ years' notice of the examination, during which period any vacancies which fell due were allotted on the result of the examination subsequently, and 2½ years after the examination. That is five years, as against the normal period of one year.
§ Sir H. CRAIKNotice of examination does not matter in the least. They passed the examination high in the list in 1921. They were men who had served or were wounded, and presumably they went back to the universities and studied so as to pass this examination. Why should they not have been appointed to vacancies which have since occurred?
Mr. GUINNESSIf my right hon. Friend looks at the Regulations, he will see that the normal procedure is that, after notice of the examination is given, all vacancies which arise are given to the successful candidates by subsequent examination; that is, six months. In this case they were given 2½ years, and after the examination a further 2½ years.
§ HON. MEMBERS: Order, order! Is this a private conversation?
§ 61. Sir J. REMNANTasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury how many of the candidates at the 1914 and 1915 open examinations for Class 1 of the Civil Service were given permanent appointments in that class after the end of the War, how many of the men who received this exceptional treatment were ex-service men, and how many were men who, although of military age, were offered temporary clerical employment during the War, exempted from military service, and subsequently given permanent appointments in the highest class of the Civil Service?
Mr. GUINNESSEight such appointments were made. Six of the men were ex-service, one was a Territorial office compulsorily retained in charge of an O.T.C., and one was rejected on medical grounds for the Army and for the Indian Civil Service.