HC Deb 22 September 1931 vol 256 cc1455-6
23. Colonel HOWARD-BURY

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware of the following hard cases due to cuts in the Army pay: where a private soldier who joined before 1925 and draws 3s. 6d. a day, being 2s. 9d. for pay and 9d. after two years' service, i.e., since 1927, is now being reduced to 2s., a cut of nearly 43 per cent.; where a private soldier pre-1925, who draws 4s. a day, is being reduced to 2s. 3d. a day, a cut of over 43 per cent.; and also the case of officers with more than six years' service and less than 15 years' service, and drawing £319 a year, are losing £61 a year, a cut of 18 per cent.; and whether he will look into these cases and see whether the cuts can be more evenly distributed?


My hon. and gallant Friend will appreciate that his figures, which were not in fact correct as regards the private soldier, are now out of date, in view of the answer given yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for South Nottingham (Mr. Knight). A comprehensive statement with regard to the effect of the new decision will be made as soon as possible.


Can my hon. Friend say that there will now be no cuts in soldiers' pay of more than 10 per cent.?


Yes, Sir.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL

Will the new cuts also be applicable to majors and officers of higher standing?


If the figures are out of date, are not the percentages also wrong, because they do not include maintenance and clothing?


Are we to understand that the cuts in the salaries of the higher ranks are to be reduced to 10 per cent.?


No; the position is that no reduction in pay which will be effected by putting the whole Army on the 1925 rates of pay will now produce a reduction in any particular person's pay by more than 10 per cent. of what he was receiving before.


Will majors, colonels and such like receive a cut of 10 per cent.?


They will not be affected in the same way because the rates in the higher ranks were not changed in 1925 from the 1919 figures.