§ 56. Mr. Marloweasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when it is proposed to introduce the necessary legislation to effect increases in the salaries of His Majesty's High Court judges which the former Financial Secretary to the Treasury stated on 3rd May, 1949, would certainly be done during 1949.
§ Sir S. CrippsThis matter will be considered further when the economic situation of the country permits.
§ Mr. MarloweDoes the right hon. and learned Gentleman realise that this was a solemn pledge given by the Financial Secretary on 3rd May last year, which was after the Budget Speech and, therefore, must be considered outside the standstill which the right hon. and learned Gentleman laid down? Is he prepared to say that His Majesty's Government are going back on that solemn undertaking given in those circumstances?
§ Sir S. CrippsThere was no solemn undertaking given. What was said by my right hon. Friend—
§ Mr. MarloweA broken pledge.
Sir S. Ctipps—was:
Legislation will be necessary, and I think can promise the House that that legislation will not be long delayed; it will certainly be this year."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 3rd May, 1949; Vol. 464, c. 814.]That was not a pledge that there would be any increase in salaries.
§ Mr. Marlowerose—
Mr. StanleyCould the right hon. and learned Gentleman say what other purpose there could be for this legislation?
§ Sir S. CrippsCertainly. There could be legislation passed which would enable us at an appropriate time to increase salaries.
§ Mr. MarloweWould the Chancellor not agree that the whole object of the Question and answer was directed towards the matter of the increase in salaries, and does he not agree, whatever other standstill may have to be made, that there is a sound case for increasing salaries which were fixed against the cost of living in 1831?
§ Sir W. SmithersWill the Chancellor tell the House and the country what is the good of a thousand paper pounds a week if they are worthless, as they are becoming more and more worthless today under this Government?