§ 29. Mr. Marloweasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer which civil servants are paid a gratuity on retirement in addition to pension; at what rate such gratuities are paid; for how long the system of paying gratuities has been in existence; what is the approximate average cost of paying these gratuities; and to what extent payment of these gratuities has been taken into account in considering the repercussive effect of increasing the pensions of those officers of the Armed Forces who retired prior to 1st September, 1950.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterEstablished civil servants receive on retirement a lump sum calculated in most cases at the rate of 3/80ths of their average annual emoluments in the last three years before retirement. When these allowances were introduced under the Superannuation Acts of 1909 for men and 1935 for women, civil servants then established were given the option of retaining the earlier higher rates of pension which were reduced by an actuarially equivalent amount for those not taking this option. Approximate cost in 1953–54 is £550 per head, after deducting contributions in respect of widows' and children's pensions schemes. These allowances have of course been taken into account in connection with the matter referred to in the last part of the Question.
§ Mr. MarloweMy hon. Friend is, of course, aware that until September, 1950, 192 the retired officers were not given terminal grants, and is it not the case that between 1920 and 1950 their pensions were assessed on quite a different basis, and therefore, when I press for an increase in officers' pensions there is no validity in the answer that Civil Service pensions have to be dealt with on the same footing? Is it not the case that they have always been dealt with on quite a different footing?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterThe fact that pensions are not precisely on the same basis is no particular reason for assuming that changes in one do not affect changes in another.
§ Mr. MarloweIs not the only way to do justice in this matter to increase retrospectively officers' pensions between 1920 and 1950 to bring them into line with what civil servants were getting at that time?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterIf my hon. and learned Friend had followed my answer he would have seen that where this lump sum had been given to civil servants the actuarial equivalent reductions were made in the rates of pension, and therefore, the latter part of his Question does not arise.