HL Deb 24 November 1948 vol 159 cc539-43

2.36 p.m.

EARL WAVELL

My Lords, I rise to ask the first question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

[The question was as follows:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether their attention has been called to a statement in the Assembly at Delhi on August 12 last by the Indian Finance Minister, Mr. Chetty, to the effect that the responsibility for the payment of pensions to British nationals for service in India rested entirely with the Indian Government, and were payable only during good conduct and for so long as their loyalty to India continued; whether His Majesty's Government are aware that this statement has caused great anxiety to many British civilians and officers who are drawing pensions for their service in India; and whether His Majesty's Government will confirm that the guarantee given by the Prime Minister in another place on July 9, 1947, and repeated in the White Paper in August, 1947, that these persons "have the assurance of His Majesty's Government that they will receive the pensions to which they are entitled" still holds good.]

VISCOUNT ADDISON

My Lords, I am aware that some apprehension has been felt as a result of the observation in Mr. Chetty's speech. I do not think that it necessarily carries the implications which have been put upon it by those who have felt these apprehensions. In accordance with the agreement announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in another place on July 15 last, the Government of India have purchased an annuity from His Majesty's Government, which is to be used to cover India's full liability for pensions payable in sterling and which will be adequate for the purpose. If difficulties arise in practice over the payment of any individual pension it will always be possible for us to take the matter up with the Government of India.

EARL WAVELL

My Lords, I thank the noble Viscount for his reply. Will His Majesty's Government make it quite clear that they, and not the Indian Government, are the judges of the loyalty of these British subjects, and will they make an announcement to that effect which will reassure these people?

VISCOUNT ADDISON

His Majesty's Government are in correspondence with the Government of India with regard to the statement referred to in the noble Earl's question. So far as the latter part is concerned, we have no grounds for believing that the Government of India will not entertain the same honourable interpretation of their obligations as we should.

EARL WAVELL

My Lords, may I ask whether His Majesty's Government will make an announcement that they definitely are the judges of the loyalty of these British subjects?

VISCOUNT ADDISON

I do not think I can make any announcement beyond the quite fair statement which I have already made.

EARL WAVELL

My Lords, I beg to ask the second question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

[The question was as follows:

To ask His Majesty's Government, what progress has been made in the negotiations for the grant of proportionate pensions to the British personnel of the non-Secretary of State's Services in India and Pakistan; and whether His Majesty's Government have secured that any grant made shall be applicable to any persons who have retired since August 15, 1947.]

VISCOUNT ADDISON

My Lords, I am glad to be able to inform the noble Earl that the Governments of India and Pakistan now agree to allow European officers of non-Secretary of State's services who are not domiciled in India or Pakistan to retire on proportionate pension, if they so desire. The Government of India have reserved the right to postpone release for as long as a year from the date of application, if they think it necessary in the public interest to do so. The Government of Pakistan have made the same general condition, but for technical officers they have fixed the maximum period of postponement at two years instead of one. Details of the arrangements were published in announcements issued by the Governments of India and Pakistan on November 18. With the noble Earl's permission, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the text of the announcement made by the Government of India. This concession will not have retrospective effect. Those who have already resigned did so of their own volition, with a full appreciation of the consequences of their resignation.

EARL WAVELL

My Lords, I thank the noble Viscount for his answer. I am very glad to learn that something has been done for these people. Do His Majesty's Government really not intend this to be retrospective to August 15, 1947? Are they not aware that quite a number of these servants have already been compelled to resign, and do they not agree that some pension is due to them for the services they have rendered?

VISCOUNT ADDISON

I can assure the noble Earl, with regard to the retrospective class to which he refers (which is a small number of officers), that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State is prepared to receive representations on behalf of those who have already resigned.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

My Lords, I have not hitherto intervened in these discussions, because I have always regarded them as matters for experts, but I hope the noble Viscount the Leader of the House will make strong representations on the point of the retrospective class, on pure grounds of equity. After all, it is not the fault of these men that they are not included in the concessions; it is the fault of the protracted negotiations between His Majesty's Government and the Government of India. The fact that the noble Viscount the Leader of the House himself says it is a very small number means that the Treasury—who are presumably the "villains of the piece" in this matter—might give that aspect still further consideration. To say that there are only a very small number of them makes the position of the Government very much worse. These men have all given faithful service, and I hope that the accident that they left the service during this interim period will not stand in their way.

VISCOUNT ADDISON

My Lords, I am sure the noble Marquess will be willing to recognise the very comprehensive agreement which has already been achieved. With regard to those servants to whom the noble Marquess referred, they are not always in the same class as the men who stayed on. The man who came away on his own volition is not always in the same class as the man who stayed on. For all that, we recognise the force of what the noble Earl has said and, as I have said, my right honourable friend will be willing to receive representations in respect of those cases.

LORD CLYDESMUIR

My Lords, does the noble Viscount recognise that it is now one-and-a-half years since the terms of retirement for the Secretary of State's services were announced, and that, by contrast, these men of the non-Secretary of State's services have been through a period of great uncertainty and difficulty? While recognising the value of the agreement reached, will the Government take care to deal with these cases?

VISCOUNT ADDISON

I am sure we shall do everything vie can. So far we have given evidence of our good will.

[Following is the announcement by the Government of India to which Lord Addison referred:

In response to representations made to them and having regard to the constitutional changes that took place in India on August 15, 1947, the Government of India have, in consultation with the Provincial Governments and in agreement with His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, decided to extend the right of retirement before completing the service normally required for earning a retiring pension, or other retiring benefits, to European officers of Civil Services in India who were not already eligible for this concession, viz. officers other than those belonging to the Services previously under the rule-making control of the late Secretary of State for India. Officers who may prematurely retire from service pursuant to this decision will receive such proportionate pension or gratuity or Provident Fund benefits, as the case may be, as would have been admissible to them in the event of their discharge from service on the abolition of their posts, without alternative employment being provided, under the relevant service rules. Officers will also be eligible for such leave preparatory to retirement as may be admissible to them under the normal operation of the rules applicable to them. These concessions will be limited to European officers of non-Indian domicile, who are permanent employees of Government.

His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom have agreed to bear any extra cost that the Governments in India may have to incur on account of the grant of this concession. They have also agreed to bear the charges on account of the grant of repatriation passages to such of the European officers and their families as avail themselves of the concession of premature retirement but are not, under the service rules applicable to them, entitled to free passages. Repatriation passages for this purpose include single railway fares from last place of employment in India to the port of embarkation and from the port of disembarkation to destination.

Efforts will be made to release officers wishing to retire under this scheme as soon as possible, but the releases may be staggered where the exigencies of public service demand. In no case, however, will the release of officers who wish to retire be postponed beyond twelve months.]