HC Deb 17 June 1913 vol 54 cc211-2W

asked the Secretary to the Treasury how many assistant clerks (new class) are employed in the Post Office Savings Bank Department, Board of Education, Board of Trade, and the Statistical Office (Customs and Excise), respectively; how many are eligible by service in each case for promotion to the second division; and how many have been promoted or nominated for promotion to the second division in each of those offices since 1st January, 1911?


The figures are as follows:—

Employed. Eligible by Service for Promotion. Promoted or Nominated since 1st January, 1911.
Post Office Savings Bank Department 265 84 25
Board of Education 805 173 27
Board of Trade 239 91 17
Customs Statistical Office 186 91 7*
*Includes two promotions to Junior Clerk, Statistical Office.

In accordance with paragraph 45 of the Order in Council of 10th January, 1910, an established Civil servant below the second division may only be appointed to that division if he receives a certificate of special merit from the head of his Department. Such certificates can only be granted exceptionally after not less than six years' established service, and the hon. Member will therefore observe that six years' service is not the sole test of eligibility for such promotion.


asked the Secretary to the Treasury how many assistant clerks in the Customs Statistical Office are eligible by service for the £10 special increment; how many of these men are in receipt of an

allowance of £30 per annum for efficiency; and, in view of the fact that on 25th October, 1909, it was stated these special increments were granted for efficiency combined with long service, why those clerks who possess these, the requisite qualifications, have not yet been granted special increments?


The answer to the first part of the question is fifteen; and to the second that eleven of these men are in receipt of a checking allowance. As was explained to the hon. Member on the 25th October, 1909, and to my hon. Friend the Member for the Tottenham Division on 10th June, 1912, the possession of a checking allowance does not necessarily imply that the holder is qualified for a special increment, which is the reward of special merit. In regard to the last part of the question, I must refer the hon. Member to my reply to a similar inquiry by the hon. Member for Tottenham on the 5th instant.