HC Deb 20 February 1918 vol 103 cc756-7W
Sir H. NIELD

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office what is the reason for excluding Army inspectors of works from the benefit of children's allowance under Army Council Instructions dated 24th January, 1918; whether, in comparison with other officers who receive higher pay and yet are entitled to the benefit of the allowance for children, these professionally qualified officers engaged in the inspection of Army works should also be entitled to the allowance, especially in view of their positions in civil life and the standard of living which they and their families have been accustomed to and the considerable pecuniary sacrifice by them of their civil professional incomes on joining His Majesty's Forces?

Mr. FORSTER

The pay of these inspectors of works is practically a Civil Service salary, these officers having formerly belonged to that branch of the public service. The permanent inspectors have been granted the bonus approved for Civil servants of similar salaries serving on permanent engagements, and those serving temporarily will be granted any like bonus which may be approved for temporary Civil servants.

Sir H. NIELD

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that a clerk of works in the service of the War Office receives a larger income by some £65 per annum than his immediate superiors, the Army inspectors of works, who are professionally qualified men, many of whom have been in considerable professional practice in civil life; are such clerks of works entitled to the benefit of allowances for children or any grant in addition to their fixed income; what is the reason of giving to a subordinate a larger income than that accorded to men occupy- ing a position of greater trust and requiring special professional qualifications; and whether it is proposed to take any steps to remedy this difference of treatment?

Mr. FORSTER

The range of pay for clerks of works is, temporarily, from 7s. 6d. to 20s. per diem, according to the circumstances of each case, the 20s. limit being altogether exceptional; while the rate of pay of inspectors of works is £300 per annum, with £350 for special posts. The statement in the first part of my hon. and learned Friend's question is not, therefore, quite in accordance with the general position, nor am I aware of the existence of any such case. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative. As regards the latter part, the whole question was considered six months ago, and it is not proposed to make any alteration.