§ Mr. CROOKSasked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the work of armament artificers covers a wide field and requires a good knowledge of guns, carriages, telescopes, binoculars, bicycles, gun sights, telephones, petrol and steam engines, and electric motors, he can state why these men receive less pay than staff-sergeants of the Mechanical Transport, Army Service Corps, and staff-sergeants of the Tank Corps; and whether, in view of the pay received by these men, he can state why, if one wishes to purchase his discharge, he is charged more than any other rank in the Army?
§ Mr. FORSTERAn Army Order is about to be issued, authorising the advancement of these armament artificers to 621W the higher rate of pay of 5s. 6d. on the completion of three years' approved service. This concession will substantially alter the comparisons made in the question. The larger sum for purchase of discharge required from these soldiers is due to the fact that they are given a costly training at the public expense.
§ Mr. CROOKSasked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a number of armament artificers of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps who have held and been paid for the rank of sergeant-major for three years and have taught the temporary inspectors of ordnance machinery their work have been reverted to staff-sergeant, while the temporary inspectors of ordnance machinery have in some cases reached the rank of major and will leave the Army with over£300 bonus; whether he is also aware that a number of the temporary inspectors of ordnance machinery served their apprenticeship in the same workshops and attended the same schools as a number of the armament articers; whether, in view of this, he can state the reason for about 250 commissions being given to the temporary inspectors and only fourteen to Regular armament artificers; and how many of these temporary inspectors are being retained in the Army?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI am informed that my right hon. Friend's statement of the position is not altogether correct, and I would refer him to the answer to questions 29 and 31 on the same subject. The temporary inspectors of ordnance machinery were drawn from the ranks of qualified mechanical engineers, many of them holding administrative appointments in civil life. Before being posted for duty they underwent a special course in war material at the Ordnance College. Their commissions were for the period of the War only, and for this class of commission, armament artificers, serving on a permanent engagement, were not eligible. Some, however, who were enlisted for the War only, were awarded temporary commissions as inspectors of ordnance machinery. In addition fourteen permanent commissions in the Royal Army Ordnance Corps have been given to Regular armament artificers. The peace establishment of inspectors of ordnance machinery will be considered in conjunction with that of the Army622W generally, and pending a decision it is impossible to specify the individuals of which it will be composed.
§ Mr. CROOKSasked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether he is aware that eleven years' ago an armament artificer with three and a-half years' service received 11s. 1d. a week more than armament artificers with the same service received immediately before the War; whether he has received any complaints from these men regarding the lack of promotion and low pay; and whether he can hold out any prospect of improvement in these respects; (2) if he can state the reason why sergeant-majors (armament artificers) who had to teach the temporary inspectors of ordnance machinery their work, were only given the rank of second-lieutenant, whilst the temporary inspectors were given the rank of full lieutenant; can he state why it is that eleven years' ago armament artificers with three years' service were made first-class staff-sergeants, whilst at the present time men with eleven years' service have not reached that position; and can he state the reason why these armament artificers are the only class of men in the Service who have to pass an examination before they are eligible to become first-class warrant officers?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe following answer refers to the first question, but the second part also answers the second question.
I am afraid I cannot accept my right hon. Friend's suggestion that these armament artificers have had to teach the temporary inspectors their work.
I am informed that all permanent commissions in the Royal Army Ordnance Corps which have been granted to Warrant Officers of the Armanent Artificer Section have been in the rank of lieutenant.
As regards the second part of the question, advancement of Armanent Staff Sergeants to the higher rate of pay as such has hitherto been governed by a fixed numerical establishment. This condition has, however, recently been modified, and an announcement as to the improved conditions will be made shortly.
As regards the third part of the question, I am informed that no such distinction, as my right hon. Friend suggests, between these armanent artificers and other classes in the service is recognised.