§ Sir T. BRAMSDONasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if, in view of the fact that leading writers have to pass a qualifying examination for petty officer writer and be recommended for higher rating, and that petty officer writers have to be recommended for two years by their commanding officers before they are eligible for advancement, he will state what object the Admiralty have in view in abolishing automatic promotion in the writer branch, which has obtained for so many years; and what steps it is proposed to take to avoid the limitation in promotion that now obtains in other branches promoted from rosters?
§ Mr. AMMONWith regard to the first part of the question. I would refer the hon. Member to my reply of the 9th July. As regards the second part, there will be 1129W no special limitation in the promotion of writers entered under the new conditions, but they will be advanced in vacancies as is the practice in other branches of the service.
§ Sir T. BRAMSDONasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if, seeing that the Admiralty policy to do away with automatic promotion is considered to conduce to efficiency, he will state why this policy is not to be extended to the higher-paid ranks of sub-lieutenant to lieutenant, engineer-lieutenant to engineer-lieutenant-commander, surgeon-lieutenant to surgeon-lieutenant-commander, surgeon-lieutenant-commander to surgeon-commander, instructor-lieutenant to instructor-lieutenant-commander, paymaster-sub-lieutenant to paymaster-lieutenant, paymaster-lieutenant to paymaster-lieutenant-commander, and in the following classes; engine-room artificers, electrical artificers, ordnance artificers, shipwrights, mechanicians, and other artisan branches; and how it is proposed to counteract the loss of efficiency caused through the maintaining of a system which has become obsolete in other branches?
§ Mr. AMMONAs regards officers, promotion to the ranks mentioned is in all cases subject to the officer being considered to be professionally and otherwise qualified; the present system does not involve any loss of efficiency, and it is not the intention to make any change. As explained in my reply of the 9th July, automatic advancement does not exist in other branches of naval ratings except in the obsolescent armourer branch and for junior ratings who are acquiring experience for their proper work. Advancement from class to class within the same grade in the artificer, mechanician, and artisan branches is on a different footing from ordinary advancement, and it is not proposed to alter the present practice.