CO885-(18-19) — Page 356

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

19

Reference :-

C.O.885

19 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

10

1. The position of Governors who are retired Naval or Military Officers,

58. Naval and military officers are at present on the same footing in regard to Governor's pension as Governors who have had no previous service. They do not derive any benefit from the provisions of section 10 of the Act of 1865 in the event of their not qualifying for a Governor's pension, and it has been represented as a hard- ship that they should be treated as regards Governor's pension in the same way as those who have had no previous service under the Crown."

59. We have carefully considered the matter, but we think that it is not possible to make any alteration in this respect. These officers are in a specially favourable position, in that they are allowed to draw their military or naval retired pay without any abatement during the period of their employment in a civil capacity, and we do not feel ourselves able to recommend that this arrangement, which was made to meet the wishes of the self-governing Colonies, should be discontinued.

60. It would, of course, be possible to require in each case that a Governor of this class, who desired to be placed on the same footing in regard to Governor's pension as a Governor who has had previous civil service, should agree at the time of his appointment to the suspension of his retired pay while so employed, but we are satisfied that the prospective advantage of this arrangement would be so slight, if it existed at all, that no officer would be found willing to agree to it.

61. On the whole, therefore, we are of opinion that the present principle of regarding military or naval employment as a matter altogether apart from civil employment should be maintained, especially as there is reason to believe that any departure from this principle in the case of Governors would render it difficult to refuse a similar concession to the large number of men who receive civil employment in the home service after leaving the army or navy.

II. The position of Officers employed as Governors or in Colonial Civil Appoint- ments while still on the Active List.

62. At present Governors of this class are in an exceptional position, owing to what appears to have been an accident in drafting the Superannuation Act of 1887. Section 5 of the Act prohibits the same period being counted for superannuation allowances under the Acts of 1834, 1859, and that Act, and also for naval or military non-effective pay; but it contains no reference to pensions under the Governors' Pensions Acts, and there is therefore nothing to prevent a Governor counting his service towards a Governor's pension while at the same time qualifying for non- eflective pay or an increased rate of such pay. We do not think that this exception was intended, and we therefore recommend that the provisions of section 5 of the Superannuation Act of 1887 should be extended to the case of Colonial Governors.

63. If our recommendation is adopted, Governors who are still on the active list at the date of their appointment will be on the same footing as officers who take up Colonial civil appointments while still on the active list. We have carefully examined the position of these officers. So far as those are concerned who are still on the active list when their civil employment ceases, no hardship is inflicted by their not being entitled to any civil pension. A large proportion of them, however, retire from the navy or army in the course of their civil employment, and, according to existing rulings, they are not entitled to count for purposes of civil pension any portion of the time during which they are on the active list. The effect of this arrangement is usually that the officer draws neither pension nor retired pay in respect of a considerable portion of his service. Army officers, who form the great majority of those in regard to whom the question arises, do not ordinarily qualify until after 25 years' service for any higher rate of retired pay than they have earned after 15 years' service, and it is, therefore, quite possible that a man may, on retire- ment from the active list, have as much as nine years' army service to his credit in respect of which he does not draw any additional retired pay, while at the same time he loses the benefit, in respect of his ultimate civil pension, of such part (possibly the whole) of this period as has been spent as a Colonial Governor or in the civil service of a Colony.

11

64. We have considered whether the existing practice should not be altered so as to allow such persons to count for civil pension any part of the period of their civil employment during which they are on the active list but which does not eventually earn retired pay or gratuity, or carry any increased rate of retired pay or gratuity; but we have decided to confine ourselves to a statement of the arguments for and against such a change without making any express recommendation on the subject, which, we understand, is a matter of considerable importance as regards the home service and may be considered to be beyond the scope of the Committee, on which the War Office is not represented.

65.

In the first place, it has to be borne in mind that the principle by which a number of years' adlitional service is required to qualify for an addition to retired pay is the basis of the whole system of retired pay, and that the rates of retired pay are fixed on the assumption that the public should get the benefit derived from the fact that fractions of the qualifying period are not counted for extra retired pay. Again, the change would induce the officer to postpone as long as possible his decision as to retirement from the army or navy, in order to be able to obtain the maximum of advantage. In the meantime, also, he would retain the right to pension for his widow and children, while at the same time qualifying potentially for a civil pension for himself.

66. On the other hand, it is of considerable advantage to the Colonial service that he should defer his decision, since it cannot at once be known whether a par- ticular officer is permanently suited to Colonial employment, and it is desirable that officers of this class should be attracted to the Colonial service by the knowledge that they will have the opportunity of returning to the army or navy if they find them- selves unsuited to that service. Further, the delay in the officer's decision results in an economy to the public service whether he ultimately qualifies for an increased rate of retired pay or not, since he does not draw in the interval any part of the retired pay for which he has already qualified.

67. We are of opinion that the balance of argument is in favour of the change suggested, and would point out that the change would apparently not be contrary to the spirit of section 5 of the Superannuation Act of 1887, which only provides that the same period shall not count for pension from two sources and does not prevent a period from being counted for pension from one source when in the event it does not count for pension from another source.

68. Any decision which is come to in the case of commissioned officers would appear to be applicable also to warrant or non-commissioned officers and men.

69. There is one aspect of this question, independent of the actual matter of pension, which might have considerable importance under the existing_Governors' Pensions Acts. An army officer who after several years' Colonial civil service is appointed to a Governorship would apparently not be entitled to reckon as part of his service qualifying for à Governor's pension in respect of combined civil and Governor's service that portion of his civil service during which he is on the active list, and, if he were still on the active list when appointed Governor, he would apparently not have any " permanent civil service" within the meaning of section 10 of the Act of 1885, on which he could base a claim to pension in respect of his Governor's service, if he did not qualify for a Governor's pension.

70. This anomaly, it is true, will disappear if our proposals in regard to Governors' pensions are adopted, but a similar point would arise in connexion with those proposals in regard to which it is desirable that a definite ruling should be laid down. We have recommended that no minimum period of Governor's service should be required as a qualification for pension in the case of Governors with previous civil service, but that Governors whose previous service under the Crown has been in the navy or army shall be treated in regard to pension on the same footing as Governors who have no previous service. It would follow that a naval or military officer who retired from the active list during his tenure of a Colonial civil appointment and was subsequently appointed to a Colonial Governorship would be entitled to be con- sidered a Governor with previous civil service, but that, in a similar case where the officer was still on the active list when appointed Governor, he would have to be treated as a Governor without previous service, although he may actually have held a Colonial civil appointment for à considerably longer time than an officer in the former category.

71. The difficulty will be removed, or at all events reduced, if it is decided to

26200

C 2