Only a few days to go: We’re raising £25,000 to keep TheyWorkForYou running and make sure people across the UK can hold their elected representatives to account.Donate to our crowdfunder
asked the Secretary of State for War if he will consider the desirability of exempting the 220 cadets who were at Woolwich, and the 549 cadets who were at Sandhurst, on the 17th October, 1925, the date of the promulgation of the revised rates of pay, from the incidence of these rates on the ground that these cadets were already committed to a military career, and in the case of cadets from the ranks the new order altered the material conditions under which they had signed a contract to serve for five years as officers?
As I stated in answer to a question on this subject on the 4th February, I cannot agree to any general departure from the rule that officers commissioned on or after 26th October, 1925, come under the new rates and conditions of pay. The question of a possible concession to Woolwich cadets who suffer in comparison with Sandhurst cadets of equal seniority is under consideration. My hon. and gallant Friend is mistaken in thinking that cadets from the ranks are required to sign a contract to serve for five years as officers.
That is a matter of opinion. It is always very hard when there is an alteration in conditions of service, and sometimes it may well be said that it is unfair, but I have tried to do what is fair in this particular case.