asked the Secretary of State for War what quantities and types of Army equipment were held by East African forces in East Africa in November, 1945; and how much of these have subsequently been sold or transferred elsewhere.

There were numerous miscellaneous units as well as units of the fighting arms in East Africa in 1945. Details of the equipment held or of its subsequent disposal are not available.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that there were the equivalent of two divisions plus a number of garrison detachments in East Africa, all of which had full equipment? How is it, therefore, that he was able to state in a recent debate that there is not sufficient equipment in East Africa for an expansion of the Colonial Forces?

That equipment has not been left in East Africa.

Can the Secretary of State say how much of the equipment went to Soviet Russia and to Soviet satellite countries?

asked the Secretary of State for War, in view of the widespread ignorance on this matter, whether he will consult with the British Broadcasting Corporation with a view to arranging to use its services again to bring to the notice of all ranks the steps necessary to ensure their inclusion on the electoral register and the absent voters' list.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that only 67 per cent. of qualified Service voters in the Army placed themselves on the new electoral register, as compared with 79 per cent. of the qualified airmen and 95 per cent. of the qualified seamen; and whether he will reconsider the suggestion that every commanding officer of a military unit should be required to report annually how many qualified persons have and have not been registered.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a large number of private soldiers are still not given adequate information about the facilities under which they can be registered as electors; and whether he will take steps to improve the present arrangements.

asked the Secretary of State for War if all Service personnel will be given an opportunity to register their vote by proxy either prior to going overseas or immediately on arrival at their overseas destination.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will make a statement as to how the arrangements for the registration of Service voters as laid down in Regulation, 1950, No. 1250 (S88), under the Representation of the People (Scotland) Act, worked.

All eligible personnel who had not already submitted the Armed Forces declaration cards, which provide for the electoral registration of the soldier and for the appointment, if he wishes, of a proxy, were given the opportunity of doing so shortly before the qualifying dates for the 1951 spring register. Instructions were issued to all commanding officers, who were required to submit a certificate that the prescribed procedure had been carried out, and all ranks were informed of the matter by an information leaflet posted on notice boards throughout the Army. In addition, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary referred specially to the arrangements made for Service voters in a broadcast on 11th November, 1950. Similar arrangements, which it is hoped will include publicity by the British Broadcasting Corporation, are contemplated for the coming year. All ranks about to proceed overseas are reminded to appoint a proxy if they have not already done so.

Approximately 67 per cent. of Army personnel will be included in the 1951 spring register as compared with some 48 per cent. in the existing register, so we are making progress in this matter.

Can the right hon. Gentleman let the House know what percentage of those who were eligible availed themselves of the opportunity when it was last given?

I think 67 per cent. is the number of eligible personnel.

But what percentage of the 67 per cent. availed themselves of the opportunity?

Of voting in the last election?

Yes.

I cannot give that information.

As there is no reason to think that the soldier is less anxious to exercise his voting rights than the seaman and the airman, and as the Minister of Defence promised on 26th July last that the procedure which the Secretary of State has just outlined would be reconsidered if it failed—and I think it has failed, as the figures given in Question No. 5 show—will the Secretary of State say whether any further action is proposed, apart from that which he mentioned in his answer?

I would not agree that the procedure has failed. It has raised the percentage from 48 per cent. to 67 per cent. between the two registers, and we very much hope to raise it further by the next register.

Is the Secretary of State satisfied that the instructions given to commanding officers in Army Council Instruction 561 of 29th July, 1950, have been carried out, and if so, how does he account for the fact that approximately one-third of the Army will not be registered?

We go on pressing commanding officers to bring it to the notice of all ranks in the Army, and take the other steps of general publicity which I have detailed, and I am certainly willing to consider any further steps, but that is all I can do.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether units in the home commands have completed the forms at a greater rate than units overseas, and if so, can something be done to make extra propaganda about it overseas?

Not without notice.

In view of the very wide disparity in the percentages shown in Question No. 5, which seems to be a measure of the relative efficiency of the three Fighting Services, which is in inverse ratio to their representation in this House, could not the right hon. Gentleman consider the automatic registration of these men on reaching the age of 21 by the Army authorities, who have all their papers and know all about them?

I should have to consult the Home Secretary about that.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will give an assurance that no more tanks will be taken from existing British divisions in Germany in order to provide equipment for the fourth division in that country; and that hence forth this division will be equipped with tanks from this country and not at the expense of the others.

The hon. Member has been misinformed. He is perhaps thinking of the fact that tanks have recently been brought from Germany to this country for modifications. But they have been replaced in Germany on a one-for-one basis. The new armoured division now being formed will not, of course, be equipped at the expense of the armoured divisions now in Germany.

As the information given to me was up-to-date and came from an unchallengeable source, would the right hon. Gentleman look into the matter again?

The source is not only challengeable, but has been challenged and contradicted in the last few minutes.

asked the Secretary of State for War what arrangements are being made for periodic reliefs of British Forces in Korea.

National Service men in Korea are relieved in time for their release to be carried out in the United Kingdom on their due date. Reservists and Regular soldiers retained after the expiry of their period of Colour service will be released in accordance with the arrangements announced by the Prime Minister on 29th January, 1951. Other Regular soldiers are subject to the normal overseas tour rules, save where there are medical or compassionate reasons for earlier relief.

As it appears that we shall have forces in Korea now for perhaps a long time, could not the Secretary of State be a little bit more explicit with regard to the Regular Forces? Will the men do their full tour of overseas duty in Korea, or will there be any chance of a shorter period? Is it to be accepted that they will do their full time in the fighting line in Korea?

I should not like to commit myself on that. At the moment it is subject to the normal tour of overseas service, but I would not necessarily commit us to that rule for the future.

Will the right hon. Gentleman arrange that the instructions in regard to the release of reservists are made available for hon. Members to send to people who apply to us to know what the position is, because we are getting large numbers of letters from the relatives of the men, who want to know when they can return?

I have to answer another Question on that subject later today.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Royal Northumberland Fusiliers completed their foreign service—more than 30 years of it —last year, and are now back in full service in Korea? Will he make a statement about that?

That is a question about the release of units as a whole and not of individual men.

Will the right hon. Gentleman look at the matter again in the light, perhaps, of future circumstances?

If it becomes clear that troops will be in Korea for a long period, then arrangements will have to be made.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will make arrangements for a Parliamentary delegation to visit the British and United Nations Forces in Korea.

I have given careful consideration to this matter, but I do not feel able to accept the hon. Member's suggestion.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that there has been a great deal of information and misinformation about what is going on with regard to our troops in Korea, and would not such a delegation give an opportunity for Members of this House to get to know what the position is?

We have to consider that there is a unified command in Korea and the fact that delegations from many national Parliaments might wish to go there.

Is there any evidence that if such a Parliamentary delegation were set up, General MacArthur would be prepared to receive it?

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's statement the other day that he was hoping to be able to go to Korea, will he at least take one Member from this side of the House with him?

If I do go, a Member from that side may be very useful.

asked the Secretary of State for War on what date the Military Cross was awarded to Lieut. C. Lawrence for gallantry in Korea on 22nd September, 1950.

This award was published in the London Gazette on 16th February, 1951.

Can the Secretary of State for War explain why it took five months for this recommendation to be considered and a decision taken?

We received it on 19th January from the Commander-in-Chief, Far Eastern Land Forces. I am not aware what was the cause of the intermediate delay.

Will the right hon. Gentleman look into the question why there is always this delay of four or five months before awards are made?

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will make a statement about the release of reservists now serving in Korea.

Reservists will start leaving Korea next September.

Does that mean that everyone who has been called up specially from the Reserves for Korea will start leaving next September?

They will start leaving next September, but we cannot, of course, take all the reservists out of the units in one month, as some units have a very high proportion. That is why I said that they will start leaving next September.

asked the Secretary of State for War, in view of the importance of tea to soldiers on active service, if he will ensure that it is made available at 3s. a pound to men fighting in Korea.

The ration which troops in Korea are at present receiving is enough to provide about five pints of tea a day for each soldier. In these circumstances, it seems difficult to ask N.A.A.F.I. to sell extra tea at a heavy loss in Korea, which would be the effect of the hon. and gallant Member's suggestion.

Does not the Minister appreciate that a soldier must have tea to fight on, that he pays his taxes the same as anyone else and that he should have his tea subsidised so that he can fight?

He receives free over double the present civilian ration, so we are here talking about extra tea. It is difficult to pick out this item and ask N.A.A.F.I. to accept a heavy loss on it.

Is it not something of an improvement that at least we have reached the position that it is better to use tea than other drinks for these purposes?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, so far as tea and other commodities are concerned, N.A.A.F.I. prices are fixed on Hong Kong prices, whereas those serving in Korea are not getting the Hong Kong allowances but a lower rate? Cannot he balance their allowances with the Hong Kong allowances?

That is another question, but I think that there is a case there which we can certainly examine.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he has any further information about the case of Private McHardy, Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, who was killed in Korea in October, 1950. and whose mother is still awaiting news about his personal effects.

I regret that no further information is yet available concerning the personal effects of Private McHardy. The military authorities in Korea have been asked by cable to report on the position and the relatives will be informed as soon as any information is received.

Is the Secretary of State aware of the grave anxiety and worry it has caused the parents of this boy not to receive any intimation about the boy's effects, even after writing to the War Office on 31st December and not getting a reply till 23rd January: and will he try to expedite this matter?

We have cabled urgently to the Far East.

asked the Secretary of State for War what progress has been made with the issue of the Meritorious Service Medal.

Orders have been placea for the production of the additional medals required. A Royal Warrant covering the new conditions for the issue of the medal has now been signed, and the issue of medals to all those registered for the Meritorious Service Medal will begin shortly.

Can the Secretary of State give us any indication of what "begin shortly" means? Will it be one year, or two years, or an indefinite period, before the issue is made?

Well, I think we can stick to the anticipation I gave the hon. and gallant Gentleman some time ago, that the process would be completed in two years from 27th June, 1950.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he can give an assurance that the policy of demolishing pillboxes and fortified points, particularly along our coasts, has now been discontinued.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given him on 14th February.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I got no proper answer? Will he, at any rate, say whether the cost of this disarmament will be included in the re-armament bill?

I can assure the hon. Member that no pillboxes or other defences of military value are being demolished.

Will the right hon. Gentleman please look into this again, because it necessitates only a motor drive through any part of England to discover that pillboxes are being demolished at river crossings and railway crossings? It is a waste of labour, if nothing else.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is now in a position to make a statement on the suggested bulk parcel scheme for the Forces overseas.

We have gone into the bulk parcel scheme very carefully, but we have found that it has certain disadvantages.

It is clearly impossible under such a scheme to give the individual soldier in Korea any freedom of choice. His relative would only be able to send him a standard parcel irrespective of his personal tastes. Again, N.A.A.F.I. cannot itself guarantee delivery of the parcel to the soldier and there might be difficulty in investigating complaints by senders.

In these circumstances we have tried to find an alternative way of achieving the purpose which I am sure the House had in mind, namely, that friends and relatives might be able quickly and cheaply to send gifts to men in Korea. Hitherto, under exchange control regulations they have not been able to remit money, but we have now decided to allow anyone to send postal orders to any member of His Majesty's Forces in Korea or Japan up to the value of £2 at any one time. The postal orders can be readily cashed and the money used to buy what the individual man prefers. I have arranged with N.A.A.F.I. greatly to increase their stock in order to meet the increased demand.

I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a list of the items already held by N.A.A.F.I. and of the additional items which are to be stocked.

In view of the considerations I have mentioned, I therefore think it is better and more practical to send the money. As an additional concession we have been able to arrange that this postal order scheme will apply not only to Korea and Japan but to all other British Forces overseas to whom it has been impossible, hitherto to send remittances by postal order. The scheme will come into operation on Monday next.

While regretting, obviously, that it has not been possible to arrange for parcels to be sent, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware how very much pleasure at the trouble that he and the other Service Ministers have taken will be felt by all relatives of serving men? I should like to thank him very much indeed.

As the bulk parcels scheme has now been found to encounter serious difficulties will the Secretary of State now look again at the question of a reduced air mail rate for the smaller weights, which was deferred while this matter was under consideration?

This scheme is made just because we do think that the cost was prohibitive of making this substantial concession on air mail rates. I think I ought to make clear that it is still perfectly possible to send parcels to Korea by sea.

In view of the statement made by my right hon. Friend, which will be received favourably by the relatives of the men in the Forces, naturally, will he consider the question of the prices in some parts of the world where our troops are serving? Is he aware that it costs 9s. to send half a pound of sweets to Korea? Surely he can find some means of providing cheaper supplies?

Could the right hon. Gentleman arrange with N.A.A.F.I. greatly to reduce prices, so that these arrangements may be of some value?

N.A.A.F.I. prices are another question, but I have gone into them very carefully. Their prices are based on prices in Hong Kong, Japan and the rest of the Far East. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] Because all N.A.A.F.I. stores all over the world charge the current price levels in the respective parts of the world. It is very difficult to ask them to change that practice.

Would my right hon. Friend consider allowing these sums of money which may be sent, since they are to be limited to the relatively small sum of £2, to be convertible into dollar scrip or, at least, Japanese yen, to provide a much wider choice of purchases?

They will be convertible under the same rules as all other moneys held by the soldiers. I would emphasise that it is to be £2 at any one time.

asked the Secretary of State for War what is the establishment strength of the Gurkha units in the British Army; and what is their present strength.

The establishment of the Gurkha units in the British Army is approximately 10,300. At present all units are up to full strength.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say, particularly in view of the invaluable work being done by the Gurkhas in Malaya, why the establishment should not be raised and, if there is any reason, what is it?

The establishment is fixed partly in consultation with the Government of Nepal and has to be carefully considered. I entirely agree about the excellent service the Gurkhas are giving in Malaya.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many National Service men are ex-miners of six months' standing in the industry.

This information is not available but, as my hon. Friend has already been informed, the number is small.

Just because the number is small, will my right hon. Friend consider extending the release to National Service men, as has already been arranged for the Regular soldiers?

We think that there are quite insignificant numbers of National Service men involved.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that applications have been made by experienced miners, including a miner from Leicester, for release from the Forces to return to the mines, and would it not be useful if these men were allowed to return to the mines, particularly in view of his statement that there are only a few of them in the Forces?

If there are any individual cases of miners whose applications have been turned down, perhaps my hon. Friend would let me have them.

How is it that this information is not available? Are not particulars taken of every man's civilian occupation at the time of his joining?

We would have to examine the documents of every National Service man in the Army.

Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many coal-miners are in the Services; how many have applied for release from the Services in order to return to work in the mines; and which active theatres of war are excluded from the general directive enabling miners to return to their civilian jobs.

Records are not available to show how many coalminers are in the Services. Instructions regarding the release of coalminers were not issued until 23rd February. It is therefore unlikely that many applications for release have yet been received. Only soldiers serving under the Unified Command in the Japanese and Korean theatre are not eligible for release under this scheme.

While most commanding officers are courteous and co-operative when miners in the ranks approach them, is my right hon. Friend aware that some are not, and that it is obviously a complicated matter for men to know whether or not they are eligible for release? Will he see that when officers are approached they give a proper explanation on whether or not a man is eligible for release?

Certainly. Perhaps my hon. Friend will give me particulars of any case she has in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for War by what date he anticipates that warning notices will have been sent to all Z reservists required for service this year.

The last of these notices will be dispatched by Saturday, 10th March. As, however, they will have been sent to the reservist's last recorded address there may be some delay before the warning notice is received in cases where the reservist has recently changed his address and the warning notice has to be reissued.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether Class Z reservists who are not being recalled for 15 days' training may volunteer for such training.

Arrangements have already been made to call up the Z reservists needed to meet the requirements of units to be trained at higher establishment this year. Consequently, there is no scope for any considerable flow of volunteer Z reservists, but it may be possible to accept a few individual volunteers to take the place of recalled reservists who are medically unfit, provided they are of the ranks and skill required. Any such reservists would have to be called up for training in accordance with the procedure provided in the Reserve and Auxiliary Forces (Training) Bill.

I strongly recommend, however, that Z reservists who have not been sent a warning notice, but who wish to train, should join either the Territorial Army or the Supplementary Reserve.

With a view to reducing, as far as possible, the number of 40-year-old men and men with five or six years' war service who are at present being recalled for 15 days' training, will my right hon. Friend pursue a little more vigorously the possibility of encouraging men to volunteer to take the place of these older men?

If we get the volunteers, we try to fit them in.

asked the Secretary of State for War why arrangements have been made for some Z reservists and Territorial Regiments in which they serve to attend camp for 14 days only, including travelling time: and why advantage is not to be taken of the full fifteen days' training period.

All reservists who are recalled for training this year will be recalled for a 15-day training period, which will include travelling time to and from their homes.

Is the Secretary of State aware that in one command, of which I can give him details afterwards, instructions have been issued that training periods will be 14 days only, although the period is nominally—so the instruction says—for 15 days? Is not 15 days little enough time in which to give these men refresher training without throwing away one day unnecessarily?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will give me particulars of that.

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of Class Z reservists called for special training who are above the age of 35 years.

This information is not readily available.

In view of the fact that it is likely to be a very small proportion of the whole, would the right hon. Gentleman consider, in the event of an emergency necessitating a general call-up, giving an undertaking not to call up men over 35 years of age in the first 12 months of such emergency provided they are members of the Civil Defence Forces?

I do not think we can give such an undertaking.

In view of the fact that the then Minister of Labour gave an assurance in September last that Z reservists over 40 years of age were free to join Civil Defence, can the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that none of the men referred to in this Question is over 40?

No, because the age limit is stated as 45. Although very few are over 40, the actual limit for Z reservists is 45.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will make a statement relating to the circumstances in which Private G. Plant and Private D. C. Walker were killed recently in Malaya.

On 22nd February a patrol of one officer and nine other ranks from the 1st Battalion, the Worcestershire Regiment, with two police constables, went to investigate a report that terrorists had burned vehicles between Labis and Segamat in North Johore. Some distance from the vehicles they came under heavy fire from a terrorist force estimated to number a hundred, and five other ranks were immediately killed or fatally wounded.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that Private Plant was under 19 years of age when he was killed and Private Walker was only just 19 years of age, and that Private Walker had just previously been in hospital for an operation and had had no sick leave? Does the right hon. Gentleman think that it is right that these men, who had a total service of only four and a half months before they left England, should be sent out to fight in a most difficult type of jungle warfare?

I am answering further Questions on the length of service of these men this afternoon, and perhaps I may be permitted to reply to this supplementary question then.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many soldiers under 19 years of age are serving in Malaya.

I have called for this information and will write to the hon. and gallant Member.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in the meantime, tens of thousands of parents are in great distress about this matter, and is it not possible, with nearly one million men in the Fighting Forces, to avoid sending out soldiers of 18 years of age to fight in this most difficult war?

I do not think that we ought to alter the age limit for going to Malaya. It is an intensely tragic thing if any soldier is killed in Malaya or anywhere else, but his exact age as to months does not seem to me to be the main consideration.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he said he would answer further Questions on this matter later, and as this is the main issue concerning the question which we are raising, will he vouchsafe a little more information on this vital subject to the House at the present time?

I will speak on it, but there are several more Questions on the subject. I gave, for example, the exact ages of some men who were killed in Malaya the other day. I think that it would be more appropriate on those Questions.

Surely, with regard to the Minister's remark that the main consideration is not whether a boy is killed at 18 or not, the question is whether he has had sufficient training?

I am asked to give the length of training which these men had, and I do give it in answer to a Question on the Order Paper today.

On the main issue of policy, will the right hon. Gentleman give us an assurance that this policy of sending young men abroad with only four months or so of training will not be continued, because it is causing grave anxiety in the minds of many families at the present time?

The number of months training I will certainly consider with my military advisers, but they are convinced that the present regulations are correct.

Apart from the present regulations, and as this is a question of policy which would alter the regulations, can the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that, in view of the perfectly legitimate anxieties on this subject, he will review the whole question of sending young men abroad at this age?

I think it is a question of training rather than of age. I repeat that we certainly must not send men abroad who are inadequately trained, and that my advisers are confident that that is not being done.

Was not an undertaking given that no young man under 19 years of age would be sent abroad? If so, does not that apply to Malaya?

No, Sir. An undertaking was given that no young man under 19 would be sent to Korea, but the age for sending abroad to any other theatre is 18 years 3 months.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise, after his own experience in Malaya, that jungle warfare is more difficult than open warfare? If his advisers tell him that four months' training is sufficient, will not he consider getting new advisers?

asked the Secretary of State for War what training was received prior to leaving this country by Privates G. Plant and D. C. Walker, who were recently killed in Malaya.

These soldiers each received 10 weeks' basic training and six weeks' continuation training, together with some further training during the time they were being prepared for drafting.

How can the right hon. Gentleman make a statement like that without taking into account the period spent in kitting-up when they first join, menial duties and embarkation and other leaves? Does he not think that this is quite an inadequate period, and now that more men are in the Army will he consider giving these men at least six or seven months' proper training?

We can consider this matter, but it is the firm view of my advisers that this is an adequate basic training. Of course, the training does not stop when the men go overseas.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that training must obviously be related to age? Will he seriously consider the views of many Members on this side of the House that no soldier should be sent abroad into a fighting area unless he is over 19 years of age, as in the case of Korea?

That can be considered, but so far the rule has been 19 for Korea and 18 years 3 months for other parts.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he will reconsider this matter, as 10 weeks plus six weeks is surely a quite insufficient training before sending troops into a fighting area?

It can be considered.

The right hon. Gentleman has said that in such cases as this the primary consideration is length of training and not age, but if he had adequate forces at his disposal, would he still take the view that there is sufficient training and that 18 years 3 months is a high enough age?

I think that the matter is rather one of training than of age, but I am advised that the training is thoroughly adequate for the purpose.

Is it the firm conviction of my right hon. Friend's military advisers that 16 weeks' basic training is sufficient to enable a soldier, whether he be 18 or 19, to go into action in places like Malaya?

Yes, that is their view, that the 16 weeks' training is an adequate period for the purpose these troops are called upon to fulfil in these theatres.

Would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that 16 weeks' training before leaving this country might be sufficient provided that when the man got to Malaya he was then given at least four weeks' training in jungle country be- fore being sent out on active operations? Is it not clear from the figures he has given to the House that these men did not have even one week's training before they were sent straight into active operations; and is there not something very wrong about that?

When my right hon. Friend repeats that 19 is the age for Korea, is he aware that at least one young man was sent to Korea at the age of less than 18½ and has been killed; and, while it is true that this young man was not in the Army but in the Royal Marines, should not the age be uniform for all three Services?

That is a different question not entirely within my responsibility.

If 16 weeks' training is sufficient before a soldier is sent to Malaya, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the two years' period of National Service is a gross misuse of manpower?

No, Sir. The purpose of National Service is not merely training. I must make it perfectly clear to the House that one of the main purposes of National Service is to reinforce the active Army.

On a point of order. In view of the right hon. Gentleman's reluctance to give an assurance that he will look into this matter again, I beg to give notice that I shall raise it on the Adjournment at the very earliest opportunity.

Further to that point of order. In view of what the hon. and gallant Gentleman has just said, does that invalidate further supplementary questions on Question No. 34?

We must wait till we hear the answer to the Question.

asked the Secretary of State for War the ages of the five men of the 1st Battalion, The Worcestershire Regiment, who were reported to have been killed last week in a bandit ambush; whether they were members of the Regular Army or were National Service men; on what date they were enlisted; what were their ages: and how much individual and collective train- ing they had had before arriving in Singapore.

Their ages respectively were 22 years 2 months; 20 years 9 months; 19 years; 18 years 11 months; and 18 years 11 months. Two were Regular soldiers and the others National Service men. All had received the requisite 16 weeks' training before being sent to Malaya. I will, with permission circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the dates of their enlistment and their ages at the time.

is the Secretary of State aware that there is a widespread feeling, in every home in the country, that the age of 18 or 19 is too young to send these boys into action against seasoned troops? Why not let them grow up a bit and, above all, give them more training before they take part in this most highly skilled form of guerilla warfare.

Changing the age would really involve changing the age for National Service, which is a much wider question. We have already discussed the point about the training.

rose——

I think this had better be debated on the Adjournment, as notice has been given.

On a point of order. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman who has given notice to raise this on the Adjournment starts balloting now he will only get the Adjournment in a fortnight's time. In a fortnight's time the Easter Adjournment is coming on, and in view of the wide interest in this matter on both sides of the House, would you consider allowing a certain amount of time to it on the Easter Adjournment?

I think the hon. Gentleman has forgotten that next Thursday we discuss the Army Estimates, and it would be perfectly in order to debate the matter then.

Further to that point of order. As this Question relates very closely to my constituency and refers to the Worcestershire Regiment, and as I have had a great many letters from my constituents about this matter, might I ask, with great respect, whether you would allow me to put a supplementary question?

I am sorry, but I thought the hon. Gentleman would have risen on the previous Question which dealt with the same matter. If it is his constituency, I will certainly allow a supplementary question.

Is the Secretary of State aware that a great many people in Worcester have written to me about this matter, many of whom have relations in the Worcestershire Regiment; that every one of them has expressed the opinion that 18 is much too young, that the amount of training given is much too little, and that they are extremely worried about the whole thing?

I think the training is the essence of the matter rather than the age, but I cannot go beyond what I have already said.

On a point of order. On Question 33 the hon. and gallant Member for Macclesfield (Air Commodore Harvey) said he would raise the matter on the Adjournment, and I then asked you whether that invalidated supplementary questions on this Question. I did not understand you, Mr. Speaker, to answer then.

My answer was that I thought we had better hear the answer to Question 34 before I gave a Ruling. Having heard the answer, I think the matter should be discussed on the Adjournment about which notice was given. That is my Ruling.

asked the Secretary of State for War why his Department is employing over 200,000 civilians outside headquarters; and what is the precentage relation of this number to the number of troops organised in fighting divisions.

The functions of these 191,000 civilians are described in Vote 4 of the Army Estimates. This is some 86 per cent. of the 223,000 men who my right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence said on 14th February could be regarded as fighting elements.

Does the right hon. Gentleman really think that it is necessary to have 200,000 bowler hats to look after only 50 per cent. more soldiers?

I do not think that they all wear bowler hats, because a good many of them are Chinese and Malayans.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will cause a review to be made of all camps now in process of demolition to make sure that nothing is demolished that may be again required in case of war.

Mobilisation requirements are now being reviewed to determine to what extent camps surplus to peace-time requirements should be considered for this purpose.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a very large camp in the area of Witley is in process of being demolished? Will he halt that process until a decision is arrived at, otherwise it is within the bounds of possibility that it will have to be rebuilt?

We are not handing over any further camps to the Ministry of Works at the present moment, but I do not think we should consider halting the demolition of camps where the work has actually begun.

asked the Secre tary of State for War what consultations he has had with the Minister of Defence with a view to combining the recruiting centres in Shrewsbury into a joint recruiting centre.

Consultation between the three Services, the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Works about the provision of joint recruiting centres is continuous. It has been agreed that a joint recruiting centre should be established in Shrewsbury as soon as a suitable property becomes available.

While accepting the fact that it is desirable that the Services should occupy one building rather than three separate buildings, is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that the interests of the Army will not be prejudiced in any way by being joined to the other Services?

I see no reason to suppose that.

asked the Secretary of State for War on what date he intends to carry out the move of the Infantry and General Service Corps Records Office from York to Preston.

The move of this office depends on the construction of new accommodation at Preston. This project is only in the planning stage and may take some years to complete.

Will the Minister bear in mind that a great many of the staff at the Records Office have already been uprooted from Edinburgh? Will he give an undertaking that before re-uprooting them he will give them at least 12 months' notice?

I do not think they need be alarmed at the tenor of my statement today.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state the normal delay between Government planning and Government action?

In this case it is a reassuring period.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many ex-officers have been re-engaged as Territorial adjutants on consolidated rates of pay; and if he will bring these rates into line with other Service emoluments.

I regret that the figures are not readily available. The consolidated rates are at present under review.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that since these officers were engaged they have been asked to take on a considerable amount of extra work, and that therefore their remuneration should show some improvement?

I think there is a case there for consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for War what are his plans for the 1st Cadet Battalion, King's Royal Rifle Corps.

On 1st January, 1951, this battalion was amalgamated with the 1st City of London Cadet Regiment, in which it provides two companies. These companies continue to wear the badge of and are affiliated to the King's Royal Rifle Corps.

Could the Secretary of State make this point rather more clear? Will this battalion, which has battle honours and has distinguished itself in three wars, be losing its identity, which is frightfully important?

To be quite frank, I think there is a partial loss of identity, and I entirely agree that that is a great pity and a very sad thing. Nevertheless, for reasons which have been given at length in this House, I am afraid these amalgamations are inevitable.

I understand that there must be certain re-organisation, but in view of this battalion's particular record, starting in the South African War, could not the right hon. Gentleman do something rather less drastic, as otherwise this will deal a very severe blow at the cadet movement as a whole?

This particular arrangement has been agreed to by the two colonels-commandant of the King's Royal Rifle Corps after very careful consideration, and I should be loth to try to modify it now.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the Vickers gun is still the standard medium machine gun for the British Army; and what steps are being taken to replace it with an equally reliable but more modern weapon.

The Vickers medium machine gun is still the standard medium machine gun for the British Army. A new medium machine gun is under development.

In view of the paramount necessity for increase fire power, will the right hon. Gentleman use his influence to see that an early decision is arrived at in this matter?

Yes, Sir, but I would not like to denigrate the Vickers machine gun, which is a very valuable weapon. We have a new weapon under development.

I possibly know as much about the Vickers machine gun as the right hon. Gentleman does, but is he not aware that there are no fewer than 16 stoppages in this gun, which prevents it from firing, and that it is a very out-of-date weapon?