Skip to main content

Ministry Of Defence

Volume 497: debated on Wednesday 5 March 1952

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

Ex-Miners (Release)


asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence to make a further statement with regard to the releasing of miners still in the Forces.

As the hon. Member is aware, over 3,000 ex-miners have been released from the Forces to resume employment in the industry. Any extension of last year's scheme, in particular one to cover men who entered a regular engagement before 1st January, 1949, would result in the loss of experienced Regulars who cannot be spared. Such men are vital to the build-up of the Forces if these are to be able to meet their increasing commitments.

There are still 30,000 miners in the Forces. If we are to win the cold war we have to win the coal war, and if we are to win the coal war we have to have more miners. Will the Parliamentary Secretary not therefore look at this again and see that these men who can get the coal which the country vitally needs are given an opportunity to do so?

There has been no change of policy under the present Government and I think the recruiting figures for the miners are much more encouraging lately. I cannot give the undertaking.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that a few weeks ago the Prime Minister promised that he would reconsider this matter? From the way he spoke I expected a more favourable reply.

Is not the reply that the Parliamentary Secretary has given this afternoon very discouraging to the case for accepting Italian workers in the coal mines when British coal miners are not allowed to come back and produce the coal?

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that it is a sound policy to call up in peace-time those who are not required to be called up in war-time?

Accused Persons (Proceedings)


asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence whether he is aware that members of the Forces have been charged twice with the same offence, once before a service court-martial and subsequently before a civil court; and if he will obviate this practice by delaying the court-martial until after the proceedings in the civil court.

It is legally possible for the same set of circumstances to give rise to proceedings both before a civil court and before a service court-martial, but in practice the alleged offender is not tried for the same offence both by a civil court and by a court-martial.

Where jurisdiction is concurrent, it is the responsibility of the chief officer of police concerned, normally after consulting the commanding officer of the unit in which the accused person is serving, to decide whether proceedings should be taken in a civil court, or the man handed over to the service authorities.