asked the Secretary of State for War if he will cut down the frequency of sending out Form D406 to Z reservists, in view of the fact that it would be sufficient to send out this form once a year only.

Yes, Sir. This will be done.

Is the Minister aware that he will receive grateful thanks from many people for doing that?

Hear, hear.

asked the Secretary of State for War how far the factors originally determining the call-up of Z reservists, namely, specialised knowledge, first out, first back and location of training near home, have been operated in respect of all the men called to serve.

Selection of Z reservists to train in 1952 was governed by qualification for the particular job; the principle of last out, first back; and, in the case of Territorial Army units, the location of the drill hall.

Is the Minister aware that I have asked how far these factors determining the call-up have been operating, because there is a great deal of criticism that men do not possess specialist knowledge, that we do not adhere to the "last out, first back" principle, and that we are not posting men near their homes?

I can only answer for my own period during the Z Reserve call-up, and my experience is that one criticism was mainly on the geographical side. We did a good deal to get men called up in the areas where they live, so that there was a chance of their joining a Territorial Army unit afterwards. As far as the other two points are concerned, I am not claiming—and I do not think my predecessor would claim—that the call-up was perfect, but those were the two principles which were aimed at. Although sometimes they were not achieved, an attempt was made to make them 100 per cent. successful.

asked the Secretary of State for War to make clear his intentions in the event of a state of emergency arising in regard to those who have undergone Z training and to those he proposes to exclude from this training, respectively; and what is to be expected by both classes as to the period when they will be recalled.

Broadly speaking, those Z reservists who have undergone training in the past two years would be required for recall during the first months of an emergency: of those who have not been trained, some would be required in the first months, but the majority would be required at a later stage. As more trained National Service men become available in the Reserve Army, some of these men will be needed later, others will no longer be required.

Is the Minister aware that his recent announcement that he would finish calling up the Z Reserve has caused a great deal of disquiet among persons who have undergone their Z Reserve training; and that his reply that they will be called up first would appear to indicate that those who have been shut out from the Z Reserve are in a much more favourable position and will not be required?

The hon. Lady will appreciate that the whole of this scheme was devised in order that we shall have a more efficient and more rapid mobilisation, and, therefore, the men who were called up were those who were last out. who, especially, would have various jobs to do and who would be required at an early stage of mobilisation. I hope that mobilisation will not take place, but in any scheme we have to call up those men who are most vital in an emergency.

asked the Secretary of State for War why he has decided not to call up the Class Z Reserve in 1953.

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to a Question on this subject last Tuesday.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will review the age limits for the Z Reserve.

I explained the present postion in my reply to a Question on this subject on 25th March this year. I cannot at the present time add to that statement.

In view of the fact that it is now considered that we have adequate reserves and that Z reservists are not to be called up next year, is it not time that people over 40 should be relieved of their liability to the Z Reserve so that they may volunteer for some other form of service?

The whole question of the future obligations, both of Z reservists and of men now doing part-time service, is under review, and I hope to be able to make a statement or some announcement to the House, although I could not give a date at the present moment.

asked the Secretary of State for War the mileage laid down in his regulations beyond which all military personnel travelling on duty are bound to travel by train.

It is our policy to use the railways for duty travel whenever possible.

Does my right hon. Friend mean by that answer that commanding officers are debarred from using cheaper transport, where it is available?

No, Sir. On duty travel, such journeys should be performed by rail, except when that method would clearly entail serious delay or marked inconvenience. Any journeys of a private nature may be taken in the way the individual likes.

Does my right hon. Friend mean that the cost is not taken into consideration?

These journeys are carried out on warrants, and, normally, where a warrant is issued, it is for a railway journey.

asked the Secretary of State for War the cost of travel incurred for 77 apprentices, who travelled from Arborfield to Harrogate on duty, for the long weekend, commencing 7th November, 1952.

On this occasion. 61 apprentices travelled to Harrogate, and' the cost of travel was £68 8s. It was paid' for from the Arborfield School's sports fund.

asked the Secretary of State for War why the Regimental Pay Office of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, Leeds, is to be moved to a hutted camp at Ovendon Park, near Halifax; and whether he has considered any compensation for the increased expenses to the staff who may live in Leeds.

My hon. Friend has written to the hon. Member about this. We must get this Pay Office into permanent accommodation. The civilian staff will be entitled to various allowances to compensate for the extra expense of setting up house in Halifax and if, temporarily,. a householder cannot find accommodation in the Halifax area, he will be able to claim refund, within certain limits, of the extra cost of daily travel to his work in Halifax.

Will the Minister say why it has taken his Department such a long time to comply with the request for information and why it has been necessary to put down a Parliamentary Question to get an answer to a letter which was sent two months ago? Secondly, why, generally speaking, in their relationships with the staffs does his Department seem to handle this matter in rather a ham-handed manner?

Changes of this kind are always unwelcome when they start. The Regimental Pay Office was unsatisfactory through being scattered in the old days in requisitioned accommodation. They will now go to a central place where they will all he together, and I hope that very soon the staffs will settle down in Halifax. If there are any particular difficulties I shall be only too glad to attend to them.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the danger of war has receded, he will now review the manpower position in the Army.

I am always trying to economise in the use of manpower, especially since the total strength of the Army is likely to decrease by about 15,000 in the next two years. Unfortunately, our overseas and cold war commitments are not necessarily reduced even if a hot war becomes less likely.

In view of the large numbers of complaints, of which the Minister has already had evidence this afternoon, and of the fact that production of equipment for the men in the Armed Forces is being reduced and of the repeated Ministerial statements that the danger of war is receding, is not this a time for some special inquiry, apart from the review which the Minister is making, to see whether some new comprehensive measures cannot be introduced into the system of the Army in order to reduce the number of men required?

When one considers the number of men called up annually, I do not believe that the number of complaints is really excessive. Although there have been several of these special inquiries in the past, it has been found that they have not had really a very considerable effect in practical reduction, partly due to the lack of specialised knowledge which is very difficult for any impartial civilian to obtain. By and large, I believe that the inquiries which I have now set up will produce good effects in the coming year.

Does my right hon. Friend not think it strange that in view of the assertions of the other side of the House that the Conservative Government would increase the risk of war they should now be pressing for a reduction in the Service?

Has the right hon. Gentleman read the report by Sir George Bailey and Mr. John Little which was published before the war? If not, will the right hon. Gentleman read it in order to learn the lessons from it?

I am obliged to the hon. Member.

asked the Secretary of State for War to give an estimate of the number of Regular soldiers required to enable compulsory service to be abolished and to reduce the period of National Service by six months.

The total abolition of National Service would require an addition of some 175,000 Regulars, including nearly 5,000 officers, over and above the present numbers. The reduction of the period of full-time National Service by six months would require an increase of about 50,000 Regulars.

Does he right hon. Gentleman not think it more desirable now that he should refer to his previous argument and try and get those people rather than insist that this two-year period is essential?

I am, and I always have been, in favour of increasing Regular recruiting, which has doubled, but I personally believe that to increase it to this extent is not within the bounds of possibility at present.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman remember what he said when he was on this side of the House, namely, that if we were to step up Regular recruitment, six months compulsory service would be adequate? Why does he not do precisely what he asked the Labour Government to do, that is increase the rate of pay?

The answer to that is very simple. When I made those remarks it was before Korea, when our overseas commitments were very small. Secondly, I would remind hon. Members that right hon. Gentlemen opposite deferred putting up the pay until it was two years too late. Had they done it earlier they would have avoided a big run-out.

asked the Secretary of State for War what regiments from North and South Staffordshire are to take part in the ceremonial duties in connection with the Coronation.

The North and South Staffordshire Regiments and the Staffordshire Yeomanry will be represented in the Coronation procession and on street lining duties.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is a wise policy to draw troops for these ceremonial parades, if possible, from all branches of the Army in order to avoid the impression that regiments which may not be quite so famous historically as others, although they are equally courageous, are not to be represented?

I have been through the matter of representation for the Coronation with great care, and I have tried to do my best for everyone, but it is not an easy task.

asked the Secretary of State for War the cost of the new British Army of the Rhine headquarters; and for what purpose it is being constructed.

The cost of this new headquarters is likely to be about 130 million deutschmarks, which is now being met from German occupation costs. The move of this headquarters is being carried out for strategic reasons.

Does the answer mean that the cost of this grandiose scheme will fall upon the German Government and not upon British funds? As the amount is equivalent to £12,500,000, is it not fantastic that at this time so much money should be spent on headquarters for B.A.O.R.? Is B.A.O.R. going on for ever?

As to the first part of the supplementary question, that is dependent upon a certain number of factors into which I cannot go now. As to the necessity for the move of the headquarters, the hon. and gallant Gentleman will appreciate that as it is situated at present it is the reverse of the Duke of Plaza-Toro, being in front of instead of behind the foremost line of defence.

How many batmen and officers' servants will be required to maintain this grandiose headquarters?

I shall require notice of that question.

In view of 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 bandsmen there are in the Army; and how much of their time is devoted to military training.

About 4,900 men, women and boys. All men undergo an initial course of military training and as combatant soldiers are liable for any form of military duty for which they may be needed.

Does that number include the members of the Government engaged in blowing their own trumpet?

asked the Secretary of State for War how many industrial civilians have been dismissed in the past 12 months; and how far they have been replaced by National Service men.

The information asked for is not available centrally in my Department, but I am making inquiries and will write to the hon. Member.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will make a statement on the manpower strength of the anti-aircraft branch of the Army in the United Kingdom which would be available in the event of an emergency.

No, Sir.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why he declines to give an answer? Does he understand that I am not asking for specific figures but put down the Question to enable him to make a general statement indicating whether the position is satisfactory or not?

The right hon. Gentleman's Question asked me to give the manpower strength of the anti-aircraft branch of the Army, and the reasons for my not giving the information are identical with those given by the right hon. Gentleman himself on 22nd February, 1949.

If the right hon. Gentleman wishes both of us to consult the columns of HANSARD to witness our respective statements on this subject, I shall be glad to meet him, but will he address himself to the Question? I am asking him whether he will make a statement on the strength of the anti-aircraft branch. I do not ask for the actual figures. I want to know whether, in his opinion, the position is satisfactory. If it is not satisfactory, will he give us the reason why?

That is not the exact Question on the Order Paper. I may have misunderstood the right hon. Gentleman's Question, but I thought he asked for the exact strength. However, on the whole the present position is satisfactory.

Is not the manpower and recruiting position of the anti-aircraft units of the Army very seriously jeopardised by the knowledge among many people who know anything about antiaircraft artillery that the present equipment on issue is hopelessly obsolete? Until there is some evidence that the Government will provide equipment capable of remote detonation by electronic means. will not that situation continue?

We are doing our best on the equipment side, but the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that the height and speed of modern bomber aircraft make the task of the anti-aircraft gun an extremely difficult one. I can assure him that in the matter of guided missiles a very high priority for research is being given.

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of military personnel sleeping in two-tier bunks at Didcot, Portsmouth and elsewhere; and what steps he is taking to have this inconvenient and unhealthy practice stopped.

There are 420 soldiers sleeping in two-tier bunks at Didcot and none at Portsmouth. I am obtaining the numbers elsewhere, and will write to the hon. Member within the next few days I would like to do away with this practice, but it is caused by shortage of accommodation. I think it is preferable to closely spaced single beds or using leaky huts. The health aspect is closely watched and so far has not been adverse

Whilst thanking the Minister for his detailed statement, may I ask if he is aware that huts erected to meet the needs of 15 or 16 soldiers by the use of two-tier bunks are now accommodating 32 soldiers, which makes it extremely difficult for these people to have the ordinary conveniences of putting their kit away, and means that twice the proper number of people are using the available space? Is not this really a very unhappy set of circumstances, in addition to being very unhealthy?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I should like to build a lot of new barracks, but the building capacity is not in the country. Where men share a bunk they have double cupboards and double the space for hanging up their kit.

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of civilians employed in the stores at Didcot and the number of military personnel.

The numbers are 2,344 civilians and 666 military.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will consult his hon. Friend the Minister of Pensions concerning the possibility of using the Ministry of Pensions Welfare Service to send welfare officers to interview next of kin when Army personnel are killed in preference to the abrupt method of sending a telegram.

I have looked into this procedure again and, as a result, I think that even if my hon. Friend could undertake the task it would be likely to cause serious and probably distressing delays which the present system does avoid.

Does the Minister realise that a personal visit from a sympathetic person such as is to be found on the welfare staff of the Ministry of Pensions would do a great deal to soften the blow and would not be so abrupt as the receipt of a telegram? Will he have another look at this matter?

I am aware of that point, but to do as the hon. Gentleman suggests would entail calling on a very large staff. We have special arrangements whereby a man can ask for a telegram to be sent not to his next of kin but to another individual, and where the next of kin is in hospital that is also done.

asked the Secretary of State for War the amount of pension Field Marshal Slim will receive on retirement; and what are his regulations with regard to the acceptance of a salary for employment after retirement in such a case.

After ceasing to be employed, Field Marshal Slim receives under Royal Warrant a rate of half pay. These retiring awards are payable irrespective of subsequent employment outside the Services.

Does not it seem rather ridiculous to retire a man and pension him when he is fit enough to take on a job at £10,000 a year? He is not a disabled man; he is retired. Why give him a pension if he is capable of doing a job at £10,000 a year?

Field Marshal Slim, as a Field Marshal, is permanently on the active list. He is now fulfilling a very important duty, and I feel that he has more than earned what the country is giving him.

asked the Secretary of State for War how far the junior officers in the Territorial Army receive training while in the Service; and what form it takes.

A junior officer in the Territorial Army is trained to carry out his job and to fit himself for the next higher rank.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the amount of the Territorial Army bounty is preventing men from enrolling in the Service; and if he will consider increasing this.

At present I am not convinced that the size of the bounty is the major factor.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Territorial and Auxiliary Forces Association have said for some time now that the bounty should be increased in order to attract more men into this very important branch of the Service, and does he recognise that while the £9 and £13 bounty was sufficient some time ago, when prices were lower, it is now totally inadequate because prices have risen? Will not he make an attempt to attract more men into this Service by raising the bounty?

The number of volunteers into the Territorial Army last year increased by 20,000. The problem, as I see it, is to induce men to remain in the Territorial Army after they have completed their part-time service, and that is the problem to which I am now devoting my attention.

The right hon. Gentleman is quite correct in saying that 20,000 more men enrolled; but many left, and they left because the conditions were not attractive enough. In the interests of the Service, is it not desirable to consider raising the bounty? Would not the right hon. Gentleman approach his right hon. Friend the Chancellor to ascertain his views on the subject?

I am always ready to approach the Chancellor on these matters, but in this instance the problem has not yet arisen. These men have volunteered but have not reached the end of their three and a half years' part-time service. When they do so, that problem will arise. I am looking into a large number of factors affecting the Territorial Army which, I hope, will, induce them to remain in it for a longer period.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) if his attention has been drawn to the orders issued by Colonel G. O. Thompson. Commandant of No. 1 Engineer Stores Depot, Long Marston, concerning the compulsory contribution by officers and other Tanks to a voluntary fund; whether he will state, in detail, the nature of these orders; and whether they were made with his knowledge, consent and approval;

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Part I orders issued by a unit, particulars of which have been sent him, prescribed a sliding scale of donations for all ranks payable to a national fund; that those who did not wish to contribute were required to inform their commanding officer of the reason; whether he will ensure that all donations thus raised will be returned; and whether he will issue an Army Council Instruction prohibiting the use of Part I orders for the raising of funds in this way for any charity however deserving.

asked the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been drawn to a recent order issued by the Colonel Commanding No. 1 Engineers Stores Depot at Long Marston. whereby officers and men were informed that a deduction according to rank would be made from their pay, towards the King George VI Memorial Fund; and whether the notice is in accordance with orders which he has approved.

An Army Council Instruction was issued drawing attention to this appeal, and it was made clear that all contributions were to be on a voluntary basis. The orders of the Commander of No. 1 Engineers Stores Depot were not in accord with the instructions issued by the War Office. In practice the order was not enforced, and the total actually subscribed amounted to considerably less than the prescribed scale. Colonel Thompjson denies that he ever made the statement attributed to him in Question No. 53.

Has the attention of the Secretary of State been drawn to the "Birmingham Gazette" of Saturday, 29th November, in which the colonel is interviewed by a reporter and is in quotes as having said that no one can query an Army order? His actual statement is in quotes, which lays down the scale which officers and other ranks must contribute unless they give reasons for their non-contribution to the commanding officer. In view of the fact that he is quoted, does the right hon. Gentleman not consider that this matter should be further investigated to see whether or not the officer did or did not issue those instructions?

This matter has been investigated, and we have been in touch with Colonel Thompson. I do not think that necessarily quotes in a newspaper can be taken as an absolutely Grade A source by the War Office.

Investigate it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that there will be no repetition of this conduct by any commanding officer, and would he, for the information of other ranks, tell the House what other ranks should say when they go to see their commanding officer in the circumstances outlined in this Question?

I think that anybody who gave an assurance that human nature will never repeat itself is very unwise.

Without in any way giving support to this procedure, would my right hon. Friend say whether it is a fair comparison to say that it is contracting out of a voluntary contribution?

What action has the right hon. Gentleman taken against this officer for posting the order in the first place?

I am in touch with this officer.

Mr. Macmillan.

On a point of order. I have three Questions on this subject, Mr. Speaker, and at the moment I have asked only one supplementary. May I ask for your permission, in view of that, to ask another?

No. I think the hon. Member asked a very long supplementary.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) how many National Service men are employed as officers' servants;

asked the Secretary of State for War how many National Service men are employed as gardeners in camps, barracks and depots in the United Kingdom; and how many man-hours per month are occupied by these tasks.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many officers' servants, waiters in officers' and other messes, and gardeners are employed at Brancepeth Camp, County Durham; and how many are Regulars and National Service men. respectively.

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of National Service men in the Barnard Castle Camp; and how many are employed as officers' servants and in other non-military duties.

No National Service men are employed as gardeners. Scales of batmen are laid down for all units and at the present time are under-implemented. The returns do not differentiate between National Service men and Regulars, and to obtain this information I should have to make special inquiries of every unit of the British Army at home and abroad. I do not think this is justified. Commanding officers have been told and are well aware of the need to avoid the misuse of National Service men within units.

Will the Secretary of State conduct an investigation to find out exactly how National Service men and Regular soldiers are being employed in view of the fact that the only possible justification for conscription is lack of manpower? Does he not think it is quite ridiculous for able-bodied young men to be employed as parlourmaids, nursemaids and so on, and is it not about time that the War Office really went into this problem?

I have gone very deeply into this problem since assuming this office and have saved 10,000 men out of the tail, which was not done in the six years of the previous Government. I would add that the whole question of the use of manpower in the Army is one in which the National Service men and the Regulars are together in units, say 500 in a battalion, and that unit has got to arrange its domestic economy. The commanding officers are told that the object of National Service is to train men to be fighting soldiers. Within those terms of reference, we have to trust them.

In view of the first remark of the right hon. Gentleman, would he not agree that the saving in the tail was the result of the recommendations of the Templer Committee? Secondly, is there not something to be said for the idea of not using National Service men at all for this purpose of officer's servants.

Replying to the right hon. Gentleman's first comment, I am sure he would wish to join me in a tribute to what General Templer did, but we did put on foot a subsequent inquiry and I am starting a further one. I think that every Secretary of State should reduce the Army by a few thousand men a year as part of his job.

Is the Minister satisfied with the state of affairs which is going on in the north? My Question related to the Barnard Castle Camp, and would it not be to the advantage of all concerned if there was a restriction in the call-up of National Service men whereby they would be able to make a better contribution to the national economy through being engaged in civil employment instead of being called up?

I have not the time here to go into the question of the call-up and civil employment. but I would tell the hon. Member that our prospects are that we shall be 15,000 men under strength in the Army in two years' time. We are now attempting to make the best and most economical use of manpower.

Does the right hon. Gentleman seriously tell the House that he is unable to discover how many National Service men in certain of the Home Commands are employed as officers' servants and undertake gardening duties to the disadvantage of their military training? Does he not think that that could be easily ascertained?

I have said that no National Service men are employed as gardeners: that I have had three specific inquiries concerned with Home Commands and that I am making inquiries and will write to the hon. Members concerned. All I further said was that, in view of the world-wide dispersal of our Army, to ask for this return would not be justified.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that all the Questions which have been addressed to him today by hon. Members on the other side of the House refer to a situation which existed under his predecessors and that nothing at all was done?

Does the Minister not remember that, under the last Government, manpower economy committees were established in each Service Department and that as a result considerable economies were made? Is not now the appropriate time, when the defence programme has been reviewed and expenditure on materials is being cut down, to make a general review of the manpower situation, and is he really arguing that to call up men for these purposes and interrupt their careers with all the economic consequences to the nation is justified?

The hon. Gentleman has a Question down about the review of manpower which I will answer later.

Has the Minister considered employing disabled ex-Service men for jobs of this sort? They are men who, in many cases, have had considerable military experience and would be quite willing to take such posts, and that would prevent interfering with the training of the young.

We have done a great deal in the way of substituting civilians for soldiers throughout the Army, but the right hon. Gentleman appreciates that one of the difficulties of expanding that still further is expense.

The right hon. Gentleman told the House that many of these cooks and officers' servants volunteered for the job. Does he now say that the principle of volunteering is allowed to take precedence over National Service training?

No, Sir. What I said was that these jobs have to be done in the Army, and if any of us goes into the cook-house we would find several cooks —I am sure the hon. Gentleman himself has been around—who would tell us that the reason they were in the cook-house was that they had volunteered for the job. Very often such people intend to be cooks when they go out of the Army. All I said was that to prevent a National Service man being a cook if he wished to volunteer for it would not be a very wise step.

Is the Minister not aware that it does not serve any useful purpose replying in the manner he has done to Questions on the Order Paper when the evidence in our possession is overwhelmingly against the answers he has given? Might I ask him if he would not respond to the request of my hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale (Mr. Anthony Greenwood) for an investigation into the charges that we have received from these men about them being employed on unnecessary work to suit the convenience of the officers?

If the hon. Gentleman will send me any particulars I will look into them willingly, but I have three investigations going on at the present time in a broad sense in order to save manpower.

The particulars are in the right hon. Gentleman's possession.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, and in order to provide the right hon. Gentleman with the evidence, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many complaints have been received in the last 12 months alleging that National Service men are not fully occupied in regimental duties.

To get these details would involve circularising all the formation headquarters in this country, which I do not think would be justified.

In view of the large number of complaints which the right hon. Gentleman must receive, does he not think there ought to be an inquiry into the whole problem of National Service?

I repeat that, considering the number called up, the number of complaints received by the War Office is surprisingly small.

Is it not a fact that both in the matter of ensuring that National Service men are fully employed and do not have their time wasted and in the saving of administrative tail the present Government have done more in one year than the Labour Government did in six years?

asked the Secretary of State for War how many Regular officers and other ranks are engaged in training National Service men in the United King-don; and how many are engaged in similar tasks in Germany.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many Regular soldiers are employed in training the National Service men.

Throughout the training organisation, the National Service man trains alongside the Regular recruit and it is not therefore practicable to segregate the training staff dealing with National Service men alone. In the United Kingdom there are some 2,600 Regular officers and 15,000 Regular other ranks employed in the training and administration of about 49,000 Regulars and National Service men. In the British Army of the Rhine, there are no training units and men are trained within their units.

Is the Minister satisfied that these figures represent a fair proportion of trainees to those who are training them, and are steps being taken to reduce the number of people who are doing the training?

They represent a considerable reduction on a year ago, and I am trying to make the number smaller next year.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that the figures that he has given to the House for the training cadres and the number of men being trained in the United Kingdom disclose that almost half the total number is required to train the number who are being trained and that that surely is a most undesirable position?

No, Sir, that is not so. Half is quite incorrect. I would point out further that these men are training non-stop throughout the year and are turning out something like 200,000 trained men and that we must have some number left for leave, replacements and. people in the pipe-line and so forth.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the official statement of Major-General B. C. H. Kimmins, Director-General of the Territorial Army, that 80 per cent. of National Service men granted commissions lived south of a line drawn across the country through Birmingham; and whether he will make a statement on this matter.

The statement was not, in fact, made personally by the Director of the Territorial Army. It is, however, correct so far as England is concerned, and this fact has been known for some years.

Would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that this points quite clearly to the fact that the War Office selection board system has broken down, because people are being selected as officers on the basis not of their competence but of their accents?

The hon. Member should appreciate that since I have been in this job I have started a special school at Welbeck to try and obtain more officers from the north of England. I hope very much that it will he a success.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will raise the age at which National Service men may be posted on active service abroad.

No, Sir.

First, will my right hon. Friend keep the matter constantly under review? Second, will some proper distinction be drawn in judging the issue, between time of technical peace and time of total war?

At present we have about 11⅓ divisions, l0⅓ of which are overseas. The present system has been very carefully thought out, and I believe it to be fair, and we could not alter it without very considerable embarrassment.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether National Service personnel have to pay for replacements of socks and other essential clothing discarded as a result of wear and tear;

A National Service man's clothing and personal equipment when first given to him are provided free. The soldier gets a weekly tax-free allowance out of which he pays for certain articles of clothing when they need to be replaced. The rest of his clothing and equipment is replaced free when it is worn out. On the prices charged for socks, I would refer to my reply to the hon. Member for Liverpool, Exchange (Mrs. Braddock) on 25th November. The price of a flannel shirt is 23s. ld., but the National Service man gets three shirts free when he joins.

Is it not disgraceful that National Service men should have to pay for the renewal of socks and shirts worn out as a result of wear and tear? Are they not paying more for socks in the N.A.A.F.I. than they would have to in this country, and, when they return on leave from Germany and other countries, do they not have to buy them here in order to save a few shillings?

Of the personal clothing issued to a man, some items are replaced free and some have to be paid for by him. He is given a weekly allowance, starting at 8d. and rising, I think, to about ls. 6d., from which he can replace those items. By and large, the number of socks and shirts given to a man should very nearly last out his period of service. The allowance alters annually in accordance with the prices of shirts, socks and other items in the annual cost list issued by the War Office.

Is the Minister aware of the dissatisfaction caused to National Service men when they go to be demobbed and find that certain items of equipment have to be paid for before they are given their final chits to leave? Is that the way to encourage them to join the Territorial Army with enthusiasm?

I was not aware of the fact mentioned by the hon. Gentleman. As he has now informed me about it, I will look into it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman look into the matter again, as the allowance is completely inadequate and causes ill-feeling in the ranks?

If one adds up the total allowance issued for the replacement of kit and compares it with the amount of kit bought, it will be seen that a very large amount of the allowance is not spent.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will state the arrangements to enable National Service men to train and study while in the Service for their return to civilian life.

I am sending the hon. Member a copy of a recent pamphlet "Education during National Service" which is available at sale offices of Her Majesty's Stationery Office throughout the country. He will see that the Army gives to a National Service man below School Certificate standard a compulsory general education during his first year of service to give a sound background for further study. National Service men above this level are each given a form to fill up regarding voluntary education to meet individual needs.

asked the Secretary of State for War what arrangements are made for leave for soldiers serving in Korea.

Every 10 days some 500 officers and men are flown from Korea to the leave centre at Ebisu near Tokyo for five days' leave. Short periods of leave, from three to seven days, are also granted at the divisional rest centre on the sea at Inchon.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that soldiers serving in Korea for 18 months are being asked to pay £51 on fares for 54 days' home leave; and what steps he is taking to reduce or abolish this charge.

Soldiers serving in Korea are not granted home leave either at the public expense or at their own.

Is any arrangement made for leave after these men have been posted from Korea to other stations? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have complaints from the parents of lads serving in Korea that after 18 months service and then being posted to the Middle East they are being offered 54 days' leave at home if they pay £51 towards their fare?

I am aware of this problem. Units go for a three years' tour of overseas duty, which is now in the Far East or the Middle East. If during the first period of that three years' tour they go to Korea they have still another period of perhaps 18 months, and they probably go to the Middle East. I could not give a whole unit leave to come back to this country. They therefore have local leave and there is an opportunity, if they wish, to buy a passage at cheap terms and come back to this country.

Is the right hon. Gentleman saying that 18 months in Korea in the conditions which prevail there are equivalent to 18 months in the Middle East? Are there not special considerations in view of the hardship and the war danger in Korea compared with the Middle East?

The whole movements problem of units in the British Army would be disrupted if 18 months in Korea counted as the whole of a three years overseas tour.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that recent casualties. in Korea included soldiers of the Black Watch, aged 19 and 20, who were called up in February and were on the casualty list in October? Will he consider giving these lads—I will not call them men—permanent leave in this country?

The hon. Member has a Question on the Order Paper on that subject.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that 22454808 Signalman Brian Clackett, of Birmingham, a National Service man aged 20. complained of pains in the chest on 28th September, but was not admitted to the British Commonwealth communication zone medical unit in Korea until 9th October, where he died two hours after admission; why no treatment was prescribed for him after the X-ray examination; why he was moved about for some days prior to his death; why his relatives were not informed of his illness; and what steps he is taking to safeguard the health of National Service men in Korea and to see that parents are adequately informed.

I have explained to the hon. Member the exceptional difficulty of diagnosis in this case. This man was found after his death to have a tuberculous cavity so situated that it was inevitably concealed by the heart shadow in the X-ray plate and, therefore, remained undetected. It was for this reason that specific treatment for tuberculosis was not instituted, nor was he removed to base. His move to 25 Canadian Field Dressing Station on 29th September was to give him better facilities while under treatment and examination. Since until just before his death there were no indications that he was seriously or dangerously ill, his parents were not informed.

Is the Minister aware that six days after his X-ray and three days before he died he wrote to a friend and complained that nothing was done for him and that he was being moved about from place to place? As the Minister has said, he was moved to at least three different hospitals. It is difficult for parents to escape the conclusion that neglect has taken place, especially in view of the fact, to which I called his attention some time ago, that a National Service man died of tuberculosis on his way to hospital and was never treated. Secondly, will the Minister do something to prevent the mental torture which is inflicted upon parents by a telegram saying that a man died of haemorrhage of the lung when they did not know that he was ill?

As I tried to explain to the hon. Gentleman, I am informed by the medical authorities that this was a quite exceptional case. By and large every effort is made to detect these diseases at an early stage, but in this particular case nobody knew what was wrong with the man, owing to the failure of the diagnosis for the reasons I have given.

asked the Prime Minister if he will publish in the form of a White Paper an up-to-date comprehensive list of all members appointed to central and regional nationalised boards of a commercial character, with details of individual salaries, pensions and expenses allowed, and contract dates, together with a separate list showing all individuals holding more than one appointment; and what those appointments are.

A White Paper of this character will be published shortly. I should like, however, to take this opportunity of acknowledging the valuable services rendered by those to whom the Question refers.

Hear, hear.

Could the Prime Minister give us what he felt unable to give last year—some information about the salaries and expenses paid to the directors and managers of the larger financial, industrial and commercial undertakings carried on under private enterprise?

I thought I gave a fair answer to the Question asked, and I put in something at the end which gained the approval of the party opposite, because I recognise all the loyal effort that is given in all these services; but I am not going to embark on a comparison of the cost of running capitalist enterprises or Socialist enterprises.

Since such a comparison is very frequently made, and aspersions are cast on members of nationalised boards, would the Prime Minister at least consider giving us information about the salaries and expenses paid to directors and managers of private coal companies and electricity undertakings before they were nationalised?

I certainly do not feel called upon to embark on official returns of that character. There is, of course, a general feeling that private enterprise manages things much cheaper for the general public.

asked the Prime Minister what arrangements are proposed to ensure that the British Legion and, in particular, the disabled, will be suitably represented in the Coronation procession; and if arrangements will be made for their massed standard bearers either to take part in the procession or to be assured of an honoured position near Westminster Abbey.

Arrangements are being made for representatives of the British Legion, including massed standard bearers, and of disabled former members,of the Forces to have special places on the processional route.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that the answer will give the very greatest satisfaction to all ex-Service,associations throughout the land?

asked the Prime Minister if he will set up a committee on the lines of that set up in October, 1929, to inquire into the powers of Ministers and to make recommendations which will secure more freedom for the individual from bureaucratic control.

I should prefer to await the report of the Select Committee which is to be appointed to consider the control exercised by the House over delegated legislation before considering whether any wider inquiry is either necessary or desirable.

While I realise the appalling difficulties of cleaning up the mess left by the Socialists, may I ask my right hon. Friend to implement his slogan, "Set the people free," as quickly as he possibly can?

asked the Prime Minister if he will approach the Governments of Ireland with a view to making a joint survey of the potentialities of Irish agriculture; and whether he will consider a Treasury grant to further an Irish agricultural survey.

The question of a joint survey is a matter for the Governments of Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. The second part of the Question does not therefore arise.

Mr. Lee.

On a point of order. I did not hear the right hon. Gentleman's answer; it was inaudible at this end of the Chamber.

If that is so, perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will repeat the answer to No. 48.

Do you wish me to repeat the answer to Question No. 48 Sir?

Yes. It was not heard.

The question of a joint survey is a matter for the Governments of Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. The second part of the Question does not therefore arise.

On a point of order. When my hon. Friend the Member for Leek (Mr. Harold Davies) says he did not hear the answer, is it in order for the Prime Minister deliberately to repeat the answer in a tone of voice which could not possibly be heard?

I must confess that I know of no precedent for this situation.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that this great country of Ireland is worthy only of an inaudible answer from the Box, when he talks so much about the friendship between the Commonwealth and the British people?

I must ask for notice of that one.

On a point of order. My understanding is, Mr. Speaker, that you requested the right hon. Gentleman to repeat his answer to Question No. 48 on the ground that his previous reply was inaudible. I submit that he deliberately defied an order from the Chair. In view of the debate which occurred in this House yesterday, are hon. Members on the Front Bench to be treated at a different level from those who occupy the back benches?

Certainly not. There is no differentiation whatever between Members on all benches, but the situation was rather peculiar. First of all, the right hon. Gentleman answered the Question, and I could hear him quite well. Then there was a request for it to be repeated, and I asked the Prime Minister whether he would repeat it. He repeated it in a tone which I think was lower than the one in which he gave his original answer. I cannot say that the matter is covered by the rules of order, but I hope that hon. Members have now heard the answer.

Before the Prime Minister answers these Questions about Ireland, audibly or inaudibly, will he bear in mind that there is another part of the country for which he has much more direct responsibility—the Highlands of Scotland, which are also capable of making a great contribution to our food supplies if they get much needed Treasury assistance?

asked the Prime Minister what steps he is taking to ensure that the most recent changes in the defence programme do not result in unemployment in the engineering industry.

The changes will not markedly reduce the total labour force employed on defence production in the engineering industry. There may be some redundancies at first in a few firms, but the Ministry of Labour are being consulted on the best way to limit the effect of these redundancies and they will arrange in advance to help any workers who become unemployed to find other work.

Would not the Prime Minister agree that many firms will have already decided their programming for next year and that that involves the lay-out of their machinery, the balance of their labour force and the type of raw materials they would need for the arms programme? Does he not agree that unless this matter is handled extremely carefully it will mean that those firms will not be able to substitute another type of product for the orders they thought they were going to receive? Would he make certain that a hiatus does not arise by tailing off the defence programme instead of abruptly cutting it?

Will the right hon. Gentleman do all he can to ensure that the capacity and manpower released by this reduction in re-armament is not frittered away on consumer goods but is used for export goods such as civil aviation?

That seems to be very much in line with much of our thoughts.

Could not the right hon. Gentleman give me some assurance on the point which I raised, which may well condition the attitude of the engineering industry towards the changes which be now contemplates?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of widespread public interest in the matter, he will reconsider his refusal to disclose the advice tendered to the Coronation Commission by Her Majesty's Government on the subject of televising the Coronation ceremony.

I have nothing to add to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Lewis) yesterday. I must however draw the hon. and gallant Member's attention to the announcement made yesterday by the Earl Marshal.

Is the Prime Minister aware that, public opinion having compelled the Cabinet to change its mind, the latest announcement by the Coronation Committee, to which the Prime Minister has referred, is much more in keeping with popular sentiment than the original ban on television for which the Cabinet was solely and entirely responsible?

One is always glad to gain applause from any quarter, but I think this is a most ungracious way of treating this grave and important affair. Parliament has expressed its views and opinions in the free and easy way we do at Question time. Great care has been given to every aspect, and if the result is something of which the hon. and gallant Gentleman approves, surely he might have said, "Thank you."

I should like to thank the Prime Minister for having changed his mind. That is all I am saying.