§ 82. Sir WILLIAM BULLasked whether it has been decided to ignore the training at Sandhurst and Woolwich and in the Regular Army; and, if not, why have so many officers who have had none of these advantages been put over the heads of officers of the Regular Army, including those on Reserve of Officers?
§ Mr. TENNANTI am not quite sure to what class of cases the hon. Member alludes. There is certainly no intention of depreciating the training at Sandhurst 1268 and Woolwich to which he refers. There are, of course, a large number of officers employed in the new Service battalions and otherwise who have not been trained at either Sandhurst or Woolwich, but who have had some military experience. Their positions have been settled with reference to their qualifications.
§ Mr. WALTER LONGIs it not the fact that in a very large number of cases promotion to the higher ranks has been given to officers who have had no training at all, while the officers who have fitted themselves as private soldiers are allowed to remain in the ranks in which they were at the commencement of the War?
§ Mr. TENNANTI do not think quite so sweeping a generality as that which has fallen from the right hon. Gentleman could be made accurately, but I should like to point out that while it may be and, of course, is desirable that officers should receive a requisite amount of training and should be drawn if possible from Woolwich and Sandhurst, it has nor been possible, I am sure he will realise, in every case to appoint officers who have had that amount of training.
§ Sir COURTENAY WARNERIs my right hon. Friend aware that there is a great deal of discontent caused through very young men from Sandhurst and Woolwich being promoted so rapidly above the heads of men of considerable experience?
§ Mr. TENNANTI am very much surprised to hear that. The opposite allegation is made by some hon. Gentlemen in this House, and I, personally, have great sympathy with officers who have had special training at Sandhurst.