§ 5. Sir A. MARKHAMasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether an Order has been issued by Lord Kitchener, headed Irregular Complaints by Soldiers, to the higher commands in the Army instructing them that they are to take steps to prevent men, particularly of the New Armies and Territorial Forces, communicating with Members of Parliament in respect to grievances; whether he is aware that the great majority of these complaints refer to the pay of men and allowances to their wives which, owing to the negligence of the War Office, have not been properly paid; and whether, in view of the privilege granted to Members of Parliament that officers and men have the right to communicate with them if such letters are addressed to the House of Commons, he proposes to take any action in the matter?
§ Mr. TENNANTWhat is stated in the second part of the question does not represent my own experience and, if I may with great respect and deference venture to say so, my experience in this matter is wider even than that of my hon. Friend. Great efforts have been made to secure that such complaints shall be regularly and promptly attended to, if made through the official channels. The Army Council instruction in question refers to officers and men both of the New Armies and the Territorial Force who compose the great bulk of the Armies in the field. It does not prohibit communication with Members of Parliament in respect of grievances, but it lays down that soldiers are not to utilise third parties in general with a view to bringing such grievances to the notice of superior authority. In so doing it merely draws attention to an old Regulation, paragraph 439 of the King's Regulations, and I think these efforts have been crowned with success. With regard to the privilege extended to Members of this House I can only express the hope that it will not be abused.
§ Sir A. MARKHAMThat is not an answer to my question. What I asked was whether this order had been sent out, and does it not specifically state in that order that officers and men are not to communicate with their Members of Parliament?
§ Mr. TENNANTYes, I did say so. I may inform my hon. Friend that cases have occurred in which officers and men have ventilated their grievances through the medium of Members of Parliament, and third parties generally. But it does not prohibit communication with Members of Parliament.
§ Mr. ASHLEYAre we to understand that out constituents are only to communicate with us after failing to get satisfaction through the military authorities, and that they must call on the military authorities in the first instance?
§ Mr. TENNANTI think probably that that is the right light in which to look at it. I do not want to go so far as to say that it is desirable for soldiers to communicate grievances to Members of Parliament.
§ Sir A. MARKHAMIf a soldier has not had his pay, can he communicate about that with his Member of Parliament or is that an infringement?
§ Mr. TENNANTIt is competent, and the proper course is, for him to communicate with his commanding officer.
§ Sir A. MARKHAMIf he cannot get it through him?
§ Mr. TENNANTI assure my hon. Friend that he is quite misinformed in thinking that there is any real grievance in the way of pay. They get their pay with the greatest regularity.
Mr. TYSON WILSONIs the right hon. Gentleman not aware that there are many scores, if not hundreds, of these cases in which it is absolutely impossible for these men to get their allowances except when they communicate with Members of Parliament?
§ Mr. TENNANTThe estmates which have been made have been really in excess. There is not anything like that number. It is very rare.
§ Mr. HOGGECan my right hon. Friend say why Members of Parliament can raise those points in this House while their constituents in the Army cannot address them on the subject?
§ Mr. TENNANTReally my hon. Friend ought to realise what the Army is. I do not think that he has any very good idea of it. It is very undesirable for soldiers to communicate irregularly.