HC Deb 09 February 1937 vol 320 c197
15. Mr. Jagger

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that H. S. R. Easthope was dismissed last July from the Army Signals at Devon-port after 12¾ years' service; what reason was given; and whether any complaint had been made as to the manner in which he carried out his duties?

The Secretary of State for War (Mr. Duff Cooper)

H. S. R. Easthope was not dismissed; he was dicharged after due notice. The reason for his discharge was that "his services were no longer required." The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Mr. T. Williams

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain what is the difference between "dismissed" and "discharged"?

Mr. Cooper

There is no element of blame whatever in discharge. This man's services were no longer required, and he was therefore informed that he was discharged.

Mr. Jagger

Is it the custom to dismiss without any reason a skilled worker like this, after 12¾ years of satisfactory service and in the middle of an armament boom?

Mr. Cooper

It is not customary, but there are exceptions to the general rule.

Mr. Jagger

Can we be told the justification for the exception? That is what I am seeking?

Mr. Cooper

The hon. Member has asked another question, not the question on the Paper. The question which is on the Paper I have answered. The other question which he has asked now is one to which I am not prepared to give an answer immediately. I am quite prepared, on a suitable occasion, to give the hon. Member the information he desires, but I do not think that it is in the interests of anybody that that information should be given.

Mr. Jagger

I asked the reason for the dismissal.