HC Deb 27 May 1941 vol 371 cc1690-3
9. Major-General Sir Alfred Knox

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will give present conditions in Stalag XXID and Stalag XXA, stating whether conditions in each one of the camps have improved and from which of them 150 officers were removed?

Mr. Law

My latest information indicates that conditions in both these camps have improved. As regards Stalag XXID, hot showers have now been provided, and the overcrowding has been relieved by the transfer of 150 officers to Stalag XXA, where new rooms have been opened to receive them. At the latter camp the quarters have also been made more comfortable and hygienic, and better facilities for exercise have been provided. A further report from the Protecting Power is awaited.

Sir A. Knox

As the reports about these two camps are very conflicting, will my hon. Friend state whether either of them is situated in an underground fort where there is only artificial light?

Mr. Law

That was the case at the beginning when the officers were first moved to that camp, because, as I have already explained, the German Government were under a misapprehension that the camp in Canada was contrary to the international Convention. It was pointed out to the German Government that that was a misapprehension, and since then there has been improvement in the way of lighting and ventilation.

19 and 20. Mr. Malcolm MacMillan

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether he will take early steps to put an end to the discrimination still made by the War Office between officers compelled to surrender to the enemy, and other ranks similarly placed by circumstances beyond their control, by which officers are regarded as not guilty of cowardice and their pay continued, while other ranks are regarded as guilty until proved innocent by inquiry; and whether he will make a statement?

(2) Whether he will consult with the Chancellor of the Exchequer with a view to allowing the pay of other ranks prisoners of war to be credited to them as national savings at the usual interest rates?

22. Mr. Leslie

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider abolishing the discrimination between officers and men prisoners of war whereby the officers are credited with their pay while other ranks have it stopped until it has been proved that their capture was not due to their own fault or misconduct?

23. Captain Lyons

asked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the effect of Section 138 of the Army Act, which operates as a stoppage of pay of any non-commissioned officer or soldier whilst a prisoner of war, pending a finding of a court; and whether he will consider an immediate amendment which will regularise the situation so as to make alike the position of all ranks whilst prisoners, in the issue, credit and disposition of pay without discrimination?

Mr. Law

There is no intention of discriminating in favour of the officer. Any difference in treatment of officers and other ranks is more apparent than real, and whatever historical reason there may have been for it is now based solely upon the different methods of issuing pay. Officers' pay is paid into their banking accounts, to be dealt with by the bank at the order of the officer. The pay of other ranks is credited to their account with the regimental paymaster, to be dealt with at the order of the soldier, except that family or dependants' allowance with the appropriate qualifying allotment and any voluntary allotment in issue is not credited but is paid direct to the beneficiary. If the officer, who is a prisoner of war, gives specific instructions to his bankers as to the disposal of the amounts standing to his credit, his bankers will honour these instructions. Similarly, if a soldier prisoner of war instructs the regimental paymaster to dispose of a portion of his pay as an allotment to his family or dependant within the limit provided for other soldiers, or to invest a portion of his daily rate of pay in the Army Savings Scheme, or to deal with the balance standing at the time to the credit of his account by way of remittances, his instructions will be honoured. In neither case is the bank or regimental paymaster entitled to act without definite instructions from the officer or soldier concerned.

Mr. MacMillan

Is the Minister aware that a Noble Lord made a speech in another place the other day in which he alleged—

Mr. Speaker

I am afraid we cannot refer to speeches which are made in another place.

Mr. MacMillan

Is the Minister aware that the discrimination referred to is still on the Statute Book and will he take steps to remove it?

Captain Lyons

Do I gather from my hon. Friend that he refers only to a proportion which may be allotted by a soldier? Is not the effect of the Army Act, to which I have drawn attention, compulsorily to stop a man's pay, subject to the allotment only about which my hon. Friend speaks? Does not that in itself bring about the unfair discrimination which some of us want to stop?

Mr. Law

No, Sir, there is no unfair discrimination. I have said that a proportion of a man's pay may go in allotment to his family, some may go to some other beneficiary, and, on his specific instructions, a proportion may go to the Army Savings Scheme. Another reason why we allow only a proportion, is that negotiations are in progress at the moment with the German authorities to ensure that prisoners of war may receive pay. The reason why we cannot put the whole of his pay in Army Savings is because a man may want it for other purposes.

Captain Lyons

Do we take it from that, that except for such amounts as he may allot for a dependant, the whole of the balance is at his disposal for the direction he may order to Army Savings?

Mr. Law

Yes, Sir, the whole of the amount is at his disposal on his specific instructions. He may dispose of it by way of Army Savings, as by voluntary allotment, or, if negotiations are successful, by receipt of pay while he is a prisoner of war.

Captain Lyons

In view of Section 138 of the Army Act, will the Minister, for the benefit of those who are interested, issue some memorandum whereby the matter can be clarified?

Mr. MacMillan

Will the Minister reply to the request for the removal of this piece of snobbery in this legislation?

Mr. Shinwell

Is there really any distinction between the treatment meted out to officers and men, and if there are such distinctions, why cannot they be dealt with?

Mr. Law

I think that I stated categorically that there was no real distinction in the treatment for officers and men. I cannot speak specifically as to what happened in the Boer War, but in the last war there was no distinction, and in this war there is no distinction. I should not like my hon. Friend to misunderstand me. Both officers and men may have an inquiry into their conduct on the field, and that applies equally to officers and men.

Mr. MacMillan

Will the Minister take steps to remove this legislation, which is 100 years out of date?