HC Deb 13 December 1944 vol 406 cc1210-1
7. Mr. De Chair

asked the Secretary of State for Air why, when officers and other ranks in the Service are invalided out of the R.A.F. as a result of wounds, no mention is made in the letter notifying the person of his discharge that it is a result of wounds received in action; and whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction felt among those invalided out as a result of wounds that the reason is defined as ill-health.

Sir A. Sinclair

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for drawing my attention to this point. I agree that the expression "ill-health" is inappropriate, and I am considering the adoption of alternative wording. I do not, however, consider it would be desirable to differentiate in this matter between invaliding due to wounds received in action and invaliding due to other causes such as flying accidents.

Mr. De Chair

While I thank my right hon. Friend for undertaking to review this matter, will he bear in mind in doing so that there is a good deal of ill-feeling in the Service that wounds are put in the same category as minor illnesses and other things not comparable to flying accidents?

Sir A. Sinclair

I think my hon. Friend is putting his case too high in saying that. This description has been in force for 20 years, and I have no evidence of widespread or deep-seated dissatisfaction. Nevertheless, I agree that the wording can be improved, and I am going to try and do that.