HC Deb 18 July 1944 vol 402 cc6-7
19. Mr. Bellenger

asked the Secretary of State of War whether he will take the necessary steps to place officers under a statutory obligation as at present applied to other ranks to maintain their families.

Sir J. Grigg

I assume the hon. Member is suggesting that the Army pay system should be changed to enable family lodging allowance to be paid to the officer's wife and not as at present to the officer himself. Whatever the merits of such a change may be I regret that at this stage in the war I do not see how it can be made.

Mr. Bellenger

Although that was not the suggestion underlying the Question, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will amend the Army Act, which at present provides that a soldier is liable for the maintenance of his family, but ignores the position of officers?

Sir J. Grigg

What happens is that under the Army Act a soldier is liable to compulsory deductions. In the case of an officer, the remedy of the wife in the civil courts is still available, so that he is in fact liable, but the procedure is not so expeditious as that available under Section 145 for the ranks.

Mr. Buchanan

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that frequently there is no redress in the civil court because, if a man is serving, and particularly if he is abroad, he cannot be called, and he must be there to give evidence himself?

Sir J. Grigg

In a case like that, we do everything we can to expedite the serving of the process. We can in special cases make temporary arrangements to cover them.

Mr. Bellenger

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, even where a court order has been obtained against a defaulting officer, there is no method by which the War Office can compulsorily enforce it?

Sir J. Grigg

There is certainly no method of actual legal compulsion, but pretty potent methods of persuasion are applied.

Mr. Austin Hopkinson

Is it not a reasonable presumption that, if an officer refuses to maintain his wife and family, he is unsuitable to hold a commission?