ARMY SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE, 1943 (Hansard, 14 March 1944)

§ Viscountess Astor (Plymouth, Sutton)
We have set up a committee to look into the question of Service pay. I am not one of those people who think that during war we can get equality in everything. War shows up the inequalities of human beings, and I consider that some people live in the light and some in the dark. Those who live in the light see what the war is about and are prepared, if they think it is right, to make the greatest sacrifices to win it. They are the fortunate ones.
Some people live in the dark and they think the war is a time to make profits for themselves, not always industrial profits, but profits of one kind and another. I do not think we can get complete equality anywhere. There are, however, some inequalities we ought to try to rectify. One of them is in the question of Service pay, particularly of the married man. We started off on the wrong foot, and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Devonport (Mr. Hore-Belisha) was responsible. Instead of trying to protect the married woman's position and give her all we could, an allowance was made for women who are unmarried, those known as the unmarried wife and unmarried mother. That would never have happened if some of us had had our way. It has caused great feeling among honest married women. This would not have happened if there had been someone in the War Office who better understood the position of the married mother with children. The basic pay of a soldier is 21s., 165 and the compulsory allotment to his wife is 3s. 6d., leaving him with 17s. 6d. a week. I believe that even the Bevin boys get 10s. a week for their amusements. It is true that a married soldier has entertainments and other facilities, but 17s. 6d. is not a very great deal.
Now the wife gets 21S. 4d., plus 3s. 6d., making a total of about 25s. per week. The allowance for the first child is 9s. 6d. and 8s. 6d. for the second. The total family allowance for a wife and two children is £2 3s. a week. It really is not possible for those people to keep a proper borne with proper conditions, and to live in a right way, on that very small allowance. In some cases a Service wife may be living next door to a civilian, and the comparison is very hard. The Minister says that to increase their pay will create inflation and that we shall all be ruined. I do not know whether that is so, but I know there was a very important letter in "The Times" yesterday, saying that that was not known. I am not an economist and I do not pretend to be one, but I say that the Government are creating a very bitter feeling if they do not take some action to help the married Service wives who have families. When some of these women get into difficulties they have to borrow, and if they cannot borrow they have to go to private charity. This House of Commons ought to impress the Government in every way that something must really be done to give these people a chance of a decent life.
The women feel the pinch in all sorts of ways, chiefly in regard to the children. It is a terrific sacrifice for a mother and there are things that men cannot understand very well. The women may want to remove, when there is the cost of the removal of the furniture, or the children's clothes may be outgrown. Above all, are the maternity expenses. It is true that the Government give a pre-natal allowance that helps, but for the woman who goes into a hospital or a home there is the problem of making arrangements for her children to be looked after. After paying the fees for the home and the midwife, there is nothing left to pay a neighbour to look after the children during that time. That is one of the most difficult problems. A case was brought to my notice the other day in which the only hostel that would look after a child charged 30s. a week. Of course, that was absurd. The women say that they would like a little extra in 166 order to send parcels to their husbands or sons, but they literally cannot do it, especially when they have young children, as they have not a penny to spare.
The real grievance with us in Plymouth is the Government's refusal to recognise full payment of mortgage commitments. A man who was buying a house in 1939 has now been away for five years. The Government pay the equivalent of the interest on the mortgage, but the man is no nearer owning his house, while a man at home getting very good wages has had an opportunity of paying off his commitments. I hope the Government will see that that is a real grievance among, I do not say very many, but a number of people.
The Government tried to assure the old age pensioner that he would have 20s. a week for living expenses after payment of rent, but the Service man's wife is only to have 18s. a week. Everything is so muddled and mixed. There does not seem to be any real plan for the whole of the country. I have always felt that when the present Prime Minister became Prime Minister he could, if he had wished, have got this country on almost a level rate because I believe that a great many men at home who are making a good deal of money feel the inequalities between the serving man and themselves. They feel it as much as anybody else. I do not believe that we ought to go on giving in to the men at home when the men who are away cannot say a word. I am sure that the country would have been ready for that universal sacrifice. I believe it is ready now to do what is right regarding the basic pay of our married serving men. There are war service grants but these are to meet commitments made before enlistment and allow the family a decent standard of life, but in no case can it exceed £3 a week. The War Service Grants Department receives about 5,000 new or revised claims each week, and 535,000 grants are being paid. Far more people apply in the hope of getting relief. Applicants are never told the reason for the refusal or the rejection of their claim. That is a grievance. When they come out it helps if they are told why they are refused.
Parents of serving men often suffer real hardship, and when they go to be helped they have to prove need. I have always believed in a means test but sometimes it is too mean a thing. This is too mean 167 a means test. There is an emergency grant paid in cases of serious or prolonged illness or death and up to £10 is paid for funeral expenses and £10 for the doctor's bill. These things are being done by the Government, but only in exceptionally hard cases.

§ Mr. Speaker
I think the Noble Lady is talking about war service grants. If so, they come under the Ministry of Pensions and not under the Army Vote.

§ Viscountess Astor
I was talking about where the wives of serving men can go and get these grants.

§ Mr. Speaker
That has got nothing to do with the Secretary of State for War. It is a matter for the Ministry of Pensions.

§ Viscountess Astor
Then I had better say no more about that. These matters are all going before the Committee which the Government are setting up. I do not know who they have put on that Committee but I hold that at this time there is such feeling not only among serving people, but people who are not serving and such real hardship that I hope that this House of Commons will see that the basic rate for married Service men is raised, and also the allowance for the children. Those who have not got parents and those who have not a little savings are simply driven to private charity. That is not what we want.
Americans and Canadians, it is pointed out, get higher rates of pay. That is perfectly true, but we know that until the last 25 years the British soldier wherever he went got a higher rate of pay than those of any other country in the world. There are these inequalities and we cannot perhaps make the rates of pay as high as those of some other nations but we can assist the man who is away from home to see that his wife is not driven to borrow and beg, and to go to work when she should not do so, and that their children are not mortified and can have a decent standard of living, which everybody in the country wants them to have.

§ The Financial Secretary to the War Office (Mr. Arthur Henderson)
The Noble Lady has raised a number of points regarding pay and allowances of the Army. In view of the fact that a meeting is to take place this week between members of 168 the Government and hon. Members representing all sections in the House, which will cover very fully the ground that she has traversed to-day, I am quite sure that she will not expect me to answer the speech she has made.

SCHEDULE
	Sums not exceeding.
	Supply Grants.	Appropriations.
Vote.	£	£
1. Pay etc., of the Army	10	110,000,000