§ 23. Lieut.-Colonel Sir Thomas Mooreasked the Secretary of State for War whether the term "Services no longer required" is still being inserted in discharge certificates of soldiers leaving the Army with a clean conduct sheet; and, if so, why.
§ Sir J. GriggMost soldiers discharged because their services are "no longer required for the purpose for which they enlisted" are those for whom no suitable employment in the Army can be found. Such a discharge carries no reflection as to the man's moral character.
§ Sir T. MooreWill my right hon. Friend agree that there is a certain stigma attaching to, or implied in, this phrase, that it did not apply to soldiers in the past, and that the civilian community do not understand that it means nothing? Will the Minister please reconsider it?
§ Sir J. GriggIn point of fact, at the instance of the hon. Member for Penryn and Falmouth (Mr. Petherick) I considered this question at considerable length some time ago. All sorts of alternatives were explored, but objections could be taken to all of them, and I may say if it will be of benefit to the individual concerned, the cause for discharge is in fact amplified on his discharge document.
§ Sir T. MooreI agree, but will the right hon. Gentleman not consider excluding it altogether, and merely state why the soldier was discharged?
§ Sir J. GriggThat was one of the alternatives explored. It is not possible to adopt it without doing, in some cases, more damage than is done by the present practice.
§ Mr. PrittIs it not a fact that this formula deprives a man of his post-war credit; and, if so, could not some steps be taken to alter it?
§ Sir J. GriggI should be extremely surprised to discover that this formula has the slightest effect on a man's post-war credit.
§ Mr. BellengerIt has.