§ 6. Mr. Prittasked the Secretary of State for War why a serving officer with an exemplary military and anti-Fascist record, whose name has been communicated to him, has been suddenly removed from his position as a staff captain in the Military Government of Germany, without explanation or inquiry.
§ Mr. LawsonThe temporary employment in Military Government of the officer in question was reviewed in accordance with the normal procedure. As a result it was decided that his services could more appropriately be utilised in another capacity. It was not necessary to explain this as it is the normal reason for the reposting of officers.
§ 23. Fliģht-Lieutenant Parkinasked the Secretary of State for War why, when 14450856 Lance-Corporal W. R. C. Hinman, left his reserved occupation to volunteer for the Army. on the death of his brother on active service, he was not offered a duration engagement.
§ Mr. LawsonI regret that I have no information as to whether or not this 1079 soldier was offered a duration engagement. He would, however, have been clearly informed of the nature of the engagement he did undertake and must have signed the attestation form voluntarily.
§ Fliģht-Lieutenant ParkinIs the Minister aware that this soldier, and others like him who, under the stress of emotion, left a reserved occupation and volunteered for service in the Forces, are now suffering considerable hardship by being held to that undertaking involving an engagement for a certain number of years? Will he look into the matter again—particularly if he is considering other penalties which have been inflicted on persons during the war—concerning, as it does, those whose only crime was over-enthusiasm?
§ Mr. LawsonI have looked into this matter very carefully and I cannot find any evidence which would justify my taking further action.
§ Fliģht-Lieutenant ParkinIs my right hon. Friend not aware that this is the second time a question of this kind has been raised in this House?
§ 42. Mr. Jannerasked the Secretary of State for War why his Department has refused the release from the Army, under Class B, of Lieutenant C. G. Noakes, 292021, R.A.O.C., particulars of whose case have been sent to him, in view of the fact that the Ministry of Labour had approved his release so that he could return to work for Messrs. J. D. Thomson, Limited, Boot Manufacturers, Leicester, of which firm he is the managing director.
Mr. BellenģerThe release of this officer under Class B has been refused because it could not be granted without delaying the Class A release of another officer. But my right hon. Friend is looking further into this case.
§ Mr. JannerWould the hon. Gentleman consider the fact that the Ministry of Labour and the Board of Trade recommended the release of this man because of his extreme importance to the shoe industry in Leicester in January, and that in March a letter was received from his Department saying that that application should be made to those Departments in order to get his release?
Mr. BellenģerYes, Sir. Unfortunately this application, if granted, would have 1080 the effect of delaying a Class A officer who has absolute rights to get out.
§ Mr. JannerWill the hon. Gentleman see to it that the industry is not impeded, by putting another person in place of this man who is so urgently needed in that industry?
Mr. BellenģerI have already given the hon. Gentleman an assurance that my right hon. Friend is looking further into it.
Mr. DriberģIs my hon. Friend saying that Class A officers have absolute rights to get out? If so, will he reconsider the case of the officers in Group 26 who are being deferred?
Mr. BellenģerI think that is quite correct. Class A release confers absolute right, subject only to one thing, namely, those who are considered to be operationally vital.
§ 70. Mr. Lipsonasked the Secretary of State for War why a soldier, of whose name he has been informed, was refused leave to attend at an interview for a post under the Ministry of Food to which he had been invited; and if he will take steps to prevent leave being refused, in future, for this purpose.
Mr. BellenģerSpecial leave for such interviews is not allowed. At home or in B.A.O.R. it may often be possible for ordinary leave to be granted so as to enable the interview to take place, but it was evidently not practicable in this case.
§ Mr. LipsonWhy cannot leave be granted, in view of the fact that the war is over, and there is a great deal of feeling among Servicemen on this matter?
Mr. BellenģerIt is obviously not practical to bring men home from different theatres for special interview. They should try to arrange their privilege leave to coincide with the interview.
§ Mr. LipsonIs the Minister aware that it is hardly within a man's power to know when some appointing body will summon him for an interview? Will he not give more favourable instructions on this matter?
Mr. BellenģerI am afraid we cannot do that. It will not be possible for men in the Far East to come home for special 1081 interviews. Men of B.A.O.R. and those at home have some advantage, but that is a geographical advantage.
80. Mr. Garry Alliģhanasked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that 14425529 Signaller D. C. Laidler, Royal Signals, has been offered B release as an agricultural worker; that this man is a tradesman in another capacity, his only experience in agricultural work being a short period on leaving school; that he has no intention of returning to farm work; and why he is being released ahead of his group.
Mr. BellenģerThis man's release was authorised because on his records he was shown as an agricultural worker of an occupation being offered Class B release. The release authorization contains a proviso that the man
should state before release if he is not of the occupation quoted and that failure to reveal this will lead to immediate recall.In this particular case the man drew attention to the fact that he was not in fact an agricultural worker and the offer of Class B release was therefore cancelled.