HC Deb 18 February 1947 vol 433 cc954-6
7. Mr. Osborne

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that 2014492 Lance-Corporal Hickson has not received any pay for his rank; that the matter was referred to him by the commanding officer, R.E., Leicester, last May, and by the Grimsby British Legion on 6th December; that to neither communication has an acknowledgment been sent; and if he will expedite the consideration of ex-Servicemen's grievances.

Mr. J. Freeman

Lance-Corporal Hick- son was not entitled to extra pay, as his appointment was that of local unpaid lance-corporal. It was explained to him at the time that the appointment was made purely to give him added authority in dealing with various units, and that he would not be eligible for additional pay. He signed a declaration that he understood these conditions. There was at no time any question of his being made a paid lance-corporal, and there was no vacancy for such an appointment in the war establishment of the unit. I regret the fact that the British Legion's letter was not acknowledged, and the delay in dealing with the representations, which was due to movement of wartime accounts to a central office.

Mr. Osborne

Quite apart from the merits of this case, is it not making grievances seem worse to ex-Servicemen when those grievances are not looked into properly? Will the hon. Gentleman see that this is looked into promptly in future?

Mr. Freeman

I recognise the implication of the question. There was no unreasonable delay in this case at all. I am sorry that the letter was not acknowledged. But Lance-Corporal Hickson was perfectly well aware of the situation the whole time.

33. Mr. Yates

asked the Secretary of State for War when the hon. Member for Ladywood can expect a reply to his letter of 16th January as to whether the sentence of three years' penal servitude imposed upon 2198535 Sapper F. S. Hadley, R.E., C M.F., on 13th August, 1946, has been reconsidered, in the light of the domestic circumstances, particulars of which were forwarded to him on 4th October last.

Mr. Bellenger

I understand that Sapper Hadley has now been released from prison and is awaiting posting. As soon as confirmation is received a reply will be sent to my hon. Friend with any further details available.

Mr. Yates

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to see that Members of Parliament get more prompt answers to their letters?

Mr. Bellenger

I do not think that is fair of my hon. Friend. A considerable speed-up in answers to hon. Members has been achieved in my Department; but I am bound to say that hon. Members' letters to me do not seem to be decreasing.

Mr. De la Bère

Why should they?

35. Mr. Dodds

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is yet in a position to give a decision in the case of 7620810 Craftsman Westhead, details of which were brought to his notice by a letter. dated 23rd October, 1946.

Mr. Bellenger

Craftsman Westhead's petition has now been fully considered but I am satisfied that no legal grounds have been disclosed for interfering with the convictions.

Mr. Dodds

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I received a letter from him, dated 21st November, informing me that the petition was being considered, and 11 weeks later I received another letter stating that the petition was still being considered; and does he not think that the 11 weeks which have elapsed is a long time even for the War Department?

Mr. Bellenger

I think the main burden of my hon. Friend's Question was whether a decision has been arrived at. A decision has been arrived at.

Mr. Leslie Hale

Is the Minister aware that I wrote to him about this matter in November, that this man has been serving his sentence all this time, and letter after letter has been sent; and does he now tell this House that it is an adequate explanaation merely to say, "We have come to the conclusion that the matter is not worth considering," without giving any reasons at all?

Mr. Bellenger

I do not like discussing these matters publicly, but, as my hon. Friend has asked me, I can tell him that I find no reason to interfere with this sen tence of two years' hard labour which was imposed for stealing machinery.

Mr. Hale

Yes—but we asked the right hon. Gentleman to write to us.

Mr. Dodds

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I asked this Question because I waited 11 weeks for the petition to be considered?

Forward to