§ 35. Major Beamishasked the Secretary of State for War what are his new regulations regarding the wearing of swords, and what arrangements he has made to enable officers to obtain swords in future.
§ Mr. M. StewartApproval has been given for the resumption of the wearing of swords by Army officers on suitable 1954 ceremonial occasions. The rule is permissive and not obligatory. Corps or regiments will make their own arrangements to provide the swords required.
§ Major BeamishIs it not a very untidy procedure that the rule should be permissive and not obligatory? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that regimental swords now cost between nine and 12 guineas, which is beyond the purse of the junior officer? Should not this matter be tidied up and arrangements made for the provision of swords at reasonable prices if they are to come back?
§ Mr. StewartI realise the expensiveness of swords. That is why it has not been possible to make it an obligatory rule at present.
§ Mr. FernyhoughWill those who do not wish to carry a sword be allowed to carry a bow and arrow?
§ Mr. F. LeeWill my hon. Friend re-lease some of this money to pay for some light raincoats for the troops?
§ Mr. StewartMy hon. Friend has misunderstood me. My answer made it clear that we are not spending money on this matter.
§ Colonel Gomme-DuncanIs the hon. Gentleman aware that a well-made bow and arrow costs considerably more than a sword?
§ Mr. StewartMy experience does not go as far back as that, but I will accept the hon. and gallant Gentleman's assurance.