§ 34. Major H. Johnsonasked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Guardsman Peter Youdale was put on a charge for fainting during the Trooping the Colour rehearsal on 29th May, 1950, and received punishment of five days' extra drill; and what action he proposes to take to ensure that fainting on parade ceases to be treated as a punishable offence.
§ Mr. StracheyThe hon. and gallant Member has been misinformed. While each case of fainting is investigated, no charge is preferred unless the man has fainted as a result of some action or negligence on his part which has rendered him unfit for parade. This guardsman was not guilty of such an act and was not put on a charge.
§ Major JohnsonIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that this guardsman had to suffer five extra drills? If that was not a punishment, what was it?
§ Mr. StracheyNo, Sir. My information is that after this occurrence this guardsman took part in the drills of his unit, which he had not been doing because of other duties beforehand, but these were in no sense a punishment.
§ Mr. StracheyThere again, no blame is attached to the officer if it is not considered that it was his fault.
§ Lieut.-Colonel ElliotMinisters get unseated, too.
§ Colonel Gomme-DuncanIs the Secretary of State aware that the country is prepared to leave this to the justice of commanding officers, and that this Question was really quite unnecessary?
§ Mr. BlackburnIs it not almost inconceivable that fainting in any circumstances could be a crime under King's Regulations?
§ Mr. StracheyNo, Sir. King's Regulations do provide that if, in the opinion of the authorities, the fainting has been due to some negligence on the part of the man or the officer, then a crime might be committed, but this did not arise in this case.
§ Mr. Somerville HastingsWhat conditions which could be prevented by the individual give rise to fainting?
§ Mr. StracheyThree conditions have been given to me, one of which is being out late at night on the eve of the parade.