§ 26. Mr. Heathcoat Amoryasked the Secretary of State for War whether he will ensure for the future that, when the name of a soldier who is to be court-martialled is to be published, the offence with which he is charged shall also be made public.
§ Mr. StracheyWe make available to the public the name of a soldier who is to be tried by court martial and the Sections of the Army Act under which he is to be charged. As regards disclosing the full particulars of the charge in all cases, I would refer the hon. Member to the replies given to the hon. Members 1867 for Dartford (Mr. Dodds) and Croydon, East (Sir H. Williams), on 18th September and to the hon. Member for Colchester (Mr. Alport) and others on 19th September.
Mr. AmoryWill the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that there is a good deal of public anxiety about the lack of information given in a recent case, and that more information was given in that case later, and rather late in the day? Will he see that in future more information is given at the earliest possible moment?
§ Mr. StracheyI understand the hon. Gentleman's point, but that was an extremely exceptional case, and in 99 cases out of 100, of course, no security considerations arise.
38. Brigadier Clarkeasked the Secretary of State for War if he will give instructions that when a National Service soldier under the age of 21 is to be tried by court-martial or a civil court, the next-of-kin are informed.
§ Mr. StracheyI would refer the hon. and gallant Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Luton (Dr. Hill) on 25th July.
Brigadier ClarkeDoes the right hon. Gentleman realise that the Service Ministries have a responsibility for these men under 21; and that a constituent of mine found that his son was in gaol by reading the evening paper? That is not good enough.
§ Mr. StracheyThe military authorities have always hitherto taken the view that it would be wrong and an interference with the liberty of the soldier to inform his parents. They prefer to leave it to the soldier's own discretion whether he should do so or not.
Dr. HillShould not an exception be made where a young man of 21 is charged with a capital offence, bearing in mind that were he seriously ill his parents would be informed under the existing system?
§ Mr. StracheyI entirely agree that there are considerations on both sides in that matter. We will consider it, but I should be rather loath to depart from the present procedure.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanIs my right hon. Friend satisfied that the considerations which have satisfied his Department so far as applied to soldiers of mature age are exactly the same considerations to be applied to boys under the age of 21 serving away from home, probably for the first time in their lives?
Brigadier ClarkeDoes the right hon. Gentleman realise that while boys serving away from home do so with the consent and wish of their parents, they are not necessarily in the Army with their parent's consent or wish, and that he therefore has a responsibility to look after them?