§ 26. Mr. Dribergasked the Secretary of State for War approximately what percentage of the net annual profits of the Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes would be needed to provide a subsidy sufficient to ensure that troops in Korea will in no case have to pay prices higher than those obtaining in the United Kingdom; and if he will propose to the Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes that a reasonable sum should be set aside for this purpose.
§ Mr. StracheyThe N.A.A.F.I. surplus for the year ended 28th October, 1950, which was made available for the Army Central Fund and Combined Services Entertainment was some £100,000. I cannot say what proportion of this sum would be required to provide a subsidy of this nature, but my hon. Friend's suggestion would, in effect, mean that the troops in Korea would be subsidised at the expense of those serving in other parts of the world. I do not consider such an arrangement to be justifiable.
§ Mr. DribergIf this particular proposal is unacceptable for the reasons stated by my right hon. Friend, does that not add some force to the request for even a modest local overseas allowance, based on those N.A.A.F.I. items which are substantially higher in cost out there?
§ Mr. StracheyThat brings us back to the previous Question.
§ 29 and 32. Mr. Dribergasked the Secretary of State for War (1) what attempt was made, before it was decided not to grant a local overseas allowance to troops in Korea, to assess the average sums spent weekly by individual soldiers on Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes items which cost less in Korea than in the United Kingdom and on Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes items which cost more in Korea than in the United Kingdom; and if he will publish in HANSARD a detailed analysis of any such assessment that was made:
(2) if, in view of the fact that the cost of living questionnaire furnished to the British Commander in connection with his Department's request for an opinion on the question of a local overseas allowance for troops in Korea, contained many items not generally required or purchased by troops in Korea, he will cause this questionnaire to be revised on a more realistic basis, and request the Commander in Korea to re-examine the position.
§ Mr. StracheyLocal overseas allowance is designed to meet the necessary extra expenses of living in an overseas station over the expenses of living in the United Kingdom. The questionnaire which has been prepared by the Service Departments is intended to cover all items of expenditure in overseas stations and in the United Kingdom in order to form a uniform basis for the calculation of local overseas allowance.
An assessment of expenditure in N.A.A.F.I. was made by the Commander of the British forces in Korea when considering whether a case could be established for the issue of local overseas allowance in Korea. But the main difficulty of making a case for a local overseas allowance for troops in Korea is that their expenditure undoubtedly falls short of that of troops in the United Kingdom.
§ Mr. DribergIs my right hon. Friend aware that this questionnaire included all sorts of entirely irrelevant items, such as white dinner-jackets, hats (felt, soft), cummerbunds, and golf club fees, and is that not somewhat confusing to an officer who is trying to make out a reasonable case for a local overseas allowance? Would it not be better to have a sensible one based only on N.A.A.F.I. prices?
§ Mr. StracheyI can tell my hon. Friend that the commanding officer in this case pointed out that many of these items were not relevant; therefore he did not fill up the questionnaire, but regretted he could make no case for local overseas allowance in Korea.