§ 40. Mr. Follickasked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware that an eager long-service recruit was recently turned down by the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force because he could not spell conventionally such words as "secretary" and "discoveries"; and if he will see that spelling tests are not allowed to exclude worth-while candidates in future.
§ Mr. DigbySpelling is only one part of a selection test designed to assess a candidate's suitability to join the Royal Navy. No candidate would be rejected solely because of his inability to spell correctly. I understand that similar conditions apply to candidates for the Royal Air Force.
§ Mr. FollickWhile accepting that partly in good faith, may I ask whether it is not absolutely futile that a young man from a comfortable home, who is willing to enter the Navy as a recruit for long service, should be turned down because he could not spell one or two difficult words?
§ Mr. DigbyAs I have pointed out, he was not turned down simply because he could not spell. I have seen the papers, and I do not believe that the spelling would be in conformity with the hon. Member's ideas on spelling reform.
§ Mr. Mikardois the hon. Gentleman aware that on this test neither Sir Francis Drake nor Lord Nelson would have been able to get into the Royal Navy?