NAVY, ARMY AND AIR FORCE RESERVES BILL (Hansard, 3 December 1953)

§ Mr. A. Fenner Brockway (Eton and Slough)

I wish to ask that I might have before the whole House confirmation of an assurance given during the Committee stage. It relates to the men who develop a conscientious objection when they are called up as reservists. I should like to express my appreciation of the efforts made by my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Mr. Wigg), my right hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, West (Mr. Strachey) and my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. A. Henderson), and equally of the assurances which were given by the hon. Gentleman opposite.

The assurance to which I wish to draw attention was: There is no question at all of these men having to be sentenced to three months before they can apply to a tribunal. What happened, and it worked well, under the Z and G call-up, was that they could apply to existing tribunals. So far as I know there was no complaint about the way in which that worked. I think that about one in 900 was released as a genuine conscientious objector. The plan of the Government, which they think would be more flexible and probably more effective than a comprehensive scheme put into the Bill, is to deal with the matter administratively, as was done in the original call-up."—[Official Report, Standing Committee A, 24th November, 1953; c. 10–11.] 1397 The right hon. Member for Dundee, West then asked for a specific assurance. He wished to know whether in this more permanent scheme it is perfectly clear that these men will have access to the existing tribunals. The Minister said he could certainly give that assurance.

It is not because I am in any way desirous of expressing doubts about the assurance given in Committee, but because I think it is well that this should be on the records of the House that I am repeating the question now.