62. Mr. Dugdaleasked the First Lord of the Admiralty the reasons which led the interview board to decide that the marine, about whom the hon. Member for West Bromwich has written to him, had not suitable qualifications for commissioned rank in the Fleet Air Arm
§ Mr. J. P. L. ThomasThis candidate was not accepted for a short service commission for aircrew duties because the interview board considered that he had not developed, to a sufficient degree, the qualities of leadership and responsibility which would be needed in an officer of the Royal Navy.
Mr. DugdaleIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that there were only three questions put to this marine which he was unable to answer—first, who was the author of "Peter Pan"; secondly, who stood on the bridge with Horatio; and thirdly, what was the profession of his father? Unfortunately his father was a bus driver.
§ Mr. ThomasThe result was not necessarily based only on those three questions. This marine has a chance to apply for an aircrew commission after another six months.
§ Mr. ShinwellWhy were these silly questions asked of this marine? Are these not ridiculous questions to ask? Surely they ought to be excluded from the questions which are put before deciding whether a marine has the right qualifications.
§ Mr. ThomasIt goes far beyond the questions asked. It is the way the man answers and his general bearing.
§ Captain RyderIs it not highly undesirable that hon. Members should use their position in this House to secure special consideration for various candidates seeking these commissions?
Mr. DugdaleMay I say—[HON MEMBERS: "No."] Yes, may I say—[HON MEMBERS: "No."]—that I have no knowledge of this marine, that this 382 marine is not a friend of mine, and may I say—[HON MEMBERS: "No."]—may I ask whether it is not in order for a Member of Parliament to take an interest in the proceedings by which officers are selected for the Royal Navy? Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that a proper question to ask is, "What is your father's profession?" What has that to do with it at all?
§ Mr. ThomasThese questions by interview boards frequently refer to the background of the boy in order to draw him out. I am sure that, like myself, the right hon. Gentleman has attended interview boards and he knows perfectly well, after the recent visit of the Press to Dartmouth, how untrue accusations of bias against interview boards have been found to be.
§ Mr. K. ThompsonCan the less erudite among us be informed who was the father of Peter Pan?
§ Mr. ThomasI should like notice of that question. Perhaps my hon. Friend will put it down.
Mr. I. O. ThomasWould the Minister indicate whether the rejected candidate, had he been able to answer the question, "Who was the father of Peter Pan?" would have passed into the commissioned ranks?
§ Mr. ThomasI should think he would have passed any examination under those circumstances.
§ Mr. SpeakerI think we have had enough of Peter Pan.
§ 65. Mr. W. R. Williamsasked the First Lord of the Admiralty the rank of each of the naval officers who constituted the Selection Board held on 14th April, 1953, to interview candidates for promotion to commissioned rank amongst whom was A4-D/MX923737 Artificer - engineer Popple, and also the rank of each officer who constituted the Final Selection Board which on 13th August, 1953, rejected the above named artificer-engineer
§ Mr. J. P. L. ThomasA captain, a captain (L), a commander and a commander (E) constituted the April Board. A commander (L), a lieutenant commander and a lieutenant commander (L) constituted the August Board.
§ Mr. WilliamsIs it true to say that while the senior board were much more concerned with the technical and the operational suitability of the candidates, and that they selected this officer, the other board was concerned in the main with the sporting and physical activities of the candidates and that it rejected this lad?
§ Mr. ThomasThe second board was the rejecting board. If it is suggested that it was biased in any way against the boy, for reasons which I gave earlier in answer to Questions today, I would point out that the Board consisted of a special entry officer and two officers entered from the lower deck.
§ Mr. WilliamsIs it not true to say that this second board asked no questions at all other than questions about the physical and sporting prowess of this candidate?
§ Mr. ThomasThe members would, of course, have before them the report of the first board.
§ 66. Mr. W. R. Williamsasked the First Lord of the Admiralty what right Artificer-engineer Popple had under the regulations to appeal against the decision of the Selection Board held on 13th August, 1953; and why he was not permitted so to do
§ Mr. J. P. L. ThomasThere is no right of appeal from the decision of the Selection Board held on 13th August, 1953. The second part of the Question does not therefore arise.
§ Mr. WilliamsI am assuming that the Minister has read the case, after the correspondence which I have had with him. Is he not satisfied that another board is required to deal with this man whose attainments in all these examinations have been so high?
§ Mr. ThomasI have certainly read all the details of the case, but I cannot agree that a third board is necessary. This boy has had a very full hearing at both the first and second boards' interviews.
§ Mr. WilliamsIn view of the completely unsatisfactory nature of the replies, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment as soon as I can.