HC Deb 18 November 1953 vol 520 cc1862-72

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Studholme.]

10.15 p.m.

Mr. David Jones (The Hartlepools)

After the debate all day on cotton, it is not without significance that I want to return tonight to the problems arising from National Service. Neither is it without significance that this follows the debate yesterday and the day before on National Service, which largely ranged around the difficulties arising from the call-up. I am particularly concerned tonight about raising the case of a young man in my constituency who, in my judgment, has been treated very badly by the Ministry of Labour and National Service. His treatment is certainly not conducive to doing what the Minister said yesterday was the desire of himself and of his Department.

This young man reached the age of 17 years and 10 months in March this year. Being a shop assistant, and anticipating his call-up under National Service on reaching his 18th birthday, he volunteered in advance in March for enrolment in the Royal Air Force for a three years' engagement with nine years in the Reserve, and he was provisionally accepted. On 8th April, he received a notice from the Royal Air Force recruiting station at Middlesbrough telling him to report at that point on 27th April. The notice which he received instructed him to be at Middlesbrough at 9 o'clock in the morning and to be ready to proceed to his depot. It said: You should come prepared to proceed at once to your reception unit. Because he did not want to leave his employer, a shopkeeper, in the lurch, the young man tendered his resignation, attended at Middlesbrough on 27th April, and was sent to Bedford and given a medical examination. He was rejected for three years' service in the Royal Air Force and was sent home on 29th April.

On 2nd May, the young man and his father saw me in the constituency and sought information as to whether the young man would again have to be called up for National Service. To make quite sure that there was no mistake, on 5th May I communicated by letter with the Minister of National Service, and on 22nd May, 17 days afterwards, the Minister replied: Mr. Thompson has been found unfit for a Regular engagement in the R.A.F. but he has not been found unfit for military service under the National Service Acts. On the advice of the Department's medical advisers, however, arrangements are being made for him to be medically re-examined under the Acts. The Minister will write to you as soon as a full report of the examination is before him. The young man was examined on 12th May by the medical tribunal at Middlesbrough, was graded in category 2, and was sent back home and told to await further instructions. The next instruction which he received was to report at Middlesbrough on 9th June for a further medical examination, which was to be a specialist examination. He attended on 9th June, when he was given no information whatsoever by the medical panel, but was told to return home and await instructions.

On 18th June, the young man was instructed to proceed to Hartlepools Hospital to be examined by a specialist. He was then put into category 3 and was told that in due course he would be called up for Army service. That was four medical examinations that this young man had had. Indeed, it looks very much as though the Ministry of Labour were seeking to persecute this lad, and kept having him re-examined until at last someone was found who would declare him fit to put into the Army.

He was not called up to the Army until 20th August, so that he was from 27th April until 20th August waiting for the Ministry to decide what they were going to do. Is it any wonder that the Minister of Labour and National Service said yesterday in the House that his Department were trying to bring about a constructive attitude towards National Service … trying to create a feeling that if there has to be National Service it should be made a period of opportunity, and not merely an unwelcome disruption of ordinary life."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 17th November, 1953; Vol. 520, c. 1586.] I should like to ask whether the hon. Gentleman regards the period of more than 100 days as being something conducive to inducing young men to regard their entry into National Service with anything like the approach that is likely to make them good soldiers?

I want to put a further point. The young man had volunteered for three years in the R.A.F. and nine years in the Reserve. He was declared unfit to do three years in the R.A.F., but after three further examinations was found fit enough to do two years in the Army. If I am told that the standard of physical fitness for air service must be high I will agree, but this man was going into a ground job. Why is it necessary to have higher standards of medical fitness for three years' service on the ground in the R.A.F. whereas Grade 3 men, after three examinations, can be put into the Army? Does that accord with the approach to the problem of National Service about which the right hon. and learned Gentleman talked yesterday.

It took over 106 days to get this boy into the Army. On 17th August I inquired of the Minister whether he would compensate him for the wages that he had lost, or for the difference between the wages he could have earned had he remained in his employment until he was called up for the Army and the unemployment benefit which he drew for the 106 days which passed from the time he was rejected for the R.A.F. until the final call-up for the Army.

When the Parliamentary Secretary and I discussed this matter he said that there was no obligation upon his Department, but there is certainly an obligation to speed up the method by which these young men are taken into the Forces when they have to be examined and reexamined because their medical category is not high enough. When the point was made that the young man should not have given up his job, the Parliamentary Secretary referred me to a document which he says the young man received and signed. If the young man received the document he must have received it at the recruiting office. The father of the boy emphatically denies that the form ever came to the boy's home.

At the top of the form are the words: To be made out in duplicate. One copy to be given to the prospective regular recruit with form 308. The point on which the hon. Gentleman relies in his refusal to give any compensation is paragraph 6, which says: You are advised to ask your employer whether he will continue your employment if your acceptance into regular service is not confirmed. In other words, the employer should be asked whether he will retain the young man in his service if he is not accepted into the R.A.F., but the recruit is not given the chance to go back to the employer to tell him whether or not he is accepted. Also, the employer is under no obligation under the Reinstatement in Civil Employment Regulation to reemploy a man who accepts a Regular engagement.

Therefore, I submit that it was perfectly reasonable that if the young man wanted to leave his employer on the best possible terms the sensible thing to do was what the boy did—to tender his resignation and leave the job on the best of terms with his employer so that he might rely on the employer's generosity to take him back when he came out of the Air Force.

When I raised a further point I was told that on 10th June, the day following the young man's third examination, he was offered a job by the officials of the employment exchange at West Hartlepool. That I emphatically repudiate. When the young man presented himself in the ordinary way at the exchange to sign, he was told that there was a likelihood of his being given employment with Messrs. Binns Limited, West Hartlepool. But I should like the hon. Gentleman to tell me why Thompson was not given a green card if there was a specific vacancy to be filled.

In the afternoon the young man's father went to the exchange and explained to the supervisor that his son did not yet know whether he was to be called up or not. He was awaiting the convenience of the hon. Gentleman's Department. I suggest that in those circumstances even if there was a job available no employer would have accepted this young man, because there was a distinct possibility that within days of 10th June he would be called up for two years National Service.

The employer, having taken him into employment for two or three days, would then have been under obligation to take him back into employment when he had completed his service in the Forces. If the hon. Gentleman believes that employers take people into their employment temporarily in those circumstances, he is simpler than I imagine he is. The fact is that there was no specific vacancy, or else the boy would have been given a green card.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell us whether the Ministry of Labour, having regard to the declarations made yesterday by his right hon. and learned Friend, will try in future to co-ordinate the medical examination standards for three-year Regular engagements and two-year National Service? I think the hon. Gentleman's defence will be that the successive medical examinations were undertaken in order to be sure that the boy was in a fit condition to go into the Army. Whether that be necessary or not, it ought not to take a Government Department 106 days to decide whether or not they will take into the Armed Forces a man whose medical category is Grade 3.

If the Ministry want to make the National Service scheme work, they had better set about making regulations which will prevent this frustration in the lives of young men who have to endure at least four months' unemployment, not because they have committed a crime, but because they are anxious to do their National Service for the country and are precluded from doing it because of the dilatoriness of the Ministry of Labour. If the hon. Gentleman wants to live up to the promises which his right hon. and learned Friend made in yesterday's debate, something must be done to make the machinery work much more smoothly than it has done in this case.

10.33 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour and National Service (Mr. Harold Watkinson)

This is rather a long story, and I am obliged to the hon. Member for The Hartlepools (Mr. D. Jones) for giving me enough time to tell it.

First of all, I want to make it plain on general grounds that at the Ministry we shall continue to carry out the policy which my right hon. and learned Friend enunciated yesterday. This is to try to be as fair as we possibly can be, and as sympathetic as the law allows us to be, over the very difficult question of the call-up.

I do not blame the hon. Gentleman at all for making as powerful a case as he could. That was his duty. He came to see me about the boy, and we discussed the case at great length. He has now made a very powerful case in support of his constituent, as it was his duty to do. I understand that, although I consider he has said some things which are hardly applicable to National Service. He has talked about persecution and a great many other things which I must rebut. I do not blame the hon. Gentleman for trying to ensure that his constituent gets what he believes to be his rights. But now I have my duty to do, and that is to put the facts as we see them, and try to relate them to the question of National Service as a whole.

We had better deal first with the relevant facts. The case starts with the boy volunteering for the R.A.F. When he went for examination as an R.A.F. volunteer at Middlesbrough, he was not only given the form which the hon. Gentleman has mentioned, which says in paragraph 6: You are advised to ask your employer whether he will continue your employment if your acceptance into Regular service is not confirmed. but also R.A.F. Form 308, which says: I understand that I shall receive a further medical examination at the reception unit and that if I am found to be below standard my final acceptance will not be approved. Although I have expressed a willingness to enter the Royal Air Force, I have not yet been enlisted and my final acceptance and allocation to a trade will depend on the requirements of the Service. I have a written undertaking here from Commanding Officer, Middlesbrough Recruiting Centre, that the boy signed both those forms, and that they were countersigned by an officer as well. I do not think there is any doubt that the boy received the two forms, which told him plainly that there was no certainty of his being enrolled in the R.A.F. and that he should take care to preserve his job as far as may be while the process was going on. I am not saying for a moment whether or not the boy read the forms carefully.

Well, he did not take that care. He left his job. Again, I do not propose to say whether that was right or wrong. My concern is to see that the procedure was properly carried out. Although what the R.A.F. does is not my responsibility, I have made most careful and searching inquiries, and am satisfied that as far as was possible the position was made plain to this boy. He left his job and went to the R.A.F. Reception Centre, Cardington. Let me here deal with the allegations of the hon. Gentleman that there is some "funny business" between the R.A.F. grading and that required for the Army.

Mr. Jones

I want the hon. Gentleman to explain why it is necessary to have a much higher standard of medical examination for three years in the R.A.F. than for two years in the Army.

Mr. Watkinson

I will, if the hon. Gentleman will give me time. The answer is that even ground staff, and indeed, all personnel in the R.A.F., must be prepared to fly. The whole basis of the R.A.F. is that ground crews must be prepared to be transported by air to any place where the R.A.F. need to send them. We all know that weakness of ears, nose and throat is the thing that most inhibits people from going by air.

It is quite reasonable that the standard for that part of the R.A.F. medical examination should be higher than for Grade 3 in the Army when we remember there is a territorial restriction on Grade 3 men in the Army. They are not sent out to fly, and in some cases they may be restricted to certain duties. It is quite right that the R.A.F. standard should be higher and that there should be a limited Grade 3 to suit certain Army requirements. It is very unfair on the fit men if we do not allow the less fit men to play their part. I do not think there is any grumble there. The normal procedure was carried out.

Now I had better explain the delay—there was a very long delay—which took place under the normal procedure for calling the boy up as a National Service man. Here we come to another difficulty, which just shows what the difficulties are in these personal cases. I have gone through this whole thing again most carefully. One of the great difficulties was that the boy, in filling in his first medical form—that is the form that all these National Service men complete for the benefit of the medical board—put "No" in answer to the question asking if he had had any discharge from either ear. He thus, quite unwittingly perhaps—I am not imputing any motives—misled the medical board on that point, and they did not at first find this trouble in his ear. When he came up again for his medical, on 12th May, he said "Yes" to the same question. This started a closer investigation into his ears.

The hon. Gentleman apparently takes the view that the purpose of repeated medical examination is to try to get a man's grade up to the stage where we can call him up. That is an untrue and improper suggestion. The whole purpose of the medical grading is to make sure that the man is excluded from the Services if he does not reach the appropriate standard.

Mr. Jones

Will the hon. Gentleman explain to me how many re-examinations a man must have before he is finally excluded?

Mr. Watkinson

As many as are necessary to satisfy the medical boards that they have given him a fair deal. This was a most difficult case, and I think that is proved by the fact that the man went to two ear specialists.

My right hon. and learned Friend and I thought that we were only deferring to the hon. Member's interest in this case. He had written to us and expressed his belief that this boy's medical examination had not been properly carried out, and that he had been improperly graded. Therefore, it was clearly our responsibility to go to whatever lengths were necessary to make sure that his final medical assessment was as correct and proper as medical skill could make it. That was the only reason—and quite a proper reason—why these medical examinations had to be carried out.

I admit that if I had been the boy's father I should have been worried, too, and I do not disagree with the hon. Gentleman when he says that it was a terribly long time to keep a young boy waiting about, not knowing what was going to happen to him. But I hope the hon. Gentleman will accept from me that if we were to try to get this medical grading really right—and I assure him that our desire was, and is in all cases, to exclude a man if he does not come up to the proper standard—it was necessary to have these further medical examinations.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, we have recently issued instructions to all medical boards—and they were going out when this boy had his last examination—that they must take every care to see that an unfit man does not enter the Services. That was the purpose of this examination and re-examination: to make quite sure that this boy was fit for limited service in the Army. That, of course, is how he finally finished up in Grade 3.

I think it is fair and right to say that although my right hon. and learned Friend and I certainly regret the delay that was caused, we do not accept for one moment that it could have been avoided. Once the machine had been put in train, and once the hon. Gentleman had written to us and expressed his disquiet about the medical grading of the boy—and I am very glad that he did so—then this delay was unavoidable.

Then there is the last question of whether the boy should receive any compensation.

Mr. Jones

I want to put the hon. Gentleman right on one point. All I did in my initial letter of 5th May was to inquire from the Minister whether the young man would now again come under the National Service Act, and whether the matter could be expedited because of the condition in which he found himself.

Mr. Watkinson

But the qualifying thing was whether the boy's standard of fitness was at an appropriate level or not, and until we had established that fact his case could go no further.

Coming to the question of whether he has any right to compensation, I think we must rest on the fact that in the beginning the boy was told, as he should have been, the difficulties arising from the R.A.F. I think that most employers try to be helpful to these young boys. They know these difficulties. Had the boy gone to his employer and said that he had applied to join the R.A.F., but did not know whether he would be accepted, I am sure he would have received a sympathetic reply from his employer. His employer would most likely have told him to wait for a bit to see how the matter went; but the boy did not do that.

When the normal call-up procedure took place, the boy only suffered the same risk that any young boy must suffer under the Act, which is that we must be quite satisfied that he reaches a proper standard before we put him into the Services at all.

I very much regret that this case took so long, but it was quite inevitable. I do not think that any particular responsibility rests on the Ministry of Labour and National Service for what happened. We shall, as always, try our best to see that this sort of thing does not happen, and that people get through their medicals as quickly as possible. I do not accept that we did not try to be as sympathetic and fair as we possibly could in this case.

Adjourned accordingly at a Quarter to Eleven o'Clock.