§ 19. Mr. Yatesasked the Minister of Labour the purpose of his Department in circulating to local conscientious objectors' tribunals during the years 1940 to 1943 notes of cases determined by the appellate tribunals; why the practice was discontinued; and whether he will consider the advisability of informing such tribunals of established precedents.
§ Sir W. MoncktonNotes on a small number of such cases were circulated in the early stages of the war, but this was discontinued as being inconsistent with the statutory independence of local tribunals. The answer to the last part of the Question is, "No, Sir."
§ Mr. YatesDoes not the Minister think that if courts of law are able to have precedents before them it is rather unjust if these tribunals cannot be aware of the decisions of the appellate tribunals to guide them in future consideration of their cases? I should like to know what objection there really can be to this information being given.
§ Sir W. MoncktonThere is, of course, always the right to appeal under the statute. I, in common with my predecessors from 1943, have, I think, regarded this matter in the following way. Conscientious objection is not defined in the Act. It is perfectly plain that there is involved not only what the tribunal apprehends to be conscientious objection, but an inquiry in the individual case as to the sincerity of the particular applicant. I do not think that precedents would assist, and certainly I ought not to issue instructions—by regulation or otherwise— where the burden has been put by the statute on someone else.
§ Mr. Fenner BrockwayWhilst I appreciate what the right hon. and learned Gentleman has said, is it not the case that these were not instructions from the appellate tribunal to the local tribunals but merely typical cases which might offer some guidance to them? Surely, in such cases, there is no interference with the rights of the local tribunals?
§ Sir W. MoncktonAs I said in my original answer, they were notes on cases. After some of them had been distributed during the first three years, 1341 the then Minister thought that they were neither advisable nor helpful, and none of his successors, including myself, has thought it right to change that.
§ 20. Mr. Yatesasked the Minister of Labour how many women are serving upon local conscientious objectors' tribunals.
§ Sir W. MoncktonSeven, Sir.
§ Mr. YatesSurely that number is a very small proportion of those serving on these tribunals. As we are living in an age where we are demanding equality, why cannot women's voices be heard more on these tribunals?
§ Sir W. MoncktonThe people who are coming before the tribunals now are, of course, men. Nevertheless, except in two cases there are women on all these boards. On two boards there are two women, and on the five boards there are, in all, seven women. If on the five boards there are seven women, I think that there is an adequate representation. Two boards, I agree, have no women members, but, after all, they are dealing with men's cases—and their voices can clearly be heard.
§ Mrs. MannIs not the right hon. Gentleman aware that in dealing with men the hardest-hearted people are women?
§ Sir W. MoncktonI think I could assume that that is not a plea for an increase in the number of lady members.
Miss WardIs not the Minister aware that women are sometimes more penetrating in knowing whether answers are good or bad?
§ Sir W. MoncktonAs long as it can be said that men are the best judges as to what to answer, I can agree.