§ 14. Mr. Swinglerasked the Secretary of State for War what is his estimate of the financial saving in his Department which would result from reducing the National Service period by six months.
§ Mr. SwinglerTo save time and to increase efficiency, quite apart from fulfilling pledges given, will the right hon. Gentleman now consider making this saving?
§ Mr. SwinglerIs not the right hon. Gentleman aware of the pledge given in 1950, when National Service was increased to two years, that this was purely a temporary measure, although it has now been going on for over four years? Will the right hon. Gentleman urgently consider reducing the period of National Service?
§ Mr. HeadThe Government stated last year, and we state again now, that it is our object and policy to reduce National Service by as much as possible as soon as possible but that depends on events, and events at present do not allow that it should be reduced by six months.
§ Mr. CallaghanDo the Government regard themselves as bound by the pledge given in 1950 that the increase from 18 months to two years was in respect of 170 the Korean war and for a temporary period only and, if so, when does the right hon. Gentleman propose to give effect to it?
§ Mr. HeadIf the hon. Gentleman thinks that that pledge was given about the Korean war and that nothing has happened since, all I can say is that he has not been studying the general strategic situation very much.
§ Mr. StracheyDoes not the right hon. Gentleman recall that that pledge was given quite clearly about the Korean war? Is he now going to plead the Government's failure to get Regular recruits as a reason for refusing to reduce the period of National Service?
§ Mr. HeadThis has practically nothing to do with Regular recruiting. Regular recruiting has remained perfectly steady for the last three years. The reasons for the present period of National Service are the general situation overseas, our commitments in Europe and our desire to balance the Army's general structure by creating a strategic reserve.