§ Motion made, and Question proposed. That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. E. Wakefield.]
§ 10.0 p.m.
§ Mr. George Wigg (Dudley)It is a reflection upon our times that since 2nd August this country has been in a state of mobilisation. Forty-odd years ago it was similar mobilisations which set in train the events which led to the First World War. I do not intend tonight to have an inquest upon all our defence preparations. That will come later. The House will have many opportunities for that on the Supplementary Estimates and perhaps some of my right hon. Friends might seek a debate upon the Government's preparations for defence.
Today the House has been discussing whether we should use force. I am a little doubtful whether, even if the Government had set about the job some six weeks ago, we should have been able to do all that we think they wanted to do, for there are certain quite marked deficiencies. There are deficiencies in tank landing craft and transport aircraft and our position regarding long-range fighter aircraft leaves much to be desired.
However, there is one aspect of this problem which must be probed before the House again adjourns. That is the topic of manpower. Somewhere tonight are about 20,000 men who have been taken from their homes, their businesses and their families and who are wondering when they will get back again. Between the wars there were three occasions, in 1921 during a strike, in 1927 at the time of the Shanghai crisis and in 1936 on the occasion of the Arab revolt when we called up Section A of the Army Reserve. On some of those occasions we had scenes which were not a credit to the Army, because, to put it in a nutshell, the troops got "browned off". Nothing I say tonight should be taken as condoning anything of that kind. These men have been called up to do their duty, and whatever we think of the Government's policy, these men are doing their duty and doing a vital job in loyally carrying out orders.
Much has happened of which the House does not seem to be aware. Not only have Section A reservists been 151 called up, but National Service men who should have been released have not been released. I do not think that that applies to men in this country, nor to those in the Middle East, because plenty of empty transport is coming back and the Government have no difficulty in bringing those men home. However, I am sure that there are National Service men in the Far East in that position. If the present situation continues for any time, that number will grow.
The Government have been forced to take the very difficult decision to "freeze" Regular men due for release. That is a very serious step indeed. My right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) had to take the same step at the time of the Korean war. If one calls up reserves, one cannot release Regulars and even if one did, one could play a trick and call them up the next day and the troops would soon see through that.
The fact is that in every unit of the Army today are men who have grievances against the Service, who have decided to go, but who cannot leave. If there is a single thing which has "cooked" Regular recruiting from 1950 onwards it is that the memory of the "freeze" still remains and now the Government have had to do it again. I hope that when the right hon. Gentleman replies he will tell us something about the plans for the release of National Service men. How many are being held? How long does he anticipate that they will be held? What steps have the Government in mind to get things back to an even keel? Above all, the right hon. Gentleman must tell the men what will happen to them. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will tell us the number of Regulars who have been "frozen" since the date the "freeze" was introduced up to 31st August, and perhaps he would be good enough to give the House an idea of how many men per month he thinks will be "frozen" as long as this is necessary.
The House ought to have a look at some of the other problems which are thrown up as a result of the decision to call up Section A. First of all, how large is Section A itself? I have no doubt that on this point I shall "buy a coconut." The Government will not give me the information and so I will give it to 152 them. First of all, I fall back on General Cobb. Time and time again I quote him in the House. He is a man of whom the Army should be very proud. He knows a great deal about its manpower problems.
At the time of Korea we called up 4,500. How many of them were from Section A I do not know. Between the wars we had a Section B of about 80,000 and we called up under 4,000 on the three occasions when Section A was recalled.
At the moment, we have about 169,000 National Service men serving in the Army Emergency Reserve and there are about 3,000 volunteers who have accepted a liability for recall. I would, therefore, like to have a little bet of sixpence that the Section A recall figure in the present emergency is not greater than 4,000. If I am right, then we have a problem which is rather worrying, for when the Prime Minister made his announcement that it would be necessary to recall not only Section A but Section B, together with the Army Emergency Reserve, he spoke of the recall of a "limited number" and when the Secretary of State for War spoke he talked about the recall of a "small number".
What, then, is the real figure recalled? I rely for my information upon the authority of the Daily Telegraph, a thoroughly reliable newspaper, particularly on military matters, for its Military Correspondent, General Martin, gets more "leaks" than anybody in the business. The Daily Telegraph last week gave a figure of 20,000 as the number of reservists recalled. It seems to me, therefore, that if that figure is right and Section A is not larger than 4,000, the number recalled has neither been "small" nor "limited".
When the Government announced their intention to call out the Army Reserve I had a pretty shrewd idea of the kind of categories they would want. For instance, they would require a number of men at the Royal Engineer Port Unit at Marchwood, but I thought, and indeed I said to the House, that the numbers involved would appear to be in terms of tens or hundreds.
I thought in small numbers for I related what was happening to the Korean operation and the occasions between the wars when similar steps were necessary. It 153 seems to me, therefore, that the Government have been caught out. I will not convenience Colonel Nasser by telling him the results of my researches, but I believe that fifteen major units have left the country since the emergency began and in addition a 3rd Division has been built up to some sort of operational level.
In raising this matter I am as concerned as the Secretary of State for War about the morale of the Army and the reservists. There must be in all about 240,000 reservists. There is no secret about it. There is the Ministry of Defence Statement of 22nd August which gives the number on the A.E.R. Then in the Abstract of Statistics for 1955 the strength of Section B is given as 70,000. Therefore there is a total strength of about 240,000. Therefore, if the right hon. Gentleman is still calling up men, if the word goes round that letters are still being put into the postbox fetching men back to the Colours, the degree of uncertainty must continue over the whole range of these 240,000 men.
I want, therefore, to ask the right hon. Gentleman two questions, the second of which I consider to be the most important question asked in the House today. First, what was the last date upon which a reservist was asked to join the Colours as a result of the Secretary of State's original announcement? Secondly, when questioned on 2nd August, the right hon. Gentleman gave the House an assurance that men would not be called beyond the scope which the Prime Minister himself indicated. The Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for War told the House that neither the range nor the numbers of the call-up would be extended without the House being recalled. That puts the House and the Opposition in a delicate position.
Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that no more reservists will be called up? If they are to be called up—the right hon. Gentleman has fetched back about 20,000 Section B and 4,000 Section A men—he still has another 230,000 to play with. The Opposition will have lost their safeguard, because they had an assurance that no more men would be called up until the House had been recalled. Now the House has been brought back.
154 I am not suggesting that the right hon. Gentleman will "pull any quick ones". In the past, he and I have had our differences. I am on to a different point and I want to defend the War Office, and I will move to a field in which it needs to be defended. I do not think that the actual mobilisation scheme itself has been found to be wanting. A number of the complaints—I get my share—which I have examined have shown the War Office in a very good light.
I want to mention three definite categories. First, when the mobilisation scheme began, there were a number of complaints from agricultural workers ; the weather were extremely bad and a considerable number of men were being fetched back. Before shedding any tears, however, one needs to remember that a considerable number of these boys who were moaning had accepted 1s. 6d. a day for this obligation. All the Section A reservists, if private soldiers, got 1s. 6d. a day. The Army Estimates show how the scale rises.
Turning to the Army Emergency Reserve, three of the categories were also volunteers and they get bounties and additional pay. Those in Section 2A, of course, are National Service men. I should like to know from the right hon. Gentleman how many National Service men in this category have been fetched back. The position of these men seems to me to be rather bad. They have had neither bounty—but I must be careful or I shall be treading ground which requires legislation to correct it, and that would be out of order. I will not ask the right hon. Gentleman for anything more than the numbers involved. How many men have been fetched back in Section 2A?
I think that the War Office and the National Farmers' Union did a very good job in relation to the agricultural workers who were fetched back and concerning whom hardship was caused. The matter was attended to with a great deal of sympathy and understanding. I had instances also of men whose wives and parents were sick. The system worked extremely well. All that a man had to do was to go to the Ministry of Labour Employment Exchange, when he would be allowed 14 days while the matter was investigated and then the War Office 155 would take its decision. The system worked well.
In another case, I consider that the War Office did extremely well. I mention this because I want also to criticise a newspaper, the News Chronicle, which, in accordance with its normal procedure, was both late and wrong. It got hold of a letter which had been written to The Times concerning an officer named Birtwhistle. Mr. Birtwhistle was a member of the Regular Army Reserve of Officers. He had volunteered and, therefore, there was no grumble on that score.
As soon as I read of this matter, I telephoned to the headmaster. I got in touch with the right hon. Gentleman's private secretary. The same day, the War Office took steps to release the man, and the Secretary of State for War has been kind enough to tell me that the man has been released. So far, so good. The fault was with the Minister of Education. I do not ask the right hon. Gentleman to agree with me on that, but the people who were at fault in not looking at the problem were those in the Ministry of Education.
I want to give the right hon. Gentleman as much time to reply as I have had, because I have asked him a number of questions. I would like him to find time to tell us the comparable figures for the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force, although I do not think that this problem touches the other two Services very much. It is primarily an Army problem. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will also bear in mind my main object in raising this matter. Many of the reservists will be reading this debate, even if they have never read a debate before in their lives, because their return to their homes depends upon what the House of Commons decides. It is most appropriate that both sides of the House should show some concern for these men who, whatever we may think of the policy of the Government, are engaged in doing their duty.
§ 10.17 p.m.
§ The Secretary of State for War (Mr. Antony Head)I am obliged to the hon. Member for Dudley (Mr. Wigg) for the responsible way in which he has raised the problem which, whatever hon. Gentlemen may think about the policy of the Government, had to be brought about, and 156 which involves a disturbance in the lives of a considerable number of men.
I am only too well aware of the reluctance, difficulty and domestic problems associated with a call-up of reservists. Speaking merely from my own point of view and from what I know, which is, I admit, limited, I am entitled to say that I admire the general spirit in which this unwelcome recall has been taken, and I believe that the House as a whole would like to admire it. There has been a remarkable absence of real complaint or of obstruction to its execution.
It would be right, in replying to the hon. Gentleman, to give a general outline of the problem and to say what we have been doing. The first important thing is that the House should have some appreciation of the size of the call-up and of the field from which it has been taken—we now enter a somewhat technical matter—which concerns solely the Army.
The field from which the call-up has been taken is, first, Section A of the Regular Army Reserve. This consists entirely of men who have volunteered to be in the Regular Army Reserve or who have been designated, as the hon. Gentleman said, into it. Secondly, there are those who belong to Category I of the Army Emergency Reserve. These are solely volunteers. It is not within the capacity of the War Office to designate men into that category. Both of these categories can be called up without Proclamation and are the main sources from which the call-up has been taken.
The hon. Member said he doubted whether I could give figures. I have gone carefully into the question of giving figures. Although I may not be believed, it is, nevertheless, a fact that I always cross-question the War Office very carefully about any obstruction to the giving of figures. I am convinced that to give figures in this case would not be wise, so I have turned them into percentages. The ceiling of these reserves is laid down in the Estimates and I can say that we are not a very long way below them, so that is going some way.
Of Section A of the Regular Army Reserve we have called up about 60 per cent. Of A.E.R. 1, that is, the volunteers within the Army Emergency Reserve, we have called up about 50 per cent. That is the scope of the call-up 157 which involves those who are volunteers or are within the scope of designation and liable to call-up without Proclamation.
I now turn to the call-ups which are outside these spheres. There is Section B of the Regular Army Reserve, of which we have called up about 7 per cent., and there is Category II of the Army Emergency Reserve of which we have called up under 3 per cent. I hope that that gives an indication that the vast majority of the recall has been of those who are either volunteers or designated, and who, in both cases, are paid because they are within the scope of recall. Of the remainder outside Section B and A.E.R. II and Section A and A.E.R. I we have not called up any one at all. The numbers there, as the hon. Member has said, are very large indeed, but no one has been recalled outside the categories I have mentioned. Nor, unless most unexpected conditions obtain, will there be any recall within that field.
§ Mr. Charles Royle (Salford, West)Would the Minister say what percentage of National Service men has been called up, compared with other reservists?
§ Mr. HeadI am coming to that. Hon. Members always say, "I am coming to that" but I really am coming to it.
The next point I think I should mention is that when the Proclamation was announced in this House I stated, and the Prime Minister stated, that the reason was that we particularly and essentially needed certain specialists within A.E.R. II, and that their numbers were limited. They are strictly limited, and I think that I have given an indication by saying that under 3 per cent. of A.E.R. II have been recalled. They are specialists, and by any present expectations it is most unlikely that any more will be recalled within that category.
The point raised by the hon. Member, as to our expectations on the future recall of reservists is, in the present situation, obviously a difficult question for me to answer. If our present policy of trying to settle this matter by negotiation succeeds, there will obviously be no cause for any further recall of reservists except, possibly, that occasioned by wastage. If, on the other hand, it turns to active operations, there is the whole question of first reinforcements and extra administrative backing. My answer, therefore, is that 158 if there is no necessity for military operations there will be negligible further recall. If, on the other hand, military operations are required, the whole question of first reinforcements and further administrative units arises. I do not think that anybody would expect me to go further than that in that respect.
On the question of speed, the hon. Gentleman—and I am entirely with him—said to me, "You must give an undertaking to the House that you will do it as quickly as possible." He is quite correct. No one wants to leave in suspense as to whether they are to be called up more people than necessary. Of the total number we have recalled to date—which, I may say, has not appreciably exceeded the number we originally anticipated calling up when the House met on 2nd August—by 7th August we had called up 70 per cent.; by 14th August we had called up 80 per cent.; and the complete total was reached some time about the end of August.
It is true that there has been a gradual call-up of very small numbers since then, but we introduced the call-up by only calling up the exact number we needed without, so to speak, aiming for a surplus. Had we done that it would have been wasteful in so far that a number of those found to be unfit, or in reserved occupations, or for other reasons exempted from call-up, are specialists. Therefore, it would have been wasteful to call up an overall surplus. We waited until we could see what the surplus was, and then, having found the deficiency, we called up replacements within their special categories. I believe that that was right and that it avoided calling up more men than were necessary.
§ Mr. HeadNobody has been warned. Either a man is called up or is not called up. The question of warning does not arise.
The next point I ought to mention is the question of screening. It is well known that a certain number of men have received their notices and have been either deferred or let off. People say that it is very stupid to call them up because in civilian life they were farmers, policemen, miners, and so forth.
§ Mr. Emrys Hughes (South Ayrshire)And doctors.
§ Mr. HeadYes, and doctors.
I think that I should say a word or two about this. First, there is the Regular Army Reserve, Sections A or B. It has for long been laid down and is accepted that within the Regular Army Reserve—men who have been Regular soldiers—nobody is deferred. As it happens, since that original ruling was made, it was felt that it would be stupid for men who had been Regulars, and especially for the shorter terms, to be recalled when they are in certain essential jobs. Therefore, policemen, firemen, miners, and so on, have not been recalled although they have been Regulars.
Next, there is the A.E.R., consisting of the National Service men and those who have a liability which is entirely voluntary. They are screened by the Ministry of Labour and National Service during the first five months after they have left the Colours. The Ministry of Labour and National Service goes through them all and takes out anybody who is within the Ministry's screening list of reserved occupations. They are not available.
We called up these men in A.E.R. II and we caught some whom we ought not to have called up. The fault lies mainly, though not entirely, in the fact that a man does not notify a change of occupation after the first five months of his leaving the Colours. He goes out of the Army and is screened by the Ministry of Labour and National Service. He changes to a new job ; he is in a reserved occupation and is then called up. Directly he is called up, the Ministry which sponsors him or he himself may apply for deferment. He is then given 14 days' deferment from being called up. The case is then considered—
§ Mr. HeadThe hon. Gentleman has raised this subject, and if he wishes me to deal with the "freeze" in the remaining time I will do so.
The position is this. We have in the Army two categories of Regulars—the 22-year man who has completed his service and is pensionable, and the man who has completed any period less than that—all the engagements right down to three and four years. Our principle has been to let the 22-year man go unless he is vital to some local situation. The remainder we have "frozen" for the reasons which the hon. Gentleman has stated. It is running at about 3,000 a month in the Army, 500 a month in the Navy, and 250 a month in the Air Force.
In the case of National Service men, the delay is much less than I expected. I expected a big pile-up. There is no delay in the Middle East, Germany or Kenya. There is a delay building up in the Far East. At the moment it is only about 8, but by 18th October it will be 608. We are trying as far as we can to reduce that number, but at present there is no long delay in returning National Service men who should be released.
§ Mr. RoyleMay I have the information for which I asked—the percentage of National Service men called up as compared to the total number of men called up?
§ Mr. HeadI am coming to that. The total number of National Service men called up all fall within the category—
§ The Question having been proposed at Ten o'clock and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
§ Adjourned at half-past Ten o'clock.