§ 11. Mr. Scott-Hopkinsasked the Secretary of State for Defence what are the latest recruiting figures for the Army, the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. John MorrisIn April this year recruits to the Royal Navy, the Army and the Royal Air Force numbered 87, 1,932 and 667 respectively. Further details are available in the Vote Office. The figures for May are not yet available. There is no total recruiting requirement in the 1969 Statement on Defence Estimates.
§ Mr. Scott-HopkinsAre not these figures much below what is needed even to fulfil existing commitments? Are we not 10,000 men short in the Army alone? What do the Government intend to do to improve the position? Is the three-year engagement working? Does the hon. Gentleman think that the new pay proposals will help?
§ Mr. MorrisYes, Sir; I agree that the figures are below what we require. However, there has been a very slight improvement over the last few months, although it is so slight that it would not be right for me to place too much emphasis on it. We hope that the pay proposals we have announced will play a significant part in improving the situation, and we are doing a number of other things as well.
§ 24. Mr. Ramsdenasked the Secretary of State for Defence what is the present trend in Army recruiting; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. BoydenThe introduction of the shorter engagement announced in the House during the defence debate has already helped to improve recruiting, and I hope to see further improvements as a result of the increases in pay and the proposed review of the pay structure which were announced in the House last week.
§ Mr. RamsdenIs the hon. Gentleman aware that, although we have not debated this subject for a few months, concern in the House and the country about the continued disappointing trend in recruiting as evidenced by the figures given earlier is still grave? Will not the Government give the appearance of a rather less leisurely and more urgent approach to the problem and at any rate give the impression that they are proposing more constructive measures to tackle it?
§ Mr. BoydenThe Government's approach is not leisurely. The three-year engagement has only recently been introduced and appears to be a success. The Press reception of the new pay arrangements has been favourable, and from my discussions with soldiers I believe that they are looking forward to the new pay arrangements. All these things seem to be helping considerably.
§ Mr. Scott-HopkinsWhat is the shortfall? Is the hon. Gentleman able to give an assurance that even now we are able to meet our commitments not only in Europe but in the Near East?
§ Mr. BoydenWe are certainly able to meet our commitments, but we should like considerably more recruits. It is much too early yet to say how we shall get along.
§ 32. Mr. Goodhartasked the Secretary of State for Defence what further action lie intends to take in 1969 to improve recruiting for the armed forces.
§ Mr. John MorrisSubstantial pay changes were announced to the House by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence on 16th June.
We are also increasing our expenditure on recruiting publicity, modernising the recruiting organisations and extending the number of "Open Days" held at Service establishments.—[Vol. 785, c. 38–48.]
§ Mr. GoodhartDoes the hon. Gentleman recall that the main reason for leaving the Services given to the Prices and Incomes Board by officers and other ranks was uncertainty about career prospects? Does he recognise that this has an inhibiting effect on recruitment? Will he urgently turn his attention to reshaping the career structure of the Services in the coming months?
§ Mr. MorrisCareer prospects play an important part in recruiting men to the Forces, but pay, too, is very important. I know that the hon. Gentleman will join me in welcoming the adoption by the Government of the proposals of the National Board for Prices and Incomes on military salaries.
42. Mr. Edward M. Taylorasked the Secretary of State for Defence what was the total net recruitment to the Army in the first five months of 1969; and what were the comparable figures in the first five months of each of the previous four years.
§ Mr. BoydenFigures for May are not yet available. With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I will circulate the figures for the first four months of 1969 and the 1483 comparable figures for the previous four years in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
Mr. TaylorAre not the figures of net recruiting disturbing and disappointing, particularly when we have a big increase in unemployment? Is the Minister certain that we shall be able to fulfil our responsibilities without resorting to conscription?
| ADULTS AND YOUNG SOLDIERS | JUNIORS | ||||||||
| (1) | (2) | ||||||||
| Inflow | Outflow | Net loss or gain | Inflow | Outflow | |||||
| First Four Months of: | |||||||||
| 1965 | … | … | … | … | 9,176 | 7,896 | +1,280 | 1,400 | 508 |
| 1966 | … | … | … | … | 8,087 | 7,389 | +698 | 1,616 | 472 |
| 1967 | … | … | … | … | 8,001 | 6,936 | +1,065 | 1,531 | 497 |
| 1968 | … | … | … | … | 5,429 | 8,052 | -2,623 | 1,459 | 514 |
| 1969 | … | … | … | … | 5,952 | 7,837 | -1,885 | 1,391 | 671 |
| (1) Inflow includes recruits from civil life, rejoined reservists and boys maturing to adult service. | |||||||||
| (2) Outflow includes recruit and trained soldier wastage, normal run outs and redundancy. |