THE MILITIA. (Hansard, 4 August 1924)

§ LORD AMPTHILL
My Lords, I beg to ask His Majesty's Government whether or not they adhere to the intention that the Militia should be re-constituted, which was declared by their predecessors in 1921 and 1922, and in the former case to inquire what is the present position as regards that Force.

§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR AIR (LORD THOMSON)
My Lords, I think that any student of military history can understand and sympathise with the Question that has been asked by the noble Lord, Lord Ampthill. The record of the Militia, more especially in South Africa, was so good that it is absolutely natural that many people should wish to see that Force re-constituted, more especially since many of them have taken a very keen interest in its development. There is only one point in the Question of the noble Lord to which I might take exception. That is the reference to the attitude of the predecessors of the present Government in regard to this question. The latest declaration which I can trace is that made in another place on March 15, 1923, by the then Under-Secretary of State for War, and which runs as follows: Much as the Army Council desire to retain the old and distinguished Militia 345 battalions which are now in abeyance, I regret that it has not been found possible in present conditions to justify the cost of their re-establishment. The present Government adhere to that declaration, and I regret to say that, in the immediate future anyhow, there is no prospect whatsoever of the re-establishment of the Militia on its old basis.
The only real justification for such a step would be that it improved the system of reinforcing our Regular Army overseas during a state of war. Arrangements are already under consideration for so improving this matter of reinforcing our troops overseas, and these arrangements are such as will avoid the very considerable expense which would be incurred by maintaining the Militia cadres on their old basis. I really do not think that this declaration that I am making on behalf of the War Office can be regarded as a breach of faith with the Militia. I may remind your Lordships in this connection that in 1907 under the re-organisation scheme for which the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack was responsible, although the Militia Act of 1882 was admittedly not repealed, the existing Militia battalions were transferred to the Special Reserve, and this altered the status and liability of militiamen, since they became really Army reservists, and the function of Militia battalions was no longer that of forming a home garrison so as to enable both the regular battalions of each regiment to go on service overseas.
I believe that the noble Lord who put this Question stated in a speech that he made last year that the men so enlisted did not realise the change in their status and liability, and that they would not have enlisted had they known it. I can only say that the intention was, nevertheless, to use them as Special Reservists—that is to say as drafts—and that during the last war the men of the Special Reserve were sent overseas as drafts, and they did splendid work. The situation now is this. During the war recruiting for the Special Reserve ceased entirely, and since the war it has not been re-opened and only a few officers remain—500 odd—and no rank and file at all. I believe the noble Lord has also got 346 in his mind the fact that the term "Militia" was mentioned in the Act of 1921. It was mentioned, if I may say with all respect, more or less" as a sop to the feelings of many like the noble Lord which were rather aroused in the matter, but it was a change of name only, and that point was made perfectly clear in the debate in the House of Commons at the time.
The service of the Militia in the South African War was magnificent—everybody admits that—but at the same time there was no obligation in pre-war days for Militiamen to go overseas, with the conquence that the War Office was faced by the proposition that it would not be possible to call on these men for mobilization purposes other than those connected with home garrisons. It may interest, but I am afraid it will not satisfy, the noble Lord to hear that it is proposed to proceed almost immediately with the raising of a Technica1 Reserve Force on what will, in reality and in law, be a Militia basis. The men so raised will be tradesmen of various kinds, and will be trained when necessary with the Territorial Army. In conclusion, I would like to say that although the Government adhere to the policy laid down last year by the then Under-Secretary of State for War—that is to say, they do not propose to re-establish Militia in complete units—

§ LORD AMPTHILL
At present.

§ LORD THOMSON
Or at any time in the immediate future that we can foresee—nothing will be done in the direction of disbanding the Militia, and the units still remain in the Army List. This decision has been reached owing to the uncertainty as regards the future. Who knows but that military necessity may compel, or financial opportunity may render possible, some further action in regard to this Force in the years to come? I regret to have had to disappoint the noble Lord, because I know how deeply he and many others feel on this subject, but that is the present answer of the Government.