ARMY AND AIR FORCE (ANNUAL) BILL. (Hansard, 2 April 1935)

§ THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (LORD STRATHCONA AND MOUNT ROYAL)

My Lords, the Bill this year contains three Amendments in Clauses 4, 5 and 6 which are common to both the Army and the Air Force Acts, and two in Clauses 8 and 9 which concern the Air Force only. They are introduced for the sake of simplifying administration or of clarifying the meaning of the Acts as they already stand; but I think your Lordships might wish to have them shortly explained. With regard to Clause 4, as the wording of Section 64 of the Army Act stands at present, a soldier serving in a Colony who is sentenced to imprisonment or detention for a term of less than twelve months may, for administrative convenience, undergo his sentence in any part of His Majesty's Dominions which may be prescribed under Rules of Procedure. But the wording does not cover the case of a soldier sentenced in Palestine or Cyprus, which are Colonies within the meaning of the Act, undergoing his sentence in Egypt, which is a foreign country within the meaning of the Act. In fact, there are no military prisons or detention barracks in Cyprus or Palestine, and unless the men can be sent to Egypt they will have to be sent either to Malta or back to the United Kingdom 501 (except in the case of short sentences which may be served in barrack detention rooms). The troops in Cyprus and Palestine are under the administration o the G.O.C. British troops in Egypt. Secondly, the clause is designed to amend Section 64 to make it clear that a soldier sentenced in a foreign country or in a Dominion shall, in accordance with the first proviso to subsection (4), be transferred as soon as practicable to serve his sentence in the United Kingdom (unless there are special reasons for not removing him). There is no doubt that this is the intention of the section as it stands already, but doubts have been expressed whether the present arrangement and punctuation of subsections (3), (3A) and (4) carry out this intention.

The purpose of Clause 5 is to define precisely what incidents of a person's service may be proved by documentary evidence in any proceedings taken under the Army Act. Under Section 163 of the Army Act a document purporting to be signed by or on behalf of the Secretary of State for War, or on behalf of the Army Council, or by the officer in charge of records, is prima facie evidence respecting the service of any person in, or the discharge of any person from, any portion of His Majesty's forces or respecting a person not having served in, or belonged to, any portion of those forces. It has been doubted whether this provision extends to the proof of particular incidents in a person's service, for example, whether he ever attained a particular rank, or served in a particular campaign or foreign country, or whether he is entitled to wear medals or medal ribbons. The Amendment will save money and time in the conduct of proceedings when evidence of this character is required.

The object of Clause 6 is to subject to military law Reserve or retired officers who, under the authority or with the approval of the Army Council, are employed with their consent outside the United Kingdom in any military capacity. Officers on the active list and Militia officers are subject to military law at all times, but Reserve or retired officers are only so subject (1) when they are employed on military service under the orders of an officer of the regular forces who is subject to military law; or (2) when they are ordered on any duty for which as Reserve officers they are liable. It is considered necessary that 502 Reserve or retired officers who accept military appointments such as A.D.C. to Governors-General or Governors, or membership of military missions abroad, should be subject to military law. Clause 7 applies the Amendments in Clauses 4, 5 and 6, whose purpose I have just indicated, to the Air Force Act, with the necessary adjustments.

I now turn to Clauses 8 and 9 which affect the Air Force Act only. Airmen are enlisted initially for twelve years or some shorter period and, if for a shorter period, the initial period of service may be "extended" provided that the total of the first period of service does not exceed twelve years. At present an airman who has completed nine years service may be re-engaged for such further period as will make up a total of twenty-four years, but may not be re-engaged for any shorter period. Clause 8 of the Bill alters the conditions of re-engagement in two respects. Subsection (1) authorises re-engagements for any shorter period than the legal maximum, and also allows of part of the re-engaged service being spent in the Reserve, which is not provided for at present. Subsection (2) permits re-engagements to complete a total of twenty-four years service or for some shorter period to be contracted at any time after the completion of eight years instead of nine years service on the initial engagement. The sole purpose of both these Amendments is to simplify administration. Clause 9 of the Bill is intended simply to improve the terminology of Section 146 of the Air Force Act, without affecting its substance. The present terminology, although technically not incorrect, is thought to be unsuitable. The two Schedules to the Bill call for no remark. The first is the usual schedule containing the billeting rates, in which no change is proposed this year. The second contains minor Amendments to the Air Force Act consequential on those provided in Clause 8 of the Bill. I beg to move.