Lords Sitting of 22 May 1946

Preamble
The House met at half-past two of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers.

THE LORD BISHOP OF LEICESTER.
Guy Vernon, Lord Bishop of Leicester—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.
THE LORD BISHOP OF ST. EDMUNDSBURY AND IPSWICH.
Richard, Lord Bishop of St. Edmunds-bury and Ipswich—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.

CABINET MISSION IN INDIA: PUBLICATION OF CORRESPONDENCE.
2.46 p.m.
VISCOUNT SIMON: My Lords, I ask leave to put a question to the Leader of the House, of which I have given him private notice. The question is whether His Majesty's Government are publishing in a White Paper the correspondence between the Cabinet Mission in India and leaders of Indian Parties which is understood to have been made public in India.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DOMINION AFFAIRS (VISCOUNT ADDISON): My Lords, the correspondence to which the noble Viscount refers is somewhat voluminous and a copy was only received in the India Office yesterday. It has already been made public in India and arrangements are being made to issue it as a White Paper as soon as possible.
VISCOUNT SIMON: My Lords, while thanking the noble Viscount, may I in this connexion call attention to two statements in The Times of to-day in a despatch from its correspondent at Delhi, which seem to indicate that there are other letters which should be included in a White Paper. I do not want to delay the one that is promised. One statement is:
398
"The Cabinet Mission is preparing a reply to the various points which Mr. Gandhi and the Congress Party have raised with them about their scheme for giving India a Constituent Assembly and an Interim Government."
The same correspondent says that the reply may not be ready for a day or two and refers to the indisposition of Sir Stafford Cripps, about which we are all very sorry to hear.
The other statement seems to be even more important. The correspondent refers to "communications of Congress to the Mission" in which Congress
"want it made plain that the Constituent Assembly, when convened, will be the sovereign authority in India, and as such free to do what it likes."
The House will, I think, agree that so important a claim, and the Mission's answer to it, ought to be made known to Parliament without delay.
VISCOUNT ADDISON: My Lords, the noble Viscount will understand that without notice of this Question I am not able to make any reply. All I can say is that I will inquire into the matter and communicate with him as soon as I have any information.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I hope your Lordships will allow me to suggest to the Government that, from the point of view of the Imperial Parliament, it is very important that they should be made aware at the earliest possible moment of the replies which are made by the Cabinet Mission to the questions put by Mr. Gandhi. What I think your Lordships would like to know is whether the answers which are going to be made by the Mission to Mr. Gandhi will have the approval of His Majesty's Government in England before they are made.
VISCOUNT ADDISON: I can only assure the noble Marquess that the Government are most anxious that Parliament should be as fully informed as possible and as quickly as possible. I cannot say anything more than that. It is quite sincere and genuine. I will make enquiries into the points he raises.
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that we have never before had day-to-day communications of this nature laid before Parliament when important negotiations were going on? This is entirely without precedent
VISCOUNT SWINTON: My Lords, I should not have intervened at all but for that last observation. I am sure the noble Viscount, the Leader of the House, thoroughly appreciates the spirit in which these questions are put. There is no question of any desire to embarrass these negotiations, but at the same time Parliament was informed immediately of the statement made by the Ministers, and if the Ministers are now going to issue a further statement in elucidation or amplification of the statement already made, then, as the Leader of the House himself has said, it is obviously right that Parliament should be informed.

"SHORT SERVICE" SYSTEM.
VISCOUNT TRENCHARD VISCOUNT TRENCHARD had given Notice to ask His Majesty's Government what progress, if any, has been made with the extension to the Navy and Army of the system known as "Short-service" system in the Air Service; and to move for Papers. The noble Viscount said: My Lords, may I, first of all, say to the noble Lord who is going to reply for the Government that I regret I could not accede to the request he made to me a week ago to postpone my Motion. The Motion had been on the Order Paper for six weeks and I found there was no day available until some time after Whitsuntide.
That in my opinion would have been too late. I think it is very necessary that this Motion should be debated, but at the same time I regret if I have put the noble Lord to any inconvenience. I have referred to this matter twice before in your Lordships' House, once right at the end of 1944, and again at the end of 1945. I return to the subject because I think it is of the greatest importance, not only to the Air Service but to all three Services and to the nation. The scheme I have outlined before I will put again but in a different way to-day. It has two great objects: (r) it would add to the efficiency of the Services, especially in war-time; (2) it would help the general life of the nation and bring the Services and the nation still closer together. That last point is of equal importance as the first.
There are three great advantages to the Services. One is that a much greater reserve would be provided of young men of the right type, thoroughly trained, ready for war. Secondly, the system would
400
reduce the pension list; thirdly, it would improve the curve of promotion for the long-service Regular officer and man. Some form of service it seems to me is required to fill the gap between the permanent service and the minimum compulsory service. I think it would be found that the "Short-service" system has the advantages I have outlined above, which I will try to elaborate. I feel that it should be exhaustively and sympathetically considered by the two Services named in the Order Paper.
What is the "Short-service" system? The "Short-service" system for the Royal Air Force proved itself a great success; in fact it helped enormously in making the Air Force the overwhelming power it was in the 1939–1945 war. I have no doubt about it. Now I admit that when it was originally introduced many years ago it met with criticism in many places, partly because it was not altogether administered as I thought it should be, or as I thought it would be. There were many small faults but it did provide the reserve and it did reduce the pension list and it did give a better curve of promotion. But there were some faults. For instance when the fear of war began to emerge again in the world, especially about 1933 and 1934, the "Short-service" system really stopped. The "Short-service" officers were offered and accepted what we called medium commissions for ten years which was not part of the "Short-service" system at all. In fact it was a great disadvantage to that system, because naturally young men thought they would be leaving the Service after ten years much too old to take up their professions in civil life, and they were right. I would like to remind your Lordships that even in those days, in 1933, of the young men who were on the "Short-service system, all I believe except one when they left the Service got very good appointments in civil life.
My idea now is that instead of a period in the Fighting Services being considered a handicap in life, as it has been in the past, though it ought not to have been, it would be accepted by the nation as an asset and a qualification of the utmost value in civil life. Is this too much to expect; is it not possible? The "Short-service" system I am now proposing affects amongst many, the Government services such as the Civil Service, education,

401
Post Office, medical and even municipal services and some big businesses. I will only deal with a few of these to-day. What I would like to see is that in the teaching profession every man who aspires to become a teacher should have, besides the educational qualifications required from the schools and universities, the great qualification of having served for three or four years in one of the Fighting Services before taking up the teaching profession for the rest of his life.
We know that a defect in the past in the teaching profession has been lack of contact with the outside world and with men of other callings. I believe it would be an invaluable qualification to teachers to rub shoulders with their fellow-men by being in one of the Services for three or four years before being permanently appointed. This idea was sympathetically received by the Coalition Government, and your Lordships may remember that at the beginning of 1945 the noble Earl, Lord Selborne, when moving the Second Reading of the Teachers (Superannuation) Bill said:
"The Second Schedule of the Bill enables teachers to be seconded for other work for a period of up to five years and yet to retain their pension rights."
He added that he hoped this would appeal to me because it was a step in conformity with suggestions I had made. This provision in the Bill really meant, as your Lordships will understand, that three or four years in one of the Fighting Services would count towards their pensions as teachers and would not be a handicap. If that can be done for one profession it can be done for other professions.
Another advantage of the scheme is that it would help to connect the three Services more closely with the life of the nation, and that service in the Fighting Forces would be regarded in civil life and in professions as advantageous and a normal introduction to a young man's career in the same way as school certificates and university degrees are considered a normal qualification. Is it too much to say this would give these young men extremely valuable experience by mixing with their fellow-men in different walks of life before settling down to civil careers in whatever profession they selected?
Now for a moment I would just like to refer to the Civil Service. Of course,
402
I am assuming that everyone including your Lordships will not have become civil servants by then. When I originally suggested this scheme some years ago I thought, and I think now, that it is most desirable not to interrupt what I call the book education of candidates for the Civil Service. I recently read in The Times some letters advocating that conscription, if brought in, should be between school study and university study, but I think it is better that book education should not be interrupted. When that is completed young men should acquire an extra qualification by going into one of the Services after they have passed their examinations.
I think that if they went into one of the Services after passing their Civil Service examinations but before they settled down to their administrative desks for the rest of their lives it would be an added help to them in their careers. They and the Fighting Services surely would gain by that. It would make a break between university life and the Civil Service. In this connexion I would say that Sir James Grigg, Sir Arthur Street, and many others, in fact, nearly all the great civil servants of this time served in one of the Services years ago. I am sure they would agree that they gained invaluable help from their experience in those days, and I suggest that this shows that the advantage of such service early in a man's career should never be forgotten.
Now I would like to turn to some of the other professions, architecture, the law, medicine, and the Church. I have said before, and I say again, that young men who are going into the Church, before taking up their curacies, after passing their examinations, should do two or three years' service in one of the Fighting Services. It would be a great advantage to them. It would help the Church enormously, as well as the young men themselves. It would help to strengthen the Church and to bring that spiritual help to the nation which is so obviously desired today. It would be of great use to the life of the nation if young men had this experience instead of going at once into the Church after passing their examinations at the universities and before seeing anything of life at all.
Surely this is the time for changes of this sort. If they are not made now, a great chance will be missed, and it is

403
questionable if they will ever be made. There is nothing in the Services to-day which has not got its counterpart in civil life. Some big businesses would look with favour on the proposal that young men after passing their book examinations should spend a certain amount of time in the Services before going into the businesses they have chosen, especially if the Services educational system included business training. These young men, I suggest, would be better fitted to take up their careers in business than is at present the case, if they were given some training when they are in the Services. I hope I am not assuming too much, and that there is going to be some private enterprise left. At any rate, I feel that the Government also have that hope.
It may be said that there would be too many officers with Short-service commissions, and that the affect on spirit and life and splendid traditions of the regiments and ships and squadrons would make it difficult to teach others to become good officers. I cannot believe this. Can anybody say that in this war officers who joined regiments or ships or squadrons for temporary service did not do magnificent work, and attain the highest distinctions? Can anybody say that those who entered the Fighting Services for the first time when the war was on did not most worthily maintain the traditions of those Services? My own experience dates back many years, for I was in the South African war, in the 1914–1918 war, and in the last war (though only in that as an onlooker, I grant you) and I feel that it would be of great advantage to extend this system of Short-service commissions in the way in which I am now advocating. I do not, I may say, want to see the regiments or ships or squadrons with too many Short-service officers. I dare say the system would have to start slowly. It would not start at the point which I hope it would eventually reach, with nearly fifty per cent. of the younger officers on the Short-service system. We might start with a much lower percentage, say, 20 or 25 per cent. of junior officers, so that we could see how the system works. Later the numbers could be greatly increased. There would be no danger of having too many of these Short-service officers in some of the great technical units in the Army, the Royal Artillery, the
404
Royal Army Service Corps, R.E.M.E., and in the Navy and in the Air Force.
Again it may be said that the Short-service system is more suitable for the Air Force than it is for the Navy or the Army. I do not think it can be looked at quite in that way. I do not think it should be looked upon only from the point of view of the advantage it might be to the Services. We have to think of the advantage to the nation as a whole. The object of the scheme is to get over some of the disadvantages of the present system, of boys joining the Services when they are young, say about 20 years of age. A large number of them get no further than the rank of major or lieutenant-colonel in the Army at ages between 35 and 45, and then they are retired on a small pension, as a noble Lord pointed out the other day. In the Navy a great number of officers are retired with the rank of lieutenant-commander or commander. When such men are retired, it is too late for the majority of them to achieve success in civil life. They have to be retired because there is no possibility of promoting them all into senior ranks. If we had this Short-service system, that difficulty would be greatly lessened, because there would be fewer officers to retire at those ages and a good many more would automatically retire under the Short-service system after three or four years' service. There would no longer be such numbers of retired officers hanging about at Cheltenham and elsewhere as you now see. These men, being automatically retired, as I say, would know of it in advance, and knowing it they would get educated for civil life while in the Services. It cannot be said with truth, I am convinced, that it would not suit the Navy and the Army as well as it suits the Air Force. There is no possibility of promoting all the lieutenant-commanders and commanders in the Navy. I think any Admiral here would agree with me on that—though I can only see one here at the moment. I feel, too, that many Field Marshals would agree that there is no possibility of promoting everybody who joins the Army up to high rank.
I hope that this is still being sympathetically considered and investigated, and gone into by the Air Service, but I wonder if it is being considered and examined thoroughly and sympathetically by the Army and the Navy. I have not heard any talk which suggests that

405
it is being considered. I feel it ought to be investigated. The Air Ministry have had exceptional experience of this system in the past, and though many of the officers responsible have retired, there are many left in the high ranks who could explain the system thoroughly to either the Army or the Navy. I hope it will be investigated and not only by a junior committee. I say again that this scheme would be of the greatest advantage to the Services. It would broaden the education of all those in Government life. It would link the Services more with each other and with every family in England, and it would fill the gap between the minimum-period conscription and the full-time of Regular service. The system could be applied to other ranks as well.
I do not want to detain your Lordships longer. The reasons which I gave before hold good today. The system would make for stronger and more efficient Services; it would reduce the pensions lists, it would give a better curve of promotion to those in the Services, which is what we all want to see. It would link all the Services with Government Departments to a far greater extent than before. May I therefore ask the noble Lord who is going to reply if he can give an assurance that this is being or will be sympathetically considered and explained to the Services with a view to its extension. I beg to move for Papers.
3.9 p.m.
LORD CHETWODE: My Lords, I will only say a very few words with regard to the Motion of the noble and gallant Viscount. As a matter of fact I have in my hands at this moment an Army Council Instruction which came out yesterday which proposes Short-service for the Army, though not quite on the lines that the noble and gallant Viscount suggests. I understand that the proposal of the Government—we shall hear what the noble Lord, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary has to say about it later—is intended to carry us through a very difficult period when we simply cannot get either officers or men. If I may differ, as an old regimental officer, from my noble and gallant friend Viscount Trenchard I would say that I do not quite see that he has given satisfactory answers to the question of what will happen if we have Short-service commissions for new officers when they first join. He said that
406
it will make all the difference in promotion. I could not quite see why. What difference would it make to promotion? The problem of promotion is bad enough at it is. Why should it make any difference if a great many officers join on Short-service only? Does he mean that Short-service would mean more vacancies for those who remain?
As an old regimental officer, I do know that in times of peace Short-service officers would be very difficult to handle. I do not believe for a moment that an officer for four or five years can possibly in peace-time be as good an officer as a long-service officer. For instance, if we still have to keep troops in India, as we may have to do, in spite of what is happening there, young men joining as Short-service officers will not be of much use until they have been out there for two or three years. They cannot stand the heat and privations of the Northwest Frontier. I know, as an old Commander in-Chief, that young men under the age of twenty-two who came out to India always had to go to quiet, cool stations for at least two years, if it was possible for us to send them there. We did not send them to the frontier. The noble Viscount, I fancy, had to go straight to the frontier. As far as I can make out, this Short-service system which the noble Lord, the Under-Secretary of State will explain, is intended purely to fill a gap. I venture to suggest, as a very old soldier, that that is all we should do in the Army. We should not attempt to have Short-service for young men joining at the age of eighteen or nineteen. I am quite certain that most of us old soldiers would prefer what is happening now, unless the noble Viscount can explain how it will later promotion so materially. When I was Military Secretary only two per cent. of the people who accepted His Majesty's commissions could go beyond the rank of colonel, and I do not quite see how a system of Short-service officers can make the position any better. There will still be the same block. I hope that the noble Lord who is to answer for the Government will say that we are not going to have Short-service in the Army.
3.13 p.m.
LORD HUTCHISON OF MONTROSE: My Lords, I am glad that my noble and gallant friend has raised this question at this time, because this question of terms

407
of service is now in the melting pot. We have heard nothing definite yet as to what terms the Government are to offer as regards service, not only long-term service but conscript service and any other form of service. I do not propose to talk of anything except the Army, because of the Navy I am not qualified to say anything at all. It seems to me that this proposal of Short-service in the Army, especially for young officers and men, has a great deal to be said for it. It fills the gap between the long-service officer or man and the conscript who will serve for perhaps two years, perhaps one and a half years, or one year. These Short-service officers and men will undoubtedly help us in keeping the ranks of our armies of occupation filled and up to strength.
It is quite hopeless to think that conscripts, only partially trained, can go out and join the ranks of our occupation armies. Those armies are bound to remain, in Germany and elsewhere, for many, many years. It is almost impossible to foresee how many years; but certainly it will be for the next twenty-five years or more. We do therefore want that class of young man and young soldier joining up and learning his military career in the most advantageous circumstances possible. At the same time, these young men will provide a very useful well-trained and fully-trained Reserve. The one thing we have always lacked in the past has been a really well-trained Reserve, upon which any Government could call at very short notice if and when the situation demanded it. The other point I see in relation to this Short-service is that from those young officers and men a selection of the most fitted can then be used towards a permanent or long-term engagement. It is only after an officer or a man has served for some time in the Army that his real worth becomes apparent. If that Short-service were used as a sort of probationary period, the more efficient could then go on as permanent officers and non-commissioned officers in the Regular Army. I think that that would give us a chance to get a very fine lot of young fellows into the Regular Service.
The other point which my noble friend raised related to the retiring age. It is undoubtedly true that the Regular officer, especially the officer who retires after
408
years of service, at the age of about forty, with the rank of major or lieutenant-colonel, finds it almost impossible unless he has very great interests somewhere, to find suitable employment. One knows so many cases of this sort. I have endless letters from my friends asking me if I can help in any way in getting them some sort of job that would suit their capacity. It is extremely difficult to place these fellows. Under this Short-service system, young men who want to do a short period in the Army will come out at an age when they can be readily absorbed into the ordinary civilian life of this country. They will have had experience, and will probably have had contact with nations abroad and thereby be the more useful in civilian life. I am sure that those in business, and others in this country, would be only too glad to absorb that class of man and officer.
Undoubtedly we shall have to send out a number of men to act in the Civil Service in the occupied countries. There will be controls at the docks and in businesses of all kinds, both in Germany and elsewhere. These young officers, after their service of four years or so, would be eminently fitted to work as civilians in these kinds of positions. There is, further, the possibility that the Colonial Service may be only too glad to absorb men who have had military training and who have also had experience of living amongst the Armies of Occupation.
I do not say that it is an ideal system for the Service, but, from what one can observe, it is true that it would be difficult to fill up the ranks of the old long-service Army that we used to know, and those Short-service officers and men will undoubtedly fill the gap; for how many years I do not know; it may become a permanent part of our system. But at least I do say with my noble friend that the War Office ought to examine it very closely. They should get the data from the Royal Air Force as to how it worked with them. They had not time really to develop it to its best stages. If we look at it carefully, it may well be that it will be a most useful form of service with which to fill up the gap between the longterm Regular and the conscript. I support my noble friend in this, and hope that the War Office will look into it.
3.23 p.m.
LORD CROFT: My Lords, any subject raised in your Lordships' House by the noble and gallant Viscount, Lord Trenchard, will always command the attention of everyone who cares for the fate of the various Services. I for one am pleased that he took this opportunity of ventilating this question. We are anxiously awaiting the decision of the Government; it is true, as my noble friend Lord Hutchison has just said, that this matter is still in the melting-pot. Any advice coming from such a quarter must, I imagine, be of assistance to His Majesty's Government. But I also am glad that this question has been raised to-day, because I myself, somewhat indiscreetly a few months ago, in asking that we might have greater clarification with regard to future forces, urged that Short-service should not be ruled out of consideration, although perhaps for somewhat different reasons from Viscount Trenchard. I had in mind at that time the principal preoccupation of how we were to build up a really large reserve, so that we would not be in a position similar to that in which we were at the outbreak of the last war.
It is always dangerous for a civilian to enter upon these subjects, but I have taken the opportunity, since I ventured those few remarks, of consulting a great number of officers in the different Services, and especially those who have just come through the war, who have had long Regular experience, who are able to weigh this question, and I think that there is no doubt whatever that the noble Viscount has won his case with regard to the Air Force. There seem to be no two opinions that at the present time it is desirable—it certainly was in the war and just prior to the war—to have Short-service people in order that there should be a great flow of pilot officers who would be ready to take their part. It must be, I think, to the ultimate advantage of the Royal Air Force, that there should be this large number of officers who have served on this system. It has been proved again and again that most efficient young officers can be turned out in a short time. I think there is no dispute about that.
The question is whether the same idea would be of the same value in the Royal Navy and in the Army. I am informed
410
by my friends in the Royal Navy (of whom there are several in your Lordships' House) that in that Service an officer cannot be considered to be of great worth to the Navy until after three or four years. The training is so intense, the technical knowledge required is so great, and the various kinds of knowledge required are so diverse, that it is only when the officer has reached his third or fourth year that he has become of great value to the Royal Navy. I understand that it would be regarded as a matter for very great regret if these men, just at the supreme moment when they are going to be of great use in the Royal Navy, had to depart because of the operation of this system.
With regard to the Army, I feel that we are somewhat at cross-purposes, because I think Lord Hutchison has emphasized that Short-service officers will be of great use in, say, the next ten years or more in the Armies of Occupation. I am not going to intrude on what the Under-Secretary of State will be saying, but I gather that this is the purpose, and that Short-service is already being encouraged in that respect during the turn-over period. I think, however, that a great number of officers of all ranks in the Army also feel that there must be very careful consideration before a permanent Short-service system is introduced. Here again it is just when the officer is beginning to qualify, for the position of, let us say, company commander or battery commander, that he will depart. That is just when he is most useful. At the outbreak of the war, we needed these key officers in order to train the multitude of other officers who came in.
I would point out that this consideration does not necessarily apply to the Royal Army Medical Corps, where a man clearly is carrying on his profession all the time. The same, I think, is true of the Ordnance Corps, of R.E.M.E. and other technical services, where a man is continuously working at his trade and undoubtedly is of value to the Army while he is in it. I am convinced that the noble Viscount is absolutely right when he says that the whole nation would benefit if all these various types of men from the Church, the Civil Service and the teaching profession could all have some brief period of responsibility in the Services.

411
But I hope and I think most of your Lordships hope that every young man in this country will serve for a year or eighteen months, or possibly two years. That, I think, will give him just that experience which Viscount Trenchard hopes to see widened, although I agree it can hardly be hoped that, under our system of promotion from the ranks, many of them can become officers in that short period of time. Some may do so and a great many will be non-commissioned officers.
I must say, however, that, having examined this question rather carefully from many angles, and taken the advice of many friends, I think we must realize that there are great difficulties. Under this system in the Royal Navy and in the Regular Army you would have two distinct classes in the same mess, on board ship or in barracks—those who came in to make the Navy and Army their career and their life and those who came in for a short span. I think there would be almost inevitably a cleavage between the Regular men and the Short-service men. There should be great consideration before any final decision is taken on this matter.
That does not alter the fact that we are grateful to the noble Viscount for having raised this matter, because I think that everything that he has said to us has interested us immensely and shown that there are certainly two sides to this question.
3.30 p.m.
LORD MOUNTEVANS: My Lords, having listened with great interest to what the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, has said concerning Short-service in the Royal Air Force and what he has proposed for the Navy, may I point out that if one goes back forty years to Lord Selborne's Short-service system one finds that definitely it was not a success. The young men came in too late and left too early. They were known as "Selborne's Light Horse." But that was forty years ago, and times change. So far as the Navy is concerned, we have seen in the second great world war how magnificently officers and men from the R.N.V.R. have risen to high position. Just to take one off the heap, we can quote the son of my late great leader, Captain Scott. His son, as a little ship man, without any previous naval training, certainly excelled. Education is so much better nowadays
412
than it was in Lord Selborne's time. I can take another case, than of my own son, now 21, who is sweeping up mines as chief engineer of H.M.S. "Plucky," off the Borneo coast. Only last year he was a midshipman in the Royal Naval Air Service, and only the year before an engineering worker and student, and air raid warden. He does not seem to find any difficulty, and that is because of the basic training the youth of our day are getting.
The noble Viscount's suggestion concerning Navy, Army and Air Force Short-service commissions, with a view to going into different branches of the Civil Service, is indeed a fine one. It would bring a more human element into the Service. By moving about and meeting others, it would make them more considerate to those who work for our great Commonwealth of Nations and whose services are rather like those mentioned in the verse attributed to Nelson:
"Our God and the sailor we adore
In times of danger, not before.
The danger past, both are requited:
God is forgotten, and the sailor slighted."
As to the noble Viscount's suggestion that we should put sailors into pulpits and make pilots into sky-pilots, that might do harm or it might do good. You are very near to God in the big ocean spaces, and may be it would bring an entirely new heart into the Church. However, we have just entered a phase of fairer and better conditions for the three Fighting Services, and I feel sure that those at the Admiralty, in the Air Ministry and in the War Office cannot possibly have failed to consider this matter from almost every angle. For that reason I am not sure that we had not better leave this question to the Departments concerned.
3.37 p.m.
THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (LORD NATHAN): My Lords, I welcome this discussion. The noble and gallant Viscount has chosen a timely and opportune moment for introducing this subject to your Lordships, not for the first time. As is clear and was mentioned by the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Hutchison, the question of the shape of the future Forces is under urgent consideration. Ideas are in the melting pot, and the form in which the Forces may emerge has yet to be finally determined. The noble and gallant Viscount, by introducing this subject

413
once more to your Lordships' House, has drawn attention vividly to a matter which obviously from the course of the debate to-day gives rise to differences of opinion, not only between the different Forces, but between those within each Force—differences upon which a decision must be taken after no long delay The noble and gallant Viscount, in his long and distinguished career, was identified with the creation of the Short-service system in the Royal Air Force, and I do not think that anyone would question but that that Short-service system was of infinite value in that Force. It provided a substantial proportion of officers before the late war, but of course the scheme came to an end with the outbreak of war and with the introduction of temporary commissions. It has not yet been resumed, and although it has already been announced that Short-service commissions will continue in the Royal Air Force after the war, the extent to which they will be required has still to be worked out and is not yet determined.
I think it might perhaps help the clarification of this issue if I were to indicate some of the reasons, on one side and the other, in regard to Short-service commissions, which need to be taken into account, either in extension or elaboration of those which have been mentioned already this afternoon by the noble and gallant Field Marshal, Lord Chetwode, the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Hutchison, the noble Lord opposite, Lord Croft, and the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Mountevans. Let me say at once that, so far as the Forces are concerned, there is no objection in principle to Short-service commissions as such, although they are not necessarily the ideal solution in every type of case. It is really a matter to be considered in regard to the needs and the times, and in relation to each particular Force. There are times and there are certain classes of cases where the advantages of a Short-service system are unquestionable. A temporary shortage of officers above the normal recruitment age, such as is now being experienced in the Army, cannot be suitably corrected except by the grant of Short-service commissions. Again, where an establishment includes an unduly large proportion of junior officers, Short-service commissions provide the only alternative to unsatisfactory prospects for the whole body of officers. Some classes of specialists also
414
lend themselves readily and obviously to this form of engagement. I think it was the noble Lord, Lord Croft, who referred to the Medical Services. It is of course true of them. The doctors, the dentists, the chaplains, and perhaps education officers, are already trained when they enter the Service, and they require little in the way of actual Service training. Short-term service is eminently suitable in that class of case, particularly when officers, on leaving the Service, can expect to obtain normal employment in their own professions. In these particular categories, Short-service commissions have long been in force in all three Services and they will continue in the post-war period.
The Short-service system is also valuable, as more than one noble Lord has emphasized, in building up a Reserve, but as well as advantages the system may have serious disadvantages from the Service point of view. It is uneconomical to give the intensive training required by certain types of officer to those who will be available for only a comparatively short period on the Active List. There is the case, to which the noble Lord opposite referred, of the young officer who has just become a company commander or a battery commander at the moment when his Short-service commission is due to terminate. At the moment when he can be most valuable he is due to leave the Service and to return to civil life. Moreover, the rapid turnover of officers involves a much larger training machine than will be necessary if the Service is to be manned by permanent officers. There is also the difficulty that while officers who leave the Service after Short-service are available as a reserve in the event of war, they have to be kept up to date, and their value will rapidly deteriorate unless they can undertake reasonably frequent refresher courses. That is not always practicable for those who have returned to their civilian professions and to business.
I would say, therefore, that the justification for Short-service commissions depends on the type of employment and on the requirements of the particular Service or establishment rather than on any inherent quality in the Short-service system itself. The fact that the system is successful in one sphere does not necessarily imply that it will be equally successful in another. In general, and excluding

415
special classes, the Royal Navy, as my noble friend behind me has pointed out, and the Army, as the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Chetwode, has pointed out, have hitherto found it more beneficial, both from the point of view of the Service and of the individual, to employ a great bulk of officers on a permanent basis. In the Royal Air Force, the requirements demanded a different form of organization, and Short-service commissions were extensively employed in order to maintain the appropriate establishment and reserves. It was for these reasons that the grant of Short-service commissions in the Royal Navy has become, in general, restricted to the medical, chaplaincy and such-like services, and, of course, for the Air Arm, where the requirements were to some extent similar to those of the Royal Air Force. This system may, however, be affected by the employment of ratings as pilots in the future and it cannot yet be said what arrangements will be called for in the post-war force. As in the case of the other Services, it may be necessary to offer extended service commissions in the Royal Navy during the interim period between the end of the war and the stabilization of the Fleet, but I am unable to give any details of that on this occasion.
As to the Royal Air Force, the permanent policy is materially affected by the new procedure for selecting officers from the ranks and the decision to fill a larger number of air crew posts by airmen instead of by officers. The whole question is now under consideration in the light of these and other changes, and it is not possible at present to say how the post-war proportion of Short-service to long-service commissions will compare with the pre-war proportion. As an interim measure, in order to man the force pending its reconstruction on a peace-time footing, the Royal Air Force is operating a Short-service commission scheme almost identical with that just adopted by the Army, to which the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Chetwode, has already referred and which I will now describe.
Before the war, the Army restricted the grant of Short-service commissions to the specialist classes, but a new Short-service scheme of a very general character has recently been decided upon which is intended, as I think the noble Lord,
416
Lord Hutchison, had in mind, to meet the more urgent requirements of the interim period pending the build-up of a post-war Army. The offer is open to non-regular officers now serving or who were released before the issue of the Army Order yesterday. The terms of service are three, four or five years on the Active List, with a reserve liability to make a total of eight years in all. Pay and allowances will be as for Regular officers, and rank will be based on the war substantive rank obtained. A gratuity will be payable on termination of service. The gratuities are £337 10s. for three years' service, £450 for four years' service and £552 10s. for five years' service, with higher rates for certain officers with technical qualifications. There is no age limit, although age will be taken into account in assessing suitability, and in general only officers of medical category A will be accepted. I hope it is clear from what I have said that there is no prejudice against Short-service commissions either in the Royal Navy or in the Army. It is simply a question of what is best for the particular Service and the particular individual in the circumstances of the particular case. The noble and gallant Viscount asked, as he was entitled to ask, that the matter to which he has drawn attention to-day, as he has done before, Should be considered thoroughly, exhaustively, and sympathetically. By his long record in the public service the noble and gallant Viscount is entitled to that assurance from me, which I now give him. They shall be so considered.
3.48 p.m.
VISCOUNT TRENCHARD: My Lords, before the noble Lord sits down, may I ask him one question? Is he going to continue giving these pension rights in the other Services from the civil point of view? The noble Lord has not addressed himself at all to the point on which I based most of my speech, namely, the benefit to the nation, like the teaching profession and others. Is that going to be extended in the same way as the Coalition extended it to the teachers?
LORD NATHAN: My Lords, I think I should like to give a little more consideration to the way in which the question put to me just now by the noble Viscount should be answered. If he will allow me to do so, I will communicate with him on that subject.
VISCOUNT TRENCHARD: My Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for his reply, may I say that he dealt a good deal with the interim period between the present day and the stabilization of the Forces on a peace-time footing. I was dealing with the Short-service system as a permanent peace-time organization. I do not feel that he altogether grasped some of the points which I elaborated. However, I do not want to weary your Lordships, because this is a subject into which one has to go in a good deal of detail. I did not hear one single argument that really showed any reason why it should not be applied to the Army and the Navy just as easily as to the Air Force—in fact, in the case of the Army, more easily. With regard to the speech of the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Chetwode, I really could not quite follow his point about the heat in India.
I was out there and I remained there for seven years and I was never on the sick list once. I was in the Plains and there were many others like myself. I have had also a very long regimental life. In fact I only retired from the regiment a few days ago, and my service is almost as long as that of the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Chetwode. I could not follow that point at all, because my experience in India was the reverse. I was a regimental officer and not a Commander-in-Chief, I agree. With regard to the point the noble Lord made that he could not see how it affected the curve of promotion, it struck me that if you have one Field-Marshal at the top and a hundred other officers before you get to him, it would be more difficult than if you only had fifty junior officers. I may be wrong, but I think that is mathematically correct. With regard to the noble Lord, Lord Croft, I am sorry he did not give the support he gave the other day. He surprised me with one statement he made, if I did not misunderstand him. He said that at the outbreak of this war we were short of the medium-aged officers for training. I think the universal feeling was that we were short of young officers fit to lead men at the start of the war, and I think you will find the whole of the Services thought the same.
LORD CROFT: If I said middle-aged I did not intend that. It was the middle picture of it which was so much needed in the Services. I was referring to the
418
battery commander and comparable ranks. Those were the men who were so essential, and that is why I was reluctant that at one gulp, so to say, we should part with a large number of officers who are just approaching fitness for those commands.
VISCOUNT TRENCHARD: I do not want to debate the point, but I still stick to my opinion that it was the young officers who were short, because when conscription was applied it applied to the young men—to get them at once into the ranks—and not to the medium officers. With regard to the noble Lord who replied for the Government, I thank him for his remarks but I do not feel that the question can be discussed in a debate in this House in detail. I would ask again that this should be looked at. Your Lordships heard the reasons why it was started by the Air Force, and after my experience in the Army I say it can quite easily be started in the Navy. The noble and gallant Lord, Lord Mountevans, supported it and I believe the noble Earl, Lord Cork, had he been here, would have supported it. I beg leave to withdraw my Motion.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.
3.54 p.m.

SIR ROBERT KOTIWALL.
LORD FARINGDON LORD FARINGDON rose to ask His Majesty's Government what were the circumstances in which Sir Robert Kotiwall, since the liberation of Hong Kong, received an invitation to Government House, and whether it is intended to institute proceedings against him for his co-operation with the Japanese during the occupation of the colony. The noble Lord said: My Lords, in putting the question standing in my name I should like, with the permission of your Lordships House, to read a brief extract from the Hong Kong News of Thursday, February 26, 1942. It is headed:
"Welcome Address delivered by Community's Representatives at the official welcome to Governor Isogai.
The address of welcome on behalf of Overseas Chinese in Hong Kong was delivered by Mr. Lo Kuk-wo, Chairman of the Rehabilitation Advisory Committee, who said:—
Your Excellency, Tile Imperial Japanese Forces, by their valiant act of arms, have brought peace and tranquility to Hong Kong.

419
The ever-forward march of these troops has gained for them a resplendent position in the history of East Asiatic peoples. The one and a half million people of Hong Kong share in the reflection of the glory of the Imperial Army, and thus enjoy the benefits of the New Order of Co-prosperity in East Asia. What greater happiness could there be? To-day we welcome Your Excellency's coming to this place to re-build it, and the people applaud your coming with great joy, the measure of which exceeds expression in words. In your office Your Excellency represents the ideals in the illustrious Emperor's heart.
To-day you are the parent official of your people. All Overseas Chinese in Hong Kong cannot, indeed express their sentiments in full. Hong Kong is an important market of East Asia from which mercantile enterprise radiates like the spokes of a wheel, and it forms a most important centre in the Co-prosperity Sphere. Although war operations have caused some damage, we rely on the Imperial Army's protection to restore gradually the former prosperity of this place. We lift our eyes and behold good and friendly teachers, and for this all overseas Chinese are truly and deeply thankful.
Now that we behold Your Excellency's arrival, we also see the establishment of an altruistic Government which will take charge of the returning dawn. Your Excellency has been for some time in China, and you are well-acquainted with the people's habits. The great task of restoring prosperity we shall behold from dawn to dusk and this shall certainly benefit the multitude and improve our government. We must join closely together in co-operation, and energetically work on reconstruction. We wish your Excellency unlimited happiness."
I would say that Mr. Lo Kuk-wo is the identical person, the Sir Robert Kotiwall who is mentioned in my question. I would not bring an individual case before your Lordships' House were it not that I have reports that the official reception of this person since the liberation of Hong Kong has caused great despondency amongst the local Chinese, local Chinese who during the occupation gave proof of their loyalty at the risk, and often enough at the cost, of their lives in giving help and assistance to imprisoned British officials. It is true that I am told Sir Robert also caused presents of food to be sent to prisoners in Japanese hands through the medium of his daughter. I myself feel that I have no vocation for martyrdom, and if some of these gifts were accepted I should be disinclined to criticize the recipients. But I do feel that a tribute should be paid to those who did actually return those gifts from this Quisling. That is the background of the question which I now beg to put to His Majesty's Government.
4.57 p.m.
LORD WALKDEN: My Lords, I have not previously been acquainted with the eloquent statement which has just been read from some Far Eastern newspaper. It has a very oriental flavour. I do not know whether it has been verified, but it sounds very journalistic. All I can say, in the absence of my noble friend Lord Ammon, is that Sir Robert Kotiwall's co-operation with the Japanese during the period of enemy occupation was undertaken for the benefit of the Chinese population of Hong Kong, after he had received instructions on the course he should follow from certain senior officers of the Colonial Government. After the liberation of Hong Kong the Commander-in Chief concluded that, although Sir Robert had displayed some lack of judgment in carrying out those instructions, his loyalty to the Crown was not in question. Accordingly Admiral Harcourt decided that there was no case for proceedings against Sir Robert, and that it was proper to entertain him at Government House. The Governor, who resumed administration on May 1, is in full agreement with the Commander-in-Chief's decision, and when accepting Sir Robert's resignation from the Executive Council on the grounds of ill-health and the approaching expiration of his term of appointment, expressed appreciation of the valuable service he has rendered to the Colony as a member of that body.

TRAVEL PERMITS TO NORTHERN IRELAND.
4.59 p.m.
LORD HACKING: My Lords, I beg to ask the question standing in my name.
[The question was as follows:
To ask His Majesty's Government why it is still necessary for a British subject to possess either a passport or a travel permit when travelling between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.]
LORD WALKDEN: The object of requiring British subjects who are normally resident in the United Kingdom to carry travel identity documents when travelling between Ireland and Great Britain is to facilitate their passage through the port controls by distinguishing them from aliens and citizens of Eire, whose entry into Great Britain is subject

421
to permission. The production of these documents enables passengers to be passed through the control points with the minimum of delay and inconvenience.
LORD HACKING: My Lords, the noble Lord has said that this restriction is put on for the convenience of travellers. May I ask whether he has studied the great inconvenience—apart from the expense—which is caused to those individuals when they apply for passports; the great delay which occurs in obtaining even a form of application for a passport, and then in getting the passport? This takes up to fourteen days. Will the noble Lord also consider the views of Ulster in respect of this matter? Is it true, as I am informed it is, that Ulster would like to see the abolition of this restriction?
Further, is the noble Lord aware that Ulster is part of the United Kingdom? If a restriction is put on travel to Ulster, why not also on travel to Scotland, Lancashire, and other parts of the United Kingdom? If this restriction is necessary at the present moment, which I doubt, will the noble Lord say how long it is to be continued?
LORD WALKDEN: My Lords, the Government are as anxious as my noble friend that restrictions of this kind should be raised, but I cannot give him any hope that they are likely to be removed before the end of this year. We are obliged to maintain them at present by reason of the necessity of checking the influx of aliens of all kinds and also of workmen coming from Ireland. Soldiers are being demobilized, and the Government is most anxious that their places in civilian life should not be taken beforehand by immigrants. We admit workmen from Eire for those occupations such as agriculture for which we desire more labour, and in the case of women, for domestic service. There are undesirable aliens in Eire now who wish to come to this country, and so we must maintain these restrictions. We are very sorry for any inconvenience which may be caused to our friends in Ulster, but the undesirable persons in question could, if the restrictions were raised, go to Ulster and then come on to Great Britain. We must preserve quite a close check on these people for some time to come. As for the delay in the granting of passports to which my noble friend has referred, I will have a
422
full inquiry made into that. It was not part of the noble Lord's question.
LORD HACKING: My Lords, these people who, Lord Walkden says, are undesirable now will surely always remain undesirable, so it would seem that it is to be assumed that we shall never have this restriction raised.

BATTLE PRACTICES AT IMBER
4.3 p.m.
VISCOUNT LONG: My Lords, I beg to ask the question standing in my name.
[The question was as follows:
To ask His Majesty's Government—

(1) How many, days a month the Field Training area at Imber is used for full battle practice.

(2) How many Officers, N.C.O.'s and men take part in each of these battle practices.

(3) What is the cost of each of these battle practices.]

LORD NATHAN: My Lords, I have assumed that in using the term "full battle practice," the noble Viscount has in mind exercises with live ammunition. The Imber Training Area is used for such operations principally by the School of Infantry, who carry out battle practice on twenty days and eight nights a month in eighty-eight separate exercises. The area is also used occasionally by other training organisations, at present to the extent of about five days a month, while the Royal Air Force carry out bombing practice with dummy bombs on four or five days a week. The above programme takes no account of rehearsals, which go on continuously and take up as much time as the actual battle practice, if not more. These figures make clear that the training area is in more or less constant use.
The number of officers and other ranks employed varies with the type of practice. There are twenty-five different forms of exercise carried out by the School of Infantry alone. The numbers employed on any particular exercise vary between about 160 all ranks and about 1,250 all ranks, according to the type of exercise. These figures do not include personnel of training establishments other than the School of Infantry, nor of the Royal Air Force.

423
In the time available, I have not been able to calculate the exact cost of each type of exercise, but I have obtained an aggregate figure relating to the operations of the School of Infantry. The approximate cost of the explosives used and the comprehensive mileage cost of the vehicles employed is £67,000 a month, for the whole of the 88 exercises to which I have referred. This represents roughly the total cost involved by those exercises apart from the cost of flying a small number of aeroplanes in one particular exercise.
VISCOUNT LONG: My Lords, in thanking the noble Lord for his answer, may I ask him further if he has heard of any unofficial or official complaint of the last exercise on a grand scale that took place ten days ago, the repercussions of which were felt some twelve miles away from the area? Further, I would ask him if it is a fact that a few bodies of officers, N.C.O.'s and men are brought at great cost to the country on trains from training camps in the north in order that they may be given a few hours' training in this area?
LORD NATHAN: As regards the first part of the noble Lord's supplementary question, no such complaint has reached my ears. Whether it has reached my office I cannot tell the noble Lord, but I will make some inquiries. The second part of the noble Lord's supplementary question raises a point which, I feel, lies outside the scope of the particular Parliamentary question which the noble Lord has put to-day.

TERRITORIAL EFFICIENCY MEDAL.
4.7 p.m.
VISCOUNT LONG: My Lords, I beg to ask the second question standing in my name.
[The question was as follows:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether a statement can now be made in regard to the Territorial Efficiency Medal.]
LORD NATHAN: My Lords, the noble Viscount raised this question a few months ago, with particular reference to the case of Territorials who had attained commissioned rank during the war, and I was then able to assure him, and other noble
424
Lords who took part in the discussion on that occasion, that the claims of the officers in question were at that time receiving the most careful consideration and that I was not unhopeful of being able to make an announcement in due course which would be regarded as fully satisfactory. I am grateful to the noble Viscount for his patience during the period which has elapsed and for putting down his question to-day. The consideration of the matter has just been completed and, although the detailed regulations have not yet been promulgated, I am able to inform your Lordships of the conclusions reached and of the concessions which are being made.
As is no doubt known to many of your Lordships, the Territorial Efficiency Medal (referred to as the T.E.M.) is granted for long and meritorious service in the ranks of the Territorial Army. There is a corresponding award, the Territorial Decoration (generally known as the T.D.), granted for long and meritorious service in the commissioned ranks of the Territorial Army. During the war, in order to make the fullest use of the services of trained personnel of the Territorial Army, it became necessary in many cases to transfer men outside the Territorial Army. These transfers involved loss of Territorial status and, with it, the right to earn the Territorial Efficiency Medal, if not already obtained. The most notable class of Territorials who suffered by this arrangement were the warrant officers, non-commissioned officers and men who left the ranks of the Territorial Army on being granted commissions. These officers have, in many cases, lost entitlement to the Efficiency Medal, notwithstanding that their aggregate service is sufficient, and the conditions are otherwise satisfied, solely because their commissioned service could not be allowed to reckon for the award. Other Territorial soldiers, transferred to Forces outside the Territorial Army, below commissioned rank, have been at a like disadvantage.
The question was accordingly referred for consideration to the Inter-Departmental Rewards Committee, of which I am Chairman. That Committee reached unanimous conclusions, which have now been agreed by the various Departments concerned and approved by His Majesty the King, and are now being put into force.

425
Under a Royal Warrant, published as Army Order 7 of 1946, warrant officers, non-commissioned officers and men of the Territorial Army who were serving on September 3, 1939, and were embodied for service and granted commissions, may be granted the Territorial Efficiency Medal provided that they otherwise fulfil the necessary conditions for the award of that medal. In order that officers of the Territorial Army who were similarly serving on September 3, 1939, and were embodied, may not be placed in a less favourable position than other ranks, the Royal Warrant provides that they also may be awarded the Territorial Efficiency Medal under similar conditions. This does not debar such officers from qualifying for the Territorial Decoration in due course, under the usual rules for that award.
The Royal Warrant deals only with the entitlement of officers. The position of other ranks of the Territorial Army, who have been transferred to other forces without promotion to commissioned rank, will be met by allowing them to count such service for the award of the medal as though it had been performed in their Territorial Army engagements. At the same time, corresponding provision is made for Supplementary Reservists, Categories A and B, and Auxiliaries of the Auxiliary Territorial Service, who were similarly granted commissions or transferred, to enable them to count their service for the grant of the Efficiency Medal appropriate in their case. The necessary amendments to the Territorial Army, Supplmentary Reserve and Auxiliary Territorial Service Regulations are in course of preparation, and although they will take some little time, will be issued as quickly as possible. I hope that the noble Viscount and other noble Lords interested in this matter, including the noble Lord, Lord Croft, and
426
the noble Marquess, Lord Reading, who participated in the discussion on the last occasion, will be satisfied from what I have said that my earlier optimistic forecasts were not without justification.
4.12 p.m.
VISCOUNT LONG: My Lords, arising from the noble Lord's reply, may I be allowed to thank him for the method and the way in which he has been able to make this statement this afternoon to your Lordships' House. I know that great satisfaction will be felt in all quarters that these officers will receive the Territorial Efficiency Medal, and I am deeply grateful for the support I have received and to the noble Lord, Lord Croft, when he was Under-Secretary of State for War, and the noble Marquess, Lord Reading.
House adjourned during pleasure.
House resumed.

ROYAL COMMISSION.
The following Bills and Measures received the Royal Assent:

Education.

Post Office and Telegraph (Money),

Trade Disputes and Trade Unions.

Northwest Midland Joint Electricity Authority Order Confirmation.

Bucks Water Board.

Newport (Isle of Wight) Corporation.

Ecclesiastical Commissioners (Curate Grants) Measure, 1946.

Clergy Pensions (Supplementary Pensions) Measure, 1946.

Benefices (Suspension of Presentation) Measure, -1946.

House adjourned during pleasure.

House resumed.
House adjourned at fifteen minutes past five o'clock.