§ 106. Sir T. Beamishasked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will state the reasons for his estimate that the proposed Army Volunteer Reserve is only likely to achieve a recruited strength of 80 per cent. of its establishment.
§ Mr. ReynoldsThe estimate is based on the recruiting experience of Category 257W I of the Army Emergency Reserve which has approximately the same call-out liability, and the same bounty, as are proposed for the Army Volunteer Reserve.
§ 107. Sir T. Beamishasked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will publish in the Official Report a table showing the comparative costs of the Territorial Army and the proposed Army Emergency Reserve at their present strength, with similar costs for the Army Volunteer Reserve in 1969–70 to show the saving that can be expected if the Army Volunteer Reserve is recruited to full establishment.
§ Mr. ReynoldsThe cost of the Territorial Army and the Army Emergency Reserve for 1965–66 was expected to be about £33 million excluding the cost of Regular Army personnel. However, savings have arisen in the course of the year as a consequence of the proposals for reorganising the Army Reserves.
The cost of the Army Volunteer Reserve in 1969–70, on the assumption that all units were recruited up to 100 per cent. of establishment, would be £16.7 million as against the £14.8 million given in my written answer of 25th January to the hon. and gallant Member for Arundel and Shoreham.
The calculation of savings should logically be made by comparing the estimated cost of the Army Volunteer Reserve in 1969–70 with that of the existing volunteer Reserves in that year and not in 1965–66.