Oral Answers to Questions — British Army. – in the House of Commons at on 3 May 1938.
asked the Secretary of State for War the number of applicants for enlistment in the Regular Army in the quarter ended 31st March, 1938, and the number of these men approved as recruits; and how these figures compare with those for the corresponding months in 1937?
The number of applicants for enlistment in the Regular Army in the first quarter of this year was 16,701. In the corresponding quarter of last year it was 13,830. The numbers accepted in these periods were 10,504 this year, and 7,116 last year.
Have the War Office any information regarding the number of applicants for enlistment who were unemployed at the time?
I have not the information at the moment, but the majority of those who enlisted were in employment before they enlisted.
Is the Army attracting a better quality of men now that they are being given an increased wage, as shown on the tape to-day?
The quality of all people in this country is getting better and better.
Is it because they are getting butter instead of margarine?
asked the Secretary of State for War what percentage of the applicants for enlistment were approved as recruits in the quarter ended 31st March, 1938; and how this figure compares with the percentage in the same quarter in 1937?
62.9 and 51.5, respectively.
Does that mean that the percentage of applicants accepted is going up; and does my right hon. Friend consider that by the end of the year he will have made up the present shortage in the armed forces?
The answer to the first half of the supplementary question is that the percentage of applicants has, I am glad to say, gone up. With regard to the future, I would not be so indiscreet as to be precise, but more and more men are enlisting every week as compared with last year.
Will my right hon. Friend consider giving some further inducements in order to get the larger number of recruits which is still necessary in order to make up the shortage this year? Does he think he will reach the number of 54,000 recruits required this year to complete the establishment?
Mr. Hare-Belisha:
In every respect conditions in the Army are improved and improving.
Would the percentage have been the same had the standard been maintained, instead of having been, as I understand, lowered?
I could not say without notice, but I do not admit that the standard has been lowered. It has been revised in accordance with common sense, but that revision is not in itself responsible for the increase, which is a substantive increase.
asked the Secretary of State for War what number of men were approved as recruits in the first quarter of the present year who would not have been accepted under the standards, medical and otherwise, in force previous to last autumn?
The common sense changes which have been made in the medical and other standards for recruits secured for the Army during the first quarter of this year an extra 1,733 men, out of a total of 10,504 accepted.
Does this number given by the right hon. Gentleman include the older men, who would not formerly have been accepted, and married men, as well as men with less qualifications as regards hearing and sight?
The statement I have made is a complete answer to the question that was put.
What percentage of these sub-standard recruits go to the Canterbury Depot?
These are not substandard recruits. Those who have been to the Canterbury Depot passed into the Army on the full standard after receiving training. They are brought up to full standard, and are not included in these figures.
Does the right hon. Gentleman suggest that common sense was conspicuously lacking at the War Office until he went there?