asked the Minister of Labour what instructions have been issued to the medical boards charged with examining militiamen as to the standard of health required for service?

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in order to dispel any suggestion that the standard of militiamen's medical examination was lower than that of entrants of the Regular and Territorial Army, he will publish the instructions, whether verbal or in writing, which were given to the doctors who conducted the examinations?

asked the Minister of Labour whether any instructions have been issued to the medical boards appointed under the Military Training Act and, if so, will he issue a statement setting out such instructions?

I am having a copy of the instructions placed in the library.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that men are being passed as fit for service who are regarded as chronic invalids?

I am not aware of that. Perhaps the hon. Lady will read the copy of the instructions which have been issued, and if she then desires to pursue the matter either in the House or with the Department, or with me personally, I shall be very glad to deal with it.

Has it been brought to the right hon. Gentleman's notice that men with glass eyes are being passed as fit for service?

I answered a question dealing with that point only last week, I believe.

Will it not be possible for the right hon. Gentleman to give more publicity to these instructions than will be given by placing them in the Library?

I cannot add anything to what I have said at the moment. The instructions are long and elaborate, and have been drawn up with great care in consultation with a number of experts. Perhaps when hon. Members have seen them they will consider whether they desire to raise the matter further.

asked the Minister of Labour whether the medical personnel examining militiamen is the same as in the case of those joining the Regular Forces; if not, how this personnel has been chosen and what are their qualifications for their posts; and will he state the percentages of medical rejects in the case of militiamen and the Regular Army, respectively?

The medical boards set up under the Military Training Act are composed of civilian doctors selected by the Ministry of Health from lists supplied by the British Medical Association. The percentage of men found unfit for any form of military service up to 20th June was 2.6 in the case of the examinations under the Military Training Act. As regards the results of the examinations for the Regular Army the hon. Member should address his question to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to tell the House that he does not realise the difference between the two, and will he tell me whether the qualifications of the doctors who are examining under the Military Training Act are the same as those of the doctors who examine for the Regular Army?

Their qualifications are of the highest kind.

That is not what I asked. They may have qualifications of the highest kind, but have they the qualifications which would set the same standard of examination in the two cases?

That is another point, and that is why I have referred the hon. Member to my right hon. Friend.

Can the Minister assure the House that there is adequate provision for testing the eyes of the militiamen, because great doubt is being expressed on that point in view of the fact that men are being passed who have never been able to see without glasses?

That does not tally with the information which I had received from hon. Members.

I am making not a general statement, but a specific statement.

asked the Minister of Labour whether a militiaman who has an unsatisfactory medical history and who is dissatisfied with the decision of the examining doctor is given the right to appeal for a second opinion from a specialist?

The decisions of the medical boards are final, but arrangements are made for men to be referred to consultants for report when the boards are in doubt.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that if a man has certificates over a long period of years certifying him as suffering from some complaint, which may be obscure to a new doctor who is examining him, that he should have the right to appeal to a specialist in his complaint?

I should not like to give a definite answer upon a particular case without consulting the specialist concerned, but I shall be glad to discuss the matter with the hon. Lady.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many Members on this side of the House have cases sent to them day after day of men who have been certified as suffering from a certain complaint but are now passed fit for service?

I hope hon. Members will send them on to me. The thing that has struck me for the last fortnight is the very small number of letters I have had on this matter.