asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the difficulty of soldiers and soldiers' wives obtaining form M.S.A.C. 10 or 21, he will take steps to have such forms available at the local headquarters of organisations catering for the interests of the men in the armed forces of the Crown?

I have been asked to reply. There is not now, I understand, any real difficulty in obtaining the forms referred to. Soldiers serving at home can obtain them through the regimental paymaster, and wives of soldiers serving overseas can obtain them on making application by postcard to the nearest office of the Unemployment Assistance Board. I am considering the desirability of making these forms available at other convenient centres.

In view of the fact that officers are still informing soldiers that they have no knowledge of this regulation and that there are women in this country whose husbands have been in the army since August who have not yet had their first military payment, does not the Minister think that it is a reflection on the organisation and a bloody disgrace to the whole Government?

Hon. Members:

Order!

rose—

I want an answer. In my Constituency I know of women with eight and nine children who have had no payment yet from the Government. I want justice for these women, these wives of our soldiers. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] You cannot say "Order" to hungry women and children. This week-end, in my constituency, I have seen women who have had to go to the pawn shop to pawn their things in order to get food for their children, and their husbands have been in the army since the beginning of September. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] I do not care a damn about Order.

The hon. Member will immediately apologise to the House or I shall have to name him.

In the name of these hungry people I cannot give any apology to anybody in this House or in this country.

I shall have to order the hon. Member to leave the House.

On behalf of these people I leave the House because to me the needs of these people are greater than the prestige of this House.

The hon. Member withdrew accordingly.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that in the last war an extra rent allowance, of 3s. 6d. was automatically paid to all soldiers' families resident in towns; and whether he will consider making the same arrangement, and also a sliding-scale special rent allowance on proof of rent paid?

During the last war, an addition of sixpence a day was made to the separation allowance of families who were residing in the London postal area and not occupying public quarters. The additional allowance was not given elsewhere. The minimum rate of separation allowance was then 9s. a week. In this war, the lowest rate of family allowance is 17s. a week. Provision has already been made whereby claims arising out of such special circumstances as high rent may be met by the grant of special financial assistance. Nevertheless, it is proposed to pay an extra sixpence a day to soldiers' wives in the London postal area.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider the desirability of appointing local appeal committees to deal with the claims and needs of wives and mothers of men on war service in respect of allowances, assessments, and similar matters; whether he will establish a right of appeal by mothers and wives to commanding officers respecting financial hardship; and whether, in view of the practice in the last war, he is considering the possibility of paying to the mothers of soldiers the net sum which the unmarried soldier contributed to the upkeep of the home or, alternatively, the payment of a definite allowance to which unmarried soldiers should be entitled for this purpose?

The admissibility or otherwise of a claim to family or dependants' allowance payable under the regulations is a question of fact and, therefore, not a matter for appeal on general grounds. Application for special allowances outside the regulations to meet hardship caused by a soldier being called up for service are now dealt with by the Ministry of Pensions, on the advice of the War Service Grants Advisory Committee. I understand that a sub-office of the committee has been established in the North of England to deal with such claims as an experimental measure. Mothers and wives are always at liberty to seek the advice of commanding officers with regard to any financial hardship from which they are suffering as a result of their sons' or husbands' service. As regards the last part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Clackmannan and Eastern (Mr. Woodburn) on Tuesday, 21st November.

May we take it that any request or communication from a wife or mother to a commanding officer will receive the same consideration as if it came from the soldier himself?

Yes, Sir, it is our desire that that should be so, and I hope it is the universal practice.

At the special tribunal for dealing with hardship cases will the wife or other dependants have some assistance, legal or otherwise, in submitting their case?

That is a question which should be addressed to the Minister of Pensions.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Mrs. Nuttall, of Burnley, an invalid and widow, who has all five sons in the fighting forces, has been advised by an Army inquiry agent not to pay clubs and other weekly payments in order to relieve her poverty, and that these payments, with rent and medical charges, leave only 1s. 3d. per week for food, in spite of the fact that her youngest son, now in France, sends 14s. per week to augment her widow's pension, her only other source of income; and whether he will cause inquiries to be made into this case?

I have no information as to the advice stated to have been given to Mrs. Nuttall, but, if the facts are as stated in the hon. Member's question, an application should be made to the Ministry of Pensions for a special allowance which would be considered by the War Service Grants Advisory Committee.

Is it on the instructions of his Department or against the instructions of his Department that the army assessors are giving advice of this character? Do I understand that it is the policy of the Army authorities to leave it to local tradesmen to bear the financial responsibilities which his Department should bear?

I do not quite understand what the hon. Member means.

Is it not obvious that if she is advised not to pay her debts local tradesmen will have to bear the expense which should be borne by the Department?

I have said that I have no information of this advice having been given.

Is the right lion. Gentleman aware that this younger son joined the Territorials at 16 and was called up in August last and that he was contributing to his mother £2 per week, and that because his contribution is now only 14s., being the maximum allowed, and is as much as he can afford, the army will not allow his mother any more money? Is it not possible for cases of that description to be dealt with more speedily and in a much more generous way?

I hope that the hon. Member does not wish to put me in the position of being unsympathetic towards this lady. I have told him that if she will make an application to the proper committee her application can be dealt with. As far as I can make out she has not yet made an application.

She has made an application.

Not to this committee.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that No. 7007836 Regimental Sergeant-Major H. J. Hynds has received no allowance for his family owing to the fact that his wife is a member of the Auxiliary Territorial Service and that this warrant officer is worse off because his wife is serving than if she were not doing anything; and will he rectify this unsatisfactory state of affairs?

I will inquire into the statement made, but, under existing instructions, the fact that a soldier's wife is a member of the Auxiliary Territorial Service does not affect his eligibility for family allowance.

In view of that, can my right hon. Friend give me an answer to a similar case that I put to him a month ago?

The answer necessarily is not the same as that given to this question.