The suitability of the more senior officers for the very responsible and widely differing types of appointments which they hold can, it is thought, better be ensured by a process of continuous individual scrutiny rather than by the method of a single, general review.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he proposes to set up independent selection boards to review the recommendations made by commanding officers on officers serving under them of 45 years of age and over; up to and including the rank of lieutenant-colonel, in order to ensure that officers efficient in modern tactics and ideas are retained in the Service?
The recommendations of commanding officers have to be confirmed by the divisional or equivalent commander. The report on an officer belonging to a technical arm who is not employed with a unit of his own arm, will also be considered by a senior officer of his corps. These safeguards should ensure that the services of efficient officers are not lost to the Army.
Does the Financial Secretary recognise that among these officers over 45 years of age there is, quite likely, a number of rebels who have been refused promotion on account of their insistence on new methods and new processes, and will not commanding officers take this opportunity to get rid of them altogether? How does the War Office propose to safeguard them?
Is it not possible that this rage for younger men may be carried too far, and might it not be the case that some older men are efficient and ought to be retained but may be removed simply because of this desire for younger men?