Lieut.-Commander Clark Hutchison:

asked the Postmaster-General why a large number of men between the ages of 60 and 66 years have recently been discharged from the postal service in Edinburgh so that they may take up work in industry, when, in fact, no industrial employment exists in the city for men of that age; and why he does not retain these older men in the service and release the younger men and women who would be more readily absorbed in employment of an industrial nature.

Forty full-time temporary postmen, of whom 14 were 60 years of age or over, were discharged at Edinburgh because they became redundant on the introduction of restricted postal services. Because of the curtailment of postal services, younger men, who would otherwise have been recruited to the Post Office, are available for employment in industry.

Lieut.-Commander Hutchison:

Is the Minister aware that there is considerable dissatisfaction with the way this scheme of reduction is operating ?

Where people are redundant and have to be stood off there is always a certain amount of dissatisfaction. That is almost inevitable.

Does the Minister agree that this process which is going on, of dismissing temporary men all over the country, is extremely wasteful from the point of view of manpower, and extremely tragic from the point of view of the men themselves?

I cannot agree about the waste part of it, but I do agree about the tragedy of it. I should like to avoid it, but it has to be done, and we have done it according to the regulations of the Whitley agreement.

Is it not wasteful for men who are good at a particular job, but are too old to be trained for a new job, to be stood down, while younger men who could be trained for industry are taken on in their places?

I do not think that necessarily proves the point about waste.

The hon. Gentleman said previously that the restriction of services was due to the lack of manpower, but he now says that the reduction of manpower is due to the restriction in services. Could he say which is correct?

I do not think that I said anything of the kind.

Lieut.-Commander Hutchison:

asked the Postmaster-General whether it is the general policy of his Department to discharge men over 60 years of age on grounds of redundancy in preference to younger employees of both sexes who might more easily find alternative employment in productive industry.

No, Sir. Temporary staff, as they become redundant, are discharged in accordance with an order of priority agreed in principle on the Civil Service National Whitley Council and in detail with the Post Office staff representatives. This order of priority is related to length of service, and not to age.

asked the Postmaster-General how many ex-Service men, recruited since 1st July, 1946, in line for establishment as postmen, have been dismissed since 1st January, 1947.

I have no information that such ex-Service men have been discharged, but if the hon. and gallant Member will give me particulars of any case, I shall be glad to have inquiry made.

Is it possible that some of these men may have been issued by the Ministry of Labour with the wrong form and, believing themselves to have applied for permanent employment in the Post Office, have in fact signed a form which makes them temporary employees? May that be the explanation?

I do not know about that, but if the hon. and gallant Gentleman will send me a case I will examine it.

May I, Mr. Speaker, through you, give notice to the Minister that I will endeavour to pursue this matter, if I am successful in catching the eye of the Chair, in today's Debate on the Post Office Estimates?

I must remind the hon. and gallant Gentleman that that will have nothing to do with me.

I said, Mr. Speaker, only if I were successful in being called.