CAB129-33 — Page 422

215

Page 422

that most of the young men concerned, had they not been called up, would have been living at home earning good wages and well able to provide themselves with civilian clothes. Their call-up, apart from interfering with their careers, and even in some cases with their chances of getting a reasonably good job before being called up, means that they get no more than 30/- or £2 a week for a long period and, although they are, in addition, fed and clothed and accommodated by the Services, all their pay is taken up by the expenses of Service life arising partly from the present lack of amenities, and also from such special factors as travelling expenses for visiting their parents. Release leave, it is said, has been earned by service, and in any event is intended to be spent as leave which is necessary for the purpose of resettlement. Pay for this period is therefore for purposes of maintenance, and is not available for the purchase of clothing. These arguments are difficult to refute:

Possible Concessions

6. My Service colleagues and I are agreed that, because of its cost both in money and in administrative overheads (including personnel), we should not be justified in continuing to grant a complete outfit of civilian clothing on the "age and service" scale; also that a money grant sufficient to enable such an outfit to be privately purchased would be too costly. We are however satisfied that there is a strong case for some concession and it is clear that, if none is made, there will be a large and growing volume of dissatisfaction. This, by affecting recruiting, may well react on Service efficiency.

7. The suggestion has been made that men should be allowed to retain without payment a suit of battledress and a Service greatcoat. This would not be a happy solution. The Services need this clothing; it is expensive to replace; there are military objections to civilians wearing it. Finally, the concession would cost a considerable sum without satisfying the main complaint.

8. There remain two forms in which a concession could be made. First, by the provision of a modified scale of civilian clothing, and secondly, by means of a cash 'grant in aid' which would go at any rate some way towards meeting the cost of civilian clothes privately purchased. We have rejected the first solution, mainly because it would involve the Services in a continuing and onerous administrative commitment. We therefore proposes that a cash grant of pf5 towards t provision of civilian clothing should be given off

-3-

the