LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
HOW MUCH NATIONAL SERVICE ?
SIR,--Most people in this country today have a vague feeling that in the present disturbed state of the world some form of National Service is needed for the time being. The six-to-one vote in the House of Commons in favour of the Second Reading of the National Service Bill, no doubt, fairly represented public opinion on this issue. The great disadvantage of conscription is that, as the conscripts are trained in the use of certain weapons, the tendency is for those weapons to be kept for them to use. As the recollection of war recedes, votes for replace- ment of antiquated types of equipment are reduced almost to vanishing point. In consequence, a conscript army is permanently out-of-date—and not only in its weapons, but in its tactics also. Officers tend to become schoolmasters and bureaucrats, and the whole military machine loses its vitality, adaptability and initiative. On the other hand, nobody has yet controverted the arguments that never again are we likely to be given the time to put the whole nation through basic training after the out- break of war, and that territorial and volunteer reserve training cannot equip men for the varied and complicated tasks of modern warfare. It appears, therefore, that there is no real alternative to National Service at present.
The question that has to be enswered in the remaining stages of the Bill is: " What is the nature of the National Service to be? " Is the aim to be to give our young men enough basic training to equip them to take their place rapidly in the Atimed Forces in the event of a national emergency ; or is it to carry out occupation duties and swell the paper strength of the Armed Forces; or is it both? If it is the second, then a reduced- period of training could be contemplated, the proportion of infantry in the Armed Forces could be greatly increased, and youths could be sent abroad soon after (heir eighteenth birthdays for operational and occupation duties. But this will not give us an efficient balanced reserve of trained men. if it is the first, then the minimum period of training to produce a balanced army would be nine months. This period would be barely ade.quate for the Navy and quite insufficient for many branches of the R.A.F. There is, however, nothing incongruous about different periods of National Service for different branches of the Armed Forces, especially as those branches which would require longer service are among the most sought after. Indeed, precedents exist abroad. If it is both, then any period of National Service less than eighteen months would not be worth while. Indeed, it may be doubted whether eighteen months will be sufficient. There would be a tendency to use the National Service men for the nearer theatres, which are at present the more important, and to dissipate our regular troops over the more distant out- posts*. It may well be, therefore, that if recruitment remains in the doldrums as at present, and if there is a demonstrable need for large standing forces in 1950, a minimum of two years' service, such as existed in the French Army on the outbreak of the last war, would be required.
The period of training in National Service could be reduced by making membership of one of the cadet forces obligatory between the ages of fifteen and eighteen. There is nothing shocking about this. Young persons are already to be compelled to attend junior colleges between those ages. If it is not wrong to compel young mien to put in a period of whole-time service after eighteen, it cannot be wrong to exact part-time service from them before they reach eighteen. As a compromise, some economy in time and cost could be made if those who had obtained certificates of proficiency in cadet corps were allowed a remission of part of their National Service. The possibility that prior service in a cadet corps might result in more rapid promotion during National Service is unlikely to prove anything like such a strong incentive to recruitment in the cadet corps as a deduction in the period of National Service. Surely the period, nature and conditions of National Service should be so arranged as to encourage the maximum recruitment both into the Regular Forces and into the Territorial Forces. The more occupation and routine guard duties the National Service men have to do, the fewer volunteers will come forward at the end of that service. On the otheto hand, if men are released from National Service on completion of their training, when interest and enthusiasm are at their height, the number of volunteers for Regular Service might well make up for the loss of some 100,000 semi-trained men which an additional six months' National Service would provide for the Forces.
The Government have so far done very little to attract volunteers. The first essential is that there should be a marked difference in the scale of pay for men during National Service as compared with volunteers thereafter. If it is accepted as a national duty to undergo training to defend oneself, one's family and one's country, there can be no justifica- tion• for paying a National Service recruit the same as a professional sailor, soldier or airman. Imorovements in pay of the higher ranks of
N.C.O.s, maintenance of short-service recruitment, coupled with greatly improved educational and vocational training facilities during service, the reservation of many Civil Service appointments for ex-Servicemen, and in general improved arrangements for placing them in jobs after dis- charge—all these practical steps would do far more for recruitment than posters and propaganda. If it were possible to send National Service men out to various parts of the Empire, there might be some attraction in prolonging the period beyond that which is strictly necessary for train- ing. It is, however, difficult to regard with equanimity the deterioration in the morale of these boys that would occur if they were to be used for the occupation of Germany or Palestine so lbng after the war is ended.
It is argued, therefore, that the period should be reduced to the minimum compatible with training requirements, say nine months, and that in those branches of the Services for which a longer period of training is required, recruitment should be limited to those who under- take to serve the requisite time, or whose training before call-up renders them capable of attaining the necessary standard in the branch within nine months. Lastly, a nine months' period is insufficient to train an officer. Probably the best plan would be for aspirants to commissions in the T.A. or Reserve Forces to spend the last three months of the period in O.C.T.U.s and then to spend a further three months in units as officers. It might also be desirable to increase the number of days of service to be completed in the Reserve in the case of officers. A man should be prepared to earn his " pips " not only by character and ability, but by longer training than the normal.—Yours faithfully,
Previous page
