asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in the East, whether he is aware that in many districts the term "potato gatherer" is used to describe those engaged in harvesting the crop and the term "potato-picker" is used to describe those engaged in sorting potatoes at the pie; whether he is aware that both these employments are ordinarily adopted as subsidiary employments only, and not as the principal means of livelihood; and whether, in view of the fact that by Special Order, No. 916, of 1912, persons engaged in harvesting the crop are exempted from insurance if they are not already insured persons, he will advise the National Insurance Commissioners to exempt those engaged in sorting potatoes at the pie from insurance if they are not already insured persons?

The evidence put before the Commission by the representatives of agricultural interests at the time when the Order referred to was under consideration indicated that persons engaged in harvesting the crop were ordinarily persons who were not at other times employed within the meaning of the Act, but that the work of sorting potatoes at the pie was generally undertaken either by permanent farm hands or by women who engage in the regular series of field employments. As at present advised, therefore, the Commissioners do not consider that employment in sorting potatoes at the pie can properly be regarded as a subsidiary employment only.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in certain parts of the country the facts are precisely the opposite of those he has stated?

Oh, no; I have stated that evidence was secured from persons, competent to speak on behalf of the agricultural interests.

Does the hon. Gentleman propose to take steps to ascertain the real facts in other districts so far as they can be obtained?

I imagine that the evidence taken referred to all districts; if the hon. Member has any other evidence perhaps he will lay it before the Commission.

asked whether the Insurance Commissioners, or any of the insurance committees acting under their directions, claim to have an arbitrary power to refuse an insured person the choice of medical attendant; if so, is there any appeal, and to whom, from any decision come to; and have any Regulations been made upon the subject of applications by insured persons to make their own arrangements, or any definite directions given as to what circumstances should be taken into account in considering such applications?

Section 15 (3) of the Act of 1911 lays upon insurance committees the duty of deciding in the first instance upon applications from insured persons for permission to make their own arrangements. Regulations have been made in pursuance of the Section, and the provisions of Section 67 (2) are applicable to these cases.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in many cases this permission to make these arrangements is wholly ignored by the Committee?

I have stated that it is within the discretion of the Committee as to whether or not they give permission to persons to make their own arrangements.

Does the hon. Gentleman know that the policy of these committees, as a whole, openly stated, is to ignore the granting of this permission?

Whether permission is granted or not is a matter within the discretion of the committee.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, what the reason is for the Middlesex insurance committee delaying to discharge the claim of Mr. A. W. Leonard, of Ealing, in respect of payments made upwards of fifteen months previously for medical attendance and drugs; why a cheque, which was not forwarded until 4th July, 1914, for a proportionate amount of such payments only, should be dated 6th June, 1914, and why drawn on the insurance committee's petty cash account; whether such amount was not forwarded until after personal communication had been sent to the committee by Mr. Masterman; and, if so, what was the reason for this personal influence being exerted?

For the reasons stated in my previons reply to the hon. Member no calculation of the dividend due, and hence no payment could be made out of the Special Arrangements Fund until all accounts had been received. The case of the person referred to was in no way specially dealt with, the whole of the payments having been made at practically the same time.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, whether the Middlesex insurance committee has yet distributed among the panel doctors any of the surplus funds for 1913; if not, what is the reason of the delay; and, if so, will be say what addition it has made to the fixed remuneration per head of persons treated?

Advances have been made to a total amount in excess of the amounts due in respect of insured persons on doctors' lists only; but the difference between the amounts due on the latter basis and the amount due in respect of the total insured population of the area entitled to treatment by doctors on the panel cannot be ascertained until the completion of the settlement now in progress.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, whether the Middlesex insurance committee have distributed among the panel doctors of their area any sum for tuberculosis treatment; and, if no such distribution has taken place, will he say what is the cause of the delay?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative; the second does not, therefore, arise.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, why William Deverill, of Chilmark, in the county of Wilts, a poor man with a wife and thirteen children, formerly a member of the Prudential Approved Society, and now a member of the Wiltshire Working Men's Conservative Benefit Society, has failed, in spite of repeated applications, to obtain maternity benefit on the occasion of the birth of his last child from either of the above societies; and whether the Insurance Commissioners will take steps to prevent this insured person from losing the maternity benefit, for the provision of which he has been paying weekly contributions out of his wages, owing to a refusal on the part of each of the above societies to admit its liability?

The Commissioners are informed that doubt arose as to which society was responsible for paying the benefit in question, owing to the fact that the insured person on receiving consent to transfer from his first society failed to inform his new society. They understand, however, that benefit has now been paid.

Is not this difficulty a reason why this man should not have gone to this Conservative society?

There was a doubt which society ought to pay, and the society which actually did pay was the Prudential.

Is the hon. Member aware that there are as many Liberals as Conservatives members of this society?

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East whether he is aware that a special levy of 2s. per member has been made by the Amalgamated Society of Tailors and Tailoresses, Manchester; whether, if members refused to pay this levy, they will suffer any and, if so, what disadvantages; and what steps it is proposed to take to deal with such societies?

The Commissioners are informed that the levy referred to is a levy for the requirements of the trade union, with which they are in no way concerned. No levy has been made by the society in connection with national insurance.

asked if, in cases in which insured seamen are taken ill in a British port and ordered by a doctor into hospital, the expenses which the hospital authorities may require the ship owner to guarantee are in any circum stances recoverable from the insurance authorities; if they are not so recoverable, whether the shipowner can be compelled to pay such expenses; and if, in any proposals brought forward for the amendment of Part I. of the National Insurance Act, consideration will be given to the question of at any rate relieving ship owners of any responsibility for expenses incurred in connection with the medical treatment of insured seamen while in British ports?

The liability of a shipowner to provide surgical and medical advice and attendance and maintenance during periods of illness in respect of the seamen employed by him is determined by the Merchant Shipping Acts, and is not affected by the provisions of the National Insurance Acts. I cannot undertake to anticipate the provisions of future legislation with regard to the liabilities of shipowners to their employés.

Does the hon. Gentleman think it either fair or reasonable that British shipowners should be called upon to pay premiums for benefits they cannot obtain, and that it was never intended that they should obtain?

There is no evidence to show that any such state of affairs as that referred to really exists.

Is the suggestion that I have made in my question correct or is it incorrect? If it is correct are the ship-owners to obtain the benefits they have paid for?

The hon. Member, I think, does not apprehend that these men are dealt with under the Merchant Shipping Acts. Questions of that subject ought to be addressed to the Board of Trade.

asked whether the Insurance Commissioners propose to take any steps to explain to waterside labourers the provisions of the proposed National Health (Port of London Casual Labour) Order, 1914?

Yes, Sir. Before the Order comes into operation appropriate steps will be taken to make known its provisions to all persons who will be affected by it.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East whether he has consulted any, and, if so, what representative organisations of waterside labourers in the Port of London as to the scheme for the payment of insurance contributions in respect of casual labour in the Port of London; and whether the scheme has been approved by such organisation?

The Insurance Commissioners called a conference last winter of representatives of all the principal trade unions concerned to discuss the scheme. As a result of this conference a small committee of the trade unions was appointed, with whom the commissioners have been in frequent consultation, and from whom they received a number of suggestions, some of which it was found possible to adopt.

Would the hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of having someone in the vicinity of the port to give to these men information regarding this Section of the Act?

Oh, yes, Sir; if the special Order is upheld, proper steps will taken to ensure that the provisions are made known to all concerned.

Does the hon. Gentleman say that this scheme has been approved by representatives of the trade unions?

I said that it had been prepared in consultation with the representatives of the principal trade unions.

Has it ever been submitted to them since it was completed, and has it been approved by them?

I do not think it is part of the duty of the Commissioners to submit schemes for approval by outside bodies.

asked the Prime Minister, as representing the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, whether he can say when the second Annual Report of the Scottish Insurance Commissioners will be distributed to Scottish Members?

My hon. Friend can obtain the Report referred to on applying at the Vote Office.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I mean the Scottish Report bound by itself?

My hon. Friend can obtain the Report from the Vote Office.

Can I get the Scottish Report bound separately, as last year?

No, Sir, the. Scottish Report is not bound separately this year.

When is it to be bound separately?

It is issued to Scottish Members as to other Members.

Why was it bound separately last year?

The hon. Member had better give notice of such important questions.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that the agents employed by the National Amalgamated Approved Society, in carrying out the provisions of the National Insurance Act, Part I., cannot get the rules of that society; if he has power to compel the production of rules; and can he take some steps to get better conditions of service for a body of workers but little removed from Government servants?

Any member of the society referred to can obtain a copy of the rules at the price of 2d. The nature of the documents or instructions issued by approved societies to their employés, and the conditions of employment, are matters to be settled between the societies and their employés themselves; the Commissioners have no power to interfere in the internal government of societies in the manner suggested.