asked the Minister of Labour whether, seeing that the only condition necessary to establish the fact that an applicant for unemployment pay is genuinely seeking work is that the individual should sign on three days a week at the local Employment Exchange, he will say what useful purpose is served by the local advisory committees?

Signature at an Employment Exchange is not sufficient by itself to prove that the applicant is genuinely seeking whole-time employment. The functions of the local employment committees are most important as regards verifying the fulfilment, not only of this condition, but also of the various other conditions relating to uncovenanted benefit. Moreover, the assistance of these committees, including, as they do, representatives of local organisations of employers and employed, is essential for the proper performance of practically all branches of the work carried out by the Employment Exchanges.

The figures asked for in the first and second parts of the question are as follow:

asked the Minister of Labour whether he has issued any instruction, direction, or rule, such as gives power to Employment Exchange officials to send men long distances from their homes in search of employment; and whether he is aware that the principal Act only provides for persons being sent when a vacancy has been notified and it is deemed reasonable that the person should be sent to fill such vacancy?

Exchange officials are not empowered to send men a long distance in search of employment. Applicants are not asked to travel in order to take up work at a distance, unless they have previously been accepted by the prospective employer, or the Exchange has good reason to expect that they will be engaged on arrival.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that J. D. Walmsley, Earlestown, Lancaster, was disallowed benefit from 22nd December, 1922, to 22nd January, 1923, on the ground that he was not unemployed; that the employment referred to was an attempt to increase his income by sales of the "Daily Herald "; that his income from this source ranged from 3s. id. to 13,s. 6d. per week; that in no case did he earn the equivalent of 3s. 4d. per day; and whether, under these circumstances, he can explain why benefit was disallowed?

The limit of 3s. 4d. a day referred to in the question applies only to the earnings from a subsidiary occupation carried on by the applicant before he became unemployed. In general, under Section 7 (2) (a) of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920, any day on which any sum is earned cannot be counted as a day of unemployment. The particular case referred to has been the subject of an appeal to the Umpire, who se decision under the Act is final, and who has confirmed the disallowance of benefit.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) the dates upon which the Darlaston Employment Committee have met since its inception; what are the names of those invited to attend on each occasion;

(2) whether he is aware that certain representatives of labour, appointed over 12 months ago as members of the Darlaston Employment Committee, were not summoned to a meeting of the committee until February of this year; and, if so, will he explain why such representatives have not been officially recognised before;

(3) the names of the chairman, vice-chairman, secretary and members of the Darlaston Employment Committee and the organisations, including local authorities, they represent, and the date of their appointment, respectively?

The Darlaston Local Employment Committee met 23 times between its first appointment in December, 1917, and April, 1921. I am sending the hon. Member a list of the dates of meeting. All members of the committee for the time being were presumably invited to attend. For various reasons difficulty arose in completing the re-appointment of the committee which subsequently became due, and on this account the members of the reconstituted committee were not summoned to a meeting till February, 1923. During the interval I understand that adequate provision was made for carrying on the necessary work through sub-committees of the old committee. The names of the industrial members of the new committee were given in the reply of 14th March to the hon. Member. I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT the names of the chairman and other mem bers. All the appointments date from February, 1923.

But is my hon. Friend aware that members of this Committee were appointed as far back as March, 1922, and have never been summoned to a meeting? How does the hon. Gentleman explain this lapse on the part of the Secretary of the Committee, and will he hold a special inquiry into the matter, as a good deal of ill-feeling has arisen owing to the action of the Secretary?

I think I ought to say this: this is a question that has involved a good deal of research, and it only appeared yesterday morning; I am awaiting further particulars. I shall be very glad to give an answer to the hon. Gentleman when the inquiry is complete. The answer I have given comprises the best information I have been able to get in the time available.

asked the Minister of Labour how many boys and girls between the ages of 14 and 16 years are at work in all industries; how many of the same age are unemployed; how many men and women are engaged in industry over 60 years of age; and how many over that age are unemployed?

I regret that no statistics are available as to the total numbers of boys and girls, or of men and women over 60 years of age, who are in employment, or as to the total numbers of such workpeople unemployed at the present time.

Are these figures not available from the Census returns, and will the hon. Gentleman make inquiries of the Ministry of Health so that these figures may be given to the House?

The only figures available are those of the 1911 Census. With regard to the 1921 Census, the figures are not yet complete.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that he gave the House the impression that these figures were not available? Now he tells us that they were available for 1911.

I am sorry the hon. Gentleman thinks I was misleading the House. It is the last thing I want to do. The figures in the 1911 Census would obviously be of no use to anybody, and would be quite misleading. Those for 1921 are not available, but as soon as they are available the hon. Gentleman shall have them.

asked the Minister of Labour for particulars of the method adopted in compiling the cost-of-living index figures shown in the "Labour Gazette" for March, 1923; and whether he will appoint a representative Committee to investigate the present system of compiling the index number?

An article giving a full account of the method adopted in compiling these index numbers was published in the "Labour Gazette" for February, 1921, and I am sending the hon. Member a copy. As at present advised, my right hon. Friend does not think it is necessary to appoint a Committee to investigate this matter.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that an Englishman working as a member of the crew of a Canadian ship in an English port who is accidentally injured is debarred from claiming benefit under both the English and Canadian Workmen's Compensation Acts; and whether he will initiate legislation to remedy this defect?

I have. been asked to reply to this question. Our Workmen's Compensation Act does not apply to the crews of ships registered out of the United Kingdom, unless the owner or manager resides or has his principal place of business in the United Kingdom. Consequently, an English member of a crew of a ship owned and registered abroad is not in a position to claim compensation from his employers for an injury sustained in an English port, unless he is entitled to do so under the Workmen's Compensation law of the country to which the ship belongs. The Departmental Committee on Workmen's Compensation inquired into this question, but they express the opinion, in paragraph 49 of their Report, that it would not be practicable or desirable, save in pursuance of an international agreement, to make any legal provision to enable a British seaman on a ship registered out of the United Kingdom to recover compensation in this country, and that British seamen engaging on such ships must he content to rely on the law of the country of registration. In view of this finding, I should not feel justified in proposing any extension of our Act in the direction suggested.

asked the Minister of Labour what was the average length of Government service of the 1,728 women employ é s dismissed from the Ministry since the present substitution arrangements came into force on 1st October, 1920; what proportion was assisted to train for other occupations by means of Government grants and what proportion received any gratuity such as was given to home service men of similar length of service in a clerical capacity?

I fear it is not possible, without considerable research, to state the average length of Government service of temporary women employ é s. discharged from the Ministry since October, 1920, nor what proportion of such women received assistance towards training from the Central Committee on Women's Training and Employment. So far as I am aware, no gratuities were payable to temporary clerical employ é s, whether men or women, who were engaged during the War.

asked the Minister of Labour whether the investigators reviewing the private circumstances of temporary women employ é s in his Department include a representative of those being cross-examined, in accordance with the general practice in other Departments and the desire of the staff concerned; and, if not, whether he will consider adding to the examining committee the women's substitution representative?

There is a representative of the temporary women staff on the Substitution Committees of the Ministry of Labour both at headquarters and at Kew. It has not, however, been the practice of the Department to include a representative of the temporary women employ é s at Kew in either of the reviews of the private circumstances of these women which have taken, and are taking, place. One of the two investigators is a permanent women officer of long experience.

Can the hon. Gentleman say that, while may not have been the practice, he will give further consideration to the point?

The question indicates what is said to be the practice in other Departments. I am making inquiries, and my inquiries have not been completed on that point.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can give the House any information as to the credit of £ 75,000,000 granted by the Bank of England to the Bank of France, which should be repaid at the end of this month; whether this credit was given with the concurrence of His Majesty's Government; is the debt due by the French Government or by a French corporation; and if there is a default in payment will the shareholders of the Bank of England or the British taxpayer suffer the loss?

The credits were given by the Bank of England to the Bank of France in 1916 and 1917 and the amount now outstanding is £55,000,000, repayable by the end of August next. The debt is due by the Bank of France with whom the Bank of England is negotiating. The transaction was entered into with the concurrence of His Majesty's Government who guarantee the Bank of England under the powers of the War Obligations Acts.

Does that mean, in the case of default, that the British taxpayer will have to foot the Bill?

I do not think that any question of default will arise.