asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what are the regulations with regard to marking and lighting of anchored fishing lines and nets in the extra-territorial waters off the Scottish coast?

There are at present no regulations for the marking and lighting of lines and anchored nets other than those issued by the Fishery Board for Scotland in respect of anchored cod nets, of which I am forwarding a copy for the hon. Member's information. Negotiations are proceeding between the Departments concerned and the industry with a view to the issue of regulations for the marking and lighting of lines.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that the modified regulations to which he has referred have been observed by Scottish fishermen?

As I have intimated in the last part of my answer, negotiations are proceeding between the Departments concerned and the industry, with a view to the issue of further regulations with regard to the marking of lines.

Am I to take it from the right hon. Gentleman's answer that he is not satisfied with the way in which the regulations have been carried out in the past?

The fact that we are negotiating for further regulations, I think, indicates that.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is the opinion of many fishermen that the marking of these nets actually attracts trawlers and causes damage to the lines?

I cannot say that my information agrees with that statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of foreign trawlers reported to the Scottish Fishery Board as trawling within the Moray Firth area each day during December, 1929 and January, 1930?

I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, to circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give the particulars of the applications for grants and loans in connection with the fishermen's relief scheme; and when and how the applications will be dealt with?

The numbers of applications for grants from the relief fund and for loans from the loan fund at yesterday's date were 1,806 and 278, respectively, the amounts involved being £67,753 and £21,520. Applications for grants will be considered in the first instance by local committees, and the allocation of the fund will be made by the Central Committee after all the local committees have reported. The loan scheme will be administered by the Fishery Board, who will deal with applications as soon as possible after the distribution of the relief fund which I am doing my best to expedite.

Are we to understand that, in fact, there has been no distribution at all to these distressed fishermen of the funds collected for them?

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that there has been ample time in which to allow these men to lodge their applications?

rose—

One at a time.

How are these local committees appointed?

With regard to the first supplementary question, if the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) keeps in mind the fact that the local committees have to make inquiries locally, and then report to the Central Committee, he will understand that a certain amount of time must necessarily elapse before any distribution can be made.

Has any thing been done? Have they got no money up to now?

With regard to the appointment of local committees that is a matter which has been arranged for by the Central Committee in each particular district. They are the people who arrange for the distribution.

Has the time for lodging applications passed, keeping in mind the number of fishermen who have not yet returned from the West Coast fishing?

The time for lodging applications was up a week ago.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many of these fishermen have only just come back and are scattered over the Western Isles; and has he taken that fact into consideration in determining the time within which applications can be lodged?

Evidently, it is very difficult to satisfy all hon. Members on this matter. The hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) has been asking me why no money has yet been distributed, and the hon. and learned Member for South Aberdeen (Sir F. Thomson) and the hon. and gallant Member for Banff (Major Wood) appear to want some more time to elapse before any money can be distributed.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether the new Housing Bill is to apply to Scotland, and, if not, whether a separate Housing Bill for Scotland is in contemplation; whether he is aware that house building in Scotland is being retarded owing to the fact that many landowners, especially in and around the small towns and villages, refuse to give off land for feus for the erection of houses and shops, notwithstanding the considerable demand for them; and whether, in these circumstances, the Government intends to introduce legislation to compel landowners in Scotland to make land available for this purpose when and where required?

As regards the first part of the question I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given on the 11th February to the hon. Member for North Lanark (Miss Lee), to which I have nothing to add. As regards the second and third parts I am not aware that the position is as stated, and I would refer the hon. Member to the powers which local authorities already have to acquire land for housing purposes—compulsorily if need be—under Sections 44, 51 and 90 of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1925.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the cost per house of type C.1, C.2, F1, F2 and F6 houses of the Glasgow Corporation, Drumoyne and Craigton schemes, respectively?

As the answer involves a table of figures I propose, with my hon. Friend's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell us approximately what is the difference between the two schemes, without going into the figures?

The difference between the Drumoyne scheme—the direct labour scheme—and the Craigton scheme—the private enterprise scheme—varies from about £190 a house to £279 a house in favour of the direct labour scheme.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, in connection with the Craigton scheme, there is still an outstanding claim of £33,000 by the contractor against the Glasgow Corporation, and, in view of the fact that the houses have been occupied for a period of six years, will the Department take steps to see that this matter is closed for good and all?

There is a claim for an amount slightly over the figure which the hon. Gentleman has mentioned by the contractor against the corporation on the private enterprise scheme, but how much of that claim will be ultimately met I am not in a position to say at present.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has received the medical report on red biddy; will he reveal its contents to the House; whether he has found that red biddy is produced in any other place than Leith; and whether it is consumed in districts other than the West of Scotland?

The medical investigation into the effect upon consumers of cheap red wine, and of such wine when mixed with methylated or other spirits, will take some time. I am informed that red wine is manufactured at Cleland and at Perth as well as at Leith, and that the consumption of red wine, whether by itself or mixed with other ingredients is not limited to the West of Scotland.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any evidence to prove that red biddy is manufactured in the Hulme Division of Manchester or in Middlesbrough?

Is it not a perfectly easy matter to have red biddy analysed and to let us know the result?

rose—

I think we had better get on to the next question.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to the growing practice in Scotland of appointing medical officers as sanitary inspectors: and whether he will take steps to see that fully qualified sanitary inspectors are employed who are specially trained for this important work?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the nega- tive. As regards the second part, I am afraid I cannot accept the suggestion that a medical practitioner who is also the holder of a diploma in public health is unqualified for the office of sanitary inspector.

Is it not a fact that the qualifications for a sanitary inspector's certificate carries with it a knowledge of building trade construction; and, if I bring specific instances to the notice of the hon. Gentleman, will he cause inquiries to be made?

Most certainly.

asked the Lord Privy Seal when he will be in a position to inform the House of Commons on the nature of the Government scheme for providing alternative employment to men thrown out of work in Government dockyards and private workshops by reason of reductions in naval armaments?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave on the 11th February to the hon. Member for North Newcastle (Sir N. Grattan-Doyle), a copy of which I am sending to him.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that answer did not deal with this particular aspect of the question at all?

On the contrary, I think that the reply then covered this question. The gist of the question was whether any special steps were to be taken to meet the unemployment resulting from the proposed abandonment of certain naval construction. The answer I then gave was "No."

Is it a fact that any schemes for alternative work in the dockyards have been definitely abandoned?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he can now state the result of his inquiries with reference to the recent purchase of German machinery by the Scottish Wholesale Co-operative Society?

My inquiries show that, while it is the normal policy of the society to purchase in this country, there were circumstances connected with this case which called for a departure from that policy.

Has the right hon. Gentleman satisfied himself that there is a real and proper reason for this purchase?

I took the unusual course, when my attention was drawn to this case, to inquire into it personally, especially having regard to the fact that I issued a circular urging the purchase of British goods. I examined the case personally, and I am satisfied that it was entirely Justified.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make special inquiries into the number of foreign cars owned by Members of this House?

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he is aware that the Association of Midland Local Authorities is still awaiting further proposals from him with reference to the scheme for the levelling of pit mounds in the Black Country; and can he state the reason for the continued delay?

The length of time for which this matter has been under consideration is accounted for by the complexity of the subject and by a desire to go to the limit of what is possible to meet the local authorities. Proposals which must be regarded as the most favourable which can be made, and as final, were sent to the association on the 1st March. I hope the offer will be accepted in the spirit in which it is made, and that there will be no further delay in commencing the work.

Am I to understand that at long last an offer in writing has been actually sent to these local authorities?

Not at long last; but, after long negotiations, we have endeavoured to meet the difficulties of the local authorities. The hon. Member knows perfectly well that their borrowing power is affected, and I have been endeavouring for six months to find ways and means of getting over it.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he is prepared to treat Liverpool University as a statutory body of the kind qualified to receive benefit under the Development (Loan Guarantees and Grants) Act, 1929, and consider an application from the university for a scheme of improvement involving a grant which would relieve unemployment?

Grants under Part II, Section 4 (3), of the Development (Loan Guarantees and Grants) Act, 1929, can be made only to local authorities, and any such statutory bodies as carry on undertakings under statutory powers otherwise than for profit. If the university claim to be eligible under that Section, my right hon. Friend will be glad to consider a statement of their case. Part I of the Act would in any case not be applicable.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman consider applying Part II of this Act to such applications?

As I have already said, it is up to the particular body to establish their claim under the Act. It is not for me either to anticipate that claim or to pre-judge it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not consider, in view of the suitability of universities to put forward such schemes, undertaking, if necessary, to amend the Act, so as to make it possible; and is he aware that the University of Liverpool have been definitely informed that they are not eligible under the present Act, and that statutory changes would be required?

The answer I gave was that, if any university could establish their claim under the Act, consideration would be given to it. If, however, the hon. Lady informs me that they have made a claim, and that they are not eligible, I cannot promise to alter the Act.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he has in view any comprehensive scheme to deal with the inland waterways of this country, and particularly to make the existing canals of value to trade by deepening and widening?

The policy of the Government in regard to this matter was recently explained fully to the House by my hon. Friend the Minister of Transport, on the occasion of the Motion for the Adjournment on the 25th January last.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the Cabinet Committee who are considering proposals in relation to the mitigation of unemployment have yet arrived at any conclusions?

As the right hon. Gentleman must be aware, it is not the practice to divulge the recommendations of Cabinet Committees.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Chancellor of the Duchy is getting very anxious about this matter, and cannot he give some satisfaction to the House?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether, in connection with the mitigation of unemployment, he will consider the raising of a loan for the provision of relief and other works; the grant of pensions to the old workers in industry; a short-term programme of certain economic works; and a long-term programme for the fundamental reorganisation of industry?

The policy of the Government in regard to the relief of unemployment has already been announced to the House.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise the valuable nature of these proposals and the source from which they have been derived; and is he going to give any satisfaction to his colleagues, who are so well and loyally supporting him?

Are we to take it that the full policy of the Government in regard to unemployment has been completely announced?

The hon. Member can take it for granted that the policy of His Majesty's Government has been and will be announced by me.

May we ask the right hon. Gentleman when he announced it, so that we may be able to ascertain what the whole policy of the Government is?

On two or three occasions before the return of the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he has any statement to make respecting the results of his consultations with the representatives of the Canadian wheat pool?

I have nothing to add to the full statement which I made on this subject on the 25th February, a copy of which I am sending to the hon. Member.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he can state the coal area which will supply the 40,000 tons of coal which are to be shipped to Canada; and from what ports in Great Britain the shipment is to be made?

I am not yet in a position to make a statement.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he will be able to make a statement?

I am quite sure the hon. Member will appreciate that these matters must be determined by the particular firms. I was concerned in getting orders for this country, and I was quite impartial as to where the coal came from.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether his Department has yet received any schemes for the relief of the unemployment situation from the Mossley Borough Council, Lancashire?

Having regard to the very heavy unemployment in Mossley, I am disappointed to learn that no formal application has yet been submitted by the Mossley Town Council to the Unemploy- ment Grants Committee for a grant towards works for the relief of unemployment.

Can the right hon. Gentleman indicate the position in Lancashire as disclosed by the latest unemployment figures?

I have already expressed my disappointment that no application has come from a town suffering so heavily. The figures for Lancashire again this week shows 11,000 odd increase in Lancashire alone.

Is the right hon. Gentleman preparing any schemes for reducing the number of unemployed in Lancashire?

I am in almost daily consultation with the representatives of the cotton trade in Lancashire. The difficulty will be manifest to the whole House. It is one of those cases where no temporary relief can really help the permanent solution.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether he has made any representation to India about the new Import Duties?

The hon. Member will have seen in the Press the very strong representations made by His Majesty's Government on that side of the question.

Is one of the difficulties of the right hon. Gentleman his disagreement with the Chancellor of the Exchequer over certain matters?

On the contrary, the friendship between the Chancellor of the Exchequer and myself would almost equal the unanimity among hon. Members opposite.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government will reconsider its decision regarding the voluntary retirement of aged workers in view of the increase in the number of unemployed?

I have nothing to add to the previous replies on this subject

May I ask whether this matter has or has not been before the sub-committee, whether that sub-committee has met, and, if it has come to a conclusion, what are the findings of the Cabinet in respect to that matter?

The matter is not settled.

Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman promised work or maintenance just before the last election?

That is exactly our policy.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will give the imports of refined petroleum from Russia for the 12 months ended to the last convenient date?

During the year ended 31st January, 1930, the quantity of refined petroleum imported into the United Kingdom and registered as consigned from the Soviet Union (Russia) was approximately 220,800,000 gallons. This quantity included 87,200,000 gallons of lamp oil, 84,600,000 gallons of motor spirit and 27,200,000 gallons of fuel oil.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he expects to be able to give the House the results of the Conference in regard to the proposed tariff truce; and whether it is his intention to issue a White Paper on the subject?

I cannot say when the Conference will conclude its labours. As I have already stated, the proposals of the Conference in their final form will be communicated to the House.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of nations which have ratified the Geneva Convention of 1927 on the abolition of import and export restrictions; which other nations must ratify this Convention in order to make it binding; and the latest date by which ratifications must be deposited?

By virtue of a Protocol drawn up in Paris in December last, the Convention has been brought formally into force between 17 countries as from 1st January last. The hon. and gallant Member will find a full statement of the present position of the Convention on page 59 of the Board of Trade Journal of 9th January, of which I am sending him a copy.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any fee is payable by British commercial travellers seeking business in Norway; what is the amount of such fee; and whether there has been any alteration in the amount during the past six months?

Commercial travellers not inhabitants of Norway and seeking business in that country are required to take out a licence for which a fee of 100 Kroner or about £5 10s. is charged for each period of 30 days or part thereof during which it is valid. A law of 21st June, 1929, which was to have taken effect on 1st January of this year, proposed to increase this fee to 200 Kroner for the first 30 days and 100 Kroner for each subsequent 15 days, but the old rate has recently been restored and I understand that arrangements are being made for the refund of any difference in the fees paid by travellers who took out licences after 1st January at the increased rate.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the provisions for marking imported articles as of foreign origin are being evaded by certain importers in that the notification is printed in such small type and in such obscure places as to give the impression that the articles are of British make; and is he aware that this practice is not confined to fragile articles or those whose artistic appearance would suffer from a legible inscription; and what action he proposes to take in the matter?

If the hon. Member will furnish me with particulars of any such cases, I shall be happy to investigate them.

Arising out of that answer—[HON. MEMBERS: "Sit down!"]—may I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware how pleased the whole House is to see him back again?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give the comparative figures of British export trade with Egypt for the last five years, showing the proportion of that trade to the total imports into into Egypt?

With the hon. Member's permission, I will circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that an alcoholic beverage, synthetically prepared from concentrated grape juice imported from Greece and other foreign countries, to which has been added grain spirit or potato spirit and other substances, is commonly sold in substitution for Empire wine or port wine; and what steps he proposes to take to prevent this substitution?

I have no information regarding the practice to which my hon. Friend refers. It is an offence under the Merchandise Marks Acts to apply to any goods a trade description which is false in any material respect, for instance, as regards the place or country in which the goods are made or produced or as to the material of which they are composed. If my hon. Friend will send me particulars of any cases which he has in mind, I will look into them.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the increasing gravity of the situation in the cotton industry, he can hold out any hope of an early Report of the inquiry at present proceeding and prompt action following upon it?

As I stated on Tuesday last in reply to a similar question by the hon. and gallant Member for Clitheroe, the Cotton Inquiry is being pushed on as expeditiously as possible.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the position of the cotton industry in Lancashire is as bad, if not worse, than the condition of the coal industry?

May I draw the Prime Minister's attention to an article in this week's newspapers—

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has received a communication from the joint industrial council for the silk trade, representing both employers and employed in that industry; if so, will he state the nature of that communication; and whether he proposes now to make any statement?

I have received a resolution from the council referred to advocating the retention of the existing Silk Duties. As I have repeatedly said I am not prepared to anticipate the Budget statement in this or any other matter.

Is this in the interest of trade and industry?

Is the Chancellor of the Exchequer aware that eight out of 11 trade union members of that council voted in favour of that resolution?

I am not aware of that fact, but I am aware of the fact that there was strong opposition to it by certain trade union members.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that at the present moment there is very serious disturbance in the silk industry owing to his persistency in not disclosing his intentions?

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that he is not prepared to anticipate his Budget speech on this occasion?

I have some recollection of the hon. Member for Aberdeen (Mr. Boothby) stating that he has had some experience at the Treasury, and I am very much surprised that, out of his own knowledge, he is not able to give to himself an answer to that question.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman ought to give [HON. MEMBERS: "Question!"]—I am putting "surely" in an interrogative form—Is it not, surely, the duty of the right hon. Gentleman to give to the House and to the country some better reason than he has given to-day for persisting in an attitude of spiteful contumely?

If I were guilty of spiteful contumely, I should find a precedent for that in the action of the right hon. Gentleman in spitefully reimposing the McKenna Duties, an action which has given rise to whatever troubles the silk industry finds itself in to-day.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer made a statement with regard to what I was supposed to have said, and I wish to say that I never said it.

Withdraw!

I have the most vivid recollection of what the hon. Gentleman said.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the fact that if the duties on silk and artificial silk are removed there will be a flood of imports from the Continent, and that there is not even a possibility of improvement in the silk and artificial silk industries whilst the present uncertainty remains, he will receive a deputation from the trade so that he may be in possession of the full facts of the situation?

I have already received representations from the silk trade, and several deputations have discussed various aspects of the question with the Commissioners of Customs and Excise on my behalf. In these circumstances I do not think there is any necessity to trouble the trade to send a deputation to me.

Surely, it has long been the custom for the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the weeks preceding the introduction of the Budget, to receive freely, 10, 12 or 15 deputations from different trades and interests in the country that are anxious about possible financial legislation, and that wish to put their case before him—

Speech!

Why does the right hon. Gentleman depart from a practice which is so respectable and so long established?

One reason for that is that I do not find so much enjoyment as the right hon. Gentleman did in airing his views before these deputations —[Interruption].

On a point of Order. May the House not have serious answers to serious questions, instead of this continual flow of petty irrelevancies?

That was very vulgar of you, Snowden.

I had not finished my reply. If my answer was vulgar, I am sorry that I had fallen into the precedent just set up. [Interruption.] I will complete my reply by saying that last week I received a most representative deputation from the Association of Chambers of Commerce, who raised this matter, and I am to meet another from the Federation of British Industries in the course of a day or two. They, no doubt, will raise this matter, and they, too, will get my views.

Having regard to the great technicality of the Silk Duties, and the special position which this trade occupies, will not the right hon. Gentleman, bearing in mind the fact that he is a public servant, receive a deputation from the silk industry himself, as Chancellor of the Exchequer? [Interruption.] Will he not, in the course of his duty, receive a deputation from a trade who wish to put the facts before him?

I have already said that deputations representing the silk trade have already been received on my behalf by the Board of Customs and Excise, and all the knowledge in the possession of these industries has been placed before the Board. Therefore, they can add nothing to the information that they have already placed before me.

Is it not the duty of the Chancellor of the Exchequer—[Interruption.]

I cannot allow questions to develop into debates.

With great respect, Mr. Speaker, may I say that very important points of departmental and even constitutional usage are raised by the refusal of a Minister to discharge in the ordinary manner the duties of his Department, and to be accessible to the various interests concerned?

Question!

I understood that the right hon. Gentleman was putting a question to me.

May I not, surely, be permitted to press the Chancellor of the Exchequer to act with reasonable courtesy and good feeling in this matter?

I understand that that question of the right hon. Gentleman is addressed to me, and I would say, as regards the continuance of these supplementary questions on this particular question, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer seems to me to have given a very definite answer, and I doubt whether any further pressure will induce him to say more.

I do not need to be lectured by the right hon. Gentleman.

On a point of Order. May I ask whether it is in accordance with the custom of the House at Question Time for a Minister, when answering questions, to preface his answer to a question by endeavouring to give a rebuke to a right hon. Gentleman on a matter which arose on a previous question?

I think it would be very much better at Question Time to confine ourselves to questions and answers.

May I draw your attention, Sir, to the fact that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Epping (Mr. Churchill), having been advised to desist from questioning by you, then proceeded to hurl objectionable remarks across the Table?

I need not specify any individual, but would re-state what I said, that it would be better for hon. Members simply to put their questions and for Ministers to answer them.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that British motor car manufacturers and traders would welcome an impartial committee of inquiry into the operation of the McKenna Duties and in relation to Empire trade, and are ready to place information respecting costs and methods at the disposal of such a committee; and whether, in view of these circumstances, he will favourably consider the initiation of an inquiry?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has considered the offer made on 24th February, 1930, by the British section of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders offering to pay the whole of the costs of an inquiry to investigate every aspect of the question in relation to the motor industry, whether by the Economic Advisory Council or by a special commission; and whether he intends to take advantage of this offer?

No such offer has been submitted to me, and I have no information on the matter beyond references to it in the Press.

If such an offer were submitted, would not His Majesty's Government fortify themselves by the advice and opinion of an impartial committee on a matter which, apart from party controversy, is of great consequence to a large number of people?

This alleged statement by this Society has not been submitted to me, and, therefore, I am not called upon to offer any observations upon it. The right hon. Gentleman knows that these duties were imposed, not in the interests of trade, but purely as revenue duties, and, therefore, it is the duty of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to consider them from that point of view.