asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that certain educational and tutorial establishments have announced that they can prepare candidates for posts under Part II. of the National Insurance Act; whether any information as to the subjects upon which prospective candidates for such posts will be examined has been supplied to them; and, if so, whether it will be made public?

The attention of the Board of Trade had not been drawn to these announcements; and no information as to the proposed subjects of examination had been given to anyone when this question was put down on Monday. A Memorandum on the subjects of examination for these posts has been prepared by the Civil Service Commissioners, and it is now being issued to applicants.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state who has been appointed Chief Commissioner for Scotland under the Insurance Act; what is the salary to be paid to him, and for how many years is his engagement; what were his previous positions and experience which qualified him for the post of Chief Commissioner; and what was the salary previously enjoyed by him in his last situation?

The chairman of the Scottish Commission (Mr. Leishman) was appointed as an established Civil servant at a salary of £1,800 per annum. He was qualified by a long and varied experience of business and of public work. At the time of his appointment he was occupying the position of honorary treasurer of the city of Edinburgh. He was strongly recommended to my right hon. Friend by men well qualified to speak, and I regard it as fortunate that the Government have been able to obtain the services of so able an officer. I have not inquired as to his income before his appointment, nor do I propose to make such an inquiry.

May I ask how it is if he knows this gentleman occupied the position of treasurer to the city of Edinburgh that he was not aware of the identity of one of the Commissioners when I asked a question the other day?

I have no idea of what the Noble Lord is referring to.

Is the salary of £1,800 a larger salary than that paid to the Irishman or the Welshman or the Englishman, in the position?

I cannot say offhand; but I think it is less than that paid to the Chairman of the English Commissioners.

Is it not the practice that all Englishmen are paid less than Welshmen or Scotchmen?

asked whether the official form of application for membership of approved societies under the National Insurance Act is intended to be filled up by small tradespeople and other intending voluntary contributors; and, if so, how they ought to reply to the question as to the mode of their remuneration?

The model form of application issued by the Commission for the assistance of approved societies, can be adapted by any such society to meet the requirements of their particular case. The way in which the question 5 (c) "How are you paid?" is answered must depend on the circumstances of the particular applicant, but in the cases to which the hon. Member refers sufficient information would be given by the statement "out of the profits of my business," taken in conjunction with the answer to Question 4, as to the exact occupation of applicant.

asked how many of the small friendly societies which since the introduction of the National Insurance Bill last May have notified their intention to dissolve are rural societies; and how many of these have made no provision for the future health insurance of their members?

Of the 278 societies which, as I stated in an answer to a question from the hon. Member for St. Pancras on the 6th instant, have, since the introduction of the National Insurance Bill, notified their intention to dissolve, fifty-six would appear to come within the description of rural societies. In no case has the dissolution of any such rural society been completed. Instruments of dissolution have been received from nine societies, but these have not been registered, and the remaining forty-seven societies have not at present, so far as is known, taken active steps to dissolve. Dissolution of a friendly society can only take place with the written consent of five-sixths in value of the members, and it would be for them to arrange individually for their future health insurance.

Is it the custom of the Commissioners and the lecturers to dissuade the small societies from dissolving?

A Circular has been sent out by the Commissioners urging members of small societies who wish to dissolve to make themselves fully familiar with the provisions of the Act before they do so.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether they can make themselves familiar with Section 72, and whether they are bound to bring forward a scheme?

Whether they are bound to bring forward a scheme is now under the consideration of the law officers, and I hope to be able to report in a few days.

Is it possible for the societies to make themselves familiar with Section 72, when the Secretary to the Treasury has had to have the assistance of the law officers?

That has nothing to do with this question of dissolution. They can dissolve quite apart from whether Section 72 affects their dissolution or not.

Is the Secretary to the Treasury or the Commissioners holding off sanction to the dissolution till the decision is given on Section 72?

Certainly. They have advised them to postpone it until that has taken place, but whatever the decision they might still dissolve or not as they please.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, whether the National Insurance Commission (Wales) still intends to establish an advisory board to nominate those who shall sit a Civil Service examination for appointments under the National Insurance Act; whether the opinion of Welsh Members of Parliament of all parties has been ascertained upon the desirability of such advisory board; and whether it is proposed to take any action as a result of the expression of any such opinion?

The Welsh Insurance Commission have made certain recommendations on the subject to the Treasury which are now under consideration. No steps, however, can be taken without Treasury approval and before a final decision is arrived at. I shall be happy to receive any representations on the subject from any quarter of the House.

Will we get some opportunity of discussing the matter before the final Treasury sanction is given?

First of all I would be glad to hear representations from those who care about the matter.

asked whether the head offices of the National Insurance Commission (Wales) had been permanently fixed at Cardiff; what was the nature of these offices; how much rent would be paid for them, and to whom; whether a stub-office would be established in North Wales; and, if so, where?

The offices of the Welsh Commission have been permanently fixed at Cardiff. The public authorities of that city have generously provided excellent accommodation rent free. The question of establishing sub-offices will be considered if and when necessity arises.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider the question of establishing a sub-office at Wrexham?

That is a question for the Welsh Commissioners. It will be considered if necessity arises.

Is not Wrexham a border town at an inconvenient point?

That, no doubt, will come under the consideration of the Commissioners.

asked whether the National Insurance Commission (Wales) had taken any steps to secure the establishment of provisional local health committees in the Welsh counties and county boroughs, in view of the number of points which must be decided by the local health committees the moment the Act comes into force in four months' time?

The steps required to secure the establishment of local insurance committees in Wales are under the consideration of the Welsh Commissioners.

asked whether, under the terms or within the meaning of the National Insurance Act, compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act must in future be obtained through the medium of a member's approved society?

The answer is in the negative. Compensation for accident will be received from the same sources as before the passing of the National Insurance Act, and any compensation less than 10s. a week in value will in ordinary cases be made up to that amount out of the Insurance Fund. Insurance for benefit upon accident beyond this amount can be made to any extent outside the National Insurance scheme through an approved society or otherwise.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in a circular issued by the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants to its members it is stated, amongst other things, that the all-important fact to its members is that compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act must in future be obtained through the medium of a member's approved society?

I should like to see the circular. I should think it probably refers to Section 11.

If that information is inaccurate, has not the hon. Gentleman means of taking steps to see that inaccurate information of this important character is not conveyed by societies to their members?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will allow me to consider his statement first. If I was to endeavour to take steps to inform people whenever inaccurate information was given, I should have my time occupied.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants is a most important society with many thousands of members?

I agree. I shall be glad to consider any documents the hon. Gentleman may place before me.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the possibility of the health insurance part of the National Insurance Act coming into operation on 15th July, 1912, he would state when Treasury concurrence with the Admiralty proposals, based on the Macnamara Staffing Committee's Report, would be given, in order that the relative position of the members of the clerical staffs of the Admiralty and Royal dockyards might be settled?

I fear I cannot at present add anything to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member on this subject on the 27th ultimo.

Can the hon. Gentleman give any idea as to when I am likely to get an answer? The question has been under consideration a very long time now.

The matter is under consideration, but it affects other Departments besides the Navy. I am endeavouring to get the matter settled as soon as possible.

asked why notice of the Regulations, dated 21st February, 1912, made by the Treasury under Section 83 of the National Insurance Act, 1911, and laid before Parliament on 22nd February, 1912, was not given to Members until the Demand Form for Sessional Printed Papers, No. 8, on 12th March, 1912?

The Regulations were laid in a complete form on 22nd February. I am making inquiries as to the delay in printing and circulation which appears to have occurred.

From when will the period of twenty-one days date?

I think from the day it is laid on the Table of the House.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this Paper could not be obtained by Members until two days ago, although it was notified at the Table as long ago as 22nd February that it was placed in dummy?

It was not placed in dummy; it was laid in complete form. But if the Noble Lord will approach me, and I have any power in the matter, I shall be glad to see that any necessary extension that is possible is given.

asked under what powers and for what reason the Regulations dated 21st February, 1912, made by the Treasury under Section 83 of the National Insurance Act, 1911 (46), which were required by Sub-section (4) of the said Section 83 to be laid before Parliament with a view to their possible annulment, have been made retrospective and were to be deemed to have had effect as from 28th December, 1911?

The usual practice has been followed in this matter. The Treasury Regulations have been made retrospective under the provisions of the Rules Publication Act, 1893, which enables the Regulations themselves to prescribe the date at which they are to come into operation. The Regulations of 21st February, 1912, take the place of rules made on the 28th December, 1911, which came into force on the last named date as being urgent in accordance with Section 2 of the Rules Publication Act. Until the 21st February the Joint Committee have of course acted only under the earlier Regulations, and did not exercise any of the additional powers provided for in the latter Regulations. The sole reason for making the rules of February retrospective is to enable the Commission and the public to have regard only to one set of Regulations and so to facilitate reference and to avoid the confusion arising from the use of two separate documents both dealing with the same subject-matter.

Does the hon. Gentleman say that these Regulations have not been acted on until after 21st February?

:Until 21st February.

They have not been acted on until 21st February?

So I am informed.

asked on what grounds the Regulations, dated 21st February, 1912, made by the Treasury under Section 83 of the National Insurance Act, 1911 (46), provided that all members of the Joint Committee of Commissioners, other than the four chairmen for the time being of the several bodies of Commissioners who were ex-officio members of the Committee, should be appointed by the Treasury, and no Regulations were issued for the selection of members of each body of Commissioners appointed under Sections 57 (1), 80 (1), 81 (1), and 82 (1), pursuant to Section 83 (1) of the Act?

Regulations (3) (1) provides for the manner in which members of each of the several bodies of Commissioners are to be selected for membership of the Joint Committee, namely, as regards the respective chairmen by virtue of their office, and as regards other members, such other (if any) as the Treasury shall from time to time by warrant appoint.

Is it not a fact that the result of this Regulation is that the Treasury has appointed the whole of the members of the Committee instead of two members, as prescribed by the Act itself?

It has not appointed them except in so far as the regulation provides that the chairmen of the several bodies of Commissioners shall be ex-officio members.

Has not the Treasury selected all the rest of the members?

No other members have been selected for the Joint Committee except the Chairmen under the Regulations.

Has not the Treasury in fact appointed all the members of the Committee by means of this Regulation, although the Act provides for the appointment of only two?

No. The Treasury provided by the Regulation that the chairmen of the Commissioners shall be ex-officio members of the Joint Committee, and I believe that that was promised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the House of Commons. That is not appointment by the Treasury.

Has not the Treasury made the Regulation regulating the appointment or selection of members, and is not that the same thing?

No; they are selected by virtue of their office, not qua members.

asked whether, in view of the fact that small friendly societies in the country were finding considerable difficulty in accommodating their constitution and management to the conditions of the National Insurance Act, the Insurance Commissioners would arrange that the Act should not come into force until the last possible date—namely, 1st January, 1913?

The answer is in the negative. The Commissioners are offering every assistance to all societies by the supply of information through lectures, by the issue of model rules and other literature, and by correspondence and interviews in their office. There is no doubt that it is in the interest of all classes of the community, and especially members of existing friendly societies, that the Act should come into operation at the earliest possible moment—namely, 15th July, 1912.

asked whether any part of the contribution payable by the workman, the employer, or the State under the National Insurance Act was available for the provision of sanatorium benefit for the wives and children of insured persons; and, if not, how was such treatment to be provided?

Under Section 17 (1) insurance committees may extend sanatorium benefit to the dependents of insured persons. In such cases the cost of their treatment may be met from the general funds available for sanatorium benefit. These include the sums specified in Section 16 (2) (a), which are contributed jointly by employers, employés, and the State, the sums specified in Section 16 (2) (b), which are contributed by the State, and any further sums which may be provided under Section 17 in equal moieties by the State and local authorities.

Is it not a fact that the Government actuaries have stated that there is no fund available under the contributions for the extension of the sanatorium benefit to the wives and dependents of members?

No, I do not think so; I am not aware of it.

Was not that stated in their report?

asked if the principle of equal pay for equal work as between men and women was being observed in the minor appointments under the Insurance Commissioners, as in the case of the Commissioners; and, if so, was it proposed to appoint male clerks at salaries of £65 a year rising to £110; and was it intended to appoint no women to the higher clerical and administrative posts?

The scales paid to men and women respectively holding minor appointments under the English Insurance Commission are those applicable to the Civil Service generally; and the Commissioners hope to appoint women to higher positions as the work progresses and opportunity offers.

Am I to assume that there is a differentiation of pay between men and women?

No. They are doing different work. There is only the differentiation which occurs in any other Government Department.

Am I to assume that if women be appointed to positions of equal responsibility to those held by men they will receive the same rate of remuneration?

I cannot say more than I have said in regard to all cases. But in the one position of great responsibility to which a woman has been appointed—namely, on the Commission itself—she is paid exactly the same as the men.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his predecessor in office, in reply to a question put by me, said that the principle of equal payment for equal work would be applied to all the appointments?

I agree with that proposition.

Then it should not be.

asked whether Mr. W. R. Lilley, of Lincoln, had been appointed by the Insurance Commissioners to explain the provisions of the National Insurance Act; and, if so, whether he had been authorised to hold public meetings, under the name of conferences, for this purpose in certain constituencies, to which members of friendly societies and all persons interested were specially invited to come and ask questions?

The gentleman referred to has never been employed by the Insurance Commissioners. The hon. Member will find a list of the lecturers employed by the Commissioners on pages 9 and 10 of the White Paper, Cd. 6095.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether his Department encourages the delivery of addresses upon Sunday upon the National Insurance Act by lecturers paid out of public money; and whether he will in any case discontinue the practice?

I have nothing to add to the answers I gave to the hon. Member for Mid-Armagh on 22nd February, and the hon. and gallant Member for East Down on 27th February.

asked whether the appointments to lecturerships under the National Insurance Act for the city of Belfast have been almost exclusively reserved for the nominees of the hon. Member for West Belfast; and whether these lecturers have passed any test or examination or have any qualification except that of being supporters of the aforesaid hon. Member?

No lecturers have been specially appointed for the city of Belfast. Of the twenty-five appointed for the whole of Ireland nine are at present engaged in Ulster. Of these I am informed that five are Protestant in religion and Unionists in politics, and four are Catholic in religion and Home Rulers in politics. They were selected by the Irish Insurance Commissioners for personal qualifications for the work as well as special knowledge of friendly societies, trade unions and social and philanthropic enterprise. There is, of course, no truth at all in the insinuation contained in the question.

Would the hon. Member be good enough to answer my question, as to whether or not there were eight lecturers appointed from Belfast—not twenty-five from the whole of Ireland; and whether these gentlemen, or six of them, passed any test or any examination—as I ask in my question—which would qualify them for giving these lectures; or if any of them have ever lectured on any subject before?

I fully answered the question.

In order to avoid any suspicion of political influence, will the hon. Gentleman undertake that in future all appointments shall be confined to Unionists and Protestants?

Would the hon. Gentleman be good enough to answer my question, as to whether or not these men have passed any test or any examination qualifying them for these posts?

I have answered the question again and again. The men were selected by the Irish Insurance Commissioners "for personal qualifications for the work, as well as special knowledge of friendly societies, trade unions, and social and philanthropic enterprises."

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the number of trade disputes which have taken place since 30th June, 1909, show an increase over the number of such disputes during the three years prior to that date?

The number of disputes, causing a stoppage of work, which have been recorded by the Board of Trade since 30th June, 1909, is 1,753, which compares with 1,420 in the three years prior to that date.

Does the hon. Gentleman attribute the increase since June, 1909, to the speech made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at Limehouse at that time?

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the case of the Orchard Colliery, a small pit near Sheffield, where those engaged were anxious to continue their employment in spite of the coal strike, but have been forced to desist since the 7th inst. by the peaceful persuasion of a deputation of miners from Derbyshire who outnumbered them; and whether His Majesty's Government will take steps to ensure that in this and all such cases where those willing to work are molested they shall be adequately protected from interference?

The Prime Minister has asked me to reply. I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave yesterday to the Noble Lord the Member for West Perthshire.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last portion of my question, which was not asked yesterday—namely, what is the policy of His Majesty's Government generally in the matter?

It was answered yesterday that adequate protection was given; and, further, a hypothetical question was put to me, and that hypothetical question is repeated now by the hon. Gentleman. I cannot answer hypothetical questions.

In fact, if men are willing to work and are interfered with, will His Majesty's Government prevent the continuation of that interference?

Yes. I have stated that order will be maintained in every district, but the responsiblity primarily rests with the local authority. Order is being maintained by the local authority in the district in question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the proprietor of the colliery in question states that he was not molested, and that he voluntarily closed his pit in order to come into line with other small collieries in the district; is the right hon. Gentleman further aware that only seven men are employed at the colliery, and that no molestation has been threatened?

My information does not quite agree with that of the hon. Member. As a matter of fact, order is being maintained in this district by the local authority.

Why do they not express the same anxiety about order in Belfast?

asked whether the Prime Minister proposes to introduce legislation to facilitate the settlement of industrial disputes, in order to avoid as far as possible the evils resulting from strikes; and whether his attention has been called to the Bill introduced last Session by the hon. Member for Woolwich?

I am aware of the Bill introduced by the hon. Member for Wool- wich; but I do not consider that legislation upon so difficult and controversial a matter would be opportune at the present moment.

asked whether the Prime Minister is aware that the action taken by the Miners' Federation in regard to the present coal dispute has involved a breach of certain existing agreements between coalowners and their employés in Wales; and, if so, whether any future legislation providing for the payment of a minimum wage will embody adequate safeguards for the due observance of any further agreements of this nature by providing for payment of damages arising from breach of the same to be made from the funds of the trade union societies concerned?

I do not think any good purpose would be served by making any pronouncement upon a question of this character at the present time.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, in view of the fact that only days divide hundreds of thousands of people from starvation, whether he can assure the House that the Government have well-grounded hopes of an early settlement of the crisis, and, if not, whether he can say when the Government will take action to enforce what is undoubtedly the will of the nation?

I can add nothing to the statements already made on the subject by the Prime Minister.

asked whether, taking into consideration the number of industries other than mining, in which unemployment has automatically resulted in consequence of the miners' strike, His Majesty's Government will approach the coalowners' representatives with a view to ascertaining whether it would be practicable to utilise some portion of such unemployed labour in working certain of the mines in order to minimise distress, to prevent damage to property, and to maintain a limited coal supply for commercial and domestic use during the continuance of the general strike?

I cannot at present say more than that His Majesty's Government are giving careful consideration to the steps that may be necessary if the existing stoppage is prolonged.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman anticipate being able to make any statement to the House before it rises?

As the hon. Member knows, the Prime Minister at the present moment is engaged on this very business. I will inquire later as to the possibility of making a statement.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman is now in the position to state if improved travelling facilities by boat can be granted to Sheerness liberty men who, in the course of their employment, have to travel to and from Chatham?

I have made inquiry, and I am of the opinion that the present facilities are adequate.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these men have to travel the whole distance without any cover at all in stormy weather?

The boat in the morning accommodates seventy men, and I understand the number carried has exceeded thirty on only twenty - two occasions in five months. The Chatham, boat can accommodate 250.

asked if the First Lord of the Admiralty adheres to the statement made by his predecessor, in debate, on 18th March, 1909, that the rate of construction in Germany for vessels of the "Dreadnought" type is almost if not quite equal to our own?

I have examined carefully the passages in Hansard in which the statement referred to occurs. I find that my right hon. Friend was speaking of the potential and not of the actual rate of construction—a very important distinction. I have already given my hon. Friend very full information as to the actual rates of British and German construction.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether it is the intention of the Board to revert to the system of three-year commissions?

I must refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave last week to a similar question by the hon. Member for Blackpool.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, how many officers are permanently added to the establishment of the Admiralty as the result of the creation of the Naval War Staff?

The additions consist of:—

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether it is the intention of the Admiralty to station a floating dock for destroyers at Portland; and, if so, when?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Tenders are about to be invited, but it is not possible at this date to say when the dock will be delivered.