asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, if he will state what men-of-war for the defence of the Empire have been built, or are building, or have been promised, during the last four years by New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Canada, and the Malay Slates; and if all these ships are and will be in addition to those voted by Parliament and in addition to the shipbuilding programme deemed sufficient by the Admiralty?

The particulars asked for are as follows:—

May I ask if, whatever the power standard now is, this is to be clearly in addition to that power standard?

I have dealt with that in the last part of my answer.

This is a matter on which we might be clear. Is it the intention with regard to the Malay armoured ship that it is to be in addition to the programme announced in July last year?

In March last I gave a forecast of the figures of construction which we thought necessary, and I see no reason to modify that at the present time. The Malay ship is in addition to that forecast.

Is the "New Zealand" being completed as quickly as was expected?

Yes, Sir, and considerably faster. She will be completed and on her voyage to New Zealand long before the time she was expected to be ready. She is practically ready to be placed in commission at the present time.

asked if the £203,000contributed by India towards the cost of the squadron of ships maintained in the Indian seas by the Government represents the anything towards the interest on the cost of the ships and the cost of their yearly depreciation?

His Majesty's East Indies Squadron includes two ships specially detailed in connection with the suppression of the arms traffic in the Persian Gulf. The cost of maintaining the whole squadron, allowing a charge for depreciation, is approximately £393,000, towards which amount the repayment from the Government of India is estimated at £167,500 for the year 1912–13. A balance of about £225,000 thus remains chargeable to Navy Votes for special, apart from general, Naval services rendered to India. The amount of £208,000 referred to by the hon. Member relates to the repayment for the year 1911–12.

Is this sum contributed by India to be considered an equivalent to the annual contribution made by various parts of the Empire towards the general upkeep of the Navy?

I do not look at it in that way. I look on it in the light of payment for services rendered.

Is India's contribution towards the Army not so large as to more than counterbalance—

The First Lord of the Admiralty cannot answer for the Army.

asked whether, if the additional German ship is laid down in 1913, the Triple Alliance will in 1914 possess forty-five "Dreadnoughts" against Great Britain's forty-eight?

The hon. Member appears to have included in his figures all ships, built, building, or projected, during 1914–15. As no official programmes have been issued by Italy or Austria-Hungary, there are no trustworthy figures available for these countries, and it is therefore impossible to check the accuracy of the forecast.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any reason to believe it is approximately correct?

asked whether we have any airship equivalent in size and power to a Zeppelin or any airship capable of travelling at the rate of sixty miles an hour?

No, Sir.

Arising out of that effective "No, Sir," will the right hon. Gentleman tell us how fast our airships can go?

No, Sir.

asked how many aeroplanes belonging to the Navy are capable of a speed of seventy miles per hour; and how many naval pilots can fly over the sea or across country at the speed?

It is not in the public interest to give the information asked for in the first part of the question. With regard to the second part, I am happy to say that we have many naval flyers who can fly over the sea or across country at speeds approaching seventy miles per hour and upwards.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he has received any report, official or unofficial, of an unidentified airship passing over the Island of Sheppey during the hours of darkness within the last month?

asked whether the airship that passed over Sheerness on the 14th October was an English one?

I caused inquiries to be made and have ascertained that an unknown aircraft was heard over Sheerness about 7 p.m. on the evening of 14th October. Flares were lighted at Eastchurch, but the aircraft did not make a landing. There is nothing in the evidence to indicate the nationality of the aircraft.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know where our own airships were on that night?

I know that it was not one of our own airships.

Were the flares lighted in order that our own airship should know where to alight?

They were lighted in case they might give assistance to aerial travellers in difficulties.

To foreign ones?

Was this an airship or an aeroplane? Has that been decided?

No, I cannot say which it was. I do not know.

Which do you think it was?

Was it anything?

Was not the sound of a motor distinctly heard at the time, and lights seen, which are not carried by aeroplanes?

asked the right hon. Gentleman (1) whether he proposes to use aeroplanes with the view of preventing an airship from proceeding to London or elsewhere; (2) what will be the relative position of Great Britain and Germany with regard to fighting airships (rigid) at the end of 1912, 1914, and 1915; and (3) whether it is the policy of the Admiralty to employ non-rigid airships for engaging rigid airships?

I am informed that Germany has the following rigid airships:

• 1 naval.
• 1 military.
• 2 passenger.
• 1 experimental.

There is no doubt that in this branch of aeronautics Germany has won a great preeminence. As to the lighting value of such vessels when compared to aeroplanes, opinions differ and experience is lacking. This also applies to the question of engaging rigid with non-rigid airships. I do not wish to make any statement at present on Admiralty policy, but the whole subject is receiving the attention which its undoubted importance demands.

asked what is the comparative size, tons, speed, endurance, armament, and wireless equipment of the latest British naval airship and the latest German naval airship; and what time would be required to complete four rigid airships for the British Navy?

It is not desirable to publish the details asked for of the latest British airships. It is sufficient to say that they are at present mainly in the experimental stage. The Admiralty has no official information about the dimensions of the latest German naval airship. A rigid airship takes about eighteen months to construct.

asked whether our dockyards and repairing docks are provided with searchlights and howitzers capable of repelling aerial night attacks?

I see no advantage in discussing such a subject, the importance of which is naturally recognised by the Admiralty.

asked whether the Defence Committee has considered the effect upon the defences the country of the development of aeroplanes and airships; and, if so, whether, in their opinion, we have a sufficient number of aircraft of both descriptions?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, the policy recommended by the Committee of Imperial Defence was explained by the Secretary of State for War on the introduction of the Army Estimates. That policy is being carried into effect. The Air Committee, which is a permanent Subcommittee of the Committee of Imperial Defence, of which the Secretary of State for War is Chairman, keeps the question of aerial navigation constantly under review.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can say how many petitions have been presented from the Royal dockyards to the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty during the last three years; how many of these have been granted and how many have not been acceded to; whether he is aware that this method of petitioning the Lords Commissioners is regarded by many workers in the Royal dockyards as a way of postponement rather than consideration; and whether he can devise some other method by which men employed in the Royal dockyards can bring their grievances to the notice of the Admiralty, with a view of their requests being more promptly dealt with than in existing circumstances appears possible?

To give the particulars asked for by the hon. Member would involve a great deal of labour. Further, such particulars would have but little practical value, inasmuch as many of the petitions contain a number of separate requests, many are repetitions year by year of the same requests, and many repeat the same requests on behalf of different classes of workmen. The number of separate requests and complaints, including repetitions, dealt with in the printed replies to the 1909, 1910, and 1911 petitions, mainly relating to Vote 8 men, was 1,319. In the great majority of these cases the replies were not favourable to the petitioners. In many cases, however, the replies were favourable, and a number of concessions were granted. The total cost of the concessions granted during the last three years is estimated at, approximately, £55,000 per-annum on the basis of the numbers at present employed. The whole question of the present method of hearing the workmen's petitions has been raised at recent interviews with the men, and is receiving careful consideration.

Are we to understand that all the petitions sent in in 1911 have been replied to?

Yes, certainly.

And none of them are now under the consideration of the Government?

Certain points in regard to Portsmouth, Devonport, and Chatham are under consideration.

Are there no petitions of 1911 under the consideration of the Government?

Some of the 1911 petitioners have been informed that the subject of their petitions are under consideration.

asked whether shortly after the National Insurance Act came into operation, men were discharged from various departments of His Majesty's dockyards; and, if so, whether these discharges were carried out in order to cover the cost of the extra expenditure involved by the Act?

The only discharges since the Insurance Act came into operation have been of a purely normal character. In point of fact, between the week ended 20th July and the week ended 16th November, the entries in the shipbuilding departments of His Majesty's dockyards have exceeded the discharges by 2,996. The result is that whilst during the first week the Insurance Act was in operation there were 38,118 men so employed, during the nineteenth week of the operation of the Act there were 41,114. I may add that under the Works Department there were 4,225 men employed at the end of June, and 4,370 at the end of September. There still remain the men employed in the Naval Ordnance Departments, and in regard to these I may state that there has been a slight increase in the numbers employed since 15th July last, and the numbers at present employed amount to approximately 3,700. The suggestion conveyed in the latter part of the question as absolutely unwarranted. I should scarcely have thought it worth while to put it forward even for purposes of denial.

Is it not a fact that there is now a considerable number of men who have received their discharges, on reduction at Devonport dockyard, to come into force next Saturday?

That may be the case if they were taken on for a particular job. It has nothing to do with the Insurance Act. That is perfectly clear.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty when he will bring forward the proposal for increasing the pay of the officers and men in the Navy; and whether any of the money intended for that purpose has been taken to provide extra remuneration for the doctors under the Insurance Act?

I hope to make an announcement next week.

asked whether the German destroyers of the 1911–12 programme are now all in commission; and what is the expected date for the completion of the corresponding British vessels?

Two of the destroyers originally forming part of the German 1911–12 programme were sold to Greece before being taken over by the German Government. The two laid down to replace these are still under construction. Of the remaining ten destroyers, eight are in commission, one has been in dockyard hands since grounding during her trials, and the last has just completed trials. Three of the British destroyers of the 1911–12 programme are completed. Of the remainder, six are due for completion before the end of the financial year, seven by July, 1913, three more in August, 1913, and one in October, 1913.

asked how many battleships, armoured cruisers, and protected cruisers, respectively, were in full commission with the British Fleet in September, 1904, and what are the corresponding numbers at the present time?

The information asked for is as follows:—

asked whether the order for the armoured cruiser "Warrior" to proceed to the Mediterranean has been cancelled or postponed; and, if so, for what reason?

The order for the "Warrior" to proceed to the Mediterranean was postponed owing to another armoured cruiser, which would otherwise have been now in home waters, being unexpectedly ordered from Gibraltar into the Mediterranean. I cannot as a general practice undertake to give reasons for the dispositions of particular ships in the fleet.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether one lieutenant (Royal Navy) has been reduced from the complements of His Majesty's ships "Bellerophon," "Superb," and "Temeraire," and that three captains (Royal Marine Light Infantry) have been embarked to make up the complements of these ships; whether approval has been given for a new supplementary list of lieutenants (Royal Navy) to be formed from officers of the mercantile marine; whether the conditions of these officers joining the Royal Navy are on the same lines as the entry of supplementary lieutenants in 1895; if not, what are the conditions under which these new officers are to join the Royal Navy; whether special inducements have been offered lately for lieutenants (Royal Navy) to retire; if so, what these inducements were and the reasons for offering them; and whether the number of lieutenants (Royal Navy) is short for present and future requirements?

The reply to the first part of the question is that in the three ships referred to, an additional lieutenant (Royal Navy) was borne, as they had only one marine officer instead of two as in other ships of the "Dreadnought" class. When the complement of marine officers was brought into line with the other ships of the "Dreadnought" class, the additional lieutenant (Royal Navy) was reduced. As subalterns of Royal Marines were not available, junior captains were appointed for duty with the detachment in lieu of subalterns. The question of entering officers from the mercantile marine is under consideration, but the details of the scheme have not yet been settled. Special inducements to retire were offered to commanders and lieutenants from the 27th October, 1909, to the 30th June, 1912. These inducements consisted in an increase in the normal scale of retired pay. The reason for offering them was to relieve the block in promotion and to mitigate in some measure the anticipated congestion on the lists. The number of lieutenants (Royal Navy) now on the list is sufficient to meet immediate requirements, but an increase will be necessary in the near future.

asked whether the fishermen whose nets were damaged during the manœuvres of the Red and Blue Fleets last July have received the compensation which has been found due to them in respect of such damage; and, if not, what reason is there for delay when claims have been admitted as just?

Compensation has not yet been paid in these cases, as the reports from His Majesty's ships to which the damage is attributed are still being investigated, but it is hoped that a decision will be arrived at immediately.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the fact that when a man-of-war is engaged in battle practice or in a gunlayers test most captains withhold the grog issue until the evening, and that in the Russian Navy 7s. 2d. each month is allowed to seamen in lieu of the vodka ration, has will consider the advisability of instituting a money alternative for the grog in the British Navy for those men who may prefer it?

The suggestion made in the question is already in force, and men who prefer not to take up the spirit ration receive a money allowance in lieu.

What is the nature of the money allowance?

Nine-sixteenths of a penny.

Per diem.

Yes, per diem, in lieu of the grog allowance. That is much more expensive to the Admiralty than the grog allowance, so far as mere pounds, shillings, and pence are concerned.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the Russian Navy an allowance of 7s. 2d. a month is made in lieu of grog allowance, which is considerably more than the amount allowed here?

The hon. Member ought to give notice of that question.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can state, on the basis laid down by the Act of Union and by the Financial Relations Commission, respectively, what is the present taxable capacity of Ireland in relation to Great Britain?

The Act of Union furnishes no basis on which profitable comparison can now be made. As regards the Financial Relations Commission, the general Report (signed by eleven of the thirteen members) states that whilst the actual tax revenue of Ireland is about one-eleventh of that of Great Britain, the relative taxable capacity of Ireland is very much smaller, and is not estimated by any of us as exceeding one-twentieth. "The separate Reports of different groups of members show, however, that there was no general consensus of opinion how relative taxable capacity should be ascertained, and I am not able to give any satisfactory estimate under existing circumstances.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that since the Union Ireland was solvent, and that before the Union Ireland was bankrupt?

That is rather a matter of opinion perhaps than of fact.

It is a fact.

asked whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce an Amendment to the Government of Ireland Bill to secure that any sums paid on behalf of Irish services in excess of the true revenue from Ireland shall be voted annually by Parliament; and, if not, what opportunities will exist for discussing this payment of more than two millions per annum?

The Transferred Sum will be charged on the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom, and will not therefore require to be voted annually by Parliament. The cost of the reserved services, which is at present almost entirely defrayed out of moneys voted by Parliament, will continue to be so defrayed, and the same opportunities for discussion will be available as now.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in consequence of the difficulty of understanding the Bill, it is the intention of the Government to appoint lecturers to explain it throughout the country?

That does not arise out of the answer.

asked whether it is proposed to have an Irish Office, or an Agent-General for Ireland, in London, if the Government of Ireland Bill passes into law?

There will, no doubt, be special officers in London acting under the Minister who will be answerable to the Imperial Parliament for Irish affairs, but whether they will constitute a separate office or not is a matter for future consideration.

asked whether, in view of the dissatisfaction shown in agricultural districts at the provisions of the National Insurance Act, by which less well-paid men in more healthy occupations are paying the same rate of contribution as better-paid men employed in less healthy trades, the Government are about to introduce an Amendment of the Act in the direction of the abolition of the flat rate of contribution?

No, Sir. If as implied in the question persons in agricultural districts enjoy superior health to those in other parts of the country, agricultural societies should, on valuation, show a substantial surplus, which will be available, either for increasing the benefits, or for paying a part of the contributions, of their members.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that suggestions are being made by Liberal candidates in the country to the effect that the Government are considering this matter?

It has not been brought to my notice before that suggestions are being made as to such a change.

asked whether in the negotiations now proceeding between the Treasury and the medical profession, it is to be understood that he is prepared to guarantee 7s. to the doctors, in consideration of their submitting themselves in their professional life and conversation to the judgment of local medical committees on which they will have little representation?

The answer is in the negative. No doctors are required to submit their "professional life and conversation" to local medical committees; and so far from local doctors having little representation on local medical committees, these committees are entirely composed of and appointed by the local doctors.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state what arrangements he has made for insured persons requiring surgical and other treatment which can only be adequately given in hospitals and similar institutions, seeing that insured persons are no longer eligible for hospital treatment as necessitous persons?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that it is estimated that of the insured persons who will claim medical benefit after the 15th January next at least 30,000 a week will need for their adequate medical treatment hospital provision; and if he will state what provision will be made for these persons in the event of their being unable or unwilling to secure treatment in the existing charitable institutions?

These questions would appear to be based on a misapprehension. Surgical and other cases which cannot, consistently with the interests of the patient, be properly undertaken by a practitioner on the panel set up under Section 15, are not affected by the Act, and there would appear to be no reason why such cases should be less eligible in the future than in the past for treatment in hospitals and similar institutions. I may state that the average number of inpatients present in the hospitals at any one time would appear to be only a small fraction of the number suggested in the question.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the income of the voluntary hospitals has suffered severely in consequence of the withdrawal of subscriptions, and whether he does not think it necessary to enter into business arrangements with hospitals for the treatment of insured persons?

Business arrangements can be entered into between hospitals and approved societies in the interest of insured persons under the Act I have no information as to any decrease of voluntary subscriptions in consequence of the Act.

Would not the funds of the approved societies go down in that case?

The societies would arrange, as some do at present, to eon-tribute a certain amount to a hospital in return for a certain number of beds being available for their members.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in view of the fact that Section 15 (2) of the National Insurance Act establishes a right on the part of any insured person of selecting the practitioner by whom he desires to be attended, he will say how this can be carried out in the event of a State medical service being set up?

The right of an insured person to select a practitioner on the panel is conditional upon a panel being set up. If in any area the practitioners on the panel are not such as to secure an adequate medical service, the Commissioners may, under Section 15 (2) of the Act, make such arrangements as they think fit for the treatment of insured persons. A State medical service is among the alternatives so open to them, but such a service including many doctors might still offer opportunities of choice by the insured person.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider the advisability of now deciding to place the sum intended for medical benefit under the National Insurance Act, together with the proposed additional Grant of £1,600,000 under the National Insurance Act, to the credit of the insured members, so that they may make their own arrangements with the medical profession for medical benefits, either through the local insurance committee or their approved society?

It is open to insured persons to apply to their local insurance committee to be allowed to make their own arrangements for receiving medical attendance, under Section 15 (3) of the Act.

asked the President of the Board of Trade for what reason the nomination by members of the Ironfounders' Society of Mr. Jonas Pearson for election as a representative on the Court of Referees, under the National Insurance Act, Part II., for the Bradford district, was declared invalid: what officer declared the nomination invalid, and on what grounds and on what date; and whether any notice was given, either to Jonas Pearson or the twenty-five people who nominated him, in time for them to make good any technical flaw in the nomination paper?

Mr. Pearson's nomination paper was declared invalid because the names of the nominators had been written in the same handwriting and the paper therefore did not comply with the requirement that it should be signed by the prescribed number of persons. As to the last part of the question, I am making inquiries and will let the hon. Member know the result.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether all the other nomination papers for the same election were not signed in exactly the same way?

That I cannot say without inquiry.

Will the hon. Gentleman inquire?

If the hon. Gentleman will give me notice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he was aware that the iron founders at Falkirk were recently informed that they were entitled to vote for representatives on the Court of Referees under the National Insurance Act, and furnished with ballot papers; that later they were told that such papers were furnished under a misapprehension and asked to return them; that on the morning of the poll the papers were sent back again to the men with an intimation that they were qualified to vote, with the result that a number of men had not time to register their votes; and if, in the circumstances, the Board of Trade proposes to arrange for a further poll to be held?

Inquiry is being made into the matter and I will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

asked how the posts of assistant insurance officer, appeals officer, and inspector under the National Insurance Act (unemployment section) are being filled; how many of these posts have been filled by Labour Exchange men of short service; and whether any effort was made to fill these posts by men already serving in other branches of the established public service?

Thirty-seven appointments have already been made to posts in these grades. Twenty of the officers so appointed were previously in the established Civil Service, fourteen were in the service of the Labour Exchanges, and three were unestablished Civil servants in other branches of the service. It will be seen from these figures that in making these appointments due consideration has been given to the claims of other branches of the public service.

asked if the right hon. Gentleman has offered to reimburse registrars and high bailiffs their contributions under the National Insurance Act as employers, in respect of the staff in their employ in County Courts; and whether this constitutes the State to be the actual employer of this staff; and, if so, will he state if such staff are Civil servants of the State?

The Treasury has agreed to admit in the accounts of registrars and high bailiffs of County Courts the sums paid by them for employer's contribution under the Insurance Act in respect of such of their employés as give their whole time to their duties. This undertaking was given by the Treasury, as it was considered inequitable that a substantial amount of additional expenditure, of which account could not have been taken, when the salaries of the officers or their allowances for clerk hire or process were originally fixed, should fall upon the County Court officers. The position of the employés is in no way affected, for, as heretofore, they will be engaged, paid, and dismissable at the discretion of the registrars and high bailiffs, and they can in no sense be described as Civil servants.

Arising out of that reply, will the right hon. Gentleman answer the second part of the question, whether this constitutes the State the actual employer?

Oh, no; certainly not.

Why then is the State to-pay for persons of whom they are not the employers?

That: is what I tried to explain in the answer.