asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, seeing that the recent revelations in the correspondence of M. Gounaris prove that the Near Eastern policy of the late Coalition Government was partly responsible for the Greek disaster in Asia Minor, the present Government will consider sympathetically the destitute condition of the Greek refugees and the possibility of relieving their distress?

I cannot accept the implication of the hon. and gallant Member as in any way accurate. His Majesty's Government are already considering with the utmost sympathy the fate of the Ottoman Christian refugees from Asia Minor and Thrace, and are fully aware of their deplorable condition. They have promised a grant of £50,000 to the League of Nations for refugee relief on condition that other countries contribute a similar amount, and £16,000 of this has already been paid. They have also spent some £52,000 on the charter of vessels for the removal of the refugees to places of safety, and granted £10,000 worth of surplus medical stores to British relief societies. In view of the financial stringency at home, His Majesty's Government are unable for the present to incur any further expenditure on behalf of refugees, who are not British subjects, but they are giving all possible support and encouragement to the voluntary organisations which are endeavouring to cope with the problem.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of statements made that the trial of the ex-Greek ministers was a travesty of justice and that M. Gounaris in particular was sentenced and executed without being given an opportunity to speak in his own defence, His Majesty's Government will lay before the House Mr. Lindley's Report of these proceedings?

The full report by His Majesty's Legation at Athens on the proceedings which led to the execution of M. Gounaris and his colleagues has only just been received, and it is not yet possible to say whether it is suitable for laying before the House. The matter will be duly considered.

If the Prime Minister decides to lay papers in reference to the near Eastern crisis, will those reports be included in them?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman knows that question should be addressed to the Prime Minister.

asked the Prime Minister whether a few days before the disaster to the Greek army in August the Cabinet Secretariat was inquiring as to whether the Greek army could possibly hold out through the winter; and, if so, whether it is his intention in future to use the members of the Cabinet Secretariat as the medium for such important communications to foreign Governments?

I presume that my Noble Friend is referring to the statement signed by Monsieur Chrussachi, which appeared in the Press of 8th December. The suggestion referred to is, I am informed, devoid of all foundation. The Cabinet Secretariat was not connected in any way with these proceedings, expressed no views on them, and made no inquiries at the Greek Legation. As regards the last part of the question, I have every reason to believe that work of this kind never has been done by the Cabinet Secretariat.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Egyptian Government has yet paid any compensation to Colonel Piggott, of the Army Pay Corps, or to Mr. Brown, of the Egyptian Ministry of Agriculture, for the murderous attacks made upon them?

The two cases are not strictly analogous. That of Colonel Piggott is being dealt with by the military authorities in Egypt, whereas that of Mr. Brown has been taken up by Lord Allenby with the Egyptian Government. So far as I am aware, no compensation has yet been paid in either case by the Egyptian Government.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has yet received detailed information as to the assassination of Hassan Pasha Abdel Razek and Ismail Bey Zohdi: and whether any arrests have been made in connection with this outrage?

The reply to both parts of the question is in the affirmative.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware that the new Order in Council regarding the disposal of the old force coastguard is creating a feeling of unrest amongst the men concerned; and what steps he proposes to take to compensate the men for loss of prospects and discontinuance of service?

This matter is under consideration.

Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman use any influence with the Board of Trade to see that these displaced coastguard ratings are given preference for the new work in the Customs?

Yes.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if his attention has been drawn to the statements from the United States of America that they are going to build the most powerful Navy in the world by building smaller ships than those specified in the Washington Treaty; and what steps he intends to take to see that this country does not lose its sea supremacy?

I have seen a report in the Press on this subject. No restriction is placed on the contracting powers as to the number of war vessels they may build in conformity with Articles XI and XII of the Washington Treaty. As regards the latter part of the question, the hon. Member can rely upon the Admiralty to scrutinise carefully the actual building programmes of other Powers with a view to the safeguarding of our naval position.

In what formula is British sea supremacy now expressed?

Equality with any other Power.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that, during the War, most necessary and valuable service was rendered to the nation by the naval armament sea-going crews engaged in carrying ammunition in the North Sea, the Irish Channel, and the different naval bases; and, in view of the fact that this work was of a specially dangerous nature, will he consider the possibility of some remunerative recog- nition being granted to the crews thus engaged, inasmuch as they were the only Government employés at sea to whom no such recognition has been granted?

The Admiralty, while fully appreciating the good services of the crews referred to, do not feel that there are adequate grounds for granting pecuniary recognition for those services, additional to the special war risk allowance which was paid during the War for service whether at sea or in harbour. I would further refer the hon. Member to my reply of the 8th June, 1921, to the hon. Member for Devonport.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the crews who were engaged on this work have been granted the War medal?

If they had continuous service of 28 days, they were granted the War medal.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty when it is anticipated that the payment of prize money to those entitled will be completed; whether, when the payment has been completed, steps will be taken to resume the issue of clasps to those entitled to them; whether those entitled are allowed to provide clasps at their own expense should they so desire; and how can anyone ascertain what clasps they are entitled to?

Notices calling for the final batches of claims to prize money were issued on the 9th December, and the resultant applications are being dealt with as rapidly as possible. As regards the remainder of the question, I would refer my Noble and gallant Friend to the answer given by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer on the 24th July.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty to what firms the principal contracts have been awarded in connection with the building of the two new capital ships; and what will be the total cost of the ships?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the contracts for the two battleships about to be constructed will be placed on the basis of the lowest tender, or whether other considerations will be taken into account; and, if so, will he state what the considerations are, so that shipbuilders on the Mersey may be given an equal chance with builders at other ports?

The two lowest tenders for the battleships have been accepted. One ship will be built on the Tyne by Sir W. G. Armstrong, Whitworth and Company, the machinery being made by the Wallsend Slipway and Engineering Company. The other will be built by Cammell, Laird and Company, on the Mersey. As regards the total cost, I am not at present in a position to add anything to the reply given by the Parliamentary Secretary, on the 7th December, to the hon. Member for Westhoughton (Mr. Rhys Davies).

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that the money for the building of these two ships is obtained by means of a capital levy?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether His Majesty's ships which commissioned for foreign service prior to the Admiralty Order extending commissions to three years will remain in commission for the revised period or pay off after two years?

It is not intended to apply the revised period in its entirety to ships commissioned before the date of the Order. It is necessary, however, in order to spread the recommissionings over the longer period, to lengthen existing commissions in proportion to the period unexpired. Thus the commission of a ship already well into the second year of her commission will be lengthened by much less than the one only recently commissioned.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the warrant writers who were recently withdrawn from capital ships have been replaced by a direct entry accountant officer in addition to a chief writer?

No, Sir.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any Regulations exist whereby the summary punishment awarded to a Naval rating who appeals under the provisions of Article 8, paragraph 2, of the King's Regulations and Admiralty Instructions can be suspended pending the result of the appeal?

There is no specific Regulation for the suspension of a punishment in the circumstances mentioned by my hon. and gallant Friend, but suspension is permitted at the discretion of the Board of Admiralty by Section 53 (1) of the Naval Discipline Act.

Do the Board receive notice of punishment before it is carried out?

The Board receive notice at the earliest possible moment.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what sum has been raised up to date for the preservation of H.M.S. "Victory"; whether His Majesty's Government is assisting in this regard, and, if so, to what extent; and whether any time limit has been fixed as to the requisite sum being obtained?

So far as I am aware, no statement has yet been issued as to the progress of the "Save the 'Victory' Fund," which was only inaugurated a few weeks ago. I think it is premature, therefore, to raise points such as those dealt with in the question. I am glad to take this opportunity, however, of commending the fund to all Members who are interested in the Navy, and of begging them to do their utmost to support it.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can give the number of officers and others borne on the active list of the navies of the United States of America, Japan, and Great Britain to-day; and when the Washington Treaty is ratified by all the Powers concerned respectively?

As the answer is in tabular form, I propose, with my Noble and gallant Friend's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any of the ships which form a subject-matter of this Treaty, and which belong to this country, have actually been broken up before the Treaty is ratified?

Are the figures relating to this country final figures, or will they be subject to any revision in the future?

I answered the supplementary question put by the hon. Member for South Kensington (Sir W. Davison) a few days ago. In regard to the second supplementary, we are carrying out already the additional reductions consequent upon the Washington Treaty.

asked the Prime Minister, seeing that no date is specified in the Treaty on the limitation of armaments signed at Washington in February last, on which the Treaty should be ratified, what is the view of His Majesty's Government as to the period within which such ratifications should take place in order to give effect to the Treaty; whether His Majesty's Government has any information as to the view of the United States on this point; whether non-ratifiation by one of the signatory Powers will be regarded by His Majesty's Government as involving the abandonment of the Treaty; and if His Majesty's Government has been in consultation with the Government of the United States as to the views which that Government would adopt in the event of non-ratification by one of the signatory Powers?

His Majesty's Government have no definite limit of time in mind as representing the period within which the Washington Treaties must be ratified. Nor, so far as I am aware, have the United States Government. On the other hand, His Majesty's Government cannot regard without grave disappointment the continued delay in the ratification of the Treaties by two of the signatory Powers. I think it premature to take into consideration what the action of His Majesty's Government might be in a hypothetical situation which I sincerely trust will not arise.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, how many houses have still to be allocated to local authorities under the late Government's restricted assisted housing schemes under the Housing Act of 1919; and on what basis will they be distributed, and how soon?

Except in so far as small adjustments on existing approvals may allow a few more houses to be allocated, there are no further houses to be allocated under the restricted housing scheme.

Has the right hon. Gentleman, as Minister of Labour, informed himself, as Minister of Health, that there are over 18,000 building operatives out of work, and would it not be to the advantage of the Ministry of Labour that these men should be drawing wages instead of unemployment pay?

No, Sir. The proposals in question, with others, are under the consideration of the Government.

When will it be ready?

I hope at the earliest possible moment.

Will it be ready at once? Does "the earliest possible moment" mean next year?

It means precisely what it says.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, whether he can state the number of houses allocated under the State-assisted housing scheme to local authorities in each town having a population of 200,000 and upwards?

My right hon. Friend will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement giving the information the hon. Member desires.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, whether, having regard to the recent decision of the House of Lords in the case of Kerr v. Bride, he is aware that large numbers of English property owners will very shortly be placed in the same difficult position as that which now obtains in Scotland, and that in the early part of next year tenants affected by this decision will be faced with heavy outstanding arrears of rent; and whether he will by every practical means accelerate the deliberations of the Rent Restrictions Committee so that legislation may be introduced at the earliest possible day in the next Session of Parliament?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given by the Prime Minister on Thursday, the 30th November, to a similar question by the, hon. Member for Lichfield (Sir C. Warner).

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, whether he will, with a view to stimulate the building trade and to bring about the reconstruction of slum property, promote legislation which will relieve all buildings and improvements from rates and taxes for a period of 10 years?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which was given on the 4th instant to a question on this subject by the hon. and gallant Member for the Central Division of Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy).

What financial assistance does the Government propose to allocate for this purpose1?

That does not arise.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, the total number of able-bodied persons in receipt of relief for the months of September and October in the years 1914 and 1922, and the amount of the same?

No figures based on the classification "able-bodied" and "not able-bodied" are now available for the periods specified. The statistics available show that the average number of persons (men, women, and children) in receipt of Poor Law relief in their own homes in England and Wales on account of unemployment was in September, 1922, 809,300 and in October, 1922, 838,600, and that the Poor Law relief given to them amounted to £182,000 per week in September and to £198,000 per week in October. No precisely comparable figures are available for the months of September, 1914, and October, 1914; but the number of persons in receipt of out-door relief on account of unemployment was then very small.

Arising out of these tremendous figures, will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider his refusal to allow local authorities to proceed with work under the Unemployment Grants Committee?

I know of no such refusal.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that officers of boards of guardians visit the Unemployment Exchanges and claim money due in unemployment benefits to men who have received poor relief? Is that done with his approval?

There is an arrangement made whereby a liaison exists between the boards of guardians and the authorities who dispense unemployment benefit, and a very proper liaison, to see that money is not paid twice over.

Is that done with the consent of the unemployed persons, who are entitled to independent poor relief?

Where it is a question of covenanted benefit, that is another matter, but a large amount of this benefit is being paid on the uncovenanted side.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of insured persons employed in the constructive industries, that is to say, in those industries mainly engaged in the production of capital goods, e.g., building, metal, engineering and shipbuilding trades; the percentage unemployed in those industries on the latest date for which the figures are available; and also the corresponding figures for all other industries, that is to say, the industries engaged in the production of goods for immediate consumption and in distribution and transport?

Detailed information of this character, covering over 60 industries, is published monthly in the "Ministry of Labour Gazette," a copy of the latest issue of which I am sending to the hon. Member.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will consider the advisability of having Scottish appeal cases under the Unemployment Insurance Act for decision by the Umpire heard in Scotland instead of in London, in order to lessen the expense of such appeals to those claiming to have their cases decided by the Umpire?

The first appeal under the Unemployment Insurance Acts is to the Courts of Referees, which are local bodies, and questions of fact, which alone require any volume of evidence, are in practice determined by these Courts. The number of appeals from the Courts of Referees to the Umpire in Scottish cases is not large enough to justify the appointment of a separate Umpire for dealing with them. If a separate Umpire were appointed, there would obviously be a risk of conflicting decisions, and I am not aware that any serious inconvenience is caused by the existing arrangements.

Does not the fact that, individuals have to come from Scotland to London account for the small number of cases?

The Board of Referees is the local body to test the evidence of facts. They sit locally. That answers my hon. Friend's question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in a recent case decided by the umpire it cost £50 to come from Leith to London and to bring witnesses?

I was not aware of that fact. I will look into it. On occasions the umpire has heard cases in the provinces.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that many men will come under the gap system in payment of unemployment insurance benefits during Christmas week; and whether something pan be done to avoid this hardship to the men and their families at this time of the year?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply given on Monday to the hon. Member for Rochdale, in which it is explained that no "gap" period arises at Christmas.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are certain men who will come under the gap regulation, which Will end just before Christmas, so that they will spend that week without anything at all?

It has been my business to inquire into that very carefully, and I assure my hon. Friend that I think that that is not so. If he likes to consult me afterwards I will give my reasons.

asked the Minister of Labour whether sailors who have been shipwrecked and paid off in a foreign port are regarded as not qualified for unemployment benefit until they have been 14 days in the United Kingdom, although in many cases two months or more may have elapsed from the date on which the men last received any wages until they arrive at a home port; and, if so, whether he will take whatever steps are necessary to secure that these men shall be entitled to claim benefit on their arrival?

A claim to unemployment benefit cannot be made until the seaman reaches the United Kingdom, and under the Unemployment Insurance Acts a waiting period of six days—not 14 days as stated in the question—must then be served before benefit can become due. I will consider whether there is any power under the Acts to enable benefit to become payable from the date of arrival in the United Kingdom in the class of cases referred to.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that shipwrecked sailors are not under pay while coming home and that sometimes two months may have elapsed since they received their last pay? Is he also aware of the fact that the shipowners of the country are in sympathy with this proposal, particularly the hon. Member for Cardiff (Mr. Gould) to whom I spoke about it to-day?

I am glad to hear of that co-operation, but I would remind the hon. Member that my powers in this and all other questions of administration with regard to unemployment insurance are limited by Statute. I promise that I will look into the matter sympathetically and see what I can do.

asked the Minister of Labour the total amount of unemployed insurance paid out in Sheffield from the commencement to the last week in November, 1922, and what proportion has been paid to women; and the average number of men and women, respectively, receiving payment during each period of four weeks since the commencement, and the average total amount of such payment to men and to women, respectively?

The total amount of unemployment benefit paid out in Sheffield from 8th November, 1920, to the end of November, 1922, otherwise than through Associations, is £2,075,314. A statement, showing the amount paid month by month, will be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT. It is not possible, without very considerable labour, to ascertain the sums repaid in respect of Sheffield branches of associations having arrangements under Section 17, or to distinguish between payments made to men and women respectively.

asked the Prime Minister what the Government proposes to do for the 22,937 women who are unemployed in Scotland; and is there any relief work likely to be provided?

asked the Minister of Labour what is his estimate of the number of unemployed women for whom work will be found by the Government schemes proposed; and whether he is aware that in Scotland alone there are at the present moment over 22,000 women out of work?

I have been asked to reply. I cannot add anything to the answer given on the 11th December to the question on this subject addressed to me by the hon. Member for Dundee.

I beg to give notice that owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I shall raise this subject on the Motion for the Adjournment to-night?

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is prepared to introduce legislation to exempt seasonal women fish-workers from the Unemployment Insurance Acts, as it is impossible for them to receive any benefits thereunder?

As pointed out in the reply I gave to the hon. Member on the 6th December, it is not correct to say that these fish-curers can never qualify for unemployment benefit. I would add that if they are ordinarily and mainly dependent for their livelihood upon some other person, or on some non-insurable employment, they may, on application, obtain certificates exempting them—but not their employers—from payment of unemployment insurance contributions. This provision would appear to meet any cases of hardship that might otherwise arise.

Is it not a fact that it is practically impossible for these women workers to get any benefit from that scheme to which they are compelled to contribute, and does the right hon. Gentleman think that is fair?

I do not agree with the hon. and gallant Member, as I have indicated in my answer.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that very few of these women have work for 20 weeks in any one year, and is it not on that account almost impossible for them to receive any benefit?

asked the Minister of Labour what is the estimated total of wage earners in Great Britain, including those for the moment unemployed, and, approximately, how many of these have never been involved in an industrial dispute; and which are the trades most free from such disputes?

I regret that there are no statistics showing the total number of wage earners in Great Britain at the present time. It is estimated, however, on the basis of such information as is available, that the total number of wage earners and small salary earners is in the neighbourhood of 16 millions. It is not possible to say how many of these have never been involved in an industrial dispute. With regard to the last part of the question, I am sending my hon. Friend copies of the "Ministry of Labour Gazette" for January and November, 1922, in which he will find recorded such recent information as is available.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, whether, in the case of an epidemic of small-pox, as at present, it is the policy of his Department to encourage the precaution of vaccination?

Yes, Sir.

As representing the Ministry of Health, and to set a good example, has the right hon. Gentleman himself been subjected to vaccination?

Has the Ministry of Health taken any steps to consider the advisability of merging the system of vaccination into the general system of public health administration in this country?

That question does not arise.

asked the Minister of Labour whether the promises made by the late Ministry that preference be given to ex-service men, to the extent of 75 per cent, on unemployment schemes financed by the Unemployment Grants Committee, still obtains?

One of the conditions imposed by the Unemployment Grants Committee is that at least 75 per cent. of the labour employed on schemes assisted by them shall be ex-service men. The Committee have power to modify this condition, but only when this is clearly necessary in the circumstances of the particular case.

Does the right hon. Gentleman regard seamen who served during the War on transport vessels under the Admiralty as coming within the category of ex-service men?

The definition has been under consideration, but I cannot charge my memory to say whether the definition as interpreted includes them. I will have it looked up if my hon. Friend desires it.

Are the 75 per cent. of ex-service men, when so employed, paid at the trade union rate of wages?

They are employed on the regular rules.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, if he will give the House the names of the local authorities who are not on the King's Roll?

I am not sure that the course suggested will further the object we have in view, and before coming to a decision I propose to await the advice of the King's Roll National Council, which, as the hon. Member is aware, is now being set up.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that for the last 12 or 18 months I have received similar answers from the Minister of Labour, and has not the time arrived to know who the local authorities are?

We should press for this because I am quite certain that—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]

I am entirely in sympathy with the views expressed in the supplementary question. I have already explained that I think it desirable that one more effort should be made in the direction of voluntary co-operation, to see what can be done.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that if that final effort be not successful, the names will be published?

The action to be taken will depend largely on the recommendation of the King's Roll National Council.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in accordance with the recommendation made by the late Minister, steps are being taken to provide that upon all new works for which guarantees are given under the Trade Facilities Act arrangements are being made for the employment of at least 75 per cent. ex-service men?

asked the Minister of Labour whether, having regard to the large number of clerical workers now out of employment, he will take steps to bring to the notice of the corporations or companies receiving guarantees under the Trade Facilities Act, and the authorities administering the unemployment grants, the desirability of employing, so far as is possible, these unemployed workers in carrying out the extra clerical work involved in carrying out the sanctioned schemes?

I am afraid it would not be practicable to attach conditions of this kind to guarantees under the Trade Facilities Act.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, whether there is any limitation to the number of insured persons on a panel doctor's list; what is the average amount of remuneration received by doctors on the panel list; and whether, on the whole, insured persons are receiving the same consideration and attention as private patients?

The limit of the number of insured persons whom an insurance practitioner may have on his list is fixed for each area jointly by the Insurance Committee and the Medical Panel Committee. No practitioner working single-handed may have more than 3,000 persons on his list, and in a considerable number of areas a lower maximum of 2,500 or 2,000 has been fixed. Taking the country as a whole, the average number of insured persons per doctor is approximately 1,000 and the corresponding remuneration, including mileage payments, would be slightly less than £500 a year. Insurance practitioners are expected to give the same standard of treatment, within the scope of their terms of service, to insured persons as they would to private patients.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, whether he will state the procedure which can be adopted by insured persons who receive medical attention from their own private doctor to obtain a return of that portion of their insurance contribution which is allocated for the purposes of treatment by panel doctors?

An insured person who desires to be treated by a practitioner not under agreement with an Insurance Committee may apply to the Insurance Committee for the area in which he resides for permission to make his own arrangements. If permission is granted a contribution will be made by the Committee towards the cost of the treatment so obtained. The Insurance Committee has full discretion in considering applications of this nature. There is no provision in the Acts for any reduction in the contribution payable by or in respect of an insured person on the ground that he does not take advantage of the arrangement made under these Acts to provide him with medical treatment.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, the present total disposable surplus of approved societies; and what grants, if any, are being made from this surplus to those hospitals which have, at considerable pecuniary loss, undertaken the treatment of their members?

The total disposable surplus of approved societies and branches in England disclosed as the result of the first valuation was about £8,000,000, the major portion of which the members elected to take in the form of an increase of the ordinary cash benefits. Of the balance a sum of £950,596 has been allocated by certain societies for payments to hospitals and convalescent homes during the period from July, 1921, to July, 1926.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is considering the extension of the operations of the Clauses in the Aliens Restriction Act expiring on 23rd December, which excludes enemy aliens from this country without special permits?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. As I explained on the 27th ultimo in reply to a question by the hon. and learned Member for the Ealing Division (Sir H. Nield), I have full powers to exclude enemy aliens without further legislation.

Is it not a fact that the increase in the number of residential aliens in this country during the past year may add to the burden of unemployment?

I do not think that that is a fact, but I am trying to get the figures. The withdrawal of Clause 10 cannot make any difference so long as the powers which I have under the Order are properly administered.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give a definite assurance that when this Order is withdrawn the number of ex-enemy aliens will not increase?

I cannot give an assurance of that kind because there may be ex-enemy aliens who want to come here for special purposes, schoolmasters and others, but I have assured my noble Friend again and again that I have ample powers to exclude not only ex-enemy aliens but all aliens, if he can show me cases in which they should be excluded.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, if he is aware that the guardians of the South Shields union are proposing to reduce the bonuses of the sub-officials to a point far below the Civil Service scale, to which scale the officials are bound to abide by contract with the guardians; and will he have inquiries made into this matter?

My right hon. Friend is sending to the hon. Member a copy of a letter written to the guardians in this matter. He understands that the guardians are not willing to refer the question to arbitration, and there is no further action which he can take.

asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Ministry of Health, whether he is aware that in the present first election by registered nurses in England and Wales, of their direct representatives on the General Nursing Council as provided for in the Nurses' Registration Act, 1919, the Chairman of the Council, Sir Wilmot Herringham, did not send any voting papers until 1st December, and then omitted to send them to 1,000 or more nurses, about one-tenth of the whole electorate, and that protests on this matter were made to the Chairman of the General Nursing Council on the 4th instant, pointing out that as voting papers could not be accepted after noon on the 8th instant, it would be a postal impossibility for hundreds of nurses throughout the country to receive and return them by that date; and whether he will declare the present election to be null and void and cause fresh voting papers to be sent to all registered nurses entitled by law to vote, allowing one month for the return of such papers, as was done in the nurses' election in Scotland?

As regards the first part of the question I would refer the hon. Member to the reply to a similar question by the hon. and gallant Member for South-West St. Pancras on the 6th December. The Returning Officer has already given directions for the issue of new ballot papers, and my right hon. Friend has asked that a longer period should be given for the return of voting papers than the minimum provided by the rules. In view, however, of the fact that the term of office of the present Council comes to an end on the 23rd December it would not be practicable to allow so long a period as the hon. Member suggests without unduly delaying the completion of the new Council.

asked the Prime Minister whether, if in the period between the rising of Parliament and its reassembling in the new year there should be an occupation by France of the Ruhr Valley or a general widening of the present area of occupation in Germany, he will advise His Majesty immediately to call Parliament together in order to decide upon the policy to be adopted by His Majesty's Government?

I can add nothing to the statement which I made yesterday on this subject, in answer to a question by the hon. Member for Aber-avon.

asked the Prime Minister how many printed papers are, on the average, circulated to the Cabinet each week; whether any system of marking that will indicate the relative importance of such papers is used; and what steps are taken to ensure that all members of the Cabinet read such papers?

I can add nothing to what I have already said in reply to questions on this subject.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman consider taking some steps to ensure that important documents are read by Ministers? Has he considered the forming of a list of Ministers and each Minister being compelled to sign that he has read such and such a document, as is done in the Army and Navy every day?

If it be done in the Army and Navy, the number of documents cannot be so large. I know of no means of discipline by which I, or any other Prime Minister, can compel Ministers to read any document.

Why cannot the right hon. Gentleman give some idea of the number of printed papers circulated every week? Are they 20 or 10 or any other number?

I do not think that this is the place for a question which is entirely confined to the Cabinet to be dealt with in this kind of way.

asked the Prime Minister if his attention has been called to the fact that, owing to the failure of the Government to provide adequate means for dealing with unemployment and the consequent hardship and privation arising therefrom, many Members are opposed to the proposed arrangements whereby the House will be prorogued for some weeks from Friday next: whether, under these circumstances, he will agree to the House continuing in Session until such time as some means has been found for relieving the distress; and will he consider giving the House an opportunity of discussing the advisability of making a financial grant of £10,000,000 in aid of districts most heavily stricken by unemployment?

The answer is in the negative.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there is very great indignation indeed against what is considered to be the callous indifference both of this House and of Ministers in dealing with the question of the unemployed?

May I ask the Prime Minister whether he has in mind the assurances given by him to the country prior to the Election, that, the burden of unemployment would be cast upon trade and industry, and whether, in view of the impossibility of maintaining anything like a standard of decency or efficiency upon the present unemployment allowance, he will see his way to extend the Session so as to provide some increased benefit for the unemployed?

As my right hon. Friend has put it, I do not recognise any of my speeches in his statement. But I would put it to him that we do mean to do our utmost for unemployment, and that the sitting of Parliament is not in itself an assistance in getting the work done.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say in what way, other than by the sitting of Parliament, it is possible to increase the benefit to which he made reference in his Election speeches?

I cannot admit that my right hon. Friend has made it clear that I have ever made any such statement as he attributes to me. Perhaps I may explain. I did make a general reference to my belief that in the end the best system of dealing with unemployment would be a general system of unemployment insurance, borne largely by the industries.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that the working classes in the Central Division of Glasgow believed that his return to this House would mean an immediate tackling of the unemployment question?

Oh, yes, and they were right.

rose—

We cannot now debate the matter.

On a point of Order. The Prime Minister has said in answer to A question by mc—[Interruption]—that the unemployed in the Central Division of Glasgow were right in believing that he was going to do something immediately for their benefit. I want to know what it is. [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer, answer!"]

rose—

I want to insist, Mr. Speaker. I stand for business. [HON. MEMBERS: "Sit down!"] I am not going to sit down. I want to ask a very plain question, and I want to do so in all deference to you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. Member should know that he must not be on his feet at the same time as the Speaker.

I know that, but the issue is so serious.

The hon. Member must have regard for the authority of the Chair.

Why do not hon. Members opposite respect us?

The matter cannot now be debated.

I do not want to debate the matter. All I want is—[Interruption.]

You (pointing to the Government side) start howling, and we will howl back.

rose again—

The hon. Member must respect the authority of the Chair.

So I do. All I want to ask is whether this blackguardism—[Interruption].

You are a nice lot howling down men who come here to help the unemployed.

I want constitutionalism and respectful attention to the serious issue of the unemployed. If the Government refuse to move, it is something that the people will not stand. There must be a facing of this business.

The hon. Member is seeking now to continue a debate.