asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has taken the opportunity of further examining into the desirability and utility of a railway and road tunnel under the Humber river estuary; whether he is aware of the great improvement in communications that such a tunnel would bring about; and whether he is aware that the local chambers of commerce, and all other organised bodies of opinion, are in favour and have pressed for the construction of such tunnels?

I have been asked to reply. No definite scheme for a tunnel under the Humber has been submitted to my hon. Friend's Department. Whenever the authorities concerned are prepared to submit definite proposals, they shall receive the fullest consideration.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the municipality and other bodies in the city have approached his Department and have asked for assistance to bring out the scheme, and have any steps been taken to give the representations effect?

I cannot answer that offhand.

In view of the necessity of finding work for the unemployed, has the hon. and gallant Gentleman's Department considered the advisability of proceeding with the Channel Tunnel?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put that question down?

asked the President of the Board of Trade the quantities and value of foreign dyes and dyestuffs imported into the United Kingdom since let January, 1923?

The answer involves a table of figures, and, with the permission of the hon. and gallant Member, I will have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Secretary of State for Air, whether, in view of the extensive use in the future of airships and aircraft by and in conjunction with naval forces, and the interdependance of both these arms of the defensive forces of the country for the common good, he will consider the construction and repair of airships and aircraft at His Majesty's dockyard, Portsmouth, which is well situated for the purpose?

As regards the construction and repair of aircraft for the Royal Air Force, the policy of the Air Ministry is still as stated in my reply to my hon. and gallant Friend on 26th July last. As regards airships, the question does not arise since the construction of airships by the Government is not at present in contemplation and negotiations for handing over existing facilities for construction to a commercial company are in progress.

asked the Minister of Health whether many representations condemning the working of the Rent Act have been received by his Department; whether there were many evictions during the first three months of the administration of that Act; whether he is aware that many orders have been made by county court authorities against tenants, without the promise of alternative accommodation, and that the county courts have their lists now full of possession cases; and whether it is proposed to proceed with an Act amending the Rent Act as an early date, in view of the widespread evictions and hardships under which tenants are suffering?

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware of the large number of evictions which are now threatened under the Rent and Mortgage Interest Restriction Act, 1923; and if he will at once bring in an amending measure to relieve the inevitable hardships which will otherwise take place?

Very few complaints have been addressed to my Department, and I have received no information which would lead me to suppose that the actual working of the Rent Restrictions Act differs from the intentions of Parliament when passing the Act. I have accordingly no ground for proposing its amendment.

asked the Minister of Labour what is the number of unemployed men and women on the register drawing unemployment pay; what national work, giving employment, has been begun in the interests of the unemployed since 1st December last; how many men and women have been employed as a result of starting such work; what is its nature; and what additional new national work is now contemplated in the immediate future?

In reply to the first part of the question, the number of unemployed persons on the registers of Employment Exchanges who are claiming unemployment benefit is as follows:—

Men	916,509
Women	235,027
Juveniles	32,710
	1,184,246

The total figure includes a small number of persons who are serving the waiting week or whose claim to benefit is awaiting the decision of the local employment committee.

As I stated in the House in the course of the Debate on Friday last, it is not possible for anybody to say how many men are really employed and affected by the schemes now in operation, but my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour has estimated that some 300,000 would probably be employed directly and 100,000 indirectly.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in accordance with the provisions of the Telegraph Act, the contract entered into between himself and the Press Association, dated the 20th October, 1922, has been laid before Parliament; and, if not, will he state the reason?

The licence granted to the Press Association, dated the 20th October, 1922, has not been laid before Parliament, and I am advised that the Telegraph Acts do not impose upon the Post Office any obligation to place a licence of that description on the Table of the House.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware of the hardships inflicted upon many pensioners by the reduction in their pensions now being enforced by his Department on the grounds of the incorrect assessment of their original dependency; and what steps he proposes to take to mitigate the same?

I have given instructions under which any of these pensioners who are dissatisfied with the decision of the Department may have their cases specially reconsidered by the Ministry.

Will the right hen. Gentleman suspend further reductions until the whole matter has been reconsidered?

Reductions are not made until after proper inquiry.

Will the pensioner himself have a right of appeal to the Committee?

I have already announced the arrangements, which will give every opportunity to the pensioner of making a personal or a written application in the matter.

In the case of pensioners already refused an inquiry, will the matter be reconsidered?

If the hon. Gentleman will read my answer, I think he will find that I have already answered that point.

Where on inquiry it has been found that the pensioner, or his dependants, have received an allowance in excess of that to which they are entitled, and that this has been going on for some years, and no claim for repayment of the excess has been made, are we to understand that that excess is to be refunded?

That appears to be quite a new question, which does not arise here.

While we are waiting for the ballot box to be brought in, I would like to ask whether any steps are likely to be taken during this Session of Parliament to in some way meet the demands of Members for seats. Members come in at various hours of the morning to attempt to secure their seats, and some of the new Members feel, as I myself feel, that there is some uncertainty whether or not a Member has a prescriptive right to a corner seat, or whether it is a matter of securing it every day.

Most of these questions are settled in the course of a very short time by the good sense of Members of the House. I hear there is to be a rearrangement of seats before long, and I think we had better wait and see.

May I suggest that there be no rearrangement of seats, unless the House has first been given an opportunity to express its opinion on the subject.

By "rearrangement," I was referring only to certain changes, of which I had heard lately.

I understand that there are certain seats on the Front Government Bench which belong to certain people. It appears to me that, as there are only a certain number of seats for the 615 Members, it might be possible to ballot for those seats at the beginning of the Session, and retain them till the end of the Session. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"]

I observe that the hon. Member for Plaistow (Mr. Thorne) has acquired a courtesy right to a corner seat.

That is because I am an old stager.

I do not think the hon. Member or any of his fellow old stagers would much care to put their seats at the chance of the ballot. We had better wait a short time to see how things settle down.

I beg to move,

"That this House do now adjourn until Tuesday, 12th February."

As the result of the vote which took place in this House last night, the Government have tendered their resignation to the King, and His Majesty has been graciously pleased to accept it. [An HON. MEMBER "Thank God for that!" I Members of the Government will retain their Seals until the new appointments have been made, and it only remains for me to tell the House that the date was arrived at to suit the convenience of the incoming Minister. May I remind the House of two points, that the date chosen will leave ample time for business, owing to the lateness of Easter and the early date at which we assembled, and that particulars as to the method by which Parliament can be summoned in a time of Adjournment were given by me yesterday in answer to a Private Notice question.

May I ask a question I wished to put just now, as to what possibility there is of any business being carried on in the House on Tuesday evening, 12th February, and Wednesday evening, 13th February, as we cannot ballot for Motions on those days. I understand the Clerks at the Table are refusing to receive Motions. Will there be any business done on those evenings; and, if not, how will it be made up to private Members who are deprived of the few opportunities they have of bringing matters before the House?

Wednesday evening will be available to private Members in the Ballot taken on the preceding day. On Tuesday, the 12th, there is no opening for Motions.

On the point of Order. Am I wrong in supposing that if I had a Motion for Tuesday evening on which the House reassembles on the Paper, there having been no ballot, my Motion would come on?

I think the right hon. Gentleman is mistaken. Under Standing Order 7, notice cannot be given within a certain limit of time from the day on which it becomes operative. That is on purpose to prevent hon. Members from forestalling the Ballot.

Are we to understand that there will be no business in the House at 8.15 on the Tuesday evening, or will the Government take that day, which has hitherto been reserved for private Members?

I wish to suggest that the period asked for is a very long interval for the House to adjourn. There is a very serious dispute affecting the whole country, and all parties have a very great responsibility to their constituents. We cannot shift that responsibility on to any Government, and it seems to me three weeks is a very long interval. We have now, been elected two months, and we have done no practical work in carrying out our duties as Members of Parliament—the practical work of legislation and administration. We have had a lot of talk, which could have been finished in two days, but we have not carried out any of the duties for which we are individually responsible to our constituents. We are not going to indulge in any factious criticism of the new Government when it is formed. The new Prime Minister should get to work as quickly as possible, and it should not be beyond the wit of man to advise an administration in, at any rate, 14 days. I think it would make a favourable impression on the country if we did our duty by reassembling after a shorter adjournment than three weeks. We have had a King's Speech which, I understand, is going to be put into practical form. If we are going to carry it out the sooner we get to work the better. I put it to the present Leader of the Opposition, that he would be well advised if, instead of asking for three weeks to perform his arduous task, the House should meet not later than in a fortnight's time.

I wish to ask a very simple question, to which we are entitled to receive an answer. I want to know whether there will be any business done in the House at 8.15 on the Tuesday evening. That evening is reserved by the Standing Orders for Private Members, and I want to know whether the Government can take it without the authority of a vote of the House.

I think the right hon. Gentleman must leave me to deal with that question when we come, to the day referred to. I am not prepared to give an answer further than I have already given.

I beg to give notice that, on 12th February, I will move "That this House is of the opinion that active steps should be taken to develop trade within the Empire."

-I think the hon. and gallant Gentleman did not hear the ruling which I gave, based on Standing Order No. 7, in reply to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham (Mr. A. Chamberlain).

I rise to oppose the Motion which has just been made by the ex-Prime Minister. I am indeed relieved to find that hon. Members opposite, spite of their vaticinations of yesterday, are prepared for three weeks to leave the country to the tender mercies of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Aberavon (Mr. Ramsay MacDonald). [HON. MEMBER: "The hon. Member for Aberavon."] The right hon. Gentleman has been sworn to the Privy Council this morning, and I wish to be the first to felicitate him on that honour. I was pointing out that hon. Members opposite are showing how little credence we can give to their vaticinations of yesterday, because they are leaving the country for three weeks to the tender mercies of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Aberavon and his colleagues. That was not my only object in rising. I had a more practical object in view, in order to get over the difficulty which has been raised by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Leith (Captain W. Benn) and my right hon. Friend on the Front Bench, that is, to move as, an Amendment to the Adjournment Motion, to add the words, "but before adjourning this day, a Ballot. be taken for notices of Motions for 12th February."

I could not accept that Amendment.. It is fixed by the Standing Orders of the House, and any Motion to suspend the Standing Orders of the House must be on the Paper.

It brings the proceedings into harmony with the Standing Orders. In the first place, the Motion proposed from the other side makes provision for the Adjournment. The Standing Order says:

" Having regard to any intervening adjournment."

Surely, in these circumstances, I can press my Amendment, and you, Sir, can accept such an Amendment, which enables private Members of this House to safeguard their rights consistently with the Standing Orders. As it is put at the end, it obviously accepts the point made in the Standing Orders with regard to the intervening Adjournment. If my Amendment were moved before any reference to the Adjournment, I agree that it would conflict with the Standing Orders, but as it is made after the. House has virtually decided upon the Adjournment, it is in harmony with the spirit of the Standing Orders.

I have ruled that it is not. In a case like this I must comply strictly with the Standing Orders.

If I propose an Amendment to insert in the Motion, "That this House, at its rising to-day, adjourn until the 12th February," provision could then he made for the Ballot to be taken after that Motion had been accepted. I very respectfully submit that this is a common form of Motion in relation to adjournments of this House made by right lion. Members opposite on the occasion of the Easter and Whitsuntide adjournments. They constantly use it. Consequently, there would be an opportunity after the Adjournment Motion was carried-for the Ballot to be taken. I submit that, to meet a situation which was not contemplated when the Standing Orders when framed, we should take the line which I suggest.

It cannot be done by an Amendment of this Question. There must be no Amendment of the Question. The Motion is "That the House do now adjourn until Tuesday, 12th February." I understand that the hon. and learned Member wishes to substitute the words "at its rising this day."

I wish to leave out the word "now" and to insert instead thereof the words "at its rising this day."

The hon. Member will notice that the only business on the Paper is Supply and Ways and Means, and those orders are not effective. Therefore, nothing can he done with regard to them. The hon. Member's suggested Amendment does not make any difference whatsoever. Therefore, I must rule that it is not an Amendment.

Would I and other hon. Members be in order in discussing the subsequent Motion, "That the House do adjourn"?

Any question can now be discussed on the Motion.

This question whether it should be "at its rising this day," with a subsequent Motion that the House do now adjourn, has frequently been the subject of rulings by you, Mr. Speaker. I suggest that on this occasion we should adopt a procedure which would safeguard what is a very valuable right of private Members, namely, the right to ballot for the introduction of a private Motion.

I cannot take a Motion which would have no effect.

Is it not a fact that the 12th February is the first day under Standing Order 7, if due allowance be made for the Adjournment?

The House has not yet adjourned. The Question is—

rose,—

On a point of Order. Is the hon. Member entitled to address the Chair after the Question has been put, except he be seated and wearing his hat?

I wish to say a few words on a subject. which I had intended to raise at an earlier stage in our proceedings. I am sure the House would not wish to separate without the subject being mentioned. I refer to the question of war pensioners. The right hon. Member for Aberavon (Mr. Ramsay MacDonald) —[Interruption]—.is about to form a Government, but he will take three weeks before he is in a position to meet the House. I know that from that quarter of the House the greatest sympathy has always been expressed and felt for the war pensioners—[Interruption]—but I do want to urge upon the right hon. Gentleman that when his Pensions Minister has been appointed he should draw that gentleman's attention to the very complicated nature of the Royal Warrant and of the Ministry of Pensions instructions issued under the Royal Warrant. [Interruption.] The Warrant and the instructions are operating in a very detrimental way on the interests of war pensioners. [Interruption.] It is perfectly well known that under instructions issued by the Ministry of Pensions a great number of people are being deprived of their pensions. They are entitled, it is true, to appear before the Appeal Tribunal, but as a rule they are not qualified to represent their eases. [interruption.] That is common ground. The matter has been ventilated in the Press and in this House. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order, order!"] I will not detain the House long. Everyone knows perfectly well that nine out of 10 of the pensioners are not capable of protecting their own interests before the Appeals Tribunals when they appear before the tribunals.

On a point of Order. Every pensioner who appears before the tribunal has the right of representation.

The pensioner may be entitled to representation, but it is another thing to obtain representation. Everyone knows that perfectly well. [Interruption.] Indeed. it has been publicly stated and not contradicted—I believe the statement was made by the Minister of Pensions himself—that in 90 per cent. of the eases where men go before the Appeals Tribunal they lose their appeal. On the other hand, it has been claimed that where the British Legion has had an opportunity of representing the men they have won something like GO per cent. of their appeals. That has not been seriously controverted. [Interruption.] The suggestion I make is. and I hope the Government will adopt it, that just as poor persons are entitled to free legal advice before the Courts of this country —[Interruption]—war pensioners appealing before the Appeals Tribunal—[Interruption]—should also be entitled to free advice and assistance. I do not know whether it can best be done with the assistance of the British Legion, who I am sure would be only too willing to help and who are helping in my own con- stituency, or whether it should be done in some other manner, perhaps similar to the way in which legal assistance for poor persons is provided in the Courts of our country.[Interruption.]

I find very great difficulty in hearing what the hon. and gallant Member is saying. May I ask the House, for the benefit of other hon. Members like myself who take a great interest in this subject, to keep quiet?

That is my suggestion. I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider whether it is not possible to provide these pensioners, when they go before the Appeal Tribunals, with the necessary expert assistance to enable them to conduct their cases successfully. It makes all the difference in the world whether these men have got advice or have not, in determining whether they Tin their appeals. I have had some experience of this. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will put this matter right. I also hope that he will simplify the Royal Warrant and cancel all these hosts of instructions that have been issued by the Ministry.

Up to.12 months ago, the party with which the hon. and gallant Member for Central Nottingham (Captain Berkeley) was associated had a dominating influence in British polities, and they had it for many years. [Horn. MEMBERS: "No"] His governor was on the Front Bench with all his lieutenants, and I think that it is rather late in the day, after five years of experience of maladministration, according to my hon. and gallant Friend, for him to come forward now and say, "It is not I. it is the other fellow." It is nearly time to put an end to this kind of thing. We are going to do our best, and we do not care who is against us.

As I understood that this Motion provides the only opportunity of drawing attention to certain !natters, and getting something done, I desire to draw attention to a matter which, I hope, will receive the sympathetic consideration of our new administrators. I refer to the position of taxicab drivers. [HON. MEMBERS: "Agreed'" and "Speak up!

I would suggest to hon. Members that the proceedings of the House are hardly dignified at, the moment.

I understand that. it is within the province of any Member to raise any question of administration, and, with great respect, I claim that privilege, to put a point which is of interest to certain constituents of many Members of this House. It is relatively a small point in some ways, but, as we can raise it on a Motion of this kind, I claim the privilege of saying a word or two, and I wish to put my point as precisely as I can. In the forthcoming Budget arrangements are made by which a man who is unable to put down the necessary sum of money to take out his annual licence must pay 20 per cent. increase if he take out four quarterly licences. It is a small but important point, and I draw attention to it, in the hope that the grievance will be remedied.