asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government has recently had any occasion to make representations to the Soviet Government with regard to specific instances of unfriendly Communist propaganda in the British Empire?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member for Dulwich on 30th March.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman remember that first portion of the question of the hon. Member for Dulwich was not actually replied to? To the second portion actually a specific denial was given?

Had any complaints been made?

No. I replied the other day that I could make no fresh representations to the Soviet Government.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman remember that what he said was that he did not intend taking any action? To the first part of the question of the hon. Member for Dulwich that was the reply. To the supplementary which I asked, does he not remember he said they had no complaint? That was specially with regard to the members of the trade delegation.

I have no doubt whatever that what I said was correct. I do not appreciate the purpose of the present question. Perhaps if the hon. Member would put it down I should understand it better.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any recent report has been received from the Charge d'Affaires in Russia on the demand in that country for agricultural machinery?

No recent report has been received on the subject of the hon. Member's question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, according to the English newspapers last week, an order valued at 2,000,000 dollars was placed for agricultural machinery in the United States?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when it is proposed to re-appoint a Consul at Batoum, Consul-Generals at Moscow and Odessa, and Vice-Consuls at Novorossisk, Poti, Moscow, Omsk, Odessa, Kertch, Kherson, Kieff, Mariupol, Nicolaieff, Archangel, Cronstadt, Ekaterinburg, ands Narva?

It is not possible in present circumstances to say when appointments will be made in those areas.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can state the names of the persons who are at the head of the present Government of Russia?

The supreme executive organ of the Soviet Union is the Central Committee, of which there are four presidents, namely:

M. Kalinin, President of the Central Executive Committee of the Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic.

G Petrovski, President of the Central Executive Committee of the Ukraine Socialist Soviet Republic.

A. Chervyakov, President of the Central Executive Committee of the White Russian Socialist Soviet Republic.

The fourth President, who is also President of the Central Executive Committee of the Transcaucasian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic, has yet to be elected to fill the vacancy caused by the recent death of M. Narimanov

asked the Prime Minister whether he can state what is the attitude of the Government to the Soviet Government; and, in paricular, what plans, if any, the Government have for promoting increased trade with Russia?

I have nothing to add to the full statement made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in the course of the Debate on the Address on 15th December last. Any trade that is possible under existing conditions can be done under the Trade Agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is within the powers or sphere of duty of the British High Commissioner in Egypt to give or tender advice to the Egyptian Government relating to matters of electoral reform in Egypt?

The Egyptian Government have not sought Lord Allenby's advice on this subject. Had they done so, there is nothing in his instructions to prevent him from complying with such a request if he himself thought it desirable to do so.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the Egyptian Government are altering the electoral law before the election takes place caused by the recent dissolution; and whether the British Commissioner has any instructions to express any views on the matter?

From such information as I possess it would appear that the intention of the Egyptian Government is as stated in the first part of the question. The answer to the second part is in the negative.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the dependence of the service of certain British loans upon Egyptian revenues, he can say if the voting of supplies by the Egyptian Parliament is an essential preliminary to the payment of interest on these loans?

I presume that the right hon. and gallant Member refers to the Ottoman loans secured upon the Egyptian Tribute. I regret that I am unable to reply upon a point of Egyptian constitutional procedure which is exclusively within the competence of the Egyptian Government.

Is it not advisable from the point of view of this country that we should know whether we can get interest paid on that loan as it used to be paid, and is it not the duty of the Government to find out whether that money can be voted without the Egyptian Parliament being called together to vote it?

That seems to me a very argumentative question. Perhaps it had better be reserved to the Debate.

Is that amount deposited with the National Bank of Egypt?

On that subject I answered a question yesterday or a couple of days ago.

But the amount?

I have not the amount.

May I put my question in a less controversial way. Do the Government intend to make inquiries from the Egyptian Government as to whether that money can be paid without the Egyptian Parliament being called together?

I have no present intention of making any such inquiry.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the question of the execution of the clause of the Franco-Turkish Treaty providing for the rectification of the frontier of Northern Syria came before the Council of the League of Nations at its recent sitting; and, if so, what attitude was adopted on behalf of His Majesty's Government with regard to it?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative; the second part, therefore, does not arise.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any understanding was reached at Geneva that the appointment of M. Rault as president of the Saar Commission should terminate at the end of this year of office?

The appointment was for a year only. It will be for the Council, which meets in March, 1926, to decide what is then to be done.

In view of the very strong feeling that has been aroused by this appointment, if there is any condition laid down in connection with it could not that be stated to the House?

I do not accept the hon. Member's premise. This appointment is in the terms of the Treaty to be made for one year, and a new appointment is to be made a year hence by the Council of that day. Because I happened to be a member of the last Council I am not entitled to say what the next Council will do.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recollect that only five weeks ago he took the opposite attitude and gave an opinion as to what should be done on this matter without consulting the Council?

No, I then said what my attitude would be at the Council meeting which I was going to attend, which is quite a different thing.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the British Government's share of the International Labour Organisation at Geneva is this year assessed at £30,000; what are the arrangements under which this country is called upon for this amount; and, in view of the small benefits accrued to this country by this expenditure, will he take steps to have it reduced in future years?

As the answer is somewhat long, I will, with my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that £30,000 is a very considerable increase on previous years; and will he make every effort to stop this amount increasing and to limit the expenditure in future?

I may say that we are taking all the natural steps to achieve economy in these circumstances as in others. My only reason for circulat ing the answer is that it extends to four pages of manuscript, which I think the House would not wish me to read.

Does the Minister agree that "small benefits have accrued to this country" in this respect? Is it not of enormous advantage to a country like ours that other countries should make arrangements with us to raise the social standing of the people?

Is the United States in this organisation?

asked the Minister of Labour when and under what conditions the sum of £4,000 was promised as a British gift to take the form of embellishment, or furnishing of a prominent part of the building of the new International Labour Office at Geneva; and whether the Government intend to ratify this promise?

At the 14th sitting of the International Labour Conference (on the 1st July, 1924) the hon. Member for West Houghton, British Government Delegate, formally announced that the Government intended to recommend to Parliament the approval of the expenditure of a sum not exceeding £4,000 as a gift to the new building for the International Labour Office. The precise form which the gift should take has not been definitely determined, but it is proposed that it shall be utilised for the decoration and furnishing of the room in which the governing body of the International Labour Office will hold its meetings. The answer to the second part of my hon. and gallant Friend's question is in the affirmative.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with the policy of his predecessor in making a gift of £4,000 for a building in a foreign country when the money could be used more profitably for the unemployed of this country?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether naval exercises have taken place recently in the waters commanding the route between Marseilles and Toulon, on the one hand, and the French Colonies of Northern Africa, on the other; and, if so, will he inform the House the purpose of such exercises;

(2) whether man œuvres, or naval exercises, have recently taken place or are contemplated off Majorca; and, if so, has use been, or will be, made of Spanish ports and harbours?

Combined exercises, forming part of the normal Fleet training and exercises of the Atlantic and Mediterranean Fleets, were carried out between Gibraltar and Malta on the 11th to 14th March, and in the vicinity of Majorca on the 17th and 18th March. Use was made of the harbours of Pollenza and Palma, in Majorca, with the sanction of the Spanish Government. These exercises are similar to those which have been carried out from time to time for the past 20 years, and are necessary to maintain the efficiency of the Fleet.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether it is proposed that the projected marriage allowance to officers in the Royal Navy shall be retrospective?

regret I am not yet in a position to mane any statement.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake that they shall be retrospective from the date on which they were included in the Navy Estimates?

That, I understand, will be the case.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware of the stagnation in promotion in the shipwright branch of the Loyal Navy and that there are men in this branch who have passed for the rating of chief shipwright for a period of from nine to 10 years, and who have 18 years' service as shipwrights; and whether he would be prepared to consider a scheme whereby shipwrights who have passed for chief shipwrights for a period of six years or over, and who are well advanced on the road to pension, shall be made chief shipwrights?

I have no reason to think that the facts stated in the first part of the question are otherwise than correct, but the hon. Member will appre ciate that the Regulations provide for the advancement of shipwrights to the fourth, third, second and first classes, and that many of the most promising of the shipwrights are advanced direct to warrant and commissioned rank without becoming chief shipwright at all. I regret that the proposal contained in the last part of the question would not be practicable.

asked the First Lord of the. Admiralty whether he is aware that, under the war-time separation rules which were operative until the end of September, 1920, an allowance was payable in respect of a woman's illegitimate child provided that a seaman who married her was prepared to maintain the child as a member of his household, whereas the Regulations have now been amended and grants for illegitimate children have been discontinued, except in those cases where the seaman subsequently marries the mother of his own child; and whether, seeing that many mothers of illegitimate children have married seamen under the old Regulations, and on the understanding that their children would be maintained by virtue of these Regulations, he can see his way to fulfil the terms of the contract which they understood themselves to be entering into in those cases where the marriage took place before the said Regulations were amended?

I am aware of the Regulations referred to in the first part of the question. Navy separation allowance, however, was definitely stated to be purely a War measure and, consequently, no vested rights exist to the continuance of allowances then paid for illegitimate children. The permanent marriage allowance—which replaced the separation allowance in October, 1920, covers payment for those illegitimate children only whose parents subsequently marry each other, and I regret that I am unable to recommend any extension of this Regulation on the plea of a contract which did not exist.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many women got married under the belief that this was a contract and that their children would be maintained: and they are now destitute?

That may be so, but it was not a contract.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many of the German warships have been raised at Scapa Flow; and if they are broken up in British yards?

Eleven destroyers already raised are being, or will be, broken up in British yards.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty when it is proposed to set up an independent tribunal to whom naval invalided ratings may appeal against the decisions of naval surgeons as to non-attributability or degree of disablement?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to my reply of the 15th December last.

Has there been no change since then? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, notwithstanding the courtesy of the Admiralty and the professional knowledge of the naval surgeons, there is still a very strong desire for such a tribunal?

The feeling may no doubt exist; but on grounds of economy I do not think the setting up of an expensive tribunal would be justified in view of the small number of cases involved.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will amend the scales of disability pensions in attributable cases, shown in reply to General Request No. 15 of the 1919 Welfare Requests, to pension earned to date for all naval ratings with over 15 years service on being invalided, observing that the pension for service is much less in the case of a rating whose disability is attributable to service than the pension for service of a rating whose invaliding disability is not attributable to service?

The present scales of disability pensions in attributable cases were determined after very careful consideration, and I regret that I am unable to recommend any modification of them. As regards the latter part of the question, the pension for service in the case of a rating whose disability is attributable is less than that of a rating with the same period of service where disability is not attributable only in cases where the disablement element of the pension is greater than that of the service element.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will send to members of rota committees all information such as is given to officials of Employment Exchanges?

Memoranda, are issued to rota committees and to other committees on all matters which come before them. Instructions have also naturally to be issued to officers of the Department on matters which never come before committees. To issue such instructions to rota committees would not assist them in their work and would add materially to the cost of administration.

In certain cases which come before the committee they have not got all the Circulars which are sent to the officials of the Exchanges, and they have not got the complete evidence on which to come to a just decision.

In matters which affect the work of the committee the rule is that they get all these Circulars, but a large number of them deal with staff matters and purely technical questions and questions which have to be dealt with from a purely technical point of view. These are the cases to which I refer, in which it would not be worth while to send the Circulars to the committee.

Does the right hon. Gentleman suggest that the committee are not dealing with technical matters They are asked by the Ministry of Labour to deal technically with these cases. Why should they be denied this evidence?

The hon. Gentleman misunderstands me. All those Circulars which could in any way affect the work of the committee are sent. I think that I could satisfy the hon. Gentleman if he would let me know the eases which he has in mind. The Circulars which are not sent are those which would not be of any assistance in carrying out the work.

asked the Minister of Labour how many unemployed have been refused unemployed benefit at the Walworth Road Employment Exchange during January and February, 1925, owing to the fact that they have failed to qualify for such benefit owing to the new Regulations increasing the number of stamps required; and how many have been disallowed benefit since the new Regulations were introduced?

The condition referred to by the hon. and gallant Member did not take effect until 19th February, 1925. Between that date and 16th March the number of applicants refused benefit at the Borough Exchange on account of the new condition was 18.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he has received from the Nottingham Board of Guardians a copy of a resolution passed by them on 24th March, asking him to suspend the recent Memorandum which deprived a large number of people of unemployment benefit and caused an increase in the number of applicants for Poor Law relief; and is he now prepared to favourably consider withdrawing the Circular or Memorandum complained of?

I have received the resolution referred to. This matter was fully discussed in the Debate on 9th March, and for reasons which I then gave, I am afraid I cannot relax the requirement referred to.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that, in view of the general feeling throughout the country, especially as expressed by boards of guardians, this is a new circumstance that might lead him to reconsider the Circular?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Labour what has been the incidence of his recent regulation regarding the number of contributions which a claimant for unemployment benefit must have to his credit in London and the surrounding districts?

The total number disqualified in Greater London up to 23rd March was 632.

Is the Minister aware that the hon. Member for Silvertown (Mr. J. Jones), on repeated occasions in this House, has stated that at least 1,000 people have been thrown on the board of guardians in the West Ham area owing to this regulation, and can he explain the discrepancy in the figures?

The West Ham union.

That does not now arise.

On a point of Order. Is it not customary before an hon. Member makes an attack on another hon. Member that he should give notice to that other hon. Member?

There is no attack.

That is the rule about us. Of course, they are gentlemen.

That is one of the reasons why I interfered with the Supplementary Question.

asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been called to the fact that men in receipt of unemployment benefit become ineligible for such benefit after working as casual agricultural labourers; and will he, in view of the hardship that this causes to those men who are anxious to find work of any kind and of the serious shortage of casual labour which this causes in many agricultural areas, consider an amendment of the existing Regulations?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply given to the hon. Member for Louth on 4th March, of which I am sending him a copy. I should perhaps add that this matter is governed by Statute, and not by Departmental Regulations.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) how many persons were removed from the unemployment registers through death in the years ending December, 1921, 1922, 1923 and 1924, respectively;

(2) how many persons were temporarily taken off the unemployment registers through sickness in the years ending December, 1921, 1922, 1923 and 1924, respectively?

No statistics are available showing the number of persons removed from the registers of Employment Exchanges through death or sickness.

May I point out that one of my questions deals with removals through death, and the other with temporary removals in consequence of sickness. Does the right hon. Gentleman wish to convey to the House that no statistics are kept at the Exchanges showing the reasons for removal from the registers of unemployment?

No. All I mean is that the information is tabulated in different ways, and so far as I know there would have to be a tabulation going through all the different records. There are not at present tables with regard to such a case as the temporary removal for sickness.

The right hon. Gentleman is confusing in his answer the two questions. The first asks the number removed through death. There can be only one way of registering that removal. The second question is as to the number of temporary removals through sickness. Surely there are some means of measuring this.

The hon. Member had better repeat the question in another form.

asked the Minister of Labour what action, if any, he will take against any firm of employers that makes a false declaration regarding the conduct or reason for dismissal of any person from employment and thus deprive him of or delay payment of benefit?

I presume the hon. Member refers to the procedure for ascertaining the reasons why a claimant's last employment was terminated. Under this procedure the claimant is given an opportunity of furnishing his is taken into account in arriving at a observations on the statement by his last employer, and any explanation he offers

asked the Minister of Labour whether he can supply the figures for unemployment in America during the years 1919, 1920, 1921, 1922, 1923, and 1924, respectively?

There are no official statistics of unemployment for the United States. The United States Federal Bureau of Labour Statistics have, however, recently published a table of index numbers showing the fluctuations in the volume of employment in the manufacturing industries of the United States in each of the years to which the hon. Member refers. I am circulating this table in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman for a reply to my question? Is he prepared to take any action against an employer who makes a false statement? If such a false statement is made to the Ministry of Labour, a man's benefit is stopped or delayed until inquiry has been made. I ask the right hon. Gentleman, is he prepared to take action against such employers in a similar way as he takes action against a workman for a false statement?

I am not aware that it is in my power to take action on a false statement of that kind. I will consider the matter further and speak to the hon. Gentleman about it if he wishes. On the other hand, if a person makes a false statement in obtaining benefit he is obtaining money under false pretences. That is a different thing.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that while the claimant for benefit takes money from the State, an employer by making a false statement takes money from working people, and is it a greater crime to rob the State than to rob working people?

Is my right hon. Friend also aware that the majority of these false statements made by employers are in favour of the man who is going to draw his insurance benefit?

I am not concerned with that. It is always open to the man himself in that case to take action as far as I know.

May I pursue this matter? Information of a false statement is very seldom shown to the man under the employer's signature, and, therefore, until he has received that he can take no further action.

If the hon. Gentleman will refer to me cases I will gladly consider them or discuss them with him. I can assure him that all I want is to see that fair treatment is meted out to all.

I beg to give notice, that at the first opportunity I intend to raise this question on the Adjournment.

Arising out of this question. [Interruption.] This is an important statement, and—

Notice has been given that there will be an opportunity to raise the matter.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that a firm in Glasgow recently dismissed a number of pattern makers from their employment; that insurance benefit was refused to the men owing to the firm informing local exchange officials that the dismissal was due to the action of the pattern makers' association in placing a ban on overtime; that the secretary of the Employers' Federation, of which the firm is a member, informed the said association that the reason for dismissal was clue to the work being completed in the usual way, and the firm has since amended the original notice and certain men have received benefit, but two have not yet been paid; and what action is proposed to be taken to secure payment and also compensate the men for the delay in being paid?

Doubt arose as to the eligibility of these pattern makers for benefit, owing to the wording of the statement made by the employers as to the reason for discharge. Benefit was not allowed, but the cases were referred to the chief insurance officer, who, on the full information before him, allowed the claims. The men's association, through which they had claimed were informed of the allowance and benefit should by now, have been paid by the association.

In view of the fact that this firm made a statement which was wrong about the men and that the men have been denied payment of benefit, for five weeks in one case, is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to say that he will take any steps to see that the men are compensated for that terrible delay of five weeks?

I will look into the matter.

asked the Minister of Labour what is the amount of unemployment benefit to which a married man with two children would be entitled in a week in which he only did three days' work, and what benefit he would receive if he did four days' work; and whether the present scale of benefits is such as to make it to the advantage of, for instance, a miner to do only three days' work a week?

Before this question is answered I would draw attention to the last line which states that the present scale of benefits is such as to make it to the advantage of a miner to do only three days' work a week instead of four days' work. The miners have no control whatever over the time they work, and this part of the question is a direct insult to the miners of the country.

I think that what the hon. Member has said is enough to show that they have no control.

No control whatever.

Assuming that a waiting period of three days had been served within the preceding six week, a married man with two children would be entitled to 13s. 6d, benefit in a week in which he did only three days' work; if he worked four days he would not be entitled to any benefit unless he was unemployed on subsequent days so as to have three days of unemployment within six consecutive working days. This is one of the marginal cases which inevitably arise as a consequence of a waiting period and a continuity rule. It has not so far been found possible to devise any means of avoiding the anomaly indicated without creating as great or greater anomalies in its place. As regards the last part of the question, I would point out that a miner would disqualify himself for benefit by refusing to work on any day, on which the pit was open to him.

Arising out of the answer of the right hon. Gentleman—[Interruption.]

Apologise for this insult.

You do not like it.

It is a base lie; yes, a black lie. Apologise and play the game! The miner does not deserve this.

Go into the mine yourself. Go down a pit yourself.

Will hon. Members please allow me? The two hon. Members by the Gangway (Lieut.-Colonel Watts-Morgan and Sir F. Hall) must not address one another in that way. I saw what was going on.

On a point of Order. Is one hon. Member entitled to call another hon. Member a liar in this House, and, if so is not the other Member entitled to justify his position? I always shall; I do not allow anyone to call me a liar.

That is exactly what I was reproving. Hon. Members must not address one another across the Gangway in that way. I do not attribute particular blame to the one or to the other.

I will not allow anyone to call me a liar.

I did not call the hon. Member a liar. I asked him to apologise, and said that the last part of his question was a lie.

That shows the wisdom of the ancient rule that everything should be addressed to me.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the Employment Exchange building at Stafford has been condemned; and whether, seeing that suitable premises have been offered by the local co-operative society and that these premises afford sufficient accommodation for the waiting men who at present have to line up outside in all kinds of weather, he will say why the offer of these premises has been refused?

The need for providing better accommodation in this case has been recognised for some time. The premises offered by the local co-operative society, known as the Old Bakery, were unfortunately not in a suitable position. Proposals are now under consideration for acquiring a site and erecting a building designed specially for the Employment Exchange service. In the meantime, it is hoped that the arrangements made whereby applicants are asked to attend at scheduled times will make it unnecessary for them to congregate outside the building.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that on 11th February last about 50 women and girls were offered work at the St. Martin's Jam Factory, on the Slough trading estate, at a wage of 6¾d. per hour for a 47-hour week, with bonus of 9d. to Is. per day on output; that on presenting themselves at the factory they discovered that no bonus was payable, and that the maximum weekly wage was about 20s. on account of travelling expenses by rail from Reading, and other deductions; that acceptance of those conditions involved the women and girls in having to leave Reading station at 7.15 a.m., returning at 8.50 p.m.; that the refusal of the workers concerned to accept such conditions has resulted in their being refused unemployment benefit; and what action he proposes to take?

I am making inquiries regarding the cases referred to, and will communicate the result to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the court of referees recently disqualified a young woman at Reading for the receipt of unemployment benefit on account of her inability to accept the offer of work in a canteen at Aldershot; if he is aware that the woman in question stated as her reason for desiring employment in the Beading district that she was the guardian of her aged mother and an invalid sister; if he is aware that, while she was neither pressed to accept work at Aldershot nor refused to do so, her representations were regarded as reasons for disqualifying her for a period of six weeks; and if the case can be reconsidered and benefit allowed?

If the hon. Member will give me full particulars regarding the case referred to, I will make inquiries and will communicate the result to him as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in view of the fact that the present restrictions upon the entry of aliens have been imposed on account of prevailing unemployment, he will state the grounds upon which permits are being issued for the entry of alien bands and musicians at a, time when many British musicians are out of employment?

Permits for alien musicians are only issued after careful consideration and are given for limited periods, generally for eight weeks in the first instance. It is normally made, a condition in the case of alien bands that the employer shall increase the number of British musicians employed by him, e.g., by engaging a British band of equal size. Permits for individual musicians are, in general, issued only for specialists and artistes of international reputation. Most of the permits are for London, where, according to my information, unemployment among musicians of this type is in no way serious.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on 5th March an arrangement was come to by the Ministry of Labour giving permission to two bands to enter for the purpose of playing at a club and at a West End cinema respectively on the express condition that British musicians there engaged should not be reduced in number or have their wages reduced, and that a band of 30 British musicians was reduced to 18 as soon an the permit had been granted?

Is it not true that the musicians in this country have a trade union which keeps women musicians out of the orchestras?

As regards the supplementary question of the hon. and gallant Member for Central Southwark (Colonel Day), I think the stipulation I made was a perfectly right and proper one, and if he has any reason to believe that it has not been observed I hope he will communicate the facts to me.

As the last three Governments always communicated with the Musicians' Union before permits were granted, will the right hon. Gentleman do the same, the Musicians' Union being the only body which can see that these arrangements are carried out?

Has the attention of the Minister of Labour been called to the proposed visit, of a party of discordant vocalists from Moscow?

asked the Minister of Labour how many partially incapacitated men are receiving unemployment pay who should be dealt with by employers under Section 16 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923; and whether any of these cases have been inquired into, and, if so, with what result?

I have not the figures asked for, and I am afraid that it would be impracticable to obtain them. Every applicant for benefit has to prove that he is capable of and available for work, and if he fails to satisfy this condition, benefit is not allowed.

Is the Minister not aware that under Section 16 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, when an individual who is partially incapacitated fails to obtain work, compensation money should be paid, but these men are receiving out-of-work pay instead of compensation?

I can assure the hon. Member that I have studied very carefully the Section of the Act in question. I think what the hon. Member has in mind is that the Unemployment Fund may be carrying a certain number of men who should be employed by the employers. Provided the men are capable of working and fulfil the other conditions for benefit, I cannot prevent them from getting benefit. The initiative under Section 16 of the Act, to which the hon. Member refers, really lies with the workers and not with me.

Is the Minister not aware that if these men are entitled to unemployment pay, they were previously entitled to compensation, and that employers are taking undue advantage of the Unemployment Fund to get away from their responsibilities, and will he undertake to examine some of the cases?

I am not sure that we can necessarily draw that conclusion. If the hon. Member wishes to discuss the matter with me afterwards, I shall be very glad to do so.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in connection with claims for dependants' benefit in respect of a widowed mother, he is aware that in cases where there is another son in employment, and partly responsible for her maintenance, the claim is not allowed; and whether such claims are disallowed on the ground that a claim can only be made if the widowed mother is maintained wholly or mainly by the claimant?

The Unemployment Insurance (No. 2) Act, 1924, expressly provides that dependants' benefit in respect of a widowed mother is only payable if she is living with the claimant and is wholly or mainly maintained by him. Accordingly the claimant must show among other things that whilst in employment he is reponsible for more than half the cost of the mother's maintenance.

asked the Minister of Health how many registered bricklayers and plasterers are on the unemployed register at present?

I have been asked to reply. At 23rd February the latest date for which figures are available, there were 1,016 bricklayers and 379 plasterers registered as unemployed at Employment Exchanges in Great Britain.

asked the Minister of Labour how many workers are employed in the various industries where the normal working week is 48 hours or less; and how many workers normally work more than 48 hours per week?