asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the British delegate to the Peking Tariff Conference was instructed to state that the British Government intend to respect the sovereign right of China to tariff autonomy: whether any additional instructions have been given to the British delegation since his letter of instructions of 18th September last; and whether he will publish those instructions?

On the 3rd November the British delegation, with the approval of His Majesty's Government, formally declared their willingness to submit to the ratification of their Government such measures as might be desired and agreed upon at the Conference with a view to ensuring within a reasonable period the full realisation of China's claim to complete liberty of action in matters relating to her tariff, and on the 19th November the Conference adopted a resolution in the following terms:

"The delegates of Powers assembled at this conference resolve to adopt the following article relating to tariff autonomy with a view to incorporating it, together with other matters to be hereafter agreed upon, in a treaty which is to be signed at this conference:

" 'The contracting Powers other than China hereby recognise China's right to enjoy tariff autonomy; agree to remove tariff restrictions which are contained in existing treaties between themselves respectively and China; and consent to the going into effect of Chinese national tariff law on 1st January, 1929.

" 'The Government of the Republic of China declares that li-kin duties shall be abolished simultaneously with the enforcement of Chinese national tariff law; and further declares that the abolition of li-kin duties shall be effectively carried out by 1st day of first month of 18th year of Republic of China (1st January, 1929).' "

No further general instructions have been issued to the British delegation since their departure on the 19th September, but His Majesty's Government have been in frequent telegraphic communication with them and have from time to time sent instructions on specific points as occasion has demanded. I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by publishing such instructions.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information as to the extent to which the recent military developments in China have thrown difficulties in the way of the successful conclusion of the Customs Tariff Conference at Peking?

The new crisis in China is, I understand, somewhat impeding the progress of the Conference, but negotiations are still proceeding. How the latest developments will affect the final issue of the conference I am, of course, quite unable to foresee.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when the Report of the recent judicial inquiry into the Shanghai disturbances will be available for publication?

The diplomatic body has now approved of the publication of the Reports, which may be expected to take place in the near future.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can give the House any information as to the result of the negotiations which have recently taken place in the cessation of the Canton boycott of British goods, and particularly of British trade from Hong Kong?

The discussions to which my hon. Friend refers have been purely unofficial and have been conducted by representatives of the Chinese merchants in Hong Kong on the one hand, and of the strike committee in Canton on the other. I understand that these discussions are still proceeding, and I am not able to say whether any progress has been made towards the re-establishment of friendly relations between Hong Kong and Canton.

Is there nothing the hon. Gentleman's Department can do to assist in bringing those negotiations to a successful issue?

As I have said, these are unofficial negotiations, and I think that at the present stage it would be far more likely to result in good if they were left in that form.

IS it not a fact that these negotiations have resulted in a deadlock?

That is not my information to date.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether this boycott has succeeded in damaging British trade to any considerable extent?

Oh, yes. This boycott has damaged the trade very much, and caused grave anxiety to the Government of Hong Kong.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can make any statement to this House with regard to the proceedings of the preparatory Commission on Disarmament now sitting at Geneva?

As the hon. Gentleman is probably aware, the British Representative on the preparatory Commission was the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster who only returned last night. My right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, is still in Geneva, In these circumstances the hon. Gentleman will realise that I am not yet in a position to make such a statement as he desires.

Can the Undersecretary say whether, in view of the fact that we shall not be assembling again for six weeks, the Foreign Office will issue any Report on this matter in the meantime?

If the hon. Member will allow me, I will have a talk with Lord Cecil and consider the point.

asked the Minister of Labour whether it is the practice for officials of the International Labour Office to attend and take part in meetings of the Trades Union Congress in this country; and whether the expenditure thereby incurred is included in the accounts of the expenditure of the International Labour Office to which this country contributes?

(Sir Arthur Steel-Maitland): Officials of the International Labour Office have from time to time attended meetings of the Trades Union Congress as observers. Their expenses for such attendance fall on the ordinary budget of the Office.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he agrees that it is a correct proceeding that these non-party officials should take part in a political organisation representing a particular body of opinion while they are employed by a body to which the Government subscribe?

I think generally the more knowledge the officials have the better it is, subject to the ordinary rules of economy.

I was not referring to economy, but to the political aspect.

Does not the effectiveness of this organisation depend almost entirely on the officers of the organisation keeping in touch with Governments, employers and workpeople's associations?

That is the effect of the supplementary answer which I have already given.

asked the Minister of Labour the total expenses incurred by the following groups of British delegates and advisers attending at the Seventh Session of the International Labour Conference, May-June, 1925, giving figures for Government delegates and advisers, employers' delegates and advisers, and workpeople's delegates and advisers, separately?

The total expenses paid out of public funds in connection with the Seventh Session of the International Labour Conference, May-June, 1925, amounted to £1,435 7s. 6d. Details of this expenditure are as follow:

	£.	s.	d.
Government Delegates and Advisers	637	2	1
Employers' Delegates and Advisers	295	5	5
Workpeople's Delegates and Advisers	358	1	3
Other expenses including hire of office and Conference Rooms, sundry expenses and entertainment expenses	144	18	9

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether that is an economy over last year?

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that, from an international point of view, this is money well spent?

asked the Minister of Labour the amount of remuneration of the Director of the International Labour Office, Geneva; whether any further sum is paid to him by way of allowance for travelling or entertainment expenses; if so, what is the amount, and whether any account is rendered by them of such expenses; and whether he will state what is the period of the appointment of the director and, when the period terminates, who appoints the director for the next period?

The remuneration of the Director of the International Labour Office is 90,000 Swiss francs a year. He receives, in addition, an entertainment allowance of 30,000 Swiss francs a year, of which an account is not rendered, and payment of travelling expenses (including an allowance for subsistence) on the authorised scale. He was appointed by the Governing Body on the 1st January, 1920, and the appointment will, according to my information, come up for reconsideration on the 1st January, 1927.

Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to support the re-election of a director who has shown himself so partial to all Socialist propensities?

Withdraw!

Is it not right to say that in every way this official is proving a satisfactory and loyal officer?

Is the Prime Minister taking note of the continued attacks made on this body by his own supporters?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will lay upon the Table a White Paper setting out the terms of the Agreement between His Majesty's Government and the French Government in reference to policy in the Near East?

There is no formal or written Agreement between the French Government and His Majesty's Government in regard to policy in the Near East, and consequently no material for a White Paper. But, as stated by my right hon. Friend in this House on the 25th November, it is the common policy of both Governments to extend their friendly relationship and close cooperation to all questions in winch they have a common interest, and this naturally applies to the Near East as much as elsewhere.

In the course of the conversations with M. de Jouvenel, were any undertakings entered into on behalf of the British Government?

There was a communiqué issued to the Press with the consent of M. de Jouvenel, and it would be improper, I think, to add to that communiqué without communicating with him.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what arrangements have been made for the taking of cinematograph pictures to be used for public exhibition on board His Majesty's ships; to how many firms has this privilege been given; whether any system of payment, rent, or royalties has been arranged for this privilege; and what are the sums involved?

Arrangements have been made on various occasions during the last six years for the filming of certain events of naval and historical interest, such as the tours of His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales in His Majesty's ships "Renown'' and "Repulse," and the Empire cruise, subject to some payment or share of profits being made by the firm concerned. Facilities have also been afforded by the Admiralty on application for the production of certain other films of naval interest. When this business was first proposed it was found very difficult to obtain tenders from producers, but since certain films have achieved success more firms appear anxious to concern themselves with the production of this type of film.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer the question on the Paper, as to how many firms have had this privilege given them at the present moment?

If the hon. and gallant Member will read my answer, he will see that these matters are dealt with therein.

I really want an answer to a question which has been on the Paper for weeks. We are told that some share of the profits has been paid. What amount has been received?

The hon. and gallant Member must realise, I think, that all matters connected with contract prices are treated as confidential.

I really must protest. I really think that this is a case of refusing information, and I am entitled to ask—

The hon. and gallant Member is entitled to put the question down again.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether all the Admiralty contracts have to be put before the technical adviser before they are accepted?

No. That is not so.

What arrangement is made for the disposal of the foreign rights?

I should want notice of that question.

Is it not a fact that some firms have, for educational purposes, taken a considerable monetary risk in producing these films which other firms would not take until they saw they were a success?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the labour supply of plantations in the vicinity of the Singapore naval base is being greatly depleted owing to Government competition; and whether he is prepared to adopt the suggestion of the Planters' Association of Malaya that the Imperial Government should recruit its own labour for the new naval base or utilise the local Government's recruiting officer to obtain labour from India?

I have been in telegraphic communication with Singapore on this matter, and am advised that the present needs for labour at the naval base are not enough to have any great effect on the general labour position in the Colony, where the present prosperity of the rubber and tin industries is creating large demands for employment. Our officers on the spot are working in association with the officers of the local Government in this matter, and will continue to do so.

Will the hon. Gentleman keep in mind that the labour for the purpose they require is best recruited from the Northern Provinces of India as against the Southern?

I will take note of that.

Does that mean that the rubber growers' new demand for labour is sending up wages?

Is there an arrangement between the local contractors, who are acting for the Admiralty, and the planters, not to pay wages higher than the local wage rates?

I must have notice of that question also.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to reduce the dockyards at Chatham or Sheerness, or both, to a care and maintenance basis?

The immediate intention of the Admiralty is confined to reducing Rosyth and Pembroke, as stated in the Admiralty Press announcement of 4th September, 1925. It is anticipated, however, that a further reduction of the amount of repair and reconstruction work of the Fleet will take place gradually during the next two or three years, in which case it will be necessary to review the situation afresh.

Is it the considered opinion of the Admiralty that it is very necessary to maintain four dockyards in Southern home waters for the benefit of six capital ships and one cruiser squadron?

As I am at present advised, I have nothing to add to the answer.

Will the Government see that greater notice is given before these yards are closed, so that private firms may have an opportunity of tendering, and so that men may not be thrown out of work?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that under the recent Admiralty reductions of pay for the Royal Navy Shore Signal Service, petty officers now transferring from the Royal Navy to this branch receive 1s. per day less than those men already in the Shore Signal Service; and whether, in view of the fact that those petty officers are all fully qualified and trained men, they will be paid the same scale as that laid down in Admiralty Fleet Order 1689/25?

The hon. Member is, I think, under a misapprehension. Petty officers do not transfer from the Royal Navy to petty officer (Shore Signal Service). The Royal Navy Shore Signal Service is recruited from pensioner signal ratings who enter as signalman (Shore Signal Service).

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will publish the evidence taken by the Goodenough Committee on the subject of marriage allowance for naval officers?

The answer is in the negative.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the very great feeling expressed, owing to the suppression of this Report, because it is believed that the Report was favourable to the claims?

I am afraid that the Report was made to the Board of Admiralty, and is confidential.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty when it is proposed to begin bringing men from Rosyth and Pembroke to the southern yards; and what arrangements have been made for the housing of these men in Devonport?

The transfers have commenced, and will be continued as the men become redundant at Rosyth and Pembroke Dock; the men transferred will make their own housing arrangements; married men maintaining homes for their families will receive financial assistance on account of the expenses they will incur by having to make temporary arrangements until they can re-establish their homes in the South.

What has the Admiralty done to fulfill its promise to make arrangements for housing? Why should the men have to make their own housing arrangements?

The whole question of housing in southern ports is now being carefully considered.

Why was it not considered before the men were moved?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the cost per cadet for education at Dartmouth, including nautical training, and the average fees paid per cadet for the year 1924–25?

The cost of training a cadet at Dartmouth and the average fee paid per cadet for the year 1924–25 were £314 and £106 respectively. The corresponding figures for the current year are, approximately, £285 and £125.

Will the hon. Gentleman tell us how many children from elementary schools are on their way to this educational institution?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, seeing that the Fleet Order, issued on 21st November, deprives engineer officers of military status as part of the combatant personnel of the Fleet and that, as they are in control of approximately 40 per cent. of the ship's company, it is essential that they should have military status and not be regarded as non-combatants, he will consider whether, if the wearing of distinctive stripes, as worn by the medical, accountant find other non-combatant branches, gives rise to the belief that engineers are to be similarly regarded as non-combatant, the alteration of the uniform of executive officers by the addition of similar distinctive stripes would be advisable?

I am unable to accept my hon. Friend's argument, which is based on an erroneous use of terms. Every officer of the Royal Navy has a military status, and all officers of the Royal Navy, except medical officers and chaplains, are combatant officers. The Fleet Order has made no change in the position of engineer officers in these respects, nor in the command which the engineer officer has over his subordinates appointed or detailed for duty in his department or placed under his orders. The distinction in uniform is, as my right hon. Friend explained in reply to a previous question, purely a matter of practical convenience, and does not imply inferiority in any shape or form.

If it be necessary to differentiate in the uniform of these officers who specialise in engineering, why is it not necessary to have a differentiation in the uniform of those officers who specialise in other branches such as gunnery, submarines, navigation, physical training, and other such services?

Is it not a fact that these officers have a distinctive uniform?

That is so. In answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Barnstaple (Mr. B. Peto), the number of officers in the engineering branch cannot be compared with the number in special branches.

Does the hon. Gentleman anticipate that this order will affect adversely the number of cadets who volunteer for engineering?

I do not think so.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affaire whether, as a result of the recent Conference held at Prague, arrangements have been made to resume payments in respect of the British-held pre-War Hungarian debt?

I have no information beyond that contained in the summary of the agreement reached at Prague, which was published in the Press on the 25th November.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if any British national whose personal belongings were commandeered in 1917 has received any compensation of any kind from the Russian Government; and if any commercial firms have received any compensation for confiscated property?

I have been asked to reply. I understand that new concessions have been granted to several British companies which formerly held properties in Russia, but I am not aware how far a settlement of the claims of the firms in question may or may not be included in the new contracts. Apart from such cases, I am not aware that any British subjects or companies have received compensation for commandeered or confiscated property.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he has yet effected any economies in the administration of his Department which will result in decreased Estimates for the coming year?

The Departmental staffs are all being carefully reviewed, and reduced where possible, and I certainly hope that the result will be seen in a reduced Admiralty establishment during next year. But I should like to make it quite clear to the hon. Member that the immediate result of the large schemes of reduction in naval expenditure on which we are at work is to throw heavy additional work on the Department for the time being, and thus to postpone the date at which reductions of staff become effective.

Why did the Admiralty tell us when they presented their Estimates that they were cut to the bone?

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is now in a position to state what economies he has effected in the administration of his Department; and whether such economies will result in decreased Estimates for the coming year?

I am considering the matter in conjunction with the Cabinet Committee on Economy. While I cannot anticipate the details to be published in due course in the Estimates, I can assure the hon. and gallant Member that I am neglecting no opportunity to effect such economies as may be compatible with the efficient discharge of the business of my Department.

May we expect increased Estimates next year?

That depends entirely upon the course of trade. There is no doubt, as the hon. and gallant Gentleman will be well aware, that if trade improves my Estimates are bound to go up, because the Treasury will, therefore, have to give more contributions on account of people who are in work.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is now in a position to state what economies he has effected in the administration of his Department; and whether such economies will result in decreased Estimates for the coming year?

The question of the provision to be made in the Estimates for my right hon. Friend's Department for the coming year is at present under the consideration of the Cabinet Economy Committee, and I am not yet in a position to make any statement in the matter.

Can the hon. Gentleman answer the second part of my question?

I have said that I am not in a position to make any statement.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether it is anticipated that alternative accommodation will soon be found for the office of His Majesty's Inspector of Taxes, at Imperial Hotel, Wrexham, 1st and 2nd districts, these premises being dirty, insanitary, badly heated, and ill-lighted, causing ill-health and consequent sick leave to members of the staff?

It is not proposed to provide either accommodation for the Wrexham Tax Offices until the expiry of the lease of the Imperial Hotel at Michaelmas, 1927. The necessary re-decorations are being deferred pending consideration by the Inland Revenue Department of certain minor alterations, and it is not considered that the premises are insanitary, badly heated, or ill-lighted.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether he is aware of the unsuitable nature of the building in which the staffs of the third, fourth, seventh and eighth tax districts are housed at Sheffield, both from the point of view of the staff and the public; that it has been common for elderly persons seeking interviews as to their taxation liabilities to collapse before arriving at the third or fourth floors; and whether he will arrange for more suitable accommodation?

The First Commissioner is aware that certain rooms on the third floor of the building are unsatisfactory, and schemes for improving matters are under consideration. It should not be necessary for the public to visit the fourth floor, and no complaints of distress to visitors to the third floor have been received.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that there is a very large building in course of construction now for Government telephone purposes where alternative accommodation is available, and will be consider using that for the staff in Sheffield?

Certainly I will consider that.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the present wages, including bonus, of the messengers and cleaners employed by the Admiralty, and the corresponding figures for 1914?

asked the Minister of Labour how many unemployed men, women, and juveniles in the city of Bristol were registered as unemployed during the week ending 28th November, 1925, and during the similar period last year?

At 30th November, 1925, there were on the registers of Employment Exchanges in the Bristol area, 10,818 men, 1,981 women, and 816 juveniles, as compared with 10,767

I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate a full statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of men in the City of Bristol who have applied for extended benefit during each month of this year, together with the number of cases in which benefit has been refused; and in how many cases the claims rejected were those of disabled ex-service men?

As the reply involves a number of figures, I will, with the permission of the hon. Member, circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

also asked the Minister of Labour the number of applicants in the City of Bristol who have been refused benefit during each month of the present year after a Rota committee has recommended that benefit should be granted?

The number of applications for extended benefit which were disallowed after having been recommended by the local Employment Committee at Bristol were as follow:

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware of the dissatisfaction expressed by Employment Exchange rota committees following the rejection by the authorities of claims that have been recommended by the local committees?

I am not aware of any general dissatisfaction. As the Statute places upon the Minister of Labour the responsibility for final decision in these cases, a certain number of rejections is inevitable. The number is very small, being less than one-half of 1 per cent. of the recommendations for the whole country.

Are these rejections personally considered by the Minister or by his subordinates?

That is a matter entirely for my discretion. I go through some of them myself; others are gone through by my subordinates.

How can the right hon. Gentleman exercise his discretion by transferring the responsibility to some one else to exercise theirs?

I can do it perfectly well.

You never see them. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] He said himself he did not see them.

asked the Minister of Labour the total number of persons refused extended benefit at the Stratford and Canning Town Labour Exchanges since the passing of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1925, by virtue of the discretion given to him by that Act?

During the period 25th August to 16th November, 1925, the number of cases in which extended benefit was disallowed under the provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1925, was 232 at Stratford and 246 at Canning Town.

In regard to the latter part of the question, may I ask the Minister what takes places when the Rota committee gives a man extended benefit which is afterwards disallowed by the special committee? How does the right hon. Gentleman use his discretion in a case of that sort? Does he, or someone else, examine these cases?

That does not arise on the question.

On the latter part, Sir, which did not appear to be answered?

asked the Minister of Labour how many persons have been refused unemployment benefit during the last three months; how many of them have since secured employment; how many are still on the live register; and how many have ceased to register, though not known to have secured employment?

During the period 10th August to 16th November, 1925, the number of applications for extended benefit disallowed by local employment committees in Great Britain was 175,396, and during the three months ended 31st October, 141,706 applications for benefit were disallowed by the Chief Insurance Officer. These figures do not necessarily relate to different individuals. At 16th November, 74,558 persons who had been disallowed benefit were maintaining registration at Employment Exchanges, but I cannot say how many of these had been disallowed benefit in the previous three months. I am also unable to state how many of those disallowed benefit have secured employment or have ceased to register.

In view of the discrepancy of these figures will the right hon. Gentleman consider consulting the Poor Law authorities so as to make his figures comprehensive, thus enabling him to give how many people that are receiving Poor Law relief through unemployment are not so unemployed according to the Ministry of Labour?

As a matter of fact, I am going into that very point myself at this moment. The figures are on a quite different basis at the present time. The Poor Law figures do not give the heads of families, but the whole number of the persons relieved. The matter will need a lot of consideration to see how far you can combine the total so as really to represent the case free from controversy.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that a number of Poor Law unions have available now, and publish, figures of relief?

Is it not the fact that a large number of people receiving relief are also registered as unemployed at the Exchanges?

Sometimes that is the case, but it is not 100 per cent. one way or the other.

Will the Minister lay before the House the information he obtains as to the difference in numbers?

If I can get any reliable information such as I would use myself, I shall certainly give it to the House.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) if he will investigate the circumstances attending the refusal of unemployment benefit to E. F. Bread street, 5, Weddin Street, E.15, on the ground that benefit would not be expedient in the public interest; whether he is informed that the father of this lad is a woodworker with wages of £3 a week, and that the committee considered that the lad could reasonably look to his father for support; and whether he will have such case reviewed;

(2) If he is aware that Mr. C. A. Berger, 137, Major Road, Stratford, No. 56,528, has been regularly and continuously employed as a railway worker for the past 40 years, has contributed to the National Unemployment Insurance Act since its inception, and has now been compelled to retire from the service of the London and North Eastern Railway Company owing to the operation of the 65 years of age limit; whether, notwithstanding this man's career as a genuine workman, he has been refused benefit by the insurance officer on the grounds that he is not genuinely seeking work; and whether such decision will be reconsidered?

I am having inquiries made into these cases and will let the hon. Member know the result as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been called to the position of the on-cost workers at the Parkhead Colliery of the Glasgow Iron and Steel Company, where the miners were on strike from the 27th August to the 28th October last; whether he is aware that these men were not allowed to ballot on the ground that the question concerned the miners alone; that the manager of the mine notified the Employment Exchange that they were taking no part in the dispute; that the Court of Referees granted the men's claim for benefit, but that it was disallowed by the divisional insurance officer and by the umpire; whether he will give favourable consideration to the claim of these men; and what steps he proposes to take in this matter?

My attention has been called to the cases in question. The hon. Member will be aware that I have no power under the Acts to interfere in cases decided by the umpire and, as the claims have been disallowed by him, benefit cannot be paid to the claimants in question.

Does the Prime Minister not think it is a great hardship that these men, who are compelled to remain neutral in a strike, should have no benefit whatever?

I cannot criticise, and I do not pretend to criticise, a decision of the umpire, but if there are new facts with regard to it brought forward then no doubt the umpire will reconsider the matter. As regards the men being obliged to remain neutral, no doubt it was or might have been within the knowledge of the parties to the strike that they would be affected so that the right of the ballot might have been extended to them. Of course that is a question for them to consider.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in view of the fact that over 800 applicants at Middlesbrough have been refused extended benefit within the three months ending 16th November by the local employment committee solely on the ground that the applicants had not had a reasonable period of employment during the previous two years, he will consider the relaxation of this Regulation in areas where acute trade depression has existed for a longer period than two years?

The condition referred to is a statutory Rule and I have no power to relax it. There is, however, no reason to suppose that the local employment committee at Middlesbrough are not fully cognisant of, or do not give due consideration to, the unfavourable trade conditions existing in their area.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Rota committees are giving as an explanation of these men being refused benefit the fact that they are having to work this Regulation, and cannot take this fact into consideration because they are not fully aware of it.

I think they have power to consider all the circumstances of the case. As a matter of fact, the ratio of the cases turned down is now the same within a fraction for Middlesbrough as for the whole country. So also is the ratio of cases allowed. As the applications in Middlesbrough are far more numerous than in the rest of the country, it follows that allowance is made for the depressed state of trade there.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be prepared to inform the rota committees at Middlesbrough that they can take these circumstances into consideration, and that therefore they are not rigidy bound to enforce these Regulations?

Certainly I will inform them, but they must take into consideration all the relevant circumstances.

Would it not be simpler and more effective to safeguard the industries of Middlesbrough?

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that, owing to the Unemployment Grants Committee having refused to allow the Middlesbrough Corporation to buy French cement at 39s. per ton and having compelled them to buy British cement at 50s. 2d. per ton, a heavy extra burden has been placed on Middlesbrough ratepayers; and will the Government reconsider their policy of prohibiting local authorities from buying in the cheapest market when the difference exceeds over 11s. per ton or, failing that, will they recompense such local authorities by extra grants from the Unemployment Grants Fund?

I am informed that since November, 1923, the Unemployment Grants Committee have stipulated for the use of British cement as one of the conditions of Government assistance. I see no ground for making a change of policy in this connection.

May I ask why these particular ratepayers should be called upon to subsidise the unemployed in another district, when their own unemployment is very serious?

It is only fair that whenever ratepayers in any district come to the Government for a grant from Government funds, the purpose for which it should be given should not prejudice the employment of their fellow-citizens in other parts of the country.

Is it not a fact that most of the cement factories are in the hands of combines and trusts?

Can the right hon. Gentleman state to what extent the present position of unemployment in this country is due to persons buying cheap foreign manufactures rather than British?

asked the Minister of Labour if he has received a resolution from the Abertillery Trades and Labour Council and a large meeting of Tillery miners, protesting against the action of his Department in importing men to do the work of the local Employment Exchange when there are thousands of unemployed men in Abertillery; is he aware that 15 men have been discharged from this Employment Exchange, thus further burdening the rates of this area; and will he reinstate these men in their employment?

Yes, Sir; the men in question were permanent officers of the Ministry. It was necessary, on account of the acute unemployment position, to strengthen the permanent staff at Abertillery, and as no permanent clerks were available in South Wales, men were transferred from Exchanges in other parts of the country. In regard to temporary staff, preference is invariably given to local applicants. Of 20 temporary clerks now in post, 19 are local men. Fifteen temporary clerks have been discharged during the past six months owing to a reduction in the volume of work at the Exchange. Further staff is not necessary at the moment, but if it should be required, preference will be given to local men who are ex-service men and who have had previous experience of Exchange work.

asked the Minister of Labour what progress, if any, has been made in carrying out the suggestions contained in the Report of the Estimates Committee, 1925, to transfer a number of Employment Exchanges to less obtrusive and less costly sites?

The practicability of providing alternative sites for certain Exchanges, now housed in main thoroughfares, is under examination between my Department and His Majesty's Office of Works. For reasons of economy, removal must depend on the terms of existing leases and the discovery of suitable alternative sites, and the problem can only be dealt with gradually as opportunities offer.

If the right hon. Gentleman cannot at once get rid of some of these Exchanges, perhaps he could let a portion of them after going into the local circumstances?

Quite clearly, if it is possible to let a portion of them advantageously. I shall be very willing to do it by letting or any similar method which will effect economy, while at the same time the work is being properly carried out in the interests of the men.

Are not a number of the Exchanges in East London always overcrowded, inconvenient, and not large enough, and in order to have the work done properly is it not desirable to have central sites, where, conveniently, both employers and employés can go to?

When the right hon. Gentleman is considering the plans of the new Employment Exchanges will He take into consideration the necessity of providing suitable waiting accommodation, and so doing away with the queues in cold weather?

All these points have already been considered and, so far as practicable, are being dealt with. Where there is a large crowd, they are quite carefully given the time at which they should go to the Exchange. There is, therefore, no need at all for queues. There may be an exceptional case, but in nearly every case there is no need for a queue if the people will observe the time regularly given to them. In regard to the question of the central site, it is desirable to get a position that is as get-at-able as possible and not far removed from the place. On the other hand, it is better to have the Exchange in a side street, though in a central situation, and not in the main thoroughfare. As to the. size, that, again, is a matter of commonsense. On the one hand, one wants to have such premises that people are not unduly cramped if there is a rush; on the other hand, one does not want to have premises so large that when unemployment in a given district goes down we are left with unduly big places on our hands. It is a matter of commonsense in each case. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I shall do my best.

asked the Minister of Labour if he can arrange to publish a quarterly return of the number of unemployed books issued to new entrants to industry during each quarter, showing the number separately for each industrial group?

The only available figures are those for the number of new books issued. As these include an unknown number of duplicate books issued to persons previously insured, I do not think the expense of publishing them quarterly would be justified. Annual estimates of the number in each industry in July of each year are already published in the succeeding November in the Ministry of Labour Gazette.

asked the Minister of Labour whether it is the considered policy of his Department that workmen who are compelled to retire from their ordinary industrial pursuits at the age limits of 60 to 65 years, and are in receipt of a weekly pension of from 5s. to 20s., to which they have contributed from their weekly earnings, are refused unemployment insurance benefit on the ground that they are not genuinely seeking work; and whether he will state whether it is the view of his Department that such men should not be expected at that age to be seeking jobs?

There is no requirement under the Unemployment Insurance Acts which has the effect of disqualifying a man for the receipt of benefit solely because he has been compelled to leave his employment on pension on reaching an age limit of 60 to 65 years. Such men, however, must in common with other claimants satisfy the statutory conditions, one of which is that they must be genuinely seeking work.

Will thy right hon. Gentleman say whether he is aware that there are a large number of cases that are affected by the principle that men are refused benefit on the plea that they are not genuinely seeking work on the ground that they are pensioned off and, therefore, are not likely to seek it?

If there are any individual cases like that, I will be glad to look into them. I do not want anyone to be prejudiced by the fact that he has a pension, because the fact of having a pension does not mean that they are necessarily past work or that they are not necessarily seeking work.

Is the right hon. Gentleman in a position to tell us what his Department regards as proof of genuinely seeking work?

We cannot go into that consideration now.

asked the Minister of Labour whether the change in the method of compilation of unemployment statistics which is being made in some districts, namely, the separation of the totally unemployed from those on short time or temporarily stood off, is being put into operation generally; and whether in future the weekly statistics of persons on the live register will show separately the number totally unemployed and the number temporarily unemployed?

I am considering whether arrangements can be made to analyse the weekly unemployment statistics in the manner suggested; but I cannot yet say with certainty whether this will be practicable.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the burden of work on existing rota committees in certain towns is so great that it is often impossible for them to do full justice to some of the claims brought before them; and whether he proposes to take any steps to deal with the matter?

I have had the matter under consideration for some time. The difficulty arises in large measure from the rule hitherto in force of the applicant in every case, whether straightforward or not, being personally interviewed. I have decided that brief particulars of any claims for extended benefit which appear to be straightforward may be placed before rota committees with a view to their being recommended for allowance without personal interview, if the rota so decide; it will always remain open to the rota to select any of the claims out of the list for personal interview if they think this necessary. This procedure will reduce the number of cases requiring detailed consideration by the committees and allow more time for dealing with those cases which really need it. Copies of the memorandum to be issued to the committees will be placed in the Library of the House in accordance with the usual practice, and copies can be obtained from the Department by hon. Members who desire to have them.

May I ask whether the difficulty is being intensified by a large number of the members of the rota committees resigning because of the new methods?

Oh, no; not appreciably at all.

In the event of the new procedure being adopted and the man being refused on these brief notes, will he be able to claim a personal appearance afterwards?

If the hon. Member had listened to the answer he would see that it was only in cases for allowance, and not cases that would be disallowed, that the notes will be submitted.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that, since the termination of the agreement between the British Government and the Irish Free State in July, 1923, soldiers returning to the Irish Free State on their discharge from the Colours are no longer allowed to draw 90 days' unemployment benefit as would be the case if their homes were in Great Britain or Northern Ireland; if he is aware that much hardship is entailed by this deprivation of unemployment benefit; and if he will examine this case in order that soldiers returning to the Irish Free State on the termination of their Colour service may not be in a worse position than others similarly discharged?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The matter is one of considerable difficulty, but I will see whether there is any practicable way of dealing with it.

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether he is aware of the feeling in the country owing to the inequality of the law with regard to betting; and, if so, what action does he propose to take in the matter;

(2) what is the main difficulty in the way of Government taxation of betting?