asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what proportion of the total costs of the League of Nations is borne, respectively, by the other members of the League excluding Great Britain, France, and Italy?

As the details asked for by the hon. Member involve many figures, I will, with his permission, Circulate them in the OFFCIAL REPORT.

May I ask whether the voting power is pro rata to the amount paid by the various nations?

No. That would destroy the work of the League.

Would it be possible to ensure that the contributions of these nations who constitute the Council of the League should at least be equal, so that membership of the League should involve an equal obligation on all nations, members of the League of Nations to enjoy that privilege?

No, I think that question shows a complete misapprehension of the character of the League of Nations. If you are to set up a money qualification for the Council that the State with the smallest revenue shall pay the same contribution as the State with the largest revenue, you could not carry on the League as now constituted.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the Government of the Irish Free State has deposited the Agreement of 1925 amending the Anglo-Irish Agreement in regard to the boundary between the Free State and Ulster with the League of Nations; and if the British Government has recognised, or proposes to recognise, the juris diction of the League of Nations to arbitrate in this matter?

With regard to the first part of the question, I am informed that the Irish Free State Government have issued instructions for this action to be taken. The reply to the second part of the question is in the negative. In this connection, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for North Aberdeen on the 17th December, 1924.

Was not the previous agreement between the British Government and the Irish Free State deposited with the League of Nations, and the British Government on that occasion made a caveat that they did not consider that agreement subject to arbitration?

That matter was dealt with in the answer to which I invite the hon. and gallant Gentleman to refer I will read the relevant part of it:

"His Majesty's Government have in of Nations that in their opinion the terms formed the Secretary-General of the League of Article 18 of the Covenant are not applicable to the articles of agreement for a Treaty between Great Britain and Ireland signed on the 6th December, 1921. The ground for this action was stated in the letter addressed by His Majesty's Government to the Secretary-General was that since the Covenant came into force His Majesty's Government have consistently taken the view that neither it nor any Conventions concluded under the auspices of the League are intended to govern the relations inter se of the various parts of the British Commonwealth."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 17th December, 1924; col. 963, Vol. 179.]

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether steps will be taken to ascertain the views of the Dominions before the representative of the British Empire on the Council of the League of Nations votes on a question which so vitally affects their interests as that of the addition of new permanent members of the Council in addition to Germany?

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether, in view of the fact that, by Article 4 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, it falls upon the Council of the League, with the approval of the majority of the Assembly, to name new permanent members of the Council, and of the fact that it is the British Empire and not Great Britain which is a permanent member of the Council, he is in consultation with the Dominions with regard to the possible admission of Germany and other nations to permanent membership of the Council; and whether he can assure the House that the representative of the Government at the forthcoming meeting of the League will not give a vote regarding such applications unless and until the Dominions express their concurrence with the policy advocated by His Majesty's Government;

(2) whether he will give an assurance to the House that His Majesty's Government will consult the Dominions in every case when an application for permanent membership of the Council is received from a member of the League of Nations?

By the terms of the Covenant a permanent seat on the Council is attributed to the British Empire but the extent to which that representative can speak on behalf of the Dominions depends upon the circumstances of each particular case and the character of the communications which have passed between His Majesty's Government and the Dominion Governments. The Dominions have separate representation in the Assembly and their representatives there act on the instructions of their own Governments although frequent consultation of all the Empire delegates takes place. His Majesty's Government are already in communication with the Dominions on the matters referred to in these questions.

As regards the future, I can readily assure my hon. Friends that we shall pursue the same policy of consultation with the Dominions with reference to other applications for permanent membership as in reference to any other international issue of importance.

Is there any prospect of the question of the extension of the numbers of the Council of the League coming up at the meeting in March?

I think there is every prospect, almost amounting to a certainty, that it will come up.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the representation of Canada on the Council of the League is as important to the future peace of the world as the representation of Brazil?

I rather deprecate invidious comparisons of that kind. The sympathy of the British Government with the desires and aspirations of any one of his Majesty's Dominions has been expressed again and again.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Egyptian Government has carried out its declared intention of purchasing cotton with the object of holding up the price; and, if so, to what extent?

The Egyptian Council of Ministers decided on 13th January to increase the Government purchase of spot cotton to a possible limit of half a million cantars, with the object of maintaining a 75 per cent. premium in the price of fully good fair Sakellarides over American cotton. If and when this quality of Egyptian cotton reaches 36 dollars per cantar, Government intervention will cease. I have no information regarding the extent to which effect has been given to this decision.

Was this policy first submitted to the British Government for approval, or was it done entirely without their knowledge?

Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider it against the interest of the world to have this interference by Governments to artificially govern the price of raw materials; and will he make representations on behalf of this country to allow the price of cotton to follow its natural course?

I think the answer to my hon. Friend is in the negative, but I should not like to make that statement definitely without having an opportunity of reference. As regards the question of the hon. Member opposite, I think any operation of this kind must be judged upon the merits of the particular circumstances in which it is applied and the particular way it is carried out. I cannot see that any arrangements that are made to preserve a steady supply of vital raw materials are injurious in the long run to consuming countries.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the new electoral law has been put into force in Egypt; whether he has received an assurance that the enforcement of this law would be in accordance with the Egyptian Constitution; and whether the date on which the new elections are to be held has yet been fixed?

The preparation of the new electoral lists necessitated by the law promulgated on 8th December is in progress with a view to elections being completed in May. Four electoral laws have been passed since the Constitution. Technical objection has been taken for one reason or another to all except the first law. The present law is, however, held by the legal advisers of the Council of Ministers to be in conformity with the principle laid down in the Constitution, that elections should be held on the basis of universal suffrage.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the small boat in which the late Lord Kitchener and the late Colonel Fitzgerald left the "Hampshire" on 5th June, 1916, has been purchased by a private individual; and whether this boat can be acquired by the Admiralty as a national relic?

As regards the first part of the question, I cannot find the slightest evidence that Colonel Fitzgerald's body was found in this boat or that he or Lord Kitchener ever set foot in it. The Admiralty evidence based on contemporary official reports and confirmed by recent inquiries is that Colonel Fitzgerald's body was picked up at sea by the rescue vessels the night of the disaster, 5th June, or early next morning. It was identified and reported to the Admiralty on 6th June. I take this opportunity of adding that the stories recently circulated in the Press, either that this distinguished officer was picked up alive some days after the loss or that his body was disfigured, me false.

To revert to the boat: The boat in question is a 16-foot skiff dinghy which belonged to the "Hampshire" in 1915 and wits approved to be replaced by a new one in May, 1916. It is therefore doubtful whether it was on board "Hampshire" on 5th June. The evidence which the Admiralty has published—as to the attempt to launch the "Hampshire's" boats—is that efforts were made to get Lord Kitchener into the captain's galley, an entirely different boat, but the weight of evidence is that no boats, but only rafts or floats, got clear of the ship. A fragment of a boat which came ashore in the Orkneys is already in the Imperial War Museum. Another boat came ashore near Thurso on the mainland. A Press report in 1922 falsely stated that this latter boat was a dinghy and contained Colonel Fitzgerald's body. It was, in fact, a 27 or:30 foot whaler, and was empty. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Is it not a fact that this particular boat was picked up the day after the tragedy, off Hoy Head, by one of our patrolling trawlers? Does not the hon. Member think it desirable, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, that all the information in the possession of the Admiralty should be published?

The whole of the information in the possession of the Admiralty has been published.

Is it not a fact that all the evidence at the Admiralty tends to show that Lord Kitchener never left the "Hampshire" after the explosion?

Can the hon. Member say what steps the Government propose to take in view of the information which has come to hand with regard to the gross misrepresentation now being perpetrated by certain newspapers?

Will the Admiralty be prepared to call witnesses who can be produced from the 15 men who were survivors from the disaster? Will they be prepared to receive their evidence?

The evidence of these survivors, all of them, is in the possession of the Admiralty. It is on that evidence that this statement is made.

Were they not all, after they had been interviewed, dispatched to different parts of the world?

Yes; but, surely, recollection within 12 hours of the disaster would be more clear than it would be at this time of day.

As a member of the Court of Inquiry into the loss of the ship, I should like to ask the hon. Member if he is not aware that only 12 men were saved alive from the "Hampshire," and that it is not true to say that more than 12 men survived the disaster?

That is absolutely true.

I have not had an answer to my question.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether it is proposed to reduce sheerness Dockyard to a care and maintenance basis; and, if not, will he explain why?

I have already replied in the negative to a similar question from my hon. Friend on 16th December last. There is at present ample repair work to keep this dockyard employed, and it could not now be dispensed with unless leased to a private firm who could themselves undertake repair work or without the prior expenditure of considerable sums on buildings elsewhere, which, in existing circumstances, would not be justified.

Does not the same argument which is applied to Sheerness apply equally to Rosyth and Pembroke. None of them are manning ports? Is it the opinion of the Admiralty that Sheerness is of greater strategical value than the other two?

No, but it is suitable to undertake the repair work which is necessary.

Will the hon. Member say whether the Admiralty contemplate dispensing with another dockyard, or do they not?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is yet in a position to report the results of the investigation with the Colonial Office into the demand of the Singapore United Rubber Plantations Company, Limited, that less wages should be paid to coolie labour employed at the naval base, on the ground that it is tending to raise the cost of local coolie labour?

Information has now been received from the Admiralty Officer in Charge of Works, the Colonial authorities and the Rubber Growers' Association, from which it is clear that the wages of the Admiralty employés are in excess of the wages of those employed by the rubber planters; but, having regard to the different nature of the work upon which they are employed, the Admiralty are not satisfied that there is sufficient ground to order a reduction in the rates at present in force.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether naval economies being effected will include the abolition of the Admiralty yacht "Enchantress" and other yachts?

The only yachts now in existence in the Royal Navy are the Royal yacht "Victoria and Albert" and the Admiralty yacht "Enchantress" There is no question of abolishing either of these vessels.

Is the "Enchantress" necessary for the fighting efficiency of the Navy?

No, but it is very useful otherwise.

When we are economising on the seagoing practice of the Service, is it right to keep this luxury vessel?

It does not cost anything.

That is not the case. The hon. Member says the "Enchantress" costs nothing. That is not true. We have had that question up before.

It is not my duty to be censor of Minister's statements.

Is it by some miracle that the "Enchantress" costs nothing?

She is laid up, and has been laid up?

The hon. Member has given an obviously inaccurate answer, no doubt in error. A vessel, even when laid up, has to have care and maintenance. She has to have her engines kept in repair. How can the hon. Gentleman say that it costs nothing?

I meant relatively.

It was a "moutho graphical" error.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what provision has been made to transfer the families of men from Rosyth to other dockyards; and if it covers railway warrants to sons of transferred men up to 18 years of age?

It has been decided, and notified to all concerned, that the established workmen to be transferred from Rosyth to the Southern Dockyards will have reasonable removal expenses for themselves, their wives, their children and their homes, defrayed from public funds. The term "children" includes sons under 16 years of age and unmarried daughters dependent on and residing with their fathers; it also includes any sons over 16 years of age who, by reason of physical or mental infirmity, are necessarily dependent on their parents. The undertaking does not in general cover the travelling expenses of sons over 16 years of age.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that these families are contemplating bringing their furniture into the southern yards, and will he take steps to prevent them adopting a course which will result in their having to store their furniture owing to lack of housing accommodation?

That is rather a matter for them.

also asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware fiat a deputation of limbless ex-service men, employed at Rosyth, interviewed the admiral-superintendent on the 10th instant regarding the notice of discharge served on one of their number; whether he is aware that this man is instructing a non-service established man in his duties, which he is expected to take over after the 13th; if this is in accord with the admiral - superintendent's Memorandum NO. 2697/25; and will he take steps to prevent disabled ex-service men being replaced by able-bodied men so long as these duties are available?

Every possible consideration is being and will be given to the -disabled ex-service men at Rosyth with a view to their continued employment so long as this is compatible with the efficient and economic working of the establishment, and does not involve injustice to other men. I regret that an assurance cannot be given of the continued employment of a disabled ex-service, man where, as in the case referred to by the hon. Member, this would mean eider the transfer of an established workman, with his family and his home, to another dockyard, or the superannuation of an established man.

Did the hon. Gentleman not give an assurance previously that so long as these jobs continued the disabled men would be kept in them? In this case the job is to continue for some time and this man is already discharged.

I think that the hon. Member is mistaken. I gave an assurance that as long as work suitable for the disabled man was available he should have it., but I am afraid that in this case it impossible.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if the Government has any arrangement in regard to profits with Messrs. Cox and Danks, who are raising the German War vessels at Scapa Flow?

No, Sir. The vessels sold to Messrs. Cox and Danks have been paid for at fixed prices.

Would my hon. Friend say whether there is any agreement in contemplation?

I must ask for notice of that question.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty when the oil tanks now being erected at Trincomalee will be completed; and whether it is intended that they shall be available at any time to merchants vessels as well as to vessels of His Majesty's Navy?

It is anticipated that these oil tanks will be completed in April, 1926. The oil fuel would only be available for issue to merchant vessels in case of emergency.

May I ask what the cost has been, and whether it includes the cost of building of railway through 120 miles of country?

I must have notice of that question.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty the number of battleships, battle cruisers, light cruisers, and destroyers there are in the Atlantic Fleet; and how many Flag Officers and Commodores are serving in that Fleet in addition to the Admiral Commander in-Chief?

As the reply contains a number of figures, I will, with my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, circulate the information in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Minister of Labour what progress has been made with the farm training centres for young men; and whether it is contemplated to train families and women also for life on the land here and overseas?

I am glad to say that excellent progress is being made at the Claydon centre with the training of about 100 young unemployed men for employment overseas. Another centre, near Brandon, will shortly be opened. The training of families and women for life on the land would raise different problems, and I will consider the suggestion.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say whether employment on the land of England is excluded from the curriculum of these schools, or whether it is possible to train in these establishments people who are to cutivate smallholdings and allotments on the land of England?

I will look into that suggestion.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is prepared to use unemployment benefit and outdoor relief for the maintenance of young men and families on training farms in preparation for life on the land here and overseas?

As regards unemployment benefit I doubt if the statutory conditions could be held to be satisfied in the case of persons under training for work on the land, but the point is one which can be decided only by the statutory authorities in relation to the circumstances at particular cases. Extended benefit clearly could not be granted inasmuch as it is one of the conditions that claimants will normally seek to obtain their livelihood by means of insurable employment. The point about outdoor relief is for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health.

Will my right hon. Friend consider the possibility of obtaining statutory power to employ the unemployment benefit in this way?

I will gladly consider the proposal, though it raises a number of difficult questions.

Is it a fact that these men, trained in these training camps are already passed as suitable under the conditions required by the Dominion Government?

I know that, at any rate, the majority of them are.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that unemployed workers who are temporarily employed by the local authorities for short periods are being deprived of benefit because the Unemployment Insurance stamps for such periods are not recognised; whether he is prepared to accept the value of such stamps; or, if not, on what section of the Unemployment Insurance Act he bases his refusal to put such stamps to the insured persons' credit?

The practice is the opposite of that suggested. I am not aware that stamps properly affixed to books are not recognised, but I shall be happy to inquire into any case if particulars are furnished.

asked the Minister of. Labour whether he is aware that nearly 600 of the unemployed at Cwmbran have to walk to Pontnewydd to sign the register and draw unemployment pay, and that this entails a walk to Pontnewydd and back of three miles, often in inclement weather; and whether he can see his way to open a branch office at Cwmbran, or fix up some room temporarily, to enable these men to sign the register?

I understand that Cwmbran is about one mile distant by level main road from Pontnewydd. I do not think the circumstances justify the extra expense involved by opening a new office.

Is the Minister aware that it is three miles back and fore, and that these people must have clothes and boots in order to do the journey, especially in this wretched weather, and will he reconsider his decision with a view of opening something temporarily?

I always try to consider the circumstances in each case, as to the number of men and women that have to walk a distance, and also the cost. It is after weighing together the cost and discomfort that I have to come to conclusions.

asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been called to a recent case at Southampton in which a motorist, convicted of riding without the requisite lights, asked to be allowed to delay the payment of the fine imposed upon him until he received his next weekly unemployment pay; and if he will have the case investigated to ascertain whether it is one in which the grant of unemployment pay is justified?

I saw a Press report of the case in question and had already instituted inquiries. I have now ascertained that the applicant was drawing standard benefit. The question whether he still satisfies the conditions for benefit is before the statutory authority.

Will my right hon. Friend put himself into communication with the statutory committee and ascertain whether this man, who is able to drive his motorcar, is entitled to unemployment benefit provided by the State?

May I point out—

No.

Is there any evidence that the motor-car belonged to the man?

The ownership of the motor-car is a matter of doubt at the present moment. We are keeping a constant watch on the case, and the development of it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make representations to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that everybody drawing interest from War Loans who can do without it shall have the interest stopped?

asked the Minister of Labour whether there is difficulty in finding suitable women to fill this vacancies for domestic servants, amounting to 4,594, for whom situations existed at the Employment Exchanges of Great Britain on 7th December last; and whether he will take steps to notify the Exchanges that benefit will not be continued to women who are suitable for this employment and who refuse to undertake it provided a reasonable standard of conditions as regards wages, leave, and leisure time can be arranged for such employment?

As is well known, there is considerable difficulty in filling vacancies for resident domestic servants in private houses. The Exchanges fill a number of such vacancies each week and have already definite instructions to the effect suggested in the second part of the question, provided of course also that there is no reasonable objection, e.g., in the form of distance or family circumstances of the applicant.

Is it not the case that, if these women go into private domestic service, they at once contract out of insurable employment; and will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the fact that in most cases these women since leaving school have been in insurable occupations, and that it is not the duty of the Exchange to ask them to transfer out of the occupations to which they have been accustomed?

I think the hon. Member is not correct in his inference. Of course, as to whether women in such cases have or have not been in insurable employment in the past, the fact is that if they have been, and if they go out to domestic service—which employment is not itself insurable—they do not necessarily lose their insurable status.

Is it not the case that as soon as they go into private domestic service they go into a non-insurable occupation; and that, before they can get the stamps upon which benefit will be paid in the future, they must be in insurable employment?

The main point is this. It is just the same in the case of women who go into domestic service, as in the case of men who temporarily take up work on the land. In either case the job which they are to undertake is not in itself insurable, but they do not simply for that reason lose their status as insured persons, unless they take it up permanently or show the intention of taking it up permanently.

Is the Minister aware that there is a growing disposition among the parents of these girls not to allow them to go to domestic service owing to certain cases in the Law Courts; and will he take steps to secure that those women who are transferred to domestic service, are sent to homes where the parents can be assured of their being properly treated?

We look into the propriety of the employment in any case.

May I press the Minister, if his last answer is correct, as to whether he has any staff employed as investigators into the homes of those people to whom girls are transferred as domestic servants? [HON MEMBERS: "Answer!"]

The hon. Member ought to put that question down. That point does not necessarily arise out of the right hon. Gentleman's answer.

On a point of Order. A question has been put on the Paper which, in fact, reflects on certain women by suggesting that they do not want work. Are we not entitled to see that these women have no such reflection cast upon them?

On a point of Order—

I do not think it is necessary to pursue the matter. Question 35.

On a point of Order, Sir. Are these girls not as much entitled to ask their employer for a character as the employers are entitled to ask the servant girl for references as to her character! [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] Order yourselves!

On a point of Order—[Interruption.]

We can roar "Order, order!" until further orders, as well as hon. Members opposite.

I think hon. Members should allow me to deal with one point at a time. There is no point of Order in the question put by the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood).

On a point of Order. I want to submit that a statement has been made from the other side regarding my motives in putting down this question, which statement is quite improper. This question does not cast any aspersion upon any class, and I very strongly object to the suggestion that it does.

May I ask if it is not a reflection upon these women to suggest, as this question does that benefit ought to be refused to them. Does not that mean that the hon. Member is inferring that these women are not genuinely seeking employment? That is the reflection.

It is most offensive.

Is an hon. Member entitled after you, Sir, have called the next Question on the Paper—as you did in this case—to raise further Supplementary Questions and to go back upon the previous question?[Interruption.]

Hon. Members are redly preventing their colleagues from being heard. I do not think it is necessary to prolong this matter.

Why does not the hon. Member apologise? [HON. MEMBERS "Order!"]

We can shout "Order!" as well as they can. [HON. MEMBERS: "Name!"] You can name me if you like.

The matter is one which rests in my discretion, and I must be allowed to deal with it in my awn way. Mr. Pilcher.

asked the Minister of Labour what is the present attitude of the Central Unemployment Committee in regard to the demand for a grant for the proposed Redruth-Illogan drainage scheme; and whether, in its decision, the Committee will be guided by the fact that in the Mid and West Cornwall district over 3,000 men are now unemployed and unemployment benefit payments exceed 24,000 a week?

I am informed that the Unemployment Grants Committee have been unable to approve the scheme mentioned which was to cost £127,000 and to last two years. The Committee in reaching this decision had all the facts before them, including information as to the volume of unemployment in the Redruth district.

asked the Minister of Labour whether unemployment benefit is paid to men who may recently have received large awards in respect of workmen's compensation; and whether this is in accordance with the Regulations?

A person receiving workmen's compensation is not thereby disqualified for unemployment benefit. The position is not altered if he has compounded the weekly payments for a lump sum. Such a person must, of course, show that he satisfies the usual conditions for benefit, including the condition that he must be capable of work.

asked the Minister of Labour the amount paid to the trade unions for the administration of benefits for insured persons for the years 1922–23, 1923–24, and 1924–25?

The amounts paid to associations in respect of the cost of administration by them of unemployment benefit during the three years in question were:

	£
1922–23	149,237
1923–24	66,743
1924–25	55,114

Could the right hon. Gentleman give the percentage of the cost of administration?

No, I could not.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) how many women applied at the Stepney Employment Exchange for unemployment benefit during each of the six months ending 14th February; in how many instances was all benefit refused and the cause of such refusal; and in how many cases was benefit refused after less than a month's payments had been received by the applicant, and the cause for such refusal;

(2) how many women applied for unemployment benefit, at the Stepney Employment Exchange during each of the six months ending 14th February; and how many claims from these women were disallowed and the reason for such disallowance?

As the reply to these questions involves a considerable number of figures, I will, with the permission of the hon. Member, circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT, giving all the available information.

asked the Minister of Labour the total cost of the administration of the Unemployed Insurance Acts during 1925?

The total cost of administration of the Unemployment Insurance Acts during the financial year ended 31st March, 1925, was £4,494,760. This sum, which was repaid by the Unemployment Fund to the Exchequer, includes the cost of the Employment Exchanges so far as they deal with insured persons.

asked the Minister of Labour the total amount paid by employers, insured persons, and the State, respectively, under the Unemployment Insurance Acts during 1925?

The amounts contributed under the Unemployment Insurance Acts during the calendar year 1925 were approximately as follow:

	£
By employers	20,030,000
By insured persons	17,760,000
By the Exchequer	13,250,000

asked the Minister of Labour the whole amount of benefit paid to insured persons under the Unemployment Insurance Acts during 1925?

The total amount of benefit paid under the Unemployment Insurance Acts during the calendar year 1925 was approximately £45,800,000.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the work of the Employment Exchange at Blackwood, Monmouthshire, is carried on in a small room in a shop that will only hold six persons; that there are at present nearly 500 unemployed there; that these men and women have to wait sometimes over two hours in the cold and rain to register, etc.; that many of them have poor and insufficient clothes and bad boots, and that, consequently, their health is endangered by this needless exposure; that there is a hall available for which the unemployed them-salves have offered to pay, but they are told they cannot go there unless there are over 500 unemployed; and will he take steps to rectify these grievances?

I understand that there are under 400 persons claiming unemployment benefit at Blackwood. A quarter-hourly timing system is in operation and provided that claimants keep to the time table there should be no overcrowding or necessity for waiting outside the premises. Extra accommodation therefore ought not to be necessary, but if unemployment should increase extra accommodation would be obtained as has been done in the past.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that numbers of unemployed have been summoned to meetings with the rota committee to which the committee had not been summoned, or if summoned did not receive notification till too late to attend the meeting, and that unnecessary hardship and expense is being imposed on these people, some of whom have to travel long distances; that imemployed women who live at Argoed, in the Sirhowy valley, have to meet the Iota committee at Bargoed, in the lihymney valley, although the unemployed men from the same place meet them at Blackwood, which is only a mile and a half away and in the same valley; and will he take steps to have these matters put right?

With regard to the first part of the question, I am not aware that there is ground for this complaint and should be glad to know of any cases which have come to the knowledge of the hon. Member. I am making inquiry into the cases referred to in the second part of the question and will let the hon. Member know the result.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that two housing schemes have had to be abandoned in the Burgh of Saltcoats owing to the high cost of building and the shortage of building labour; and whether he will call the attention of the neighbouring Employment Exchanges to the good prospects of employment in the building trade in the district in question?

I am having inquiry made, and will cornmunioate with the hon. Member as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of coal miners unemployed in South Wales and the other coalfields, respectively, during each month from July, 1925, to February, 1926.

The figures are being extracted, and as soon as this has been completed I will circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he can give the numbers of men sent by the Dundee Employment Exchange to work on the Perth-Inverness road; whether he is aware that these men are paid upon an hourly wage basis and get no pay during periods of inclement weather when work is impossible; that) as a consequence, some of these men have been able to earn as low as 12s. 2d. and 12e. 6d. per week; that there are complaints as to living conditions and costs of commodities at the contractor's stores; and how many men have refused to work under these wages and conditions and have been refused insurance benefit at the Labour Exchange in Dundee?

Up to 6th January, 128 men have been sent from Dundee to this road. It is customary to pay for such work on an hourly basis for the hours worked. Men on the job who will work when work is regarded as possible earn from 35s. to 40s. a week, and reports I have received indicate that there is no reasonable ground for complaint with the conditions or the accommodation. The site is in an exposed position and this fact, with the recent bad weather, may account for complaint of insufficient earnings. I am inquiring into the last two points raised by the hon. Member and will communicate again with him.

If I can show the right hon. Gentleman official wages sheets for a week, proving that men have only been able to earn 12s. 2d. a week, and that these men, who could stick it no longer, have been refused benefit at the Dundee Employment Exchange on the ground that they have refused employment, will he go into the whole matter and get this scandal stopped?

Certainly, I will go into the whole matter again, but I would remind the hon. Member that work of this kind for men from Dundee and similar towns was only set up at the urgent request of hon. Members, in order to try and meet the situation. Of course, if he will communicate facts to me of that kind, I will gladly get the thing gone into.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that a number of women who are signing at the Govan Employment Exchange have been called upon to undergo a medical examination by medical doctors at the Exchange; whether he can state the reasons for this course and its purpose; whether the medical examination is compulsory on those called to undergo it; if not, whether women so called upon can refuse without prejudice to their claims for benefit; and whether he can state under which Statute these powers are operated by his Department?

I presume the hon. Member refers to a test which is being carried out with my consent by the Industrial Research Fatigue Board. Acceptance of the test, which is carried out by a woman doctor and a woman assistant, is absolutely voluntary, and does not affect benefit in any way. The proposal of the Board was considered by a conference of women representatives of local employment committees in Glasgow who considered that it would be useful.

Are we to take it that women who are going to the Exchanges are told that they are to be examined by a lady doctor without being told it is voluntary, and being led to assume that, if they do not undergo this medical examination, their claim to benefit will be prejudiced, and probably disallowed; and, further, since this has been done with the right hon. Gentleman's consent, will he now withdraw that consent and have the Exchange used for the purpose for which it ought to be used, that is, finding unemployed people employment, and not allow—[Interruption.] Are these the gentlemen of England.

The hon. Member is rather too long with his supplementary questions. He really must have consideration for others.

It is a very serious matter.

But I want to point out this is really a very serious matter. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order."] It is not a serious matter to men who are well paid.

The hon. Member should wait to hear the reply of the Minister.

The hon. Member must not draw the inference that women are led to undergo any examination without being told it is voluntary on their part. I will undertake to make inquiries, or, rather, to send down in order to ensure chat it shall be made quite clear that it shall be entirely voluntary and unconnected with benefit. On the other hand, I am always willing to say that inquiries by the Research Board are for the general good, and I should be very sorry to stop them.

I want to know by what right the Ministry of Labour puts this particular examination upon the women who are going to these Exchanges for unemployment benefit. If the right hon. Gentleman cannot answer that satisfactorily, I am going to move the Adjournment of the House.

Would you like your women to be examined?