asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if all the contributions due from members of the League of Nations have been received at Geneva; and, if not, will he state the amount of any outstandings; what nations are responsible for any unpaid balance of expenditure; what percentage of the total amount is paid by Great Britain; and is the total amount of our assessment paid to date?

The position in regard to unpaid contributions to the funds of the League of Nations on 31st August, 1925, the date of the last report by the Secretary-General to the Assembly of the League, was as follows:

	Gold francs.
1920	29,947,47
1921	425,351,93
1922	405,746,00
Adjusted arrears account.	287,598,33
1923	2,553,363,29
1924	2,069,089,89
Total	5,771,096,91

The countries responsible for these unpaid contributions were: Bolivia, China, Guatemala, Honduras, Liberia, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Rumania, Salvador. South Africa was at the date in question responsible for a postponed payment which has now been paid. The percentage of the total amount of the League budget payable by Great Britain for 1926 is 11·2 per cent. The sum due from Great Britain is paid in quarterly instalments, which have been paid up to date.

What is being done in regard to these unpaid contributions? Is there any hope of collection?

Is it our business to collect them for the League of Nations?

It is not the business of this Government to collect these arrears. I believe reminders are sent out not infrequently by the Secretariat to the countries concerned.

Do the figures given by the right hon. Gentleman include the cost of the International Labour Office?

No, Sir.

Is there anything in the Constitution by which States that are in arrears for a certain period do not take their seats?

I do not think there is; but the Constitution is open to the hon. and gallant Member to see.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs who will be the members and the expert advisers of the British delegation to the forthcoming Conference on Armaments at Geneva: who will be the representatives of the Dominions; and whether a joint programme of policy has been drawn up with the Dominion representatives?

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has been asked and has agreed to serve as the British representative on the preparatory Committee on Disarmament, to which I assume the hon. and gallant Member is referring. He will be assisted by representatives of the Foreign Office, Admiralty, War Office and Air Ministry. In accordance with the decision of the Council, the committee will be composed of representatives of States members of that body and of certain other States invited ad hoc; the latter do not include any British Dominion. As regards the third part, the Dominion Governments have, as usual, been kept informed of developments. Special steps were also taken with the object of associating them with the work of the sub-committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence appointed to advise on all questions connected with the meeting of the preparatory committee.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give in the OFFICIAL REPORT a list of the expert advisers who will go? I do not press for it now.

I do not like to undertake to do that without consultation. I do not think it is usual to give the list of experts who accompany Cabinet representatives. I do not think it would be desirable in the public interest.

Will the right hon. Gentleman look into the matter? I do not want to press him now. I presume there is no secrecy about it.

There cannot be any secrecy. The question is whether we should attach responsibility to individuals of that kind who are sent to assist Cabinet Ministers.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many men during 1924 and 1925, respectively, were placed on the establishment of the Royal Dockyards after they had reached the specified age limit under the authority of Clause 7 of the Order in Council, dated 10th January, 1910, relating to the Home Civil Service?

The numbers of workmen placed on the establishment of the Royal Dockyards and other Admiralty Civil Establishments after reaching the specified age limit, in the years 1924 and 1925, respectively, including yard craftsmen (to whom the Order in Council of the 10th January, 1910, is not applicable) are as follow:

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many lieut.-commanders, formerly mates, have reached the zone of promotion for commander during the last 12 months; if any, how many have been promoted; and how many of these gentlemen will reach the promotion zone during the next two years?

None of these officers has yet reached the zone of promotion; 32 will enter it during the next two years, assuming that the lower limit of seniority remains unchanged.

Does promotion in this case entirely depend upon seniority?

No.

Will the rate of promotion increase or decrease?

I should require notice of that question.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he can state the number of persons at present registered as unemployed; whether he has any estimate of the unemployed not on the register; and whether he has any estimate of the number of persons consistently working short time?

At 5th April the number of persons on the registers of Employment Exchanges in Great Britain was 1,049,800, including 238,600 who were temporarily stopped from the service of their employers. The latter figure includes those working short time so far as they are registered. I am unable to give any estimate of the number of persons unemployed or on short time, and not on the registers.

Do not these figures include many persons who would not have been regarded as unemployed in former days, such as merchant seamen waiting for the next voyage?

Yes, from that point of view it includes a certain number.

Is the Minister doing anything outstanding in order to minimise the amount of unemployment?

That does not arise on this question.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of persons unemployed at the present time and the number for the same period last year?

At 5th April the number of persons on the registers of Employment Exchanges in Great Britain was 1,049,800 as compared with 1,166,353 at 6th April, 1925.

How does that figure compare with after Easter last year, instead of exactly a year ago?

I cannot tell the hon. Member that from memory. The point of interest in regard to Easter this year is that, as might be expected, there was an increase in the weekly number of 36,000, because of Easter, consisting of 56,000 who stood off, clearly on account of the holiday, while, on the other hand, there was a decrease of 20,000 in those permanently unemployed.

Will the Minister tell us how much of the decrease is due to people being thrown on to the Poor Law?

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in view of the statistics recently published by his Department showing the approximate number of persons who would appear on the un- employment returns if the present restrictions in regard to payment of unemployment insurance benefit were removed, he will consider the desirability of publishing similar information every six months in order to allay suspicion in regard to the accuracy of the unemployment figures published meekly?

Under existing arrangements, the material from which these statistics were compiled will continue to be available. I will consider in due course whether it is desirable to issue a further memorandum similar to that referred to in the question.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of men at present employed on the various relief works subsidised by the Unemployment Grants Committee and the number similarly employed a year ago?

At 27th February, the latest date for which figures are available, 33,799 men were employed on relief schemes approved by the Unemployment Grants Committee, as compared with 42,151 at 28th February, 1925.

In view of the largely reduced numbers employed on unemployment relief work, will the right hon. Gentleman make representations to the Unemployment Grants Committee that they should consider more sympathetically applications for assistance from towns where the unemployment is greatest?

They already have instructions and their ideas as to the degree of unemployment, and the conditions upon which they may consider applications, and I can see no reason far asking them to vary that.

Is it not a fact that, if applications were considered more sympathetically, many more thousands of unemployed could be employed on these schemes?

That is a matter entirely for argument, and hardly capable of being dealt with within the compass of question and answer. On the whole, my opinion is that the number of unemployed would not be diminished, but would probably be increased, by diverting more to unemployment grants funds that would otherwise go into normal channels of trade.

Has it not been more difficult to get these grants during the last five years, and is it not a fact that local authorities are complaining of the difficulty of getting their applications accepted?

We cannot now argue the matter.

asked the Minister of Labour if he has received a communication from the Tyldesley District Council in regard to his intention to remove the Employment Exchange to Atherton; and will he give consideration to the application made for a sub-office at Tyldesley, as, unless this is granted, it will mean considerable expense for the unemployed people of Mossley Common, Boothstown, and Astley who at present register at Tyldesley?

I have been in communication with the Tyldesley Urban District Council and have undertaken that the claims of Tyldesley and the outlying districts to separate facilities will be considered in the light of the conditions that obtain when the Exchange is moved from Tyldesley to Atherton.

Will the right hon. Gentleman receive a deputation representative of these outlying districts before he finally decides? I think that is very necessary.

The constituencies which are affected by this proposal desire to meet the Minister of Labour through their Parliamentary 'representatives before he comes to a final decision.

I cannot answer off hand, but if the hon. Members will get in touch with me or with the Parliamentary Secretary we can discuss the matter and find out if any advantage is to he gained by a further consultation.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of women who have passed through the Government's domestic training course since March, 1925; what percentage of these women have on the completion of their course been placed in situations, and what percentage are at present registered as unemployed?

I have been asked to reply for my right hon. Friend. Between 31st March, 1925, and 31st March, 1926, 5,947 women completed courses in home training centres conducted by the Central Committee on Women's Training and Employment. Complete information as to their subsequent employment is not available, but not less than 62 per cent. are known to have obtained situations. With regard to the last part of the question, information is not available.

Is the Department in a position to state what percentage of the unemployed women are engaged in skilled industrial occupation, and therefore are not suitable for training as domestic servants?

That question had better be put on the Paper.

asked the Minister of Labour, the number of disabled ex-service men who were engaged on telephone and other duties in his Department who have been discharged during the 12 months ending 28th February; and whether girls have been substituted in their places?

The number of disabled ex-service men, engaged primarily on telephone duties, who were discharged during the period in question was eight. Three of these were discharged in consequence of the closure of the Government instructional factories at which they were employed, while the remaining five were displaced by blind ex-service men or by other disabled men with superior claims to retention. In no instance was the man discharged replaced by a girl.

Are steps taken by the Minister to endeavour to secure employment for the men when they are discharged?

Yes.

asked the Minister of Labour if there is any substantial change in the figures of firms on the King's National Roll, and of disabled ex-service men now employed, and if he will give the latest available figures?

There has been no substantial change during the past 12 months in the figures relating to firms on the King's National Roll. The latest figures available relate to the position on 1st March, 1926, when approximately 28,000 firms were on the Roll, employing about 370,000 disabled ex-service men.

May I ask whether every borough council is on the King's Roll?

I have the list., and can send on the information to the hon. Member, but I cannot answer the question now. There are one or two borough councils which are not on the King's Roll.

Will the Minister give the names of the borough councils which are not on the King's Roll?

I cannot. from memory. There are a thousand or so public authorities concerned, and I do not carry in my head the names of those not on the Roll.

Instead of worrying private individuals, and in order to do justice to these men, the Government should withdraw their Economy Bill.

Will the right hon. Gentleman publish a list of the borough councils and local authorities which are not on the King's Roll?

The hon. Member must put that question down.

I will consider that suggestion.

asked the Minister of Health if he will grant the Return standing in the name of the hon. Member for West Ham (Plaistow)? [Return showing the number of men who have served in the Army, Navy, or Air Force, in receipt of Poor Law Relief in, England and Wales in the week ending the 27th day of February, 1926.]

No, Sir. My right hon. Friend does not think that the value of the return would be such as to justify the considerable amount of labour and expense that would be involved.

Is the Department aware that all boards of guardians have this information, and are only too willing to supply it to the Ministry if they are asked? Is it not possible to get it, therefore?

That is not the advice given to my Department.

Does the hon. Gentleman admit that his Department is hopelessly ignorant of the work of boards of guardians?

On a point of Order. As this question has now been asked arid answered, can we know exactly what it means?

If the hon. Member will look at the Order Paper, he will see.

asked the Secretary of State for War what was the cost of moving the British Army of Occupation from Cologne to Wiesbaden?

On the information at present available, the cost of moving the British Army of Occupation from Cologne to Wiesbaden is estimated at, approximately, £160,000. This figure represents the cost of evacuating buildings at Cologne, of transporting the troops to Wiesbaden, and of the initial works services required for their reception and accommodation.

Is this paid by the German Republic?

There is a refund of part on the Reparation Account.

Why is it not paid by the German Republic?

Are any troops left in this area?

There are troops in Wiesbaden, but not in Cologne.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the number of the troops in Wiesbaden?

Yes, after notice. It is, approximately, 9,000.

Is there any estimate of the cost of the troops remaining there?

The figure I have given is the approximate cost of moving.

Would it cost very much more to bring that army back to Britain?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that, although the Corps of Military Accountants has been reduced from 100 officers and 700 men to 25 officers and 140 men, the services of the controller of cost accounting are still being retained at a salary of £1,200 a year, plus bonus; and whether he will inquire into the necessity for retaining this Civil Service official in view of the fact that the remaining 25 officers, who have now been transferred to the Royal Army Pay Corps for accounting duties, are all qualified chartered or incorporated accountants, and as such fully capable of dealing with all accounting matters?

The holder of the post of Controller of Cost Accounts has not only great knowledge of the methods and possibilities of cost accounting, but he has also exceptionally wide experience of the system and requirements of Government accounts generally. He is usefully employed in his present position.

Is the appointment of this official permanent?

No; I think that it is not.

Is he pensionable?

I must have notice of that question.

I beg to give notice that, on Wednesday, 12th May, I shall call attention to the inequalities of the present electoral system, and move a Resolution.

I beg to give notice that, on Wednesday, 12th May, I shall call attention to co-partnership schemes, and move a Resolution.

I beg to give notice that, on Wednesday, 12th May, I shall call attention to the use of home-grown wheat, and move a Resolution.