asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any and, if so, what steps have been taken by the Nanking Government to abolish likin (internal customs duties) in accordance with their undertaking; whether any fresh internal taxation in substitution for likin is being levied or contemplated; and, if so, can he state the nature of such substituted taxation and by whom it will be borne?

No steps have yet been taken, so far as I am aware, to abolish likin. I understand that the reorganisation of the fiscal system is now under the consideration of the Chinese Government. It is too early for definite information to be available but what appears to be contemplated is the levy of consumption taxes for local requirements after the goods have passed out of the possession of the importers.

Will the Foreign Secretary take steps to ascertain the nature of these consumption taxes, and whether they are consistent with treaty rights between this country and China and the proclamation of the Nanking Government that no further internal taxation will be levied either on import or on arrival at destination?

I am endeavouring to obtain all the information possible about the nature of the proposed taxes, but I cannot get it at all at present.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the tenants of Lot No. 111b, in the ex-British concession at Hankow, were forcibly ejected by Chinese troops at the beginning of 1927, who proceeded to occupy the premises in conjunction with a Chinese concern calling itself the Hankow day school; that such ejection and occupation was and is a violation of the regulations relating to the ex-British concession at Hankow made pursuant to the Chen-O'Malley agreement; that the premises concerned are owned by a British subject and are mortgaged to a British subject; that the owner has received no rent and the mortgagee no interest since the ejection; that the occupiers refuse to pay for the water they consume and are protected in this refusal by Chinese troops; that the sum of tls. 17.640.90 is due to the bureau administering the district for taxes and water consumed which it is unable to collect owing to the occupation and protection referred to; and will he state what action he proposes to take to secure the observance of the regulations and the protection of the British interests involved?

I have just received a report from His Majesty's Minister on this case. His Majesty's Consul-General at Hankow has made representations to the local authorities in regard to it, I do not yet know with what result.

Will the right hon. Gentleman let me know the result of his representations?

Certainly.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that about August last the bureau administering the ex-British concession at Hankow pursuant to the Chen-O'Malley agreement were instructed by the Chinese authorities to impose a tax on all property of 30 per cent. of one month's rent for barrack building, and a tax of 10 per cent. for bandit suppression; that such taxation is not authorised by the provisions of Articles 13 and 16 of the regulations made under the Chen-O'Malley agreement; that payment of such taxes is nevertheless being enforced from Chinese and British owners of property; and will he state what steps he proposes to take to secure the observance of the regulations and to protect the British interests involved?

This breach of the Chen-O'Malley agreement has been reported to me by His Majesty's Minister, but the statement that payment is enforced from British property owners is not confirmed. Representations to the local authorities have been made by His Majesty's Consul-General at Hankow.

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that British property owners, even if not directly concerned are, indirectly concerned in this tax owing to the fact that they own properties jointly with the Chinese?

I am afraid that I did not catch the hon. Member's question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that British property owners come within the scope of this tax even if they are not directly affected because wherever they own property jointly with Chinese they have to pay their share of the tax?

The first question I should want answered is whether, in fact, the British do own property either in whole or in part.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government propose to open negotiations with the Chinese Government for the revision of the existing treaties?

The further questions involved in treaty revision were dicussed by His Majesty's Minister during his recent negotiations with the Chinese authorities on the subject of the tariff, and the whole subject is now being considered by His Majesty's Government.

In view of the very large business interests at stake in China, has the right hon. Gentleman thought of sending out British trade union leaders to co-operate there?

I confess that I have not considered sending out either trade unionist leaders or representatives of the employers. I do not think that that would be necessary, though we are, of course, through the Board of Trade, in close touch with commercial interests in that country.

Is the Foreign Secretary aware of the very considerable efforts that the American Government are making to secure trading operations under the Constitution of China—

We cannot hear a word!

and does ho not think it worth while to consider in these circumstances, as a new China is being established, the making of a special effort to develop our trading relations with China?

The hon. Member passes from one subject to another rather rapidly. His first proposal was that trade union leaders should be sent out to help in the negotiations in regard to such treaty revision as is necessary. That, I think, is not a suggestion upon which it would be wise to act. As regards trade propaganda in China, I should be glad if he would communicate with the Secretary of the Department of Overseas Trade.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the damage done to the war memorial at Hankow on the 4th January, 1927, and to which Mr. Chen on behalf of the Nationalist Government undertook to effect the necessary repairs, has yet been repaired?

I have received no further information since the reply returned to my Hon. and gallant Friend on the 7th March last.

In view of the fact that a year has passed and the monument has not yet been repaired, will my right hon. Friend keep this in mind in the negotiations with the Chinese?

I will make inquiries as to how the matter stands at present.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in view of the fact that a number of French and Italian representatives of high rank attended officially the funeral on the Riviera and the memorial service in Paris of the Grand Duke Nicholas, former commander-in-chief of the Russian forces in the War, whether the British Government and British Army were officially represented at these two ceremonies; and, if so, by whom?

His Majesty's Government and the British Army were not represented at the services referred to in the question, but His Majesty's Government and the Army Council were represented at the corresponding memorial service held in London on the same day.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why we did not send a special deputation, in view of the fact that both the Italian and the French Governments were represented by high officials?

Because His Majesty's Government thought it was sufficient that we should be represented at the ceremony which was held in this country.

Could we not have sent the military attache at Paris at the cost of a railway fare?

Yes, Sir; it is not a question of the expense of a railway ticket.

Would this not have been a gracious recognition of the great service of the Russian Army to the Allied cause during the War?

Yes, Sir. I think it was right and due to the services of the Russians in the War that we should mark our respect, but that was done by attendance at the memorial service in this country.

My question was whether this would not have been a gracious recognition of the services of the Russian soldiers in the late War and their great services to our cause.

(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any statement to make regarding the attitude which His Majesty's Government propose to adopt in relation to the present disturbances in Afghanistan?

His Majesty's Government have no intention of interfering in the internal affaire of Afghanistan by supporting or assisting any of the parties at present contending for power in that country. They earnestly desire the establishment of a strong central Government, and they will be prepared, when this Government is established, to show their friendship for the Afghan people by giving it such assistance as they can in the reconstruction and development of the country. King Amanulla has formally announced his abdication to His Majesty's Government, and consequently, until it is clear that in spite of this abdication he is regarded as their King by the people of Afghanistan generally, His Majesty's Government are unable to regard his Government as the rightful Afghan Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether suitable recognition was spontaneously and at once given by the German Government to our Government as to the rescue of her nationals from Kabul by British aircraft?

At the end of last year I received from the German Ambassador an expression of his warm thanks for the services rendered, and the German Government similarly expressed their thanks to His Majesty's Ambassador at Berlin some 10 days later. I may perhaps quote the terms of the communiation from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs:

"They would take the opportunity of expressing to His Majesty's Government their sincere thanks for the assistance rendered by them and by the Indian Government in rescuing the German women and children from Kabul in the most difficult circumstances. The German Government request that their thanks may also be conveyed to the Government of India."

Was any similar communication given by the German Government to the German Press?

Yes, Sir. I understand that the Press Bureau of the Foreign Office in Berlin did make a communication to the German Press, and I think it is regrettable that the German Press paid so little attention to it.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, what has been the attitude of the Afghan factions towards the British Mission or Consulates?

The various parties have all respected the sanctity of the British Legation at Kabul, although considerable material damage was done to the buildings last December, when the Legation lay in the line of fire between the forces of King Amanullah and Habibulla Khan. Similarly, the postion of the British Consul at Jalalabad appears to have been respected by all parties, although there has been a report, not confirmed, that the Consulate suffered damage in the course of the disturbances. No disturbances have taken place in the area of the British Consulate at Kandahar.

Has my right hon. Friend seen the report, which I hope is wrong, that it is proposed to withdraw Sir Francis Humphrys and his staff from Kabul?

I do not think that question arises. If my hon. and gallant Friend wishes to ask a question on the subject, perhaps he will be good enough to put it on the Paper.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the recent bombing accident on the frontier has had any effect upon the Afghans?

Not as far I know.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any special instructions have been issued to His Majesty's representative in Belgrade regarding relations with the new regime in Yugoslavia?

No, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what decision he has reached in the case of Mr. A. J. Brewer, second officer of the Clan Line ss. "Clan Lamont," who, after arrest on the charge of theft of £l, was imprisoned for nine months while awaiting trial in Portuguese West Africa, and was then condemned to 360 days' imprisonment and £18 fine or another 90 days' imprisonment; and what action he has decided to take?

Instructions are being sent to His Majesty's Ambassador at Lisbon to request the Portuguese Government to order a revision of Mr. Brewer's case.

Will any question of compensation arise?

No, Sir, at any rate not at this stage. What we are asking for is a revision of the trial.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the German Government has submitted a Memorandum on the British proposals for the revision of the 1914 international agreement for the protection of human life at sea; and the nature of the proposals therein contained?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The Memorandum comments in detail on the British proposals, and in some cases puts forward other suggestions bearing on the various technical questions which will come up for discussion at the forthcoming Conference for the revision of the 1914 Convention.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been called to a statement by Mr. Kellogg in Washington on 24th January that another attempt would be made before 4th March to hasten the negotiations for the conclusion of a new arbitration treaty with Great Britain, and that a draft treaty had been forwarded to London 13 months ago, but the British Government had not yet signified either its aproval or rejection; and whether all the replies are now to hand from the several Dominion Governments on this subject?

I have seen the report of the statement attributed to Mr. Kellogg. We have not yet received the answer of one of the Dominion Governments to the inquiry which we addressed to all of them last March, and the considered replies of two others were only received during the last few weeks. In this connection it should be remembered that the attention of all our Governments was for a considerable part of last year concentrated on the negotiations for the Treaty for the Renunciation of War, which it was necessary to bring to a successful conclusion before taking up more closely the Arbitration Treaty. His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom are now engaged in a careful examination and comparison of the observations of the Dominion Governments as well as of the material which they have themselves collected. They attach the highest importance to obtaining complete agreement among all His Majesty's Governments, and further exchanges of opinion will be necessary before they can send a definite reply. I may add that this Treaty is of particular importance, as it will presumably form the model for many others.

Is it not the fact that the Kellogg Pact outlaws war altogether; and, in view of the fact that the Foreign Secretary, on Monday of this week, said that we had signed that Treaty without any reservations whatever, will he, in preparing this draft, take the same view, that it should be all-inclusive?

I cannot tell the hon. Gentleman what kind of Arbitration Treaty we should desire to see until the examination and communication of which I have already spoken arc complete, but I will try to make myself, by my conduct, as consistent as I can.

Colonel Woodcock.

rose—

The hon. Member has received a very full answer.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the number of requests which have been made during the last two years by officers of the ex-mate class to take specialist courses; and what number have been selected?

Twenty-one officers, ex-mates, applied to take specialist courses, of whom 10 were selected.

Does not my right hon. Friend think that this proportion of ex-mates is very small, and is there any reason why they should not receive a larger proportion of these opportunities?

No, Sir; I do not think that the proportion is small.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the number of Lieut.-Commanders (ex-mate class) who have been promoted to the rank of Commander since the 1920 scheme?

Two ex-mates have ben promoted to Commander on the Active List since June, 1926, when the first officer (ex-mate) came within the zone for promotion to Commander.

Is not this a very small proportion of promotion for these officers?

It is only since 1926. The 1920 scheme was a scheme for the special retirement of surplus officers.

Have not at least 100 officers who were not ex-mates been promoted during the same period?

Does not my right hon. Friend think that, when only two of these officers out of the whole number have been promoted, it is quite disproportionate to the total number of promotions since then?

That is a matter of opinion. I have no prejudice against the scheme, and I cannot admit that it is a small proportion.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why the number is so small? Is it due to a lack of candidates, or to limitations imposed by the regulations?

I cannot say off-hand. If the hon. Member will put down a question raising that point, I will give him an answer.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether seeing that a man who is eligible for both disablement and service pensions under the existing regulations is only awarded the larger pension in full and one-half of the other, he will consider amending the regulations so that a man will receive the full amount of both disablement and service pensions to which he is separately entitled?

The present method of combining the service and disablement elements in these cases was determined after very full and careful consideration, and is common to the three fighting Services. I regret that I am unable to entertain the suggestion that it should be modified.

Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman say why a man should not draw two pensions if he has earned two pensions, one for service and one to compensate him for his disablement'?

The system is infinitely more favourable now than it was before the War. A Committee has gone very carefully into the whole matter, and it was decided, in view of the fact that the pensions are considerably larger than before the War, that this would be the fairest way of doing it.

Is not an ex-service man, on the final determination of his degree of disability, entitled to the full amount of pension both for disablement and for service?

I think that in certain cases that is so, hut I should like further notice of that question.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will state the number of ratings, and the percentage to the total strength, invalided out of the Navy in each of the years ending December, 1922, 1923, 1924, 1925, 1926, 1927 and 1928; and the number in each year that were granted disability pensions?

As the reply is in tabular form I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will consider the desirability of making the marriage allowance payable to married ratings above the age of 21?

The present age limit rule was carefully considered when marriage allowance was instituted. It has been reviewed on many occasions since, and I am not prepared to recommend any alteration.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the House the benefit of the investigations as to why they limit the age above 21?

I should have to look up the report of the Committee, but I will endeavour to do so.

Is it not a fact that they can get this marriage allowance at 25?

Yes, the age is 25 in the Navy.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is in a position to announce any decision with regard to a pension or superannuation fund for captains and officers oft the Royal Fleet Auxiliary Service, especially in view of the low pay in this service compared to that in well-managed private shipping lines under the British flag; and if he is aware that, in addition to the pension and superannuation schemes in force in nearly all other Government Departments, many of the good private shipping companies on the British register have pension funds for their captains and officers?

I regret that I am not yet in a position to announce any decision with regard to a pension or superannuation fund for captains and officers of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary Service. The matter is one of considerable difficulty, involving considerations of some complexity, but it is anticipated that a satisfactory solution will soon be reached. The rates of pay in this Service are in accordance with the agreements arrived at on the National Maritime Board. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it very unfortunate that the Admiralty should lag behind private employers? Should not they rather set an example to private employers? What is the difficulty in coming to a decision?

I have said I hope a satisfactory decision will soon be reached. So I do.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he answered a question in practically the same terms a year ago, and that three years have elapsed since he received a deputation of all the officers' organisations, including the engineers, and promised a sympathetic consideration to their representations?

I regret that there has been this delay, and I hope a satisfactory arrangement will be come to.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether a reply can now be given to General Request, No. 15, of the 1922 Welfare Conference?

Admiralty Fleet Order No. 496, dated 29th February, 1924, intimated that this Request had been fully considered and that it was regretted that it had not been found possible to accede to it.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what rates of Income Tax were charged on the income of naval officers for the financial year 1915–16?

The incomes of naval officers for the financial year 1915–16 were charged with Income Tax at the same rates as those of taxpayers generally, except that incomes from naval sources below £160 a year were exempt and incomes from naval sources exceeding £160 and not exceeding £300 a year were charged at 9d. in the £ on the excess over £160 per annum.

Does that mean that the higher incomes were not considered earned?

I think the arrangement was rather better for the Navy than it was for ordinary persons.

That does not answer the question whether the salary is going to be considered earned or not earned.

I am afraid I do not understand my hon. Friend's question. The point was that the Income Tax deduction was rather more favourable to the Navy than to civilians and that all incomes are treated in the same way.

asked the Minister of Labour how many unemployed miners have now arrived in London to take up temporary employment at the Royal parks; how many are married men: whether their wives and families accompany them; what arrangements were made for housing accommodation; and how long the work upon which they areengaged will last?

The number of men from the depressed areas now in employment in the Royal parks is 420, of whom 260 are married. No dependants of these men have so far removed. Lodg- ings were found in advance for the men through Employment Exchange machinery. The work itself will last about 12 weeks but it does not follow that the engagement of individual men will last so long. The men are expected to make every effort to secure more permanent employment, and the married men will be assisted to find accommodation and to remove their families under the special financial arrangements announced in the Press on January 17th.

Are there any special financial arrangements to enable men who are here by themselves, as their families are still in the depressed areas, to keep two homes going?

That raises a different question. I should not like to say without examination. Perhaps the hon. Member will put down a question or communicate with me.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it advisable, instead of bringing married men from de pressed areas, to bring single men?

That question does not arise.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are already very large numbers of unemployed men in London, and has his attention been called to the remarks of two London magistrates about the tragedy of bringing men from one depressed area to another?

What facilities are provided for married men to return home, and at whose expense are they enabled to do so?

It is not contemplated that they should return home during the 12 weeks. The contemplation was that they should be able to find work as employment improved during the first months of the spring which will enable them permanently to get occupation outside the depressed areas.

rose—

The hon. Member is very considerably extending the scope of the question.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of men, women and juveniles who have been placed in em- ployment in the London area under the transference of labour scheme which deals with unemployment in the mining districts; and how many of these transfers were assisted from the Lord Mayor's Fund?

The numbers of direct transfers through the Employment Exchanges from the depressed areas to employment in the Greater London area are:

May I ask whether the grant of maintenance from the Lord Mayor's Fund for the 800 boys is a weekly sum paid to them for lodgings or because their wages are low?

I should like to be precisely accurate on the matter, and perhaps the hon. Member will put the question down.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government has under consideration any plans for providing useful employment for any considerable number of the existing unemployed; and, if so, will he specify what these plans are?

I have been asked to reply. In the opinion of the Government the only really satisfactory method of reducing the number of unemployed is by re-absorption into industry, and not by the artificial creation of work. The general policy of the Government—of which the De-rating proposals are one example—is therefore directed to the removal of obstacles to the revival of industry. In so far as employment is not likely to be available for the unemployed In the future in their own trades or industries, arrangements for training and transfer are being developed to the utmost practicable extent. Since August, over 11,000 men, women and boys have been thus transferred by the Ministry of Labour, besides those who have moved on their own accord, and the rate of transfer is increasing. At the same time certain facilities for obtaining Government grants remain available in aid of relief works set up by local authorities in areas of exceptional unemployment.

Could the right hon. Gentleman give the House any figures as to the number of people displaced in the industry into which these people have been put?

If the right hon. Gentleman will specify exactly what he means I will try to get him any figures that are available. I am not sure what exactly is the point which he wishes to raise.

I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether his Department has any knowledge of the number of people displaced in the particular industries in which these people, who have been trained for other work, (have already found employment?

AS far as I am aware, no statistics exist as to the number of people displaced, nor have we reason to believe that numbers of persons are displaced. What is quite clear is that we are training people in some employments in which there is a need for workers who are not easily obtained at the moment, and in every case it must be quite clear that you cannot have instructional factories and yet be debarred from instructing the men in any occupation.

Arising out of the original answer, will the right hon. Gentleman ask the Prime Minister whether he is seeking to emulate a gentleman named Nero?

Is it not a fact that there are tens of thousands of unemployed men in London—men who were in London—and that these men are displaced by those who have been brought in to do work in the public parks?

The answer is "No."

Is it not a fact that there are tens of thousands of unskilled workers out of employment in London available for relief work in the public parks, to which the right hon. Gentleman's Department is transferring men from other districts?

The answer is quite clear. The work in question would not have been set in hand at all had it not been for the policy of transfer, and for that reason no persons are displaced.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House why that or similar work could not be put in hand in order that the unemployed men of London may get a chance of work?

Schemes of various kinds have, I believe, already been set up.

That is untrue.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that if he persists in carrying his schemes to a successful conclusion, and if he reduces substantially the number of unemployed, he will ruin the chances of the Socialist party at the General Election?

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in view of the great volume of unemployment continuing amongst dock labourers, he is now prepared to reexamine the system of unemployment relief for casual workers in view of the unfair way in which this works out in many cases; if he is aware, for example, that man who works three half-days in a week only is entitled to no unemployment benefit and only draws 18s. pay, whereas if he is unsuccessful in securing three half-days' work and has a wife and five children he draws 34s. unemployment relief, and that it is in consequence a temptation to a man who has. for example, signed on Wednesday and Thursday and worked half a day on Friday and Saturday, not to take a half-day's work that offers on the Monday so that he can then draw the benefit; and if he is aware that if dockers only had to sign once a day, like men in other trades, much trouble would be saved and the employment insurance funds would benefit?

I think that the hon. and gallant Member is under a misapprehension. If a man works three half-days only in a given week, he may receive benefit for the remaining three days on which he did not work. I do not understand how the unemployment fund would benefit if dockers had to sign only once a day. The requirement of two attendances a day, in force at certain ports, is considered essential in order to secure adequate evidence of unemployment.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that now, after experience of this system, it is a fact that the willing workers, the best of the men, are often penalised, and it is a great temptation to the slacker men to take advantage of the scheme? Is be aware that that is where the saving will take place, and also that men will have a better opportunity of seeking work if they have not to attend twice a day at the Exchanges?

No, I am not aware of that, unless the hon. and gallant Member means that people are taking advantage of unemployment benefit who ought not to be allowed to do so. I think he is under a misapprehension, but, if he will communicate with me, I shall be glad to go into it with him.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that what happens is that a man who, if he gets another half-day's work will actually lose, stands at the edge of the crowd and does not catch the foreman's; eye, and that sort of thing?

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that by a recent decision given by the umpire under the Unemployment Insurance Acts an unemployed person ceases to be entitled to unemployment benefit when he or she reaches the age of 65 whether or not that person is qualified for the old age pension; can he give the approximate number of persons who are affected by this decision; and whether he intends to take any action in the matter?

asked the Minister of Labour whether the umpire's decision No. 3223/28, has constituted a definite and final ruling that men and women are not entitled to receive any unem- ployment benefit on reaching the age of 65, even if they may not be qualified to draw the old age pension; and, if so whether he will take steps to introduce measures to remove this disqualification?

The Umpire's decision in question merely affirmed the provisions of Section 37 (1) of the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Pensions Act, 1925, which enact that unemployment benefit is not payable to persons of the age of 65 or over. I have no statistics showing how many unemployed persons of this age, who were previously insured against unemployment, are not eligible for an old age pension but I have no reason to think that they can be more than a very few.

Was it the intention of the Minister and his draftsmen that, when a person was not entitled to his old age pension, he should be left stranded without other benefit?

I personally was not responsible for the drafting of the old Age Pensions Act, but, if the hon. and gallant Gentleman wishes to raise the point, I will consider it with my right hon. Friend who brought it in. It is a point which will need legislation in the case of any Amending Act.

Is it made any better whether there are few or many suffering, and would it not be better to remove the hardship instead of paying £400,000 to the brewers?

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that at no time during the last two years have less than 200,000 miners been wholly or temporarily unemployed; and if he can give an estimate of the number of miners who are unable to fulfil the 30 stamps qualification or will be unable on 19th April?

I am not able to make such an estimate. Although it is true that the number on the registers, except at one date, has not fallen below 200,000, this total includes those temporarily stopped, and the balance is largely made up of different individuals at different dates.

How is the right hon. Gentleman going to decide the general point if he does not form an estimate?

I have already stated that I am making inquiries.

Is it not necessary to get an estimate? Is the right hon. Gentleman trying to get an estimate in a typical case like that of the miners?

I have 6aid that I am making inquiries into the whole question, but, whether it will be possible to classify the information according to particular industries, I cannot say.

Are we to assume that if the number of unemployed colliers proves to be very large, some amelioration will be given to them?

The hon. Member must not make any assumption before the results are obtained.

Is the right hon. Member aware that there is almost universal approval in the country for a continuance of the present transition arrangement, and can he not make a statement quickly on the matter in order to dispel the apprehensions which prevail?

I believe there is apprehension, but the apprehension is largely exaggerated, and I would ask hon. Members, as they doubtless would be willing, to help me by dispelling the exaggeration.

asked the Minister of Labour an estimate of the number of miners in Durham County whose unemployment benefit will cease in April, 1929, as a result of the 30 stamps qualification?

I am not yet in possession of information which would enable me to make the estimate referred to.

Are we to understand that the right hon. Gentleman is seeking the information?

Yes.

And you will let us have it?

Yes, but I cannot tell the hon. Member when I shall be able to obtain it. At the present moment I can give only a rough guess as to the inclusive number, and I hesitate to give it to the hon. Member because he may rely upon it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this information has been asked for for months now? Can he tell us when he is likely to get it?

asked the Minister of Labour the number of men and women, respectively, who have been refused benefit at the Stockport Employment Exchange for the last 12 weeks on the ground of not genuinely seeking work; the number, respectively, who have appealed; and the number, respectively, who were successful on appeal?

During the three months ended 14th January, 1929, 58 applications for unemployment benefit by men and 252 by women made at the Stockport Employment Exchange were disallowed by the insurance officer on the ground that the applicants were not genuinely seeking work. I am unable to state how many of these applicants appealed against the decisions. In addition 30 claims by men and 18 by women were recommended for disallowance on the same ground by the Court of Referees on review after 78 days' benefit had been paid within the preceding six months.

Has the right hon. Gentleman yet made up his mind what is meant by the phrase "genuinely seeking work"?

Is it not possible to get the information as to the number of appeals to the referees?

I could give the hon. Member the number of appeals for the area for which the Court of Referees sits, but not for each district within that area.

Is there an appeal if a man is cut off after 78 days?

There are appeals within certain conditions, particulars of which I can give to the hon Member.

Would it not be possible for the right hon. Gentleman to obtain the information respecting the Stockport area from the Stockport Employment Exchange?

Not without undue trouble.

I would remind hon. Members that we are getting on very slowly with the questions upon the Paper.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that, for the four weeks ended 10th December, 1928, the percentage of disallowances by insurance officers is much higher than in the previous year; and if, in view of the greater amount of unemployment and consequent difficulty in finding work, he will advise his officers that, in every case where there is doubt, the benefit of the doubt should be given to the applicant for benefit?

At the end of 1928 the insurance officers dealt with large numbers of cases which a year previously would have been dealt with by rota committees; the proportions of disallowances by insurance officers in the two periods are therefore not comparable. In any event, I could not issue the instructions which the hon. Member suggests, since I should thereby be attempting, most improperly, to influence the decisions on claims to benefit.

Is not the fact that the insurance officer is dealing with these cases a reason why the right hon. Gentleman should instruct his officers to give the benefit of the doubt? Why should the benefit of the doubt be against the men?

Certainly not.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the whole trouble in the different districts is the interpretation of what is meant by "genuinely seeking work"? Will the right hon. Gentleman issue a circular or give an answer in this House defining what is "genuinely seeking work"?

I have already dealt with that question in detail. If the hon. Member wishes, I can give him the Umpire's decision on the point.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will issue instructions that, in cases where unemployed men are charged with an offence arising independently of the receipt of unemployment benefit, such persons shall not be deprived of their benefit by local officials of the Ministry until they have been found guilty of the offence for which they are charged by the Court?

Local officials of the Ministry are not empowered to disallow claims for benefit. If they are aware of circumstances which throw doubt on a claimant's title to benefit they must refer the matter to the chief insurance officer who would have regard to such of the facts as might have a bearing on the conditions for the receipt of benefit.

What right has an insurance officer to institute an inquiry in a case where a man is to be brought before a competent Court who will have to decide whether or not he has been guilty of a felony? What right has an officer of the Ministry of Labour to say that such a man is guilty before the Court has had an opportunity of expressing its opinion?

The hon. Member has misunderstood the facts of the case. What is desired by hon. Members opposite is that a decision shall be given with as little delay as possible, and it is right for an insurance officer to try to deal with the case as quickly as possible. If he does so, he has to take all relevant considerations into account, and he cannot keep out of his mind any circumstances arising out of another case.

I am afraid the Minister of Labour has not got the essence of the matter. [HON. MEMBERS: "Speech!"] Is the Minister aware that in this particular case the man was charged with an offence quite distinct from any benefit he was receiving from the Ministry of Labour, and that before there was an opportunity of going before the competent Court his benefit was stopped? I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he can justify such conduct on the part of any of his officers?

The hon. Member refers to a particular case. He does not refer to any particular case in his question, and I know of no particular case. If he has any particular case of this nature in his mind, perhaps he will communicate with me about it.

Arising out of that reply—

We are getting on very slowly with Questions.

asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been called to the action of the Derby Employment Exchange in stopping unemployment insurance benefit to two fitters named Herbert and Smedley, because they were unable to pay for medical certificates of fitness for employment in the Army Ordnance Depot at Aldershot; and whether he will cause full inquiry to be made into the case?

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

asked the Minister of Labour the number of unemployed miners in the County of Durham whose insurance benefit has been stopped during the last 12 months?

I regret that statistics giving the information desired are not available.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of men and women who were denied unemployment insurance benefit at the Rochdale Employment Ex change during 1928 on the point of not genuinely seeking work?

Complete statistics of the disallowace of claims to unemployment benefit made at the Rochdale Employment Exchange are available only from the 19th April, 1928. Between that date and 14th January, 1929, 265 claims made at that exchange by men and 383 by women were disallowed by insurance officers on the ground that the claimants were not genuinely seeking work. In addition, 81 claims by men and 42 by women were recommended for disallowance on the same ground by Courts of Referees on review after 78 days' benefit had been paid during the preceding six months.

Were the people who were refused benefit by the insurance officer informed that they had the right of appeal to the Court of Referees?

I think so, but, if the hon. Member wishes, I will look into the matter, or if he will put down a question I will give him an answer.

asked the Minister of Labour what number of miners were unemployed in Wrexham and district during the months of October, November, and December, 1928; whether any miners have been transferred to other districts owing to unemployment; and, if there were no unemployed miners, whether any application was made to the Employment Exchange to procure miners from other coal areas?

The numbers of insured workpeople classified as belonging to the coal mining industry recorded as unemployed at the Wrexham Exchange were 223 at 22nd Octoher, 1928, 225 at 26th November, 1928, and 229 at 17th December, 1928. Wrexham is not regarded as a depressed area for the purpose of the Industrial Transference Scheme. A number of coal mining vacancies for special classes of workers not available locally have been notified to the Wrexham Exchange. Some of these vacancies have been filled by men brought forward from other areas and further transfers are being arranged.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what special class of miners are required for Wrexham?

I am not an expert in mining, like some hon. Members opposite, but? am told—

You might make yourself an expert at your job. [Inter ruption.]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the manager of the Gresford Colliery, Wrexham, quite recently stated that he required 300 colliers? Can the right hon. Gentleman account, therefore, for the number of unemployed colliers registering at the Wrexham Exchange?

The answer, as far as I am aware, is that a particular kind of miner is required because of the difference of seams in different places. I speak subject to reservation, but I undertand that, according to the nature of the seam and the nature of the employment, one kind of collier from one district is more experienced than a collier from another district.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this situation is being taken advantage of to deprive men of benefit in other districts?

I am not aware of that fact.

asked the Minister of Labour whether the application of Mr. John Twist, of Parkfield Terrace, Haydock, for unemployment benefit was in order when made at the Employment Exchange at St. Helens, Lancashire, why the claim was referred to London, and why there has been delay in arriving at a decision?

I regret that inquiries in this case have not yet been completed. I will communicate with the hon. Member as soon as possible.

Can the right hon. Gentleman do anything to expedite these cases?

I am expediting every one of these inquiries as fast as I can. The number of inquiries is very considerable ax the present time, the amount of sickness among the officials is very great, and the consequence is that beyond a certain degree I cannot press them further.

Even making allowances for sickness among the officials, does it take, on the average, 10 to 12 weeks to decide a question of this kind?

Certainly not. On the average that is not the case, by any manner of means. There are sometimes exceptional cases and exceptional difficulty, and those cases take, longer than others.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the decision given on 7th December as to the right of inquiry into incomes of relatives of applicants for unemployment benefit was given by the deputy umpire; and if, in view of the importance of the said decision, he will allow a further appeal to the chief umpire?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, the right of appeal does not depend on any permission to be given by me; in accordance with the provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Acts, the decision of a deputy-umpire is final and conclusive.