asked the Minister of Pensions if he is aware that George Lister, late A. B. 55/3423, Royal Navy, Reference No. ll/N/21540, who has been detained for 12 years in Broadmoor Asylum, has applied for a pension for War service, and that this has been refused on the grounds that more than seven years have expired from date of discharge; and, seeing that a man in an asylum has not adequate means of keeping in touch with the regulations, that Lister's brother died from the effects of War service, but his relations have not been able to establish their claim, and the elderly parents, dependent on these two sons, are now penniless, whether, in view of his assurance that any case outside the seven years time limit would receive every consideration if sufficient medical evidence could be provided, he will reconsider the decision given in the case of George Lister?

I am aware of the facts of this case. As, however, I have already informed the hon. and gallant Member, there is nothing in the information before me which would justify me in adopting the course suggested.

How can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman justify refusing a lunatic the right to appeal on the ground that he did not appeal within the seven years' limit?

The man has made other communications to the Ministry, but one claim that he is making is that he is not insane.

Would the right hon. and gallant Gentleman consider not preventing that claim on the ground that it is beyond the seven years' limit?

It is not the seven years' limit alone that has debarred the claim. The man referred to murdered a seaman and was found guilty of murder and to be insane.

But has not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman informed me that the trouble is that the claim is beyond the seven years' limit, and now he says it has nothing to do with that?

I have answered also on the other ground, that there are no adequate reasons, apart from the seven years' limit altogether, to grant the claim.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that Mr. A. E. Rogers, of 35, Mount Vernon Street, Liverpool, who joined up for war service in January, 1917, and was discharged from hospital suffering from neurosis; and classified C 3, in August 1917, who rejoined in January, 1918, and after four months was again admitted into hospital suffering from so-called shell-shock, being finally discharged in October, 1918, and has had both pension and treatment stopped on the grounds that his condition is not now due to war service; and whether, in view of the Ministry's acceptance previously that the disability, neurosis, was attributable to service and the man's total incapacity for work, he will now remove him from the liability of being maintained by the guardians of the poor in the West Derby Union of Lancashire?

I am fully aware of the facts of this case. On the occasion of his first enlistment, after three weeks' effective service at home, Mr. Rogers spent 10 months in hospital on account of a condition described as disseminated spinal sclerosis. On his second enlistment, he did four months' work in the Liverpool docks, followed by six months in hospital on account of neurosis. In this case, which has been given every consideration, I am advised that whatever elements, if any, in the case originally may have been connected with service, the man's present condition is not one in regard to which the Ministry would be justified in taking further action.

In view of the fact that it was the Ministry's doctors themselves who accepted this man's condition as due to his service while he was with the colours, and that the local authorities are now maintaining this man for a disability which was at one time accepted by the Ministry, cannot the case be reviewed?

It is true that this man did obtain payment from the Ministry, but I have evidence that on more than one occasion he deliberately deceived the medical board.

Has the pensioner himself had an opportunity of refuting this allegation that is now made for the first time, as far as I am concerned?

The claim that this man was injured by shell shock was quite clearly disproved owing to the fact that he never went overseas and has never been under fire.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say whether or not the opinion expressed by his medical advisers was contrary to the subsequent diagnosis that has been formed?

Yes, undoubtedly, mistakes were made owing to the way in which this man deceived us.

As this is a very important matter for the ratepayers of Liverpool, will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say whether the doctors who first of all examined this man have since been asked for their opinion as to his present condition?

I have very full evidence, and I shall be happy to explain to the hon. Member how this man has on two occasions at least deceived the medical boards.

asked the Minister of Pensions if he is aware that James Reilly, late private Highland Light Infantry, No. 12,715, and lately residing on the south side of Glasgow, died in Craig-lochart Hospital, in Edinburgh, on the 29th January, 1929; that the pension authorities refused to provide for his burial; that as a result he was buried in common ground; and if he will take steps to have full inquiry made and, if possible, a burial granted which will not be in common ground?

I have inquired into the facts of this case, which was, I regret, not eligible for a funeral grant. I have no authority to defray funeral expenses in cases where death has occurred from causes which are not connected with the man's war service.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that this matter is subject to an appeal, and how can he say that the man's condition was not due to war service when there is going to be an appeal?

Of course, if there are any new facts which would enable me to do anything more than I am doing now, I shall be very happy to do it.

Before the appeal is decided, would it not be better to treat this man to a decent burial? Is it not common justice, before the appeal is decided, that the man should be buried, not as a pauper, but as an ordinary citizen?

Is it not a fact that the British Legion would give assistance towards that funeral?

I do not know whether I ought to answer about the British Legion, but I hear they were appealed to, and refused.

But in a case like this, is it not possible for the right hon. and gallant Gentleman's officials or someone else to see, with this terrible poverty, that a man who has admittedly suffered is given at least a decent burial?

I entirely appreciate the hon. Member's point of view, and if new facts enable me to help, I will gladly do so.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention was called to the trials of two disabled ex-service men, Mr. Holden and Mr. Sarll, on 10th January at the Central Criminal Court, and to the remarks of the Judge in each case; and whether he will consider steps by which such cases can be dealt with at the discretion of the Judge otherwise than by the usual criminal procedure?

Everyone must feel the utmost sympathy with ex-service men who, by reason of mental impairment due to war service, bring themselves within the operation of the criminal law. The first difficulty is that the full facts cannot usually be determined until the man concerned has been brought before a Court of Trial. The question then arises as to the alternative courses of action that are open to the Court. On this point, I should observe that the learned Judges who dealt with the two cases mentioned by my Noble Friend expressed no dissatisfaction with the courses open to them under the law. As the law stands, a man who is found insane or mentally defective can be sent to a suitable institution other than a prison. In other cases, it is open to the Court to bind the man over on condition of his entering a suitable institution as a voluntary inmate if he is willing to do so.

In the case of Holden the jury, with all the facts before them, did not find him insane, and he cannot at present be certified medically insane without further observation. Meanwhile, he is receiving every care and attention; and X-ray examination is being arranged, in consultation with the Ministry of Pensions; and there may be a question of an operation.

The case of Sarll is on a quite different footing. He has no disability pension, and I understand that his condition cannot be attributed in any way to his war service, which was not rendered overseas. The learned Judge was prepared to bind him over on condition that he went into a suitable home, but he refused.

asked the Home Secretary if he has now completed his inquiries into the facts as to how many colliery companies in Great Britain have insured and how many have not insured against their liabilities to their employés under the Workmen's Compensation Acts: and can he state how many employés are covered by insurance and how many are not so insured?

The total number of colliery owners insured with insurance companies or mutual indemnity associations was, according to the last returns, 1,607. The total number uninsured was 476. The aggregate number of persons employed at the insured collieries was. shown by the returns to be 782,619. The corresponding figure for the uninsured collieries was 242,299.

In making these inquiries, has the right hon. Gentleman ascertained what proportion of these people were affected by the liquidation of the concerns?

There are other questions on that point.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is now able to provide statistics showing, with reference to the colliery companies in South Wales that have gone into liquidation during the last two years, the number which had not insured with an insurance company against workmen's compensation risk; and the number of workmen who are deprived of their right to compensation in consequence?

My information on this point is not quite complete but replies received from the liquidators of 32 South Wales companies, show that three of these companies had not insured and that in one case the failure to insure resulted in a permanent loss of compensation affecting 12 workmen. As explained in my replies to other questions on this subject, hardship has also been suffered by a number of workmen through the stoppage of the weekly payments pending a final settlement of the claims.

asked the Home Secretary, (1) whether he is aware that about 800 miners have been deprived of their compensation payments because the Cambrian Colliery Company, the Naval Colliery Company, and the Glamorgan Colliery Company have gone into liquidation without having insured against liabilities to their employés, under the Workmen's Compensation Acts; and whether, in view of the distress in which these disabled miners and their dependants have been placed, he will take steps to expedite the payment of the compensation due;

(2) whether, in view of the gravity of the situation, he has given further consideration to the question of introducing this Session a Bill making it compulsory on all colliery companies to insure with an insurance company against workmen's compensation risks?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that several thousands of disabled miners and other workers employed in industries in which serious and/or fatal accidents are frequent have been deprived of their compensation payments in part or in whole due to the failure of the employers to insure against their liabilities to their employés under the Workmen's Compensation Acts; and, in view of the distress in which these disabled workers and their dependants have been placed, will the Government amend the Workmen's Compensation Acts during this Parliament?

The inquiries I have been making in connection with liquidation of colliery companies do not disclose quite so serious a situation as has been represented. There do not seem to have been more than four cases during the last two years, affecting some 24 workmen or their dependants, where, through failure to insure, the compensation has been permanently lost. On the other hand, it is the case that many workmen have suffered hardship through being kept out of their compensation for longer or shorter periods during the winding-up of the companies. I think it is clear that the present position is unsatisfactory and that it must be dealt with. I need hardly say that I sympathise very much with the unfortunate position in which these workmen are placed and I am taking steps to ascertain whether anything can be done immediately to enable liquidators, in those cases (which form the majority) where assets exist, to make-advances in compensation cases before liquidation is completed. The question of compulsory insurance is a much larger one. Obviously, any measure, if it were decided to adopt the system, could not be limited to colliery owners but would have to cover all industries and classes of employment, and there would be many technical difficulties in working out a scheme for the purpose. The whole position is being examined, but it is clear that I could not possibly give the pledge asked for without the fullest inquiry and consultation with my colleagues, and that any legislation on the subject would necessarily be of a complicated character.

May I draw attention to the fact that the question to the Prime Minister refers to the need for legislation affecting injuries to other classes of workers and does not relate to miners alone? Further, has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been drawn to the White Paper issued by the Government a few weeks ago dealing with the financial aspects of this question in the Workmen's Compensation Act of last year, which revealed that 25 per cent. of the people employed are not covered by insurance? [HON. MEMBERS "Speech!"] Is not that a serious state of things?

This is a very important question, and it cannot possibly be decided without the fullest inquiry. I am making inquiries as to what legislation would be needed and what the effect of it would be. It is a far-reaching question.

Is there any prospect that the Government will bring forward such a Measure during the present Parliament?

There will be plenty of time in the next Parliament.

Will the Borne Secretary press for an immediate inquiry into the position of the men at the Cambrian and other collieries who have not received any compensation during the last three months? As they are in adverse circumstances, will he not make immediate inquiries?

Yes, certainly; that is the very question upon which I am consulting my legal advisers.

asked the Home Secretary whether, in order to afford the electors the opportunity of making themselves acquainted with the opposing arguments on the subject of club regulations, he will cause to be circulated, in advance of the General Election, the memorandum which he is preparing on the subject?

This is a memorandum on the whole licensing question, which I am preparing for the Cabinet and is, of course, strictly confidential.

asked the Home Secretary if he will specify exactly what restrictions remain under the Defence of the Realm Act?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave on 31st January to my hon. Friend the Member for Acton (Sir H. Brittain).

Are there any other restrictions?

No other restrictions of any kind except those imposed by this House.

I want a list.

I will give my hon. Friend a list of the Statute's if he likes, but they are all on the Statute Book.

Am I not right in believing that my right hon. Friend told me. in reply to my question, that "D.O.R.A." was dead?

Yes, dead and buried.

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that some thousands of miners and other workers transferred from depressed industrial districts to employment, or absent in search of employment elsewhere, have been struck off the new voters' lists for their habitual homes and have thereby been disfranchised, as they have not been placed upon the new voters' lists anywhere else owing to being compelled to shift from lodging to lodging whilst in or seeking intermittent employment during the three months' qualifying period up to 1st December, 1923; and will he take the necessary steps to empower the registration officers to retain the names of all such persons as absent voters upon the incoming registers at the polling districts within which their habitual homes are situated so that they may preserve their right to exercise the Franchise at the forthcoming General Election?

I can only refer to the reply given on the 22nd November last to the question put by the hon. Member for Elland (Mr. Robinson).

Has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been drawn to the position disclosed by the publication of the new voters' lists, and is he aware that a considerable number—a few thousand at any rate—of miners and other transferred workers have lost their right to register for their home place, and have not been put on for the places to which they have gone; and is it not rather serious that men transferred by the Government should be disfranchised in this way?

Really. the hon. Member must not say that. There is no difference at all between a man who is transferred, which is a voluntary operation on his part, under a Government scheme, and a man who goes from one part of the country to another to obtain fresh employment. The Acts are very wide and very democratic. A very short residence is required, but there must be some residence in order to get the voters' lists made up.

But is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, owing to the abnormal conditions of unemployment, there has been an abnormal reduction of the voters' register in the mining and distressed areas?

I admit the difficulty, but it occurs all over the country in regard to men who are transferred, and there is no power to get them on the register.

asked the Home Secretary whether it is his intention to introduce this Session a Bill to implement the recommendations of the inter-Parliamentary Committee in connection with charitable collections?

I regret that in view of the state of public business, I cannot promise to introduce a Bill this Session.

asked the Home Secretary (1) if he will appoint a special commission to inquire into and report upon the police supervision of night clubs;

(2) how many night clubs have been closed in London as a result of law breaking from 1924 to 1927?

The number of "night clubs" struck off the Register in 1924–27 is, I am informed, 48. I do not think it necessary or desirable to appoint a special Commission to report upon the matter. The Royal Commission now sitting on police administration is dealing with certain points, and the Commissioner and myself are going carefully and fully into the whole matter. In particular, I have informed the Commissioner that I propose to review the acts and character of all aliens concerned in the administration of night clubs, or concerned in the recent Goddard case, and have asked him to provide me with all relevant information in this connection. I have reason to believe that as a result of the recent proceedings a number of aliens have already left the country, and orders have been given preventing their re-entry without my sanction. I have always been ready to use and have used my powers of deporting aliens to the utmost degree advisable in connection with the breaking of the law and other misdeeds in clubs and I shall continue to use these powers in proper cases. I have this morning received from the Commissioner reports on some further cases which I am now considering. I have at the same time asked the Commissioner to let me have his considered opinion, as soon as he is able to give it, as to the best method of dealing with such clubs. This being so, I hope that the hon. Member and the House will allow the Commissioner and myself to deal with the matter.

Will the Commission which is now sitting have power within their Terms of Reference to go into the whole matter of the police supervision of the clubs; and will the necessary privacy required for such an inquiry be recognised by the Commission?

The Commission have power to take evidence in private. It is not possible for me to interpret the reference to the Commission; they must interpret their own reference, but they undoubtedly have power to go a certain way, and the Commissioner's power is adequate to deal satisfactorily with the other part of the way.

Is the supervision of this particular class of work being transferred from the uniformed branch to the Criminal Investigation Department?

Would the hon. Member defer that question for a short time?

What happened to the Bill which the right hon. Gentleman prepared and was going to introduce at the beginning of this Parliament?

Like so many good efforts, it "went west."

Have not recent events strengthened the hands of the right hon. Gentleman and myself in our desire to improve these matters?

I am quite sure that if it is necessary to ask my colleagues in the Government for further powers in this matter, the information which the hon. and gallant Gentleman has will support us in that effort.

Will the Home Secretary say whether he is maintaining friendly relations with any of these deported night club keepers?

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen a statement by Sir William Horwood before this Commission, which implies that the right hon. Gentleman has not utilised to the full his powers to deport aliens?

I would like to postpone answering that question. I have not had notice of it, but, if necessary, I shall be prepared to make a statement. I think that on the whole, however, it is better that there should be no controversy between the late Commissioner and myself.

asked the Home Secretary the number of officers at Maidstone Prison against whom disciplinary action has been taken during the past 12 months; whether at disciplinary inquiries officers are allowed the right of questioning witnesses; and whether he is prepared to consider the setting up of machinery to deal with disciplinary cases similar to that now operating in the police forces of England, Scotland and Wales?

Apart from a few minor offences, there have been no cases at Maidstone Prison within the last 12 months in which disciplinary action has been taken as a result of an inquiry. At disciplinary inquiries prison officers are allowed the right of questioning witnesses. All prison officers have a right of appeil to the Secretary of State as the head of the prison service, and it is open to him, if the circumstances warrant it, to arrange for an inquiry by an independent person.

In view of the experience that has been gained in the last 12 months of the appeal tribunal in the police service, could not the right hon. Gentleman now extend the experimental stage to the prison service?

The hon Member does not perhaps realise that the Secretary of State is in a very real degree the head of the prison service, and all questions of dismissal have actually to come up before me for my personal decision before they can be carried out. Therefore, there is, in effect, an appeal to me, and, if an officer desires to put any statement before me, he has a right to do it, and it is invariably considered by me before I arrive at a deci- sion; I have also power to direct a separate inquiry if I think well.

I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman understands that I am anxious to remove the handicap of his having to decide something in the absence of the officer; if a prison appeal tribunal could be established, would it cot ease the situation considerably?

I have had no request of that kind from the prison officers. Everything is going very satisfactorily, so far as I know, in the prison service, but, if the hon. Member has any information on this subject and will communicate with me, I Bill be glad to look into it.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that at the New Gallery Cinema, Regent Street, on Sunday last, 3rd February, the Film Society presented a film entitled "The End of St. Petersburg," a Russian picture commissioned for propaganda purposes in connection with the tenth anniversary of the Russian revolution; that during the presentation of the film the words, All power to the Soviet, appeared; that these words were cheered and the National Anthem hissed; and what action he proposes to take?

Yes, Sir, I am aware that this film was exhibited at a meeting of the Film Society last Sunday, and that there was some demonstration on the appearance of the words mentioned. The society state that no demonstration of any kind save that of respectful attention was remarked by members of the council during the playing of the National Anthem. I may add that a colleague in this House who was present assured me that the National Anthem was properly received by all the people at the meeting. The Film Society is authorised by the London County Council to exhibit privately on Sunday afternoons to a restricted audience of members and their friends films which have not been passed by the British Board of Film Censors, subject to certain conditions, of which one is that no film likely to lead to disorder or to bo in any way offensive in the circumstances to public feeling shall be exhibited. I have drawn the attention of the London County Council to the exhibition of this film, and they will no doubt consider whether it comes within the condition referred to. I am disposed to think, from information that has reached me independently, that such incidents as occurred have been exaggerated, and I do not contemplate any further action in the matter.

May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) is an official censor; if not, whether the right hon. Gentleman does not consider that the time has arrived for the appointment of at least two or three official film censors?

That question does not arise out of the answer.

Are we to understand that, while this was going on, the right hon. Gentleman left this city for a week-end in the country, and that these matters were only brought to his attention by the hon. Baronet the Member for Anglesey (Sir R. Thomas)? How is it that the right hon. Gentleman has to have his attention drawn to such a terrible—[Interruption.]

asked the President of the Board of Education what staff Mr. Curtis-Bennett has at his disposal for the organisation and co-ordination of the various charitable and other funds for the relief of distress in the coalfields; and in which districts, areas and towns are there representatives of this organisation answerable to the Minister through Mr. Curtis-Bennett?

I should like to make it clear that Mr. Curtis-Bennett and his staff have been placed at the disposal of the Lord Mayor of London to assist him in the administration of his fund and are responsible to him and not to me. I am informed that the staff in London consists of 16 persons including typists. In addition, Mr. Curtis-Bennett has four full-time assistants, two at Cardiff for South Wales and two at Newcastle for Northumberland and Durham, acting as liaison officers between himself, the divisional committee and the various local committees operating in the area. For each of the other divisional areas he has the part-time assistance of one officer for this purpose. I should add that responsibility for the actual executive work of distribution does not rest on Mr. Curtis-Bennett's staff but on the divisional committee of the fund for each area, operating through local committees, or through the education and public health authorities, or in certain areas through both, as it may decide.

I am much obliged to the Noble Lord, but his answer does not mean that he is not responsible for the money voted by this House?

Of course, I am responsible for the money voted by this House, in so far as this House may decide that the Government should actually control its distribution.

Who pays the staff? Does the money come from the fund or does it come from the Exchequer?

This House voted last December a certain sum for administrative expenses.

Could the President say whether any directions have been given as to the placing of contracts by local officers Are goods purchased wholesale or retail?

asked the President of the Board of Education if he is aware that South Shields is not included as a distressed area in connection with relief from the Lord Mayor's Fund; and, as there are many unemployed miners living in that borough, will he immediately take the necessary steps to rectify this omission?

asked the President of the Board of Education if he is aware that South Shields is not scheduled as a distressed area for purposes of the administration of the Lord Mayor's Fund; the reason for this; and whether he will cause further investigation to be made into the matter?

asked the President of the Board of Education if he is aware that the borough of South Shields is not included in the list of distressed areas of the Lord Mayor's Mansion House Relief Fund; and, seeing that there are 10,000 miners resident in the town, wherein there are also two collieries, will he lay the claims of this town before the Lord Mayor's Committee for inclusion?

I will answer these questions together.

South Shields has been included as a distressed area for the purpose of grants from the Lord Mayor's Fund for the provision of boots for school children and assistance to necessitous mothers. The question whether assistance should be given in any other form falls to be decided by the Lord Mayor of Newcastle's Divisional Committee, who are understood to have the matter under consideration.

Could not the Noble Lord make representations to the Committee to say that there are so many miners living in the area who are unemployed?

I do not understand the hon. Member. I have said that the hon. Member's statement in his question that this is hot dealt with as a distressed area is incorrect, and that assistance is being given.

I am not clear on the point. Are we to understand that South Shields is scheduled as a distressed area to come under the Lord Mayor's Fund?

An answer has been given as regards that point.

On a point of Order. I understood the Noble Lord to say that they came in for boots only.

That is not a point of Order.

I want to be clear on this point. I understood the Noble Lord to say that it was scheduled for the purpose of supplying boots and something else, but that it was not scheduled for relief under the Lord Mayor's Fund. It is that we are asking about; we want it to be scheduled for relief under the Lord Mayor's Fund.

Speech!

It is not a speech. I want to ask the Noble Lord to make that point clear.

The hon. Member has put his supplementary question under the guise of a point of Order.

May I ask a question on this matter? The Noble Lord is well aware that South Shields is in very much the same condition as many of the distressed areas in the North. Is South Shields scheduled and treated in all respects as other distressed areas?

I do not know what the hon. Member means by "scheduled." There has been no seheduling. South Shields is being treated by the Divisional Committee of Newcastle as a distressed area, as part of the distressed area of the Northumberland and Durham coalfield, and it has been receiving relief in the matter of boots for school children and assistance for necessitous mothers, which includes practically all that the fund has been doing up to now. I must safeguard the discretion of the Divisional Committee for the future.

Is the Noble Lord aware that the town council and all the local authorities have protested that they are not being treated as a distressed area?

I think they are entirely mistaken.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware of the delay of over six weeks that has occurred in setting up the local relief committee at Aberblaengwyn, adopted for relief by Enfield; and whether he will take immediate steps to expedite the setting up of this committee, in order that the relief organised and waiting at Enfield may be put into operation at an early date?

The villages of Abergwynfi and Blaengwynfi, which have been adopted by Enfield, form part of the urban district of Glyncorrwg. A local committee of the Lord Mayor's Fund for this district was formed on 31st January. This committee is now actively engaged, with the assistance of the representatives of the Coalfields Distress Funds organisation at Cardiff, in the work of organising its district, which is expected to be completed within the next few days. Enfield are at present sending contributions direct to the district and have been advised to continue doing so until they are satisfied that the local organisation of the fund is in a position to take over their commitments; but it is hoped that arrangements will then be made, as in other cases of adoption, for contributions from Enfield to be forwarded through the Lord Mayor's Fund.

May I assure my constituents in Enfield that this committee will be set up within the next few days?

It was set up on 31st January.

asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to the conditions prevailing in certain mining areas of Durham and Northumberland; and whether, in view of the fact that similar conditions prevail in many other industrial areas, he will withdraw his order that out-door relief shall not be granted to able-bodied men and their dependants, and restore, for the time being and until some better means of assistance is found, the conditions which prevailed before the recent tightening up of his regulations?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, I make full allowance for exceptional conditions where they prevail as well as for the physical difficulties of introducing task work when the number of applicants for relief is high, but I am convinced that, in the general interest, a return to the policy embodied in the Relief Regulation Order, 1911, ought, so far as possible, to be secured.

In arriving at that decision has the Minister of Health taken into account the amount of distress due to increasing unemployment during the past year?

Yes, Sir.

In view of the fact that in South Wales and elsewhere there are many thousands out of work, and that a large percentage of them are single young men, can the right hon. Gentleman not do something for them as they are not being given any relief at all under the regulations?

asked the Minister of Health whether he will lay upon the Table of the House a copy of the Report presented to him by his inspector and medical officer who recently visited the South Wales distressed areas on his instructions, as reported to the House before the Recess, in order to investigate and report on the social and economic conditions prevailing in such areas; and will he state what conclusions these officials arrived at and what proposals they made for dealing with distress arising from unemployment and other causes?

I propose to lay this Report on the Table of the House at an early date. As regards the second part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the Report itself.

Would it not be possible for the Minister of Health to give us at least a final summary of the Report?

I propose to give the whole Report.

I mean to-day. That is rather important in view of the answer which the right hon. Gentleman has just given.

I cannot give a summary by way of an answer to a question.

Does the Report state that distress prevails in the districts visited by the inspector and the medical officer, and what is their view of the relief that should be given?

I think we knew before that there was distress in that district. I cannot answer as to what measures they propose.

Previous to the Adjournment, the right hon. Gentleman informed the House that he was sending these officials specially to investigate this question. [HON. MEMBERS: "Speech!"] The question I want to put is a perfectly simple one. The Minister of Health, in response to a discussion previous to the Recess, sent these gentlemen to South Wales to inquire whether distress prevailed, and I wish to know whether they have reported that the distress has been adequately dealt with under the Regulations of the Ministry of Health?

I think that the hon. Member had better await the Report.

rose—

I think the hon. Gentleman had better await the Report.

I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, if I put down a question, be will be good enough to give the House the conclusions arrived at by these gentlemen, which are of some importance to the people concerned?

I really cannot answer that question without seeing what the hon. Gentleman's question is.

You are much too clever—

I have already told the hon. Gentleman that I cannot summarise the conclusions in answer to a question. I shall lay the whole Report on the Table at an early date.

When?

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the conditions of overcrowding and poverty prevailing in the mining areas of Durham and Northumberland; whether he is aware that similar conditions prevail in many other great industrial centres; and whether, in the face of these conditions, he is now prepared to respond to the appeal made to him by the Opposition some time ago that a non-party committee of this House be appointed to consider and prepare schemes of national work and social service, such as land drainage, slum clearance, road making, and other works which have been proposed, in order to give useful employment to those who are now unemployed?

The measures which are being taken to relieve distress and aid employment are well known, and I need not recapitulate them. I do not think that a useful purpose would be served by the appointment of a committee such as the hon. Member suggests. The large-scale measures which I understand he contemplates would involve great State borrowings, which, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, would in the end do much more harm than good. In our view, the objects which we all desire can best be attained by perseverance in our policy which aims, by relief of trade from the burden of rates and in other ways, at the absorption of the. unemployed into productive industry and their transference from areas of distress.

Is the Prime Minister aware that this state of things has been going on now for some 10 years; that unemployment is actually increasing; and that those concerned do not care a fig how it is done as long as it is done; and is his only answer to a proposition of this kind to say that things are as bad as they are?

The hon. Member is not entitled to make a speech at Question Time.

I am entitled to an answer.

Is the Prime Minister aware that, in spite of all that is being done by himself and by the local authorities, there are a quarter of a million more out of work to-day than there were at this time last year?

The general strike!

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the raising of the Bank rate will assist that restoration of trade of which he speaks?

asked the President of the Board of Education how many education authorities have initiated reorganisation schemes with separate buildings for junior and senior schools; how far it has meant the reduction in the number of head teachers; and whether he can make any statement as to the progress made in the proposed reorganisation of education in elementary schools on these lines, as advocated by the Board?

I find some difficulty in answering this question, because it seems to reduce the whole problem of the reorganisation of education to terms of bricks and mortar. Local Authorities generally are dealing with the problem, but I cannot give statistics of their progress in these terms. For some years past the number of head teacherships has been slowly decreasing, but the net decrease in 1924 was greater than in any subsequent years.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his Department has been sending out directions in favour of the reorganisation of our education system on the basis of separate buildings for junior and senior schools, and that it is not a mere matter of bricks and mortar but a question of reorganisation on a new basis?

The hon. Member asks me to give statistics on the basis of separate buildings for junior and senior schools, but that is really only one of the factors in a very complicated organisation, and I do not think that that is the way to look at the problem.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a great number of education authorities have been carrying out his policy, and have been reorganising education on this basis; and are we not entitled to know how many authorities have schemes of this character?

I think all authorities are considering or carrying out schemes of this character.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware of the hardship imposed upon some of the poorest people in Liverpool in having to make provision for the rebuilding of St. Anne's schools, Edge Hill, consequent upon the old schools being condemned by His Majesty's inspector; and whether he will consider some form of financial relief for such non-provided schools?

This school has not been "condemned." Ever since 1911 its accommodation has been regarded as inadequate; the Managers have been the first to reeognize this fact and have shown themselves anxious to provide new or additional accommodation. The school was, therefore, included in the Board's list of defective premises but in view of the obvious difficulties which faced the Managers I have refrained from fixing any date for the termination of the recognition of the existing premises. If the hon. Member has been following the discussions on educational policy which have taken place during the last three or four years he will know that I am very keenly conscious of the burden which the replacement of such a school imposes on a poor parish, but I think he is well aware of the fact that I am at present precluded by law from relieving that burden.

In view of the examination made of this subject by the President of the Board of Education and his experience, is he in favour of introducing legislation which will do something to help effectively in this problem, which is getting worse and worse?

The hon. Member has overlooked the fact that in 1926 I announced that the Government were prepared to introduce amending legislation on certain lines which I thought would ease considerably the position of Liverpool and elsewhere, provided that they were satisfied that: the legislation was generally acceptable.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what is the position now with regard to the proposed legislation?

It is the same as it was then, and, as the hon. Member seems to be enthusiastic on this subject, I hope that he will give it more attention than he did in 1926 when I made the announcement.

asked the Minister of Health the kind of test work the West Ham Poor Law Commissioners insisted upon being undertaken by men receiving Poor Law relief; if he is aware that one man refused such test work with the result that he was sentenced to 14 days' imprisonment; what portion of the amount of 28s. per week paid to this man for his wife, four children, and himself was in cash and kind; whether this amount is the maximum allowed by the West Ham Poor Law Commissioners; and if he intends taking any action in the matter?

I am informed that the test work required to be performed by the West Ham Guardians may be any of the following tasks, namely, sawing and chopping wood, excavating sand and gravel, digging, mowing and similar work on the land, coaling and corn grinding. The reply to the second part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the third part, the relief paid was 31s. a week, of which 14s. was in cash and 17s. in kind. The guardians have no fixed scale of relief and no maximum is fixed by them. The case does not appear to me to require any action on my part.

asked the Minister of Health if any definite arrangement has been made with the West Ham Corporation in respect to the outstanding loans and interest affecting the Poor Law union area; whether any consultation has taken place with the borough treasurer in this connection; whether his attention has been called to the published statement of the chief commissioner of the board of guardians stating the financial effect of the Local Government Bill in respect to the borough; and whether he proposes to issue a statement showing the financial rearrangements?

No such arrangement as the hon. Member refers to has been made, and no consultation with the corporation has yet taken place. I understand that the statement made by the chairman of the West Ham Board of Guardians was an estimate based on the latest available figures of the probable effect of the provisions of the Bill on the general ratepayers of the county borough. The financial arrangements to be made as regards the West Ham Union and the county borough will be announced as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that in certain seaports, including Hull, many workers at the docks and other casual labourer, employed in work of national importance, are permanently resident in respectable lodging-houses either because they are single men or because their homes have been broken up, or owing to the housing shortage, and that the Poor Law authorities have a rule not to give outdoor relief to these men however great their need; that if a man in similar circumstances is a lodger with a family or has a furnished room he can get outdoor relief; whether this is by his orders; and why this ban on the relief of such workmen cannot be removed?

I am aware that boards of guardians commonly, and as I believe properly, distinguish, in the exercise of their discretion, between applications made for relief by inmates of common lodging-houses and other persons, but I should not criticise a board of guardians who decided that no discrimination should be made against persons who were correctly described in the terms suggested in this question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make that known to the boards of guardians? Is he aware that large lodging-houses, some of which are provided by the dock companies, are not common lodging-houses in the ordinary sense, but are really the homes of these men?

That was the impression I derived from the hon. Member's question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman let the guardians know that?

Is: there a special rule applied to Hull and the guardians there authorising outdoor relief to single men living in their own homes; and is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he and his Department prohibit that kind of relief in other areas?

I do not think that that can be deduced from my answer.

The right hon. Gentleman has said that he would not object to assistance being given to these men, and I am asking whether it is not a fact that they are being treated as if they were living in their own homes? Is it not a fact that within the last two months he has prohibited other boards of guardians from giving relief to single and able-bodied men generally in their own homse?

I said nothing about able-bodied men. The distinction made here is between the ordinary common lodging-house and a particular kind of lodging-house, and the same distinction would apply in Hull or elsewhere.

Will the Hull Board of Guardians be allowed to give outdoor relief to able-bodied men?

I did nor say that.

asked the Minister of Health the number of boards of guardians which have forwarded him resolutions urging that authority should be given to chairmen of parish councils or to guardians to grant relief, excluding relief in money, in sudden and urgent cases; and whether he will introduce an amendment to Clause 6 of the Local Government Bill giving county councils the power to include such authority in their administrative schemes?

47 boards of guardians have forwarded resolutions on this subject, but, as I have indicated in reply to earlier questions, I see no reason for altering the present arrangements in this matter.

asked the Minister of Health whether it is his intention to introduce legislation this Session to amend the conditions under which compensation is paid for property included in an improvement scheme under Section 9 of the Housing, Town Planning, etc., Act, 1919, and Section 46 of the Housing Act, 1925?

asked the Minister of Health if he will take steps to carry out his conditional promise with etc., Act, 1919, and Section 46 of the the Housing Act of 1925?

I would refer my hon. Friends to the reply, a copy of which I will send to them, which was given by the Prime Minister on the 14th November last to a question on this subject by the hon. Member for Hackney Central (Sir R. Gower).

asked the Minister of Health whether work is still being continued at the mine in Cornwall where radium deposits have been found; and, if not, whether there is any proposal to restart operations?

I am not in possession of any information on this subject.

Could the right hon. Gentleman try to find out something?

I have said that I have no information.

Will the right hon. Gentleman endeavour to get some information?

Perhaps the hon. Member may recollect that there is a Committee looking into the whole question. I propose to await their Report.

asked the Minister of Health in view of the fact that the Swedish nation has recently purchased six grammes of radium sulphate at an approximate cost of £10,000 per gramme, whether he will inquire into the possibility of a similar purchase being made by his Department, thus effecting a saving of £2,000 per gramme on the price of £12,000 at present being charged to British purchasers?

I have seen Press reports to the same effect as the first part of the question. I have no funds at my disposal for the purchase of radium, but the whole question will be considered by the Government when the Report of the Sub-Committee of the Committee of Civil Research has been received.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any information as to how long it will be before the Report is issued? Is it likely to be a month, or a year?

I have no reason to think that it will be as long as a year, but I cannot say when it will be.

asked the Minister of Health with regard to the schemes which have been submitted to the Ministry by county boroughs and other local authorities for building new maternity and child-welfare centres, whether in cases where the schemes have been already approved by the Ministry on the principle of a 50 per cent. grant, that undertaking will be adhered to by the Ministry if the local authority so desire it?

No, Sir. The grants for maternity and child-welfare other than the training of midwives and health visitors will be wholly discontinued after 31st day of March, 1930, and will be absorbed in the now grants to be given under the Bill.

asked the Minister of Health whether he proposes to issue to Members a revised financial memorandum relating to the Local Government Bill prior to the Report stage being taken?

It is not proposed to issue a revised financial memorandum relating to the Local Government Bill prior to the Report stage being taken. The main Amendments affecting the financial provisions of the Bill were fully explained in Command Paper 3257.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us when the principal Government Amendments will be on the Paper for the Report stage?

I am afraid I cannot, off-hand. They will be put down as soon as possible.

asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that electricity is not a matter of transport and that the merchant marine is, he will interchange those two sections of the Ministry of Transport and Board of Trade, respectively, especially in view of the fact that the latter Department also has responsibility for gas?

I have noted my Noble Friend's suggestion,. but I do not think it is practicable.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what were the number of Custom House officials on 31st December, 1923, and 31st December, 1928, respectively?

The total staff employed in the Customs and Excise Department on 1st January, 1924, and 1st January, 1929, respectively, was 11,314 and 12,069.

Is that due to increased work in collecting Safeguarding Duties?

Yes, it is another form of the increased employment that is afforded by them.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the great and growing distress in the mining areas, the impossibility of absorbing more than a very small number of unemployed miners in general industry, and the fact that each unemployed person costs the country at least £60 a year, he will consider the possibility of increasing the afforestation programme already outlined?

The Government have already promised to ask Parliament to vote a provision for afforestation in the next 10 years exceeding by more than 50 per cent. the statutory sum provided in the first decennium. In addition, the Forestry Commission expect an increase of 100 per cent. in their revenue from forest products. I fear I can hold out no hope of any further increase in the financial provision.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what the amount of the Tote will be?

I think it is £5,500,000.

Could not this expenditure be covered by means of a loan rather than out of the revenue, seeing that it is productive expenditure, and that all the experts declare that there will be a very great shortage of timber in the future?

That is entirely another question.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what percentage of the new opportunities will be provided for miners, in view of the unemployment that exists in many agricultural areas?

I cannot say without notice.

asked the Minister of Health the extra cost of taking the census every five years; and whether any part of this cost will fall on the rates?

The cost of any census depends, not only upon the scope of the inquiries which it may include, but also upon the rates of remuneration which may be current at the time that the census is taken for the kind of services which it is necessary to employ. It is very difficult, therefore, to furnish any estimate of the cost of census-taking over any future period, either on the quinquennial system or, indeed, on the present decennial system. But it may be assumed that the average cost per census under the quinquennial system will fall considerably short of the average cost on the present system, other things being equal; and in any event no part of the cost will fall upon the rates.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the cost to the Exchequer if unemployment benefit were made a national charge?

The total contributions of employers and employed towards the unemployment insurance scheme now amount to approximately £31 millions a year, and if the scheme were entirely a State charge without alteration in any other respect, this sum would have to be found by the Exchequer, in addition to its actual contribution of £12 millions. My hon. Friend will, however, realise that so fundamental a change as the abolition of all contributions would tend to have considerable reactions on the whole structure of the scheme.

In addition to the £31,000,000 which now represents the contributions of employers and workpeople, is there not a figure representing the deficit; and what would be the total amount paid, say in the last year, in unemployment benefit?

The deficit which has been accruing in the last two years to the National Insurance Fund is a very small monthly proportion of the contributions by the State, the workers, and the employers.

Do these figures take into account the hundreds of thousands who are returned as unemployed but are refused the right to benefit, and can the right hon. Gentleman say what would be the total amount paid in unemployment benefit if all unemployed persons had been admitted to benefit during the past year?