asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any reply is being made to the statement of the Afghan Ambassador at Constantinople criticising the British flights over Afghanistan?

There is no truth in the statement attributed to the Afghan Ambassador in Turkey that British aircraft, other than those engaged in the evacuation of foreigners from Kabul, are daily flying over Afghanistan. I may add that these aircraft—the aircraft which are evacuating persons—are flying with the full consent of the de facto authorities in Kabul.

Is there any truth in the statement that for many months past British aeroplanes have been flying over Afghan territory?

No, Sir, there is no truth in that statement.

Did I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that he was taking any action in regard to the speech of the Afghan Ambassador in Constantinople?

No, Sir. I have not thought it necessary to take any action.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether each successive step in the execution of British policy in Afghanistan is being determined by the Imperial Government in London or by the Government of India, or by His Majesty's Minister at Kabul; and whether His Majesty's Minister at Kabul has ever served in any capacity under the British Foreign Office?

The responsibility for the execution of British policy in Afghanistan rests with His Majesty's Government in this country, but in determining this policy they naturally give great weight to the advice of the Government of India and His Majesty's Minister at Kabul. His Majesty's Minister had not served under the Foreign Office until he took up his present appointment in 1922, but in that post he receives his instructions from me as Foreign Minister.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, when King Amanullah of Afghanistan formally announced his abdication to His Majesty's Government, he stated that he was abdicating in favour of his elder brother, ex-King Inayatullah; whether when the latter withdrew from Afghanistan King Amanullah rescinded his abdication; and whether he will define the attitude of His Majesty's Government towards King Amanullah and Habibullah Khan, otherwise Bachai-Sagao, respectively?

Yes, Sir. When the Afghan Minister, Shuja-ud-Dowleh Khan, informed me on the 14th of January of King Amanullah's abdication, he added that His Majesty had nominated Sardar Inayatullah Khan to take his place. On the 28th January, some days after King Inayatullah's departure from Kabul, I received a further communication from Shuja-ud- Dowleh Khan stating that King Amanullah had cancelled his abdication. As I have already informed the House in my reply to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby (Mr. J. H. Thomas) on the 30th January, His Majesty's Government do not support or recognise any party or Government in Afghanistan at the present time; and as I stated in my reply to the hon. Member for North Battersea (Mr. Saklatvala) on the 6th of February, His Majesty's Minister at Kabul and His Majesty's Consul at Kandahar are in unofficial touch with the administrations of Habibulla Khan and King Amanullah respectively in regard to local matters.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, besides His Majesty's Legation, the legation of any other Power has not been withdrawn from Kabul; whether King Amanullah has invited the foreign diplomatic representatives accredited to his court to join him at Kandahar; whether any members of the diplomatic body at Kabul have accepted this invitation; and what is the attitude of His Majesty's Government in the matter?

No foreign legation has been withdrawn from Kabul. I understand that King Amanullah has expressed his willingness to receive the foreign diplomatic representatives at Kandahar, but so far as I am aware no members of the diplomatic body at Kabul have accepted this invitation. His Majesty's Government do not propose to move their mission to Kandahar.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the number of British passports at present in existence issued either by the British Foreign Office in England or by consular representatives abroad?

So far as it is possible to say, the total number of valid British passports now in existence issued in the United Kingdom and at British Consulates abroad would be approximately 2,606,000.

How many of these were issued abroad? Can the right hon. Gentleman give the figures?

I am not quite certain, I probably could, with notice, but I could not give them without notice.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any cases have been brought to his notice during the past 12 months of unlawful traffic in British passports issued outside of Great Britain; and, if so, can he give particulars?

The hon. Member has, no doubt, in mind, the reports which have recently appeared in the Press as to the traffic in passports in Cyprus. A telegram on this subject has been received from the officer administering the Government of Cyprus which indicates that irregularities are not so widespread as has been suggested. Three clerks have been brought to trial on the charge of conspiracy to obtain false certificates of British nationality. The matter is still under investigation in Cyprus.

Can the right hon. Gentleman assure us that none of these clerks who have been brought to trial is of British nationality?

I think they are Cypriotes, and therefore British subjects. I cannot speak confidently without notice.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any representations from the British Consul-General as to the complaints and recommendations made by the British Chamber of Commerce at Tangier, and endorsed by the international chamber there, as to local administration abuses; and what attitude he is adopting in connection therewith?

I have received from His Majesty's Consul-General at Tangier the text of an open letter addressed to him by the British Chamber of Commerce, the main purport of which is that the international zone is saddled with a number of superfluous officials appointed for the satisfaction of national ambitions. While I cannot wholly accept the chamber's contentions, I am not prepared to deny that the number of posts may be somewhat in excess of what is strictly necessary. I do not, however, think that this state of affairs, which is a defect common to most composite administrations, could have been avoided in the circumstances. In so far as the complaint may he directed to the additional posts created by the Protocol of last July revising the Convention of 1923, the charge imposed upon the zone will, I hope, be more than offset by the financial benefits accruing from the participation of Italy in the international regime. His Majesty's Government have at all times done their best to keep the administrative expenses as low as possible. They will continue to do so, but my Noble Friend will realise that it does not rest with them alone.

Are the Powers taking any action, or considering the complaints made by these bodies?

I do not think the Powers can be expected to alter an arrangement come to as recently as last July.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the pledge which the Hupeh Government gave that no further change would be made in the administration of the former concessions in Hankow, and of the fact that the action of the Hankow authorities in regard to the ex-German and ex-Russian concessions constitutes a breach of the undertaking, he will state what action he is taking to safeguard British interests in those areas?

I am not aware of any such pledge given by the Hupeh Government regarding the ex-German and ex-Russian concessions at Hankow. The question of the cancellation of the constitutions of these districts is being taken up with the National Government by His Majesty's Minister, who is stating the objections to the retrograde step taken by the Wuhan authorities and urging reconsideration thereof, with the idea of preserving some form of foreign representation in the administration.

Is it not the case that the changes which have taken place are very much against British interests in Hankow?

I think the Minister would not be making representations if he thought that the changes were favourable to British or foreign interests. I hope a friendly settlement will be reached in due course.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when he expects that the new commercial treaty with China will be ratified?

The Tariff Autonomy Treaty signed on the 20th of December by Dr. C. T. Wang and Sir M. Lampson was ratified by the National Government of China on the 9th of January and by the Counsellors of State on behalf of The King on 1st February. The ratifications have not yet been exchanged, but the treaty was brought into force by a protocol signed at Nanking on the 6th of February.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information regarding the negotiations now proceeding between the Russian Government and the Government of the United States of America for a settlement of debt and the resumption of diplomatic relations; and whether he has any statement to make on the subject of Anglo-Russian relations?

The answer to both parts of the question is in the negative.

Did the right hon. Gentleman see the London Press of last Friday?

I can only see some papers. I do not know to what paper the hon. Member alludes.

Is it not a fact that references appeared in the London Press last Friday based upon statements made in the "Berline Tageblatt"?

I do not know what appeared.

With regard to the second part of the question, has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to the figures which were given in the House yesterday by the President of the Board of Trade showing the very serious diminution in British exports to Russia; and does he not think that a statement of the terms and conditions on which the British Government would be willing to enter into negotiations would help British trade?

That question does not arise.

But, Mr. Speaker, I am asking the right hon. Gentleman—

The hon. Member is asking a question which does not arise from the answer which has been given.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government now proposes to call a new conference on naval armaments; and whether the invitation will include any suggestion for an international conference on maritime law?

His Majesty's Government have no intention of issuing invitations to a conference on these subjects. As I informed the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood) on the 6th instant, all questions concerning our relations with America and the naval conditions of the two countries are under consideration by His Majesty's Government. I added that I was unable to make any statement until that inquiry was concluded. Our examination of these questions is being diligently prosecuted. As soon as it is concluded, the first step will be to communicate its results to the Governments of the Dominions and to receive and consider their views.

Do I understand from that answer that the communications now passing with the Dominion Governments are not as to the possibility of a new conference on armaments; and does that mean that the invitation of last September—the practical invitation by the American Secretary of State—is not going to be answered?

Certain communications which have passed and are passing between His Majesty's Government and the Dominions are not in relation to the summoning by this Government of a new conference. The Note of the United States Government did not contain an invitation to His Majesty's Government to summon or to attend a new conference.

Did not the Note make a valuable suggestion for further agreement? Surely that can only be reached by a conference?

That Note objected to proposals which had been made by His Majesty's Government, on the ground that the United States Government had already expressed its objection to them. The same Note ended by suggesting that the United States Government would be prepared to proceed with negotiations on a basis to which His Majesty's Government had previously expressed their objection.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been called to the statement of the British Ambassador at Washington to the effect that, after the General Election, the British Government would initiate fresh negotiations on the naval armaments question and if this statement was made on the instructions of His Majesty's Government?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and to the second part in the negative.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the statement of the Ambassador and the subsequent contradiction here caused misunderstanding to arise in America; and will the Foreign Office be at pains to instruct our Ambassador as to the policy which the Foreign Office intends to pursue in this matter?

If the hon. Members looks carefully at the statement issued here and the statement made by the Ambassador, he will see that there is no contradiction between them. The statement issued here was a correction of mistaken inferences drawn from the Ambassador's correct statement, in Washington.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman's answer to me a moment ago give an account of the matter totally different from that given by the Ambassador?

There are further questions on this subject on the Paper, including, I think, one by the hon. and gallant Member, and perhaps he will await my replies.

Is there any reason to assume that our Foreign Office is always in the wrong?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the negotiations as to a renewed arbitration treaty with the United States of America included and embraced the settlement between the two Powers of what was to be mutually agreed to as understood by the freedom of the seas?

As I have already informed the House, the proposals made by the United States Government for an Anglo-American arbitration treaty to replace the Root-Bryce Treaty of 1908 are receiving the attentive consideration of His Majesty's Government in Great Britain in consultation with His Majesty's Governments in the Dominions. As these consultations have not yet been concluded, I am not in a position to make any further statement on the subject.

Are these consultations the same consultations and considerations that have been given to the question of the freedom of the seas?

All questions that arise out of the matters now open between us and the United States Government are being taken into consideration.

Is this treated as the same question?

I will not say that it is the same question, but it is one of the questions which His Majesty's Government are considering.

I am sorry to he pertinacious, but as the one trouble between us and America which might involve the use of this Arbitration Treaty arises through different interpretations of the rights of neutrals at sea, would it not be wise to avoid the expense and risks of arbitration by seeing that this question is settled in the treaty itself?

I cannot make a statement as to what will be the result of a review of these matters which has not yet been concluded. All that I can say—and I think the right hon. and gallant Member ought to be content with that—is that His Majesty's Government are examining all these questions with a view to coming to such conclusion.

Is it expected that that examination will be concluded in the next few months?

I cannot say how long it will take. Some time further will be required, by His Majesty's Government here, and full time must be given to the Dominion Governments to express their views.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will explain the circumstances which led to the statement being made by His Britannic Majesty's Ambassador at Washington in connection with the increase in the American fleet and the possibility of renewed agreements on the fleet-strength of the United States of America and England?

His Majesty's Ambassador at Washington has reported that on being approached by representatives of the Press for his views on cables emanating from this country suggesting the possibility of an imminent renewal of negotiations for the limitation of naval armaments, he issued a statement representing his personal opinion as to the probable course of events. It will not have escaped the attention of the right hon. Gentleman that in no part of the Ambassador's statement did he indicate that immediate developments were likely, although erroneous deductions in this sense seem to have been drawn from his remarks by certain sections of the Press.

Are we to understand that answers given in this House by the Secretary of State, with such explanations of them as may be necessary, are not communicated to His Majesty's Ambassadors abroad who are concerned, and in particular was the answer of 6th February not communicated to our Ambassador in Washington in time to check it?

He would receive the answer of 6th February in due course, though exactly what "due course" may be I could not say without notice, but we do in the ordinary routine of our duties take all the measures we can to keep our Missions abroad fully informed, and I repeat that in this case the contradiction, if contradiction there be, between the communiqué which I issued on Saturday and what the Ambassador said, is not in that communiqué and is not in what the Ambassador said, but in incorrect inferences drawn from it.

In point of fact, is there any substantial difference between the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman and the statement made in Washington by our Ambassador?

I have already said that in my opinion there was not.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that those erroneous deductions were very warmly received in Government circles in Japan and America?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many claims have been received since the revision of the rules and principles relating to the assessment of attributability of tuberculosis; in how many cases a disability pension has been awarded; how many claims have been reconsidered in the light of fresh medical evidence submitted since the revision of the rules; and in how many cases a disability pension has been awarded?

Since the new rules came into operation on the 1st of October last, 70 cases of invaliding for tuberculosis have been dealt with. In 46 of these cases disability pensions have been granted and 10 cases are still under consideration. Ten cases dealt with before the 1st of October have been reconsidered on appeal, but in none of these was any fresh medical evidence adduced and the original awards were therefore maintained.

Is it true that a very much higher percentage of claims is now being submitted under the new Rules?

I think that is clear from my statement.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what is the present-day cost, approximately, of a British 10,000-ton cruiser of the "A" type and an 8,000-ton cruiser of the "B" type?

The mean cost of the 10,000-ton cruisers of the "A" class at present under construction or on order is estimated approximately at £2,180,000, and of the "B" type (8,400 tons) £1,800,000.

Does that include armament?

Is this an estimate for dockyard construction or for construction by private firms?

I am not quite certain. I would rather like to have notice of that question.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any changes are contemplated in the organisation and duties of the wages and expense accounts sections of His Majesty's Dockyard, Portsmouth; whether he is aware that the clerks in the wages section are pensioners from the Royal Navy and Royal Marines; whether it is the intention to abolish these posts and substitute women clerks; and, if so, whether he will consider whether the same number of clerkships can be given to pensioners in other departments?

Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman say whether this applies to Portsmouth only, or whether it is intended to apply at other places as well?

We are trying out the new system at Portsmouth, and if it is proved to be satisfactory, we shall no doubt extend it.

Are we to understand that the positions to which the pensioner clerks are to be moved will not mean a lowering of their status?

I do not think there is any intention of lowering their status.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that naval ratings who are ordered to purchase articles of uniform by the clothing officer have their leave stopped until the article or articles have been purchased; and, in view of the fact that issues of clothing are made by cash purchase, whether he will authorise the credit issue of such articles, recovery being made through the ship's ledger, so that young ratings shall not lose their liberty time?

I am not aware that naval ratings have their leave stopped in the circumstances mentioned by my hon. Friend, but if he has any particular case in mind and will supply me with the details I shall be glad to institute inquiries.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will consider granting the same scale of retired pay to lieutenant-commanders of the supplementary list as those granted to lieutenant-commanders who transferred from the Royal Naval Reserve to the active list in 1916, observing that the officers of the supplementary list are called upon to perform the same duties and that their daily rates of full pay are the same as other lieutenant-commanders, but that the messing allowance of supplementary officers of 2s. per day was abolished on the 1st April, 1919?

The rates of retired pay and other emoluments of supplementary officers, in relation to those of other classes of officers, were fully considered in 1919 when the present rates of pay and allowances were fixed, and I regret that I cannot hold out any hope of their being revised.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is in possession of any details regarding the proposed new 10,000 ton German armoured vessels; and can he give their proposed armament, speed, and radius of action?

No information beyond what has appeared in the Press is available in the Admiralty.

Is not the Admiralty entitled to certain information under the Treaty of Versailles about the details of these ships?

There is nothing in the description that appears in the Press which is inconsistent with the Treaty of Versailles.

Yes, but we do not rely on the Press, do we? Do the Admiralty rely on Press statements only, or have we any other means of ascertaining if the Treaty is being observed?

Is not the hon. and gallant Member right in thinking that every detail of armament has got to be communicated?

I cannot answer that question offhand, but I am pretty certain that we are correct in supposing that the Treaty has not been in any way infringed.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that men frequently find that, by going to seek for work directly they hear of a prospect, they cannot attend at the Employment Exchange to sign at the scheduled time allotted to them; that, on reporting out of their time, they are sent away, and not allowed to sign until a later hour in the day, and then in some cases are given a form to be completed by two householders who have to state that of their knowledge the applicant was unemployed on that day; and whether these formalities can be altered so as not to impede attempts to find work?

Timing arrangements are introduced in the interests of the applicants themselves in order to prevent queues, and it is important that they should be observed as far as possible. If, however, an applicant attends later than his proper time for a good reason such as that mentioned by the hon. Member, no difficulty is put in the way of his signing the Unemployed Register. The form referred to in the question is issued only in cases where doubt arises as to whether the applicant has in fact had work during the day. If the hon. Mem- ber has any individual cases in mind and cares to give particulars, I shall be glad to have inquiries made.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the outer circle of London these cases are frequent owing to the large number of men whose only hope of employment is to go into the heart of London?

In those cases, the rule is that they should be allowed to sign later. If mistakes have been made, I shall be glad if hon. Members will let me have cases.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware of the pressure of work and the amount of overtime being worked by the clerical and supervising staffs of the Employment Exchanges due to the application of the Act of 1927; whether these staffs receive any extra payment for the hours worked beyond the normal working day; whether he is prepared to engage additional employés from the unemployed clerks registering at the Exchanges; and whether he will bear in mind that the representative of his Department stated before a Civil Service court of arbitration that the clerical work at the Exchanges was of a routine and repetitive nature?

I am aware that the work of the Employment Exchanges necessitates a certain amount of overtime. All time worked (a) by established clerical grades in excess of 44 hours a week, and (b) by unestablished clerical grades in excess of 46 hours a week is paid for at special rates. Where there is prolonged overtime of certain supervisory grades this is also paid for. Every effort is made to avoid the working of overtime by engaging additional staff wherever necessary, but it is not practicable to avoid all overtime by this means.

Is the Minister aware that owing to the pressure on these staffs, they cannot give adequate time to the cases, and that a great deal of friction arises out of the system?

I am not aware of that fact. Wherever possible or necessary, I get in additional help, but the distribution of work over different days of the week and as between different classes of officials makes it impossible to deal with the whole of it in that way.

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain why it is 44 hours in one case and 46 hours in the other?

I cannot do so without notice.

asked the Minister of Labour the extent to which unemployment now obtains in the industries associated with the production of handkerchiefs, household linen goods, cotton piece goods, and in those manufactures in which jute and hemp form the whole or part of the finished product; and the volume of employment in similar industries in Switzerland and the corresponding rates of wages and hours of labour of workers employed in these industries in this country and Switzerland, respectively?

I regret that the information in my possession is insufficient to provide a satisfactory basis for the comparisons desired by my hon. Friend, but I will supply him with a statement giving such particulars as are available.

Is it not a fact that in Switzerland there is practically no unemployment, and that that is a country which is protected, while in this country, with an open Free Trade market, there is substantial unemployment?

asked the Minister of Labour the number of lads at present in training at the juvenile training centre in Bishop Auckland; and what proportion this number bears to the total number of unemployed lads of the same age in the area served by this centre?

The number of boys in attendance at the Bishop Auckland Juvenile Unemployment Centre during the week ended 16th February was 541. This number represents 83.6 per cent. of the boys registered for employment at the juvenile employment bureaux at Bishop Auckland, Spennymoor, Crook and Weardale.

What are the maximum and minimum ages of the trainees?

Speaking from memory, the ages are from 14 to 18, but I should like to verify that.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider providing larger and better equipped premises, which would give accommodation for all lads who are registered as unemployed, and also for many of those lads who are not registered and who are known to be unemployed?

It is quite obvious that the premises are likely to be sufficient in size for the district when 84 per cent. are already attending. That is a high percentage in any case of this kind. With regard to the accomodation of the other lads, that means an extension of the whole question of age, and it is a larger question which would need full consideration.

asked the Minister of Labour whether records are kept by his Department with regard to the transference of men from mining areas showing how long each man start in his first job and the details of his subsequent employment or unemployment, as the case may be?

No special records are kept for this purpose.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that without this information it is impossible to estimate the permanent value of this transference scheme?

No; when we place people in what are continuing jobs, it is an almost impossible task to keep track of every person from one job to another, and, from the information at our disposal, the work is going on sufficiently fell and does not need it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to see that the men who are transferred to jobs provided by the Minister of Health are adequately clothed and booted?

In matters of clothing and boots, the Lord Mayor's Fund—

That really does not arise out of the question.

Are steps taken when men are transferred from the mining areas to other districts to see that the wages paid are trade union rates?

That again does not arise out of the question.

Has the right hon. Gentleman taken action along the lines which he partially promised me, namely, to take samples from various towns as to what has become, or is becoming, of the men who are transferred? I put a simple question, and I was told that the right hon. Gentleman or the Parliamentary Secretary would try and track them.

I am not aware of it, but I will look to see if I ever said anything of the kind.

If the right hon. Gentleman did not, the Parliamentary Secretary did.

Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman has been asked for information on these lines time after time since the Transference Board came into operation, and that he has not been able to give it; and, as we cannot judge whether the scheme is a success or not without the information, is it not worth while compiling it?

Is it the practice of the right hon. Gentleman's Department to force men to take jobs that other men have refused because of the rotten conditions under which employment is given?

That does not arise out of the question.

asked the Minister of Labour whether any youths have been sent from Birkenhead or other industrial centres to Wrexham; if so, can he give the numbers sent from such places; whether the wages paid are sufficient for their maintenance; and whether any additional amount is being paid to them or their employers out of the Lord Mayor's Relief Fund?

No youths from Birkenhead have been sent to employment in a coal mine at Wrexham, but three youths have been sent from Accrington and one from Maryport. I cannot say precisely what wages are being received by them but I have no reason to suppose that the wages are insufficient to cover the cost of maintenance. No grant has been paid to these youths or to the employer from the Lord Mayor's Fund.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether these people had previously been employed in or about a mine?

Not without notice being given to me.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that Leaflet No. U.1. 591, issued to persons claiming unemployment benefit, states that they are refused for not having the 30-stamps qualification; that it makes no mention of the transition period; and that persons are thus denied benefit; and if he will take steps to have this circular withdrawn and another take its place?

I agree that the wording of the letter is unsatisfactory, and it had been already decided to revise it. An amended print is in the press. The hon. Member may, however, rest assured that benefit is not being refused under the First Statutory Conditions to claimants who can satisfy the reduced transitional conditions.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a man has no knowledge that he can take advantage of the transition period and that no information to that effect is supplied to him? Does he not know that a man is often deprived of benefit through no fault of the Exchange officials, but because of the lack of information given to him?

I think that is not the case. This leaflet is issued only to those claimants who have failed to satisfy the transitional conditions and, in addition, have failed to satisfy the statutory conditions. It is issued to them in order that if for some reason such as sickness his is a case in which an exception can legitimately be made, he should be able to take advantage of the fact.

I have sent the right hon. Gentleman a case this week where that does not apply at all. Will he have full inquiries made?

I will certainly look into the case.

asked the Minister of Labour if he has yet come to any decision as to the continuation or otherwise of what is known as the transition period in the Unemployment Insurance Act of 1927; if so, can he state the nature of such decision; and, if not, in view of the anxiety felt in many quarters, when he will be in a position to make a statement?

asked the Minister of Labour whether any estimate has been made of the number of men and women, respectively, who will fail to qualify for benefit if the transition period under the Unemployment Insurance Act is not extended; and, if so, can he state in what areas investigations have been made in this connection?

I regret I cannot add anything to the replies which I gave to the hon. Members on this subject on 23rd January.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he thinks it will be possible to make a statement on this matter?

When I have got together the information which will enable me to make any substantial and reliable statement to the House, I shall be very glad to do so.

Can the Minister not answer the part of my question as to whether he has taken any sample cases in connection with this matter?

I have been making inquiries.

Seeing that the end of this transition period is approaching, can the Minister not give us any idea of when he will be able to make a definite statement to the House?

I cannot. As I have said, it will be made in ample time for the House to take the whole matter into consideration.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that most of the local authorities who will be affected, and the unemployed persons, think that this six weeks is becoming less than ample time, and will he define just exactly what he means by "ample time"?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say that the statement will be made before the General Election?

asked the Minister of Labour the total number of persons in Glasgow now signing at the various Exchanges and receiving benefit, and the number signing who are not receiving any benefit?

Statistics are not available regarding the number of persons on the live register who are actually in receipt of benefit. At 11th February, 1929, out of a total of 59,422 persons on the Registers of Employment Exchanges in the Glasgow area 41,528 had claims to benefit admitted or under consideration, leaving a balance of 17,894, including a considerable number of persons who are not insured, who had no such claims.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that miners from the Ashton-in-Makerfield and St. Helens district are being struck off unemployment benefit because they refuse to accept employment at Wrexham, which is some 40 miles away; and if he will see that they are not refused benefit on this account, especially as they are refused employment in the district where they live because they are over 39 years of age?

I am informed that men registered at the Ashton-in-Makerfield Exchange have had claims for benefit disallowed owing to the refusal of what the statutory authorities regarded as suitable employment at Wrexham. I cannot find that any men registered at the St. Helens Exchange were disqualified on similar grounds in respect of the Wrexham vacancies. As regards the last part of the question, I am afraid that incorrect information was given to the hon. Member locally as the result of a misunderstanding of a telephone message. Men up to the age of 54 have recently been taken on for colliery work in the district.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any power to deal with employers who fix an age limit so much below the pensionable age?

No, Sir.

If the Minister has no power to do that, can he not give an instruction to the court of referees that they should take such a circumstance into consideration when dealing with a case?

No, Sir, I have no power to give instructions to courts of referees; but, if any considerations of this sort are brought to their notice, I think that as reasonable men, who have the responsibility of judging these cases, they would take them into account.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in some of the cases in which it has been said that mines are wanting men and cannot get them they are refusing to set men to work if they are over 40 years of age, and that is the reason why they cannot get skilled labour?

Though the right hon. Gentleman says he has no power to give instructions to the court of referees, is it not a fact that his insurance officer remains in the court of referees to advise and instruct them after the applicant has withdrawn?

The chief insurance officer, whose deputy the local insurance officers are, is part of the system of the statutory courts. I have no right to interfere with the decision of the chief insurance officer or with the court of referees.

rose—

That seems to be a question of law.

On a point of Order. Is it not possible for you to have a course of instruction for Ministers, so that we may get proper answers to our questions?

I want the right hon. Gentleman to meet me about the statement I have made, in order to clear up a point. Can I see him?

indicated assent.

asked the Minister of Labour what percentage of 78 day review cases considered by the courts of referees have been disallowed benefit during each of the past two quarters?

The proportion of 78 day review cases recommended for disallowance by courts of referees was 4.5 per cent. in the three months ended 8th October, 1928, and per cent. in the three months ended 14th January, 1929.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, if a married man is selected for training at one of the Ministry's training centres, his wife receives unemployment benefit during his training?

Married men at the Ministry's training centres are, as a rule, in receipt of unemployment benefit (including the allowance in respect of a wife or other dependants) if they are being trained for employment in this country, but not if they are being trained for employment overseas.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, if an unemployed man and wife are both given training at the only centre in the country where married families can be trained unemployment benefit is withheld; and, if this is so, will he consider giving the organisation which undertakes to support the family whilst training that benefit?

I understand that the training at the centre referred to is for employment overseas. Accordingly, as I explained in reply to the hon. and gallant Member's previous question, unemployment benefit is not paid to those undergoing this training.

Can the Minister explain why unemployment benefit should not be paid?

The reason is this. When we were training persons for employment in this country, it could be reasonably assumed that a man would later take up insurable work, but we are also training persons for employment overseas, where, normally speaking, they are likely to go out of the field of British insurable work. On the other hand, the situation is being met by giving the married men who are training for overseas an additional allowance which will take the place of benefit.

Could not the right hon. Gentleman see his way to treat this as a debt of honour?

asked the Minister of Labour if he will state the authorities which have submitted schemes, and received approval of such schemes under the circular of 9th November, 1928, for dealing with work for the unemployed?

A list is being prepared and will be sent to the hon. Member when complete.

asked the Minister of Labour why he issued permits to land in England to a music-hall troupe known as the Coney Island Freaks; and whether, considering the widespread unemployment amongst British music-hall artistes, he will consider rescinding the permits?

After consultation with the Variety Artistes' Federation permits were issued in this case for a number of aliens, described as vaudeville artistes, on condition that they were engaged with not less than 50 per cent. of British "acts" I have since learned that there has been objection to some features of the performance and I understand that the performers concerned will be repatriated forthwith.

Was any procedure adopted by the Labour Ministry to find out what kind of turn it was?

I am occasionally the judge of artistic merits, but it is the Home Secretary who is the censor of morals.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ascertain from the party opposite since when has it been their policy to restrict the importation of alien freaks?

Is the Minister of Labour not aware that, like his right hon. Friend, he is in a minority on art as his colleague is on morals?

Will the right hon. Gentleman state whether a consultation took place with the Variety Artistes' Federation before permits were issued to these foreign artistes?

As regards employment, I generally consult with the different bodies representing British artistic performers in this country.

asked the Minister of Labour whether money advanced for removal expenses of an unemployed man, his wife, children and furniture from a mining area to London is repayable, and under what conditions?

if the hon. Member has in mind the household removal scheme affecting workpeople transferring from certain depressed mining areas, grants made under this scheme are not normally repayable. Only if the applicant fails to remove his household and returns to his home area upon the conclusion of the employment to which he came, and cannot show good reason for not removing his household, does any question of repayment arise. I should add that the railway fare of the workman himself is an advance on loan, except that part of it may be on certain conditions paid out of the Unemployment Fund if he is an insured person.

If I send the right hon. Gentleman particulars of a case in which a man's wages are being stopped at the rate of 4s. a week by arrangement with the Employment Exchange, in order to repay the fares of himself and his wife, with his furniture, to London, will the right hon. Gentleman look into it?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Labour to the latest available date the deficiency in the Unemployment Insurance Fund; whether the deficiency is increasing weekly; and whether during any recent weeks there has been no deficiency in the fund?

The present debt of the Unemployment Fund to the Treasury is £34,030,000. During recent months the debt has been increasing weekly, and there has not been any week recently in which the debt has not been added to.

asked the Minister of Labour how many additional workers are in employment this year to the latest available date as compared with last year and 1924; and of those how many are in productive and distributive industry respectively?

It is estimated that at 21st January, 1929, there were approximately 105,700 fewer insured persons aged 16 to 64 in employment than at 23rd January, 1928, but 613,000 more than at 28th January, 1924. I am not sure that it would be possible to analyse the figures with sufficient accuracy under the headings of productive and distributive industry.

In view of the importance of these figures, cannot the Minister give us some estimate from his Department as to how many are in productive and how many are in distributive industry?

The difficulty of defining what is productive and what is distributive lies in deciding

asked the Minister of Labour the numbers of men actually employed in the iron and steel trades of Great Britain and France in

In view of the fact that the Minister of Health has just piloted a Bill through this House to give relief to productive industries as against all other industries, surely the Minister will see the importance of giving us some estimate with regard to these two branches?

The question of municipal industries does not enter into that Bill.

Surely the Minister of Labour can consult the Minister of Health and give us some figure?

asked the Minister of Labour the number of unemployed signing the register at the following Employment Exchanges in Derbyshire on 28th January last, Eckington, Clay Cross, Clown, Bolsover, Chesterfield, Staveley, Whitwell, Dronfield, and Cresswell?

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

I regret I am unable to give figures on a, comparable basis for these two years, either for Great Britain or for France.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give me the later year?

For 1928 in Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the total number of workpeople from 16 to 64 inclusive insured, against an-employment was about 200,700 in the iron and steel industry. In France, the most recent figures in my possession refer to 1927, and, according to the Comité des Forges, the total number of workers, including salaried employés, in the iron and steel works was 166,000, of whom 32,500 were in Alsace and Lorraine.

asked the Minister of Labour what information is available regarding the wages and standard of life of the industrial workers of Rumania?

The Rumanian Government have published two volumes of statistics dealing respectively with the wages of a large number of categories of workers in each of the principal towns in Rumania and with the prices of commodities in different districts in 1927. These statistics are too extensive to be condensed within the limits of a reply to a Parliamentary question, but I shall be glad to supply the hon. Member with extracts if he will indicate a limited number of towns for which he requires particulars.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in order to bring about a reduction both in the size and cost of the Cabinet, he will consider a combination of more than one portfolio by individual Ministers?

I do not think that my hon. and gallant Friend's suggestion is practicable.

Has the Prime Minister taken into consideration Mussolini's successful combination of no less than eight portfolios in his Ministry?

If the Prime Minister cannot accept the suggestion of the hon. and gallant Member for Maidstone (Commander Bellairs), will he change the whole of the portfolios?

May I ask the Prime Minister whether there is at present a Cabinet vacancy at the Exchequer?