asked the Lord Privy Seal if he has considered the advisability of using the Unemployment Fund for the purpose of subsidising wages in respect of the anticipated schemes of industrial development, in consideration for the employment, on such work, of a minimum percentage of workers engaged through Ministry of Labour Employment Exchanges?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Gentleman to the reply which I gave on the 19th November to the hon. Member for North Newcastle (Sir N. Grattan-Doyle), of which I am sending him a copy.

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he has issued instructions to local authorities carrying out State-aided relief schemes that British materials only shall be used on such schemes?

Yes, Sir. A circular has been issued to local authorities, in which, among the conditions governing Government grants for approved schemes of work to relieve unemployment, it is laid down that all materials which are required for assisted works shall, so far as practicable, be of United Kingdom origin, and all manufactured articles shall be of United Kingdom manufacture, subject, however, to such exceptions as may be found to be necessary or desirable in any particular case having regard to all the circumstances, including the comparative price of British and foreign articles.

How does the right hon. Gentleman reconcile that policy with the policy of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to remove the Safeguarding of Industries Duties?

Do I understand from the answer that the circular has gone out to the local authorities?

Yes, last week.

May I have an answer to my question?

Has the right hon. Gentleman had any objections from local authorities saying that they cannot comply with the circular?

None whatever.

Does this mean that if the foreign article is cheaper, the Government are going to buy the English?

asked the Lord Privy Seal the attitude of his Department towards the promotion of civic weeks; and whether it gives encouragement to local authorities to organise them in the interests of trade and employment?

I would refer the hon. Member to a reply which I gave on the 3rd December to the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy). I am sending the hon. Member a copy of that reply, from which he will see that I welcome any manifestation of the spirit of civic enterprise.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether any schemes for the purpose of relieving unemployment have been submitted to him by the Southwark Borough Council; and, if so, what action he has taken in the matter?

The Southwark Borough Council applied to the Unemployment Grants Committee on 29th October for assistance on terms not involving the employment of transferred men in respect of street paving works estimated to cost about £10,000. The Council was informed that assistance could only be granted provided employment was given to a proportion of men transferred from the depressed mining areas. This is still a necessary condition, but the proportion of transferred labour may now be modified on the lines announced in the House on the 4th November.

What proportion were they requested to take?

I have not the details.

Will the Lord Privy Seal explain why transferred labour is so good now when it was not six months ago?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the new proposals for the control of London traffic will in any way delay his schemes for the extension of London tubes?

I presume that the hon. Member refers to certain extensions and improvements of the London tube railways which are the subject of an application under the Development (Loan Guarantees and Grants) Act. I do not think the inauguration of these works should be delayed as a result of the recent announcement of the Government's policy in regard to the co-ordination of passenger transport in the London traffic area.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he will encourage by some financial assistance the immediate building of a tube east of London to Ilford and beyond as an integral part of the new London traffic scheme?

It would be open to any authority or company proposing to build a tube from London to Ilford and beyond, to make application under the Development Act for Government financial assistance in connection with any such scheme.

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he will seek to give to rural district councils a larger grant than at present allowed by the Unemployment Grants Committee for the essential work of improving their water supplies?

As stated by my hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster during the Debate on the 4th of last month, the present Government have offered greatly improved terms for certain types of work, including rural water supplies. The new terms, which are generous, provide for grants equivalent to approximately 41 per cent. of the capital cost, as compared with 26 per cent. under the old terms, and must be regarded as the final offer of the Government.

Has the right hon. Gentleman received any applications from rural district councils for these grants since this offer?

Quite a number; the changed terms have certainly brought forward a number of applications.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the de-rating proposals, which have affected the value of a penny rate in agricultural areas, make it impossible for them to consider schemes of work?

I do not think that that has anything to do with this question.

asked the Lord Privy Seal what arrangements he is making to ensure the employment of a proportion of ex-service men in all Government-assisted schemes; and what is that proportion?

It is a general instruction to Employment Exchanges to give preference, other things being equal, to ex-service men when submitting men for employment. In particular, it is a condition for the receipt of assistance from the Unemployment Grants Committee that normally 75 per cent. of the men employed on relief works shall be ex-service men.

Does the right hon. Gentleman find any difficulty in maintaining the 75 per cent. of ex-service men in view of the fact that there is a certain amount of transference of miners and others from necessitous areas?

There is this difficulty. Certain ex-service men's organisations made representations to us that it is difficult sometimes to apply a fixed percentage, and we have laid down a general principle and told them that they must have a certain elasticity in giving effect to it.

asked the Lord Privy Seal how many men have been employed in Durham county on work schemes sanctioned and assisted financially by his Department and other Government Departments; and whether he can give an estimate of the number of workmen indirectly employed in the manufacture and distribution of the materials required for these schemes?

According to reports submitted by local authorities in the County of Durham, the number of men employed on 25th October, the latest date for which figures are available, on schemes assisted by grants from the Ministry of Transport and Ministry of Agriculture, and from the Unemployment Grants Committee, was 1,744. As regards the last part of the question, no estimate is possible.

Does the Lord Privy Seal expect to be able to employ any more men, and is he aware that there are 30,000 men unemployed in the County of Durham?

I have no idea as to what further applications have been sent in from Durham. I have reason to believe that there are some. It would be wrong for me to assume that there were not more schemes—I believe there are some—but I do not know the details.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether, seeing that the Liverpool City Council has submitted unemployment relief schemes totalling £2,800,000 in respect of roads, and £2,365,000 under the unemployment grants scheme, and that none of the schemes involved has yet been approved, he will say what is the reason for the delay in approving schemes which should provide work for a large number of men?

I cannot agree that the situation is as suggested in the question, but, as the answer is a long one and involves figures, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

In view of the fact that we have 57,000 people on the unemployed register in Liverpool, and 69,000 people receiving Poor Law relief, can the right hon. Gentleman allocate responsibility for the delay?

It would be unfair for me to say to the Liverpool municipal authorities what they should do. They know perfectly well the terms which have been offered, and they know the position with regard to the unemployed in their district, and I not only await but shall welcome an application from them.

Has any application for grant been made in connection with any of the schemes submitted?

There have been a number of schemes. As the answer is so long I am circulating it. When he reads it, the hon. Member will then see the details of the schemes.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether any works have been sanctioned which would mitigate unemployment and make further provision against the Thames floods?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he is aware of the existence of a plan for dealing with the periodical flooding of the Thames Valley; and, if so, can he tell the House how many men would be employed on such a scheme and what steps he proposes to take to encourage the responsible authorities to put it into operation?

A comprehensive drainage scheme for the Thames catchment area has been discussed at various times. Its execution must await the legislation which my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture hopes to introduce in the near future. Meanwhile, limited schemes for the Wey Valley and the Thames at the Wey outlet have been submitted. These schemes have been the subject of local inquiries, and it is expected that a decision will shortly be given. These limited schemes would, if sanctioned, employ, in respect of the Thames 375 men for three years, and in respect of the Wey 600 men for 18 months. In addition schemes for the Thames at the mouth are under consideration by the London County Council.

Is not the Lord Privy Seal aware of the seriousness of the position at the present time so far as the Thames floods are concerned, and could he not really do something immediately, in the course of his efforts to mitigate unemployment?

It is a cause of serious concern, but it is not so serious as in the case of the last Thames floods. If legislation had then been introduced, we could have got on with the work.

Is not the Lord Privy Seal aware that the matter is very urgent indeed, and cannot he take some steps?

Why did you not take steps?

It is because it is so urgent that I have had interviews with the authorities, but, unfortunately, legislation is necessary.

Does the statement outlined include anything about the River Lea, which is very much bound up with the flooding scheme?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the Government will give special consideration to the case of the men thrown out of work due to the decision to cancel or slow down the building of warships and see if some alternative work can be provided for these men this winter?

I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to the hon. and gallant Gentleman on 26th November.

asked the Lord Privy Seal how many more persons are in employment to-day than there were in 1914?

As stated by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour on 5th December, there are no statistics available regarding the numbers of persons employed in industry in 1914 comparable with those derived from the working of the Unemployment Insurance Acts at the present time. It is, therefore, only possible to give an estimate. I am advised that the increase in the numbers in employment over 1914 may be estimated at between 800,000 and 1,000,000.

May I ask whether that state of affairs causes the right hon. Gentleman some gratfication?

Everything which means that more people are employed ought to be gratifying to hon. Members in all parts of the House.

Then why, when we were in office, did the right hon. Gentleman pour scorn upon us Conservatives when we, too, were gratified with this increase?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether, in view of the fact that many members of the community with some resources are depriving others of legitimate work, he proposes to issue an appeal to them to desist forthwith from pursuing their present occupations in the interests of the unemployed?

I do not think that an appeal on such lines would meet the situation.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has agreed to make provision for a Treasury grant to the proposed Employment and Development Board?

My right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal is to-day publishing a White Paper giving particulars of the main items which have been approved in the Government's programme of home development.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he is considering the installation of shellfish cleansing tanks on the model of that used at the Conway research station in order to increase employment in coastal areas suitable for the development of mussel fisheries?

Yes, Sir; but it is desirable that any tanks so erected shall be maintained and managed by a responsible local authority, and this has been found to involve certain technical difficulties which I am discussing with my right hon. Friends the Ministers of Health and Agriculture and Fisheries.

Will the right hon. Gentleman invite the coastal authorities to make proposals to him so that he may consider this matter?

indicated assent.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury under what principle the Treasury has proceeded in fixing the amount of the proposed remission of debts due to public funds by Scottish fishery harbours as set out in Command Paper 3447; and whether account has been taken of the fact that the financial embarrassment of these harbours is the direct result of the War, which necessitated the steam drifters, the chief source of the harbour revenues, being commandeered for the assistance of the Navy?

In recommending the amounts of the proposed remission of debts due to the Development Fund by Scottish fishery harbours, the Development Commissioners proceeded, I understand, on the principle of giving such relief as in their opinion would enable local authorities to meet their remaining liabilities. The effect of the War, as well as of other causes of the financial embarrassment of harbours, was thus taken into account as a reason for granting remissions.

How is it that some of them have got no remission at all, although they have suffered very seriously in revenue as a direct result of the War?

If the hon. and gallant Member reads my answer, I think he will understand the principle upon which the Commissioners proceeded. As far as the Treasury are concerned, we are limited to a certain amount.

Can the hon. Gentleman say why no remissions have been made of debt due to the Public Works Loans Board, as that debt amounts to by far the largest item owing by Scottish harbours; and is he aware that the proposals of the Government go no distance towards solving the financial difficulties of the Scottish harbours?

If the hon. Member puts down that question, I will see whether it is possible to give him an answer on the point?

Will a proportionate amount be given to English fishing harbours?

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he has now inquired into the difficulties alleged to have been placed by the Government in the way of the publication of certain charts specially designed for fishermen; and, if so, whether he can state the result of his inquiries?

I have had occasion to look into the question of the reproduction of charts. The present practice is to charge a small royalty for the preservation of Crown copyright. Beyond this I know of no difficulties which have arisen and I am not prepared to modify existing arrangements.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is now in a position to state the intentions of the Government with regard to the fishermen's relief fund?

The Government have given very careful consideration to the suggestion that they should provide from State funds a contribution towards the replacement of the gear recently lost by a number of Scottish herring fishermen; but have come to the conclusion that any such departure from practice and precedent would involve them in making a similar contribution towards other industries which from time to time suffer heavy losses of the implements of production. Any further assistance than that which I have already intimated would require to be given through other channels and in other directions.

Will the right hon. Gentleman refresh his memory as to the statements which were made by his colleagues last year with regard to the assistance which was given to the miners?

Has the right hon. Gentleman any other proposals in view? Is he in touch with any other Department, and does he propose to do anything to help the fishermen at this time?

In regard to the supplementary questions following the question to which I have already given an answer, the circumstances are not on analogous lines at all. The assistance given to the miners was not given to replace implements of production, but to relieve the general distress existing among the mining industry. With regard to the second supplementary question, I have already said that any further assistance would require to he given through other channels and in other directions.

rose—

Arising out of the answer—[Interruption].

If hon. Members would not make quite so much noise, I should be heard when I call them. Mr. Boothby.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not consider that a great deal of the general distress which exists among the fishermen at the present time has largely arisen out of this disaster, and is he of opinion that the fund is sufficient to meet the urgent requirements of the fishing communities along the South-East coast of Scotland at the present time?

I have already replied to a similar question and stated that that is a matter for which I have responsibility and that, if it is brought to my notice, there will be a thorough inquiry into it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is the intention of the Government to do anything at all in this case?

I wish to give notice that I shall raise this question on the Adjournment to-morrow.

In spite of our sympathy with the Scottish fishermen, what about the fishermen of Silvertown?

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he has received representations from manufacturers of motor-cars in this country as to the effect on employment in that industry of the removal of the McKenna Duties; and, if so, what action he proposes to take?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Gentleman to the reply which I gave on 3rd December to the hon. and gallant Member for the Isle of Wight (Captain Macdonald), of which I am, sending him a copy.

Are we to understand that the Government are still unsettled in their minds on this question?

If the hon. and gallant Gentleman reads the answer, he will understand it.

Has the right hon. Gentleman taken any steps to ascertain the total amount of employment in this industry and in all the accessory industries, and, if not, will he assist in helping the Measure which it is proposed to-day to be passed?

I am discussing with the motor industry every point in connection with that industry with a view to helping them.

Will the right hon. Gentleman remember that the figures given by the motor industry do not include all the accessories, and will he take steps to see that that is taken into consideration?

I am sure that the motor industry will assume that they know as much about their own business as the hon. and gallant Gentleman.

May we take it, then, that the right hon. Gentleman is well aware of the views expressed by the industry?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what increase has taken place in the number of motor-cars produced in this country since the McKenna Duties were reimposed; and what was the number of persons employed in the motor-car industry in the year 1925 and in the year 1928?

As the answer to this question includes a number of figures, I will, with the hon. and gallant Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether there has been an increase in the production of motor cars?

Oh, yes; the figures certainly show an increase.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to see that nothing is done to interfere with the home market for motor cars?

Is not the Lord Privy Seal now saying that all our social reforms depend upon increased production?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he has considered the advisability of some assistance being given to enable British steel manufacturers to instal the necessary plant to produce the type of steel required for high buildings to be erected in our Colonies and elsewhere?

I assume that my hon. Friend refers mainly to the "broad flanged beam" which is a special feature of the buildings in question, and which is not produced in this country. I am advised that there is not yet a sufficient market to warrant the laying down of a special mill for the production of this type of section.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, if financial facilities were available to assist the production of this kind of steel in this country, markets might be found abroad, and that this would assist employment in this country?

It is no good providing financial facilities if there is no demand for the goods. Financial assistance is useful where it can be proved that it will facilitate business, but so far as this particular article is concerned, there is no evidence that would warrant a special mill being set up.

Does the Lord Privy Seal consider that we are incapable of competing with manufacturers in the United States in the production of this kind of article?

On the contrary, I think we are capable of competing with anybody, given a fair chance.

Can the right hon. Gentleman now say when the White Paper which he has promised us on no lees than four or five occasions will be produced?

That question does not arise out of the answer.

wish most respect-fully to point out that the Lord Privy Seal's answer mentioned financial considerations, and on several occasions he has promised a White Paper with regard to them.

It is in the Vote Office.

Now?

Yes.

Put there just this minute?

asked the Lord Privy Seal if the proposals for assisting the export of motor cars now before the Government include cycles and motor cycles as well?

My discussions with the representatives of the British motor-car manufacturing industry have dealt with motor cars and motor cycles.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how far his proposals are now advanced, and whether he is in a, position to make a statement?

Certainly not. Those engaged in the industry are the beat judges as to what is best in their own interests.

My question was whether any discussions have now reached the stage at which the right hon. Gentleman would be able to make a public announcement to the House, which is a totally different thing?

Not yet.

Will the right hon. Gentleman apply the principle of his last answer to the case of the coalowners as well as the motor-car manufacturers?

And the miners!

And the fishermen!

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the effect that the new Australian tariff will have on the trap trade of Wednesfield, causing cancellation of orders and unemployment; and will he make representations to the Australian Government?

I am aware that the Australian import duty on rabbit traps has been increased. As I informed the House on Tuesday, 3rd December, the question of making representations to the Commonwealth Government with regard to the recent tariff revision is under consideration.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these new duties on steel traps are absolutely prohibitive, and that 75 per cent. of the men in this industry are already out of work; and will he do something to remedy that condition of affairs?

From the statistics published in the last issue of the Board of Trade Journal, it is perfectly clear that many of these new duties are pro- hibitory in character. I can only say to the House that representations are being received, and I am now considering them.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take into account the fact that over a period of several years, owing to -the preferential treatment we have received, our export trade with Australia has increased?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can give an estimate showing approximately how many men would be given employment directly and indirectly by the carrying out of the convention with the Argentine Government, under which £9,000,000 worth of Argentine Government orders are to be placed in this country within the next two years?

I fear it is not possible to give any such estimate.

Would it be correct to say that this convention is one of the biggest things that has been done for unemployment in this country since the present Government took office?

It is by no means unimportant.

When the right hon. Gentleman comes to collect the statistics, will he also see whether he can give the number of farmers and agricultural labourers employed in this country and in Canada who might possibly be affected?

I think the last supplementary question is based on a misapprehension. I have just indicated that it is impossible to give an estimate on the lines of the question put by the hon. Member for Withington (Mr. Simon).

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, with reference to the promised concession on the part of the Government of the Argentine of a reduction of the Import Duty on artificial silk goods entering that country from Great Britain, he has any information if a similar reduction of duty will be given by the Argentine Government to other countries under commercial agreements under a most-favoured-nation clause arrangement?

I understand that this matter is engaging the attention of the Argentine Government, but I have not yet heard whether they have come to any conclusion.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman know that, in point of fact, in the commercial agreements which the Argentine Government have with this country there is a most-favoured-nation clause?

That is quite true, but we have always explained that it is no part of our policy to ask for preferential treatment for ourselves. I have given in my answer all the information on this point that I have at this stage.

If it is no part of the policy of the Government to ask for preferential treatment for British trade, what does the Convention with the Argentine Government amount to?

The answer is that it is of very considerable value to this country.

Does it not seem a pity to depreciate the concession which the Argentine Government has given to us?

Was it not precisely to arrange such an agreement as this that the late Government appointed the D'Abernon mission?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in connection with the overture recently made by the Argentine Government in regard to the reduction of the Import Duty on silk and artificial silk goods imported from the United Kingdom on condition that no restrictions be placed upon the exportation of Argentine wheat and meat to this country, he can state the total quantity of wheat, wheatmeal, flour, and meat, chilled and frozen, imported into this country from the Argentine and from Australia, respectively, and the value of the total exports of silk and artificial silk and the products thereof to the Argentine and to Australia, respectively; and whether any negotiations are in progress or in contemplation with the Commonwealth of Australia before the conclusion of the proposed agreement with the Argentine?

The reply takes the form of a table of figures, which I will circulate with the OFFICIAL BEPORT. AS regards the second part of the question I would refer to the answer given by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary on 27th November, to the hon. Members for Richmond (Sir N. Moore) and Devizes (Mr. Hurd).

Is the President of the Board of Trade prepared to give an undertaking to the House that no con-

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that a part of Soviet Russian

Is it not a fact that, while the Argentine Government reduced their duties on textiles, the Australian Government have within the last few weeks increased them?

As the hon. and gallant Member was informed on the 10th July, I have no information as to the conditions under which Russian timber is being produced. The second part of the question, therefore, does not arise.

Will the Government take steps to find out whether this timber is produced by Russian prisoner labour, and also by labour conscripted by press-gangs; and, if so, is it the policy of the Government to tolerate such conditions?

On a point of Order. Is it in order, in a supplementary question, to make insulting insinuations about Russia?

May I ask, Mr. Speaker, whether it has not been the practice of yourself and your predecessors to rule that hon. Members should make themselves responsible for statements of fact contained in their questions; and may I ask whether the hon. and gallant Member has given these facts to the President of the Board of Trade?

Undoubtedly it is the case that, when an hon. Member states facts, he must make himself responsible for those facts.

I make myself responsible for the question that I have asked. I have asked the Government to make inquiries.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the total amount of trade credit given to Russia by this country since the setting up of the Soviet system of Government; and what is the total amount of British exports to Russia and of Russian imports into this country during the same period?

As the answer is long, I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is it not the fact that there is still a large trade balance, amounting to many millions in favour of the Soviet Government in this country?

I would invite the hon. Member to wait until he has seen the detailed terms of this reply.

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to the statement made by Lord Parmoor in another place in which he indicated that every penny had been paid by Russia, which was, he said, different from any other country; and does the right hon. Gentleman think that that is a fair way to criticise other counries?

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many artificial silk factories have been built or commenced in the last five years, and how many persons are employed therein?

According to Press reports some 23 factories for making artificial silk have been established or re-equipped during the last five years. Of these it would appear, however, that only some 13 were actually working in October last. I have no information as to the numbers of persons employed in these particular factories, but the total numbers of persons estimated as employed in the silk and artificial silk industries in June, 1925, and June, 1929, were 42,750 and 67,573, respectively.

Do these figures include extensions of factories as well?

Part of the reply refers to the re-equipment of factories, but, on the facts before me this afternoon, I should not like to be precise regarding extensions.