asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information, and can he state the amounts paid by British subjects as ransom for their release who have been captured by bandits in China during the three years ended to the latest convenient date?

So far as I can ascertain, in only one case during the past three years has ransom money been paid to bandits by British subjects, the sum paid in that instance being about £6,000.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether any portion of that was subscribed by the British Government?

No, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state the present position in Nanking and Shanghai?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any further statement to make respecting the progress of affairs in China?

I have no information beyond that contained in my reply on the 9th of December to the hon. and gallant Member for the Isle of Wight (Captain Macdonald), except that the majority of British and American women and children left Nanking for Shanghai on 8th December and arrived safely on 9th December.

So far as the right hon. Gentleman can ascertain, is the presence of the British forces having a salutary effect, and is the position improving?

I have no evidence on which I could base a conclusion. The only thing I can say is that on the 9th a Note from the commander said that things were very much quieter.

Does the right hon. Gentleman still think that the sending of British warships is tantamount to murder? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"]

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what progress he has made towards a settlement of the question of the Hungarian optants; and what the situation now is?

I am in communication with the two Governments concerned, and in the meantime would prefer not to make any statement on the present situation.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that it might be advisable as a preliminary measure to submit the legal issue to the world Court for their opinion?

No, I am convinced that at this stage that would be a mistaken policy to adopt.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Government has received any communication with reference to a union of Germany and Austria from either of the parties mentioned?

No, Sir. His Majesty's Government have received no such communication.

May I ask whether the Government have any objection to such a union?

May I ask whether the hon. Member will leave the two Governments to settle their own affairs?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the case presented by the Travel Association of Great Britain and Ireland, in connection with the abolition of visa charges between Great Britain and the United States of America, has yet been reported upon by the inter-Departmental Committee; if so, what was the nature of their Report; and what action the Government proposes to take in the matter?

asked the. Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information showing that the United States Government have with-drawn their offer with regard to Anglo-American passport visas, reported in Command Paper, No. 2746, of 1926 and, if not, whether the Government intend to accept the suggestion for the reciprocal waiving of fees for passport visas in favour of non-immigrants?

I am afraid that this matter is still under consideration, but I have no reason to suppose that the offer made by the United States Government in 1925 is not still open.

In view of the great. importance of this matter, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether he will be able to give a definite reply before the House rises for the Christmas recess?

I have tried to indicate that the matter is really under active consideration, but I would prefer that the right hon. Gentleman should put down a question immediately after the House resumes.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Soviet Ambassador has presented his credentials on his appointment?

No, Sir. The Soviet Ambassador has not yet arrived.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what steps he is taking to ensure the approval by Parliament of the terms of the Anglo-Russian agreement, as embodied in the protocol, before it is ratified by the exchange of ambassadors?

I have nothing to add to the reply which I returned on Monday, the 9th December, to similar questions put by the hon. and gallant Member for the Isle of Wight (Captain Macdonald) and the hon. Member for East Toxteth (Mr. Mond).

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman does not appreciate that those answers do not reply to the question on the Paper. May I, therefore, again ask him what steps he is taking to obtain the approval of Parliament to the ratification as laid down in the terms of his own Protocol?

There may be a difference of opinion as to when an answer is an answer to a question on the Paper. I think that with the first answer and all the supplementaries the question has been very fully covered.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate the very real seriousness of proceeding to the ratification of this agreement when the terms in his own Protocol are unfulfilled by him?

This is, in my opinion, a dispute about one word. I intimated to the House in my reply on Monday that if a mistake had been made, and we should have used the words "House of Commons" instead of the word "Parliament," in order to give effect to the pledge of the Prime Minister, then the blame rests upon me.

The right hon. Gentleman must see that this is a very serious matter. May I ask what he is going to do to alter the position in the terms of his own Protocol?

I am afraid that I cannot see that it is such a serious matter.

Are we to understand from that last reply that the use of the word "Parliament" by His Majesty's present Government always means the House of Commons?

No, the right hon. Member must not conclude anything of the kind. I gave a reply on Monday in which I said that we were trying to fulfil the condition made by the Prime Minister when he said the subject bad to be put before this House, and it has been put before this House, and there was a large majority in favour of the Protocol.

rose—

We have had five supplementary questions already!

I beg to give notice that, in view of the unsatisfactory nature of the right hon. Gentleman's reply, I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in view of the necessity of ascertaining under the Kellogg Pact whether either Power is waging offensive or defensive war, whether he can state if any Chinese forces or aircraft have been ascertained as raiding over Soviet Russian territory; and what is the greatest distance inside the Chinese frontier that Russian forces have advanced to and aerial bombardments carried out?

I have received no official report of raids by Chinese troops or aircraft over territory of the Soviet Union. According to my information Soviet troops advanced as far as Chalainor some 50 miles within the western frontier of Manchuria, and Soviet gunboats raided Fuchin, 50 miles within the northern frontier. Pokutu, about 200 miles from the frontier, was bombed by Soviet aircraft.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the decision to suspend work on the naval base at Singapore has involved any transfer., discharge, or disbandment of personnel in the employ of the Admiralty; if so, how many; whether the terms of the contract with the contractors engaged on part of the work include any break clause; whether the contractors have yet preferred any claim for compensation as a result of the decision to suspend; and whether the period of suspension of which notice has been given to the contractors is limited in time?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative in so far as concerns personnel directly controlled from the Admiralty; on the third part, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to my answer on 29th November (OFFICIAL REPORT, Column 463) to my hon. and gallant Friend, the Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy). On the latter parts of the question, I would say that no notice of suspension has been given to the contractors, but we are in communication with them on the question of slowing down.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the new floating dock erected at the naval base at Singapore in 1928 has yet been utilised; and whether it is proposed to move this floating dock to some other port during the suspension period announced in connection with the base?

The reply to the former part of the question is in the affirmative and to the latter in the negative.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the decision to suspend further work on the naval base at Singapore involves the closing down of the anti-malaria measures now being undertaken in the neighbourhood of the proposed base; and whether the cost of these anti-malarial works are charged to the Straits Settlements Government or to the several Governments of the Empire contributing to the cost of the base?

As regards the first part the reply is in the negative. As regards the second part this expenditure is being borne by Navy Votes.

Does not this expenditure indicate the unsuitability of Singapore as a naval base?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will cause an inquiry to be made as to the system of pensions of established men, particularly with a view to seeing whether a greater proportion of hired time can be counted towards pensions; if a percentage of all emoluments enjoyed, such as overtime, can be similarly reckoned; and whether established men enjoying pensions, insufficient to sustain them, can become eligible for unemployment benefit after their retirement, as is the case with sailors and soldiers?

The answers to the first and second parts of the question are in the negative; the answer to the third part is that provision is made in the Unemployment Insurance Act for bringing discharged sailors and soldiers within its scope, but established workmen are expressly excepted from the operation of the Act. I would draw the attention of the hon. Member to the replies given to his questions on these subjects on the 4th December. [OFFICIAL REPORT, cols. 2346–7.]

Do I understand from that that the Admiralty are satisfied with the present scale of pensions for established men in the Civil Service?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the maximum pay for tug-masters serving in His Majesty's tugs is £4 18s. a week with unlimited hours, whereas the maximum pay for tugmasters of the Liverpool Towing Company and the Alexandra Towing Company is £8 10s. a week with normal hours, and for tugmasters of the Southern Railway Company's vessels £6 18s. a week of 48 hours; and whether he will consider giving the same rates of pay to masters serving in His Majesty's tugs as those enjoyed by these employés of private firms?

The maximum pay of masters of His Majesty's dockyard tugs is £4 18s. 7d. a week. Allowances are payable in addition in certain circumstances. The rate of pay is that awarded in arbitration by the Industrial Court on 4th July, 1928. The various considerations affecting the pay of this class of employés were brought out by the parties at the hearing by the Industrial Court in the arbitration proceedings, and it is not proposed to depart from the finding of the court.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary think that those in the employ of the State should be treated worse than those employed by private individuals?

The conditions are not analogous, and I think that we must stick to the well-defined trade union principle of the acceptance of the findings of the Industrial Court by both parties.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any decision has been reached as to the allocation of naval expenditure incurred as the result of naval movements in consequence of the recent disturbances in Palestine?

No decision has yet been reached on this matter.

Has there been any appreciable expenditure?

I must have notice of that question.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the forthcoming Five-Power Naval Conference, dockyard construction and extension is being suspended elsewhere than at Singapore?

No other dockyard work of this character is in hand at present.

Will the suspension of work at Singapore be reviewed by the Five-Power Naval Conference?

That question does not arise.

It is actually in the question.

That does not arise.

In view of the persistent doubts in the minds of everybody, and in view of the fact that the Five-Power Naval Conference is a national and not a party question, will the First Lord ask the Prime Minister to make a statement?

That does not arise.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether discipline in the Navy has suffered owing to the abolition of flogging; and whether there has been any demand by the naval authorities for its re-introduction?

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

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any contracts for steel tubes have been undertaken by a tube works at Landore for his Department; and, if so, whether such contracts include the Fair Wages Clause?

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

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what Reports have been received on the working of the Industrial Employment of Children Ordinance of 1922 in Hong Kong; and whether he will lay them upon the Table of the House?

The Annual Reports of the Inspector of Factories in Hong Kong have given information on the effect of this Ordinance since 1922. The results have been encouraging and further legislation to improve factory conditions for women and children in the Colony is under the Governor's consideration. I am arranging for a set of the Annual Reports to be placed in the Library of the House.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Courts of any of the British Colonies have, during the previous three years, passed sentences of corporal punishment upon prisoners who have been convicted of political offences?

No, Sir. I would point out that there are no offences specified as political in British Colonies. Prisoners can only be convicted of breaches of the ordinary law.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that a pre-marriage initiation rite is practised on young girls among many African tribes that this rite in its most severe form consists of actual mutilation and causes great suffering and subsequent most serious injury to health; and whether any steps are taken to repress this custom?

The answer to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative. Considerable caution is necessary in interfering with native customs of this kind, and the policy followed up till now by the Colonial Governments concerned has been to bring persuasion to bear upon the tribes which now practise the rite in its more brutal forms to return to the traditional and less harmful form of it. I am glad to say that a number of the local Native Councils in East Africa have in fact passed resolutions making illegal the severer forms of the operation. My noble friend proposes to go further into the matter with the Colonial Governments concerned.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state the numbers of the African populations of Tanganyika, Kenya and Uganda, respectively; and, in the last year for which figures are available, what was the amount spent by the Governments of these Colonies, respectively, on midwives, hospitals, child welfare, and any other form of health service, and in the education of women and girls, distinguishing services supplied direct by Government and services supplied by missionary bodies with the aid of a Government grant?

As the reply is necessarily long and includes a number of figures, I will, with the Noble Lady's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. I may, however, add that my Noble Friend is taking steps to ascertain what can be done to further the objects mentioned in the question and other matters of native welfare.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state when a declaration of the Government's policy on East Africa is to be made?

There is nothing which I can add at present to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Sir R. Hamilton) on the 21st November, except to say that it will not be possible to make any statement on this subject before Christmas.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what was the amount expended, in the last year for which complete figures are available, on boys' and girls' education, respectively, in Uganda, Kenya, and Tanganyika, respectively, distinguishing expenditure on Government institutions and institutions administered by voluntary agencies with the aid of Government grant?

As the answer contains a number of figures, I will, with the Noble Lady's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will give a return showing the number of prosecutions and convictions of persons refusing to work on the railway in the Entebbe district of Uganda for the four quarters ending March, 1929?

It is understood from the Governor of Uganda that there have been a few cases in which natives have been convicted in the native Courts of Buganda for refusing to work on the new railway from Jinja to Kampala. The Governor recognises that this is inconsistent with the Protectorate legislation and he has issued instructions to ensure that illegal sentences in the native Courts are, so far as possible, prevented. Detailed information as to the number of natives convicted for refusing to work on the railway is not available, but when this has been obtained from Uganda I will communicate with my hon. Friend.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what arrangements are being made to compensate Jews in Palestine for loss of life and property in the recent riots?

Claims for compensation are being considered; and in approved cases advances on account of compensation can be made. I will place in the Library of the House a copy of a notice issued by the Palestine Government on the subject.

Will this compensation have to be paid by the British taxpayers?

Can the Under-Secretary state against whom the claims for compensation will be made?

Will similar compensation be given in respect of the four Christians and the 83 Arabs who also lost their lives?

That does not arise.

I would like to point out that the terms of the notice are framed so that claims can be made irrespective of the race or religion of the claimants.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether it will not be the people who committed the outrages who will have to pay the compensation?

I would like to have notice of that question.

Is the British taxpayer going to pay the compensation or not?

I must ask for notice of that question.

I understand that a general notice has been sent out inviting people to make claims for compensation, and yet the hon. Gentleman is unable to say who is going to pay the compensation.

I am unable to answer that question without notice. These are matters which I cannot deal with offhand.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that Sir Henry MacMahon on 24th October, 1915, wrote to King Hussein, stating that he was empowered in the name of the Government of Great Britain to recognise and support the independence of the Arabs within the territories bounded on the north by Mersina and Adana and on the west by the Red Sea and the Mediterranean up to Mersina; that these boundaries included Palestine; that on that assurance the Arabs took up arms on our behalf against the Turks; and that after the War Lord Curzon in a letter to King Feisal on 9th October, 1919, repeated these pledges; and whether, seeing that these pledges have not up to date been carried out, he will at least see that the Arabs, who form four-fifths of the population of Palestine, are given a fuller share in the Government of Palestine?

With regard to the question of the pledges, I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave on the 9th December to the hon. Member for the Isle of Ely (Mr. de Rothschild). The last part of the question raises a matter of general policy which cannot be dealt with by question and answer.

In view of the prevailing uncertainty, will the Government take an early opportunity of laying down their policy with regard to Palestine.

The policy of the Government in regard to Palestine has been frequently stated, and I see no necessity for any new statement.

Will the Under-Secretary publish the correspondence between Sir Henry MacMahon and King Hussein as a White Paper?

I will consider that point.

Will the Government publish the correspondence in which it was made clear that Palestine was excluded from the mandate?

rose—

Mr. Ormsby-Gore.

May I ask my hon. Friend—

I have called the next question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what action, if any, has been taken by the Ceylon Legislature with regard to the present proposals for the change of the Constitution, and when a final decision is expected?

The Debate on the proposals is proceeding. I cannot say when a final decision may be expected.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs the number of single women who were assisted to proceed overseas for household work during the 12 months ended to last convenient date; and can he give a general outline of the rate of pay received by such persons in the Dominions?

During the year ending 30th September, 1929, 6,874 single women were assisted to proceed to the Dominions as household workers. Of these, 4,748 went to Canada, 1,930 to Australia, 184 to New Zealand, and 12 to Southern Rhodesia. The monthly rates of pay of household workers in the Dominions vary. I understand that the following may be regarded as the normal rates, in addition to board and lodging:

Can my hon. Friend say whether there is any fund which would permit of assisted passages for these female workers to return to this country if they found employment more congenial to them?

There is nothing, so far as I know, up to the present.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how many of these ladies get married out there?

I hope all of them.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether the Empire Marketing Board is responsible for the showing in this country of the film, "Ireland's Rough-hewn Destiny"; and by whom the film was produced and upon what terms it is being shown?

The film to which the hon. Member refers was produced by Lieut.-Colonel V. A. Haddick. The Empire Marketing Board had no hand in its production. It illustrates one of a number of lectures which have been approved by the Board for inclusion in their programme for the current session.

Can the hon. Gentleman say why this film contains no reference whatever to the most important industrial area in Ireland, that is to say, Northern Ireland?

It may be that there is going to be another film which might bring in Northern Ireland.

While thanking the hon. Gentleman for his reply, may I ask whether the title of the film could not be altered to a more appropriate one? Surely, the destinies of the Irish Free State are sufficiently rough-hewn?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air if this year's programme of seven new squadrons for the Air Force is being carried out; and, if so, whether these seven squadrons are being properly equipped?

The provision of two new flights for the Fleet Air Arm, which form' part of the programme referred to in the question, is being reexamined, but otherwise no change has been made in the programme, either as regards the formation of new units or the scale of their equipment.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air what sum of money has been expended to date on the air base at Singapore; what is the estimated further expenditure required to complete the base; whether the object of this new base is the defence of the naval base or has an independent objective; what is the proposed strength of the Air Force to be maintained perma- nently at Singapore; and whether any change has been made as a result of the decision of the Admiralty to suspend further work on the naval base?

As regards the first two parts of the question, the amount expended to date on the air base at Singapore is approximately £270,000, and the sum required for its completion, £300,000. As regards the third part, the facilities which are being provided will serve, not only for local defence, but also for the maintenance of British air communications in the Far East, and for the shore training and repair of equipment of air units allocated to naval forces in those waters. As regards the fourth part, the strength of the Air Forces which will be normally maintained at Singapore as at present contemplated, is one squadron of land machines and one squadron of flying boats. These numbers are exclusive of any Fleet Air Arm units which may from time to time be disembarked there. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Does the hon. Gentleman's answer mean that any alterations in the policy of His Majesty's Government do not affect previous arrangements made by the Air Ministry?

My answer is complete in that respect. So far as there may be alterations, they will be purely of a detailed character.

Does the hon. Gentleman's first answer apply to the Navy as well as to the Air?

I cannot speak for the Navy.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether he can give any further information regarding a Royal Air Force flying boat cruise in South American waters?

No, Sir, I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave the hon. and gallant Member on 10th July.

asked the Under-Secre- tary of State for Air if parachutes are yet adapted for use on and compulsory equpiment for pilots and crews of seagoing aircraft and flying boats?

No, Sir, not as yet. A good deal of difficulty has been experienced in devising a form of quick release gear which will enable the wearer to free himself from the parachute harness if he falls in the water and which complies with the other special requirements for sea-going aircraft. A new form of such gear is under trial at present and I am hopeful that it will prove satisfactory.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air if Royal Air Force Officers posted for overseas service in His Majesty's aircraft carriers stationed abroad are allowed indulgence passages for wives and families under the same conditions as naval officers serving in these vessels and Royal Air Force officers serving at land stations overseas where married establishments are recognised?

The answer is in the affirmative, so far as it relates to Air Force officers; naval practice is, of course, a matter for the Admiralty. Indulgence passages for Air Force officers' wives and families are allowed under the same conditions whether the officers are serving His Majesty's aircraft carriers stationed abroad or at land stations overseas.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is his intention to appoint a Royal Commission of inquiry into the question of rating, having in mind the position of local and national taxation?

The reply is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is prepared to set up forthwith a committee of inquiry on the question of self-government for Scotland?

I can add nothing to what I said on this subject during the Debate on the Address in July last. My observations will be found in the OFFICIAL REPORT Of the 10th July, 1929, Vol. 229, columns 930–934.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman not to overlook the fact that there is also the question of self-government for Wales?

asked the Minister of Transport when he will be in a position to lay before Parliament his proposals for the reorganisation of London transport?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he can give in greater detail his plans concerning London traffic, and particularly what is the nature of the public ownership that is contemplated, and how he proposes to provide at the same time for the principle of commercial management; and whether he has any statistics which indicate that such a scheme will provide a self-supporting consolidated transport enterprise for London?

If the hon. Members will refer to the statement which I made on the 2nd December, they will see that I do not expect to be in a position to make any further statement on the subject for some time.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer the last part of my question, which is not affected by that reply, namely:

"Whether he has any statistics which indicate that such a scheme will provide a self-supporting consolidated transport enterprise for London?"

No, Sir, I am not prepared to answer that question. We are on the verge of very important and delicate negotiations, and every responsible Member of this House will agree that the Minister should conduct those negotiations with a full sense of responsibility, and not discuss details in this House.

The hon. Gentleman, surely, is able to say whether he has any statistics? I am not asking him to produce them. I am asking him whether, before he made that statement, he had any statistics in relation to it? Further, I would like to ask him, inasmuch as he declines to make a statement here, how it was that he went on a public platform last week at a Socialist meeting and gave further explanations?

As far as the public platform is concerned, I was very careful not to add anything to the statement which I made in this House. As far as the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is concerned, the Government have sufficient information to warrant them in approving of the principle which I have already announced to the House.

Will my hon. Friend, before he makes his next report to the House of Commons, be able to bring before it the relationship that the River Thames will bear to the problem of transport in London?

Before the hon. Gentleman opens up discussions with the Traffic Combine, will he discuss the matter with the London County Council, as representing the people of London?

We are keeping all proper contacts with the bodies concerned, but there is nothing to be gained by the premature opening up of detailed negotiations.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the idea is that the Combine should be conducted by a board of directors free from Government control?

That is obviously covered in principle by the statement which I made in the House on the 2nd December.

Does the hon. Gentleman know that the public and business people are unaware of what the intention of the Government really is, and will he reply to the point that I have put to him?

asked the Minister of Transport what was the original estimate for the Glasgow-Edinburgh road at present under construction; and what has been the total expenditure to date?

The original estimate for the Glasgow-Edinburgh road was £2,115,000, and the total expenditure to date is £1,377,000. Further expenditure of a substantial amount will shortly be incurred as a result of works now in progress or about to be undertaken.

asked the Minister of Transport how many unemployed men have been engaged from the Labour Exchanges in Glasgow and Lanarkshire for the construction of the Glasgow-Edinburgh road since the work was begun; and what was the approximate average duration of their employment?

Information in the precise form asked for by the hon. Member is not available. I may say, however, that since October, 1924, up to the end of September, 1929, the average number of workmen employed per day on the construction of the Glasgow-Edinburgh road has been 837.

Is the Minister aware that there are miles of this road standing in a semi-finished condition, with no men working there; that there is a number of bridges to be built which would employ a lot of unemployed men this winter; that the people of Glasgow and Lanarkshire are very dissatisfied about it, seeing that they are subscribing £350,000 of the money; and will he take steps to see that the road is gone on with, so as to take up these unemployed people?

I think the hon. Member's supplementary question is not quite right in relation to the last question that I answered. He may be perfectly certain that the Government are doing everything that is possible to push forward the execution of the work.

asked the Minister of Transport whether the memorandum prepared by the town clerk of Edinburgh on the proposed Forth road-bridge has yet been brought to his notice; and whether he is prepared to arrange for a conference with the local authorities on the matter?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, I have the matter under consideration.

asked the Minister of Transport the total amount of the Government grant towards the cost of making the Liverpool-Manchester road now in the course of construction: and will he state what percentage it is of the total cost?

The Government grant towards the cost of the Liverpool-East Lancashire road is limited to £2,250,000, or 75 per cent. of the approved cost of the scheme, whichever is less.

Can my hon. Friend tell us how many people are employed on this road, and when it, will be finished?

I am afraid that that question must be put on the Paper.

Will the owners of the land alongside the road be asked to contribute to the cost?

I should require notice of that question, but in any case—

I do not think that that question arises here.

asked the Minister of Transport if he is now in a position to make a statement with regard to the cross-river communications between North and South Shields?

I regret I am not yet in a position to give a decision on the application made by the Boroughs of Tynemouth and South Shields with regard to the appointment of an engineer to report upon cross-river communication between North and South Shields, but I hope to be able to do so very shortly.

Will my hon. Friend be able to give a decision this side of Christmas?

I cannot be certain, but I hope to be able to do so.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has any information as to the organisation of passenger boat service on the rivers. Clyde and Mersey both as to the number of passengers carried and fares charged; and, if so, whether he will supply the particulars?

I am not in possession of the information which the hon. Member desires.

Will the hon. Gentleman be able to collect the information through the ordinary channels?

I am not certain, but, if the hon. Member will communicate with me, I will see whether we can get any useful information for him.

asked the Minister of Transport whether his Department has any report as to the use of the River Thames, within the Metropolitan area, for transport purposes, or any statistics showing the number of barges and steamers carrying goods regularly using the river in the tidal area; if not, whether he will have an inquiry made as to how far it is used; and whether by improved organisation more use could he made of the river?

I have brought the hon. Member's question to the notice of the Port of London Authority, who informed me that the number of sea-going ships which used the tidal portion of the River Thames during the year 1928 was 55,694, with a total net registered tonnage of 55,423,681. In addition there are 9,363 barges registered by the Port Authority. The Authority estimate that in the course of a year about 2,000 tugs, launches, barges and other small craft, exclusive of rowing boats, navigate the river above London Bridge.

Would the present traffic on the Thames preclude the extension of traffic to passenger boats going up and down the river?

I have not noticed that the Thames is so congested that it could not stand any passenger boats.

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether, in view of the shortage of parking places in the West End of London, he will consider allowing cars to park in the Mall?

I have given this matter full consideration, and I cannot see my way to allow the Mall to be used as a parking place for cars.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has recently received from the Severn Commission and other bodies representations for the improvement of the navigation on the River Severn; and what action he proposes to take in the matter?

I have recently been in communication with the Severn Commissioners, and explained to them the conditions under which Government financial assistance might be given for the purpose of improving the navigation, and have pointed out to them that if the undertaking is to be maintained it would appear to be necessary that the various local interests concerned should themselves take steps to improve the present financial position of the undertaking. I understand that the Commissioners are considering the desirability of conferring with the interested parties.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will give a definite interpretation as to Clause 13 of the draft form of wayleaves agreement issued by the Electricity Commission and, in particular, as to whether this Clause is an over-riding Clause whereby rights saved to undertakers extend to the case of land required by the grantor for any of the purposes set out in Clause 9?

I would remind the hon. Member that the document to which he refers is merely a provisional draft which has been circulated, for the consideration of the parties interested, by the Electricity Commissioners, who would be prepared to consider any observations they may receive. I may add, however, with regard to the particular point referred to, that I under- stand that the intention of the Commissioners was that the rights saved by Clause 13 of the document should not extend to land required by the grantor for any of the purposes set out in Clause 9.

Will the Minister of Transport take steps to see that the Electricity Commissioners amend the draft form of wayleaves agreement so as to make it clear that Clause 13 shall not over-ride Clause 9 before issuing the wayleaves agreement in final form?

I have no doubt that they will have that factor in mind, and that it will be considered. As a matter of fact, they are in consultation with well-informed people and no doubt that point will be gone into.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will state the areas which are covered by joint electricity authorities and joint advisory boards, respectively, in Great Britain what proportion these are to the total area of Great Britain; and will he give similar statistics based on population?

The four areas which are covered by joint electricity authorities are London and Home Counties, North Wales and South Cheshire, West Midlands and North-West Midlands. The areas cover 7,560 square miles, or 8.5 per cent. of the area of Great Britain, and include a population of 10,307,000, or 24.3 per cent. of the total population of Great Britain. The four areas which are covered by joint advisory boards or committees are South-West Midlands, South-East Lancashire, East Midlands and Mid-Lancashire. The areas cover 4,636 square miles, or 5.3 per cent. of the area of Great Britain, and include a population of 6,818,000, or 16 per cent. of the total population of Great Britain.