asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state when he last made representations to the Soviet Government in regard to the hostile propaganda of the Third International against this country; and whether, apart from reports of action contemplated or taken by various Communist organisations, he proposes to make immediate representations to the Soviet Government with regard to the repeated hostile propaganda published in the official organs of the Soviet Government during the last few months, and particularly directed to recent events in India?

I would call the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the replies which I gave to a number of similar questions on the 19th of May and the 26th of May, to which I have nothing to add at present.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he did not reply to the question:

"if he will state when he last made representations to the Soviet Government."

I may not have replied to the satisfaction of the right hon. Gentleman, but I did reply.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to tell the House what reply he did make?

The reply on that subject occupied about three columns of the OFFICIAL REPORT.

What was the object of the pledge given by the Soviet Ambassador, when it is not fulfilled in any respect?

Is it the opinion of the Foreign Secretary that Russia can do no wrong?

You think that Russia can do no right.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is now in a position to tell the House the names of the committee he has set up to investigate the Communist propaganda, and what their terms of reference are?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the tribunal set up by him to inquire into Soviet propaganda is prepared to receive evidence and testimony from private sources?

I have nothing to add to the answer which I gave to a question on the same subject by the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Marjoribanks) on the 28th of May.

Is it a Departmental Committee? Surely the right hon. Gentleman can tell us the terms of reference.

I have already informed the House that machinery has been put into operation, and I do not propose to go further, because I believe it is in the public interest that I should not do so.

Will the right hon. Gentleman reply to question No. 8, as to whether it will receive such evidence, and may I ask how anybody is going to come forward and give evidence if they do not know what the tribunal is, or where to go?

If the hon. Member has any evidence and he will forward it to me, I will have it inquired into.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is able to state the stage which has been reached in the Lena Arbitration proceedings at Berlin?

I have no information beyond that given in my reply of Monday last.

As the refusal of the Soviet Government to take part in these proceedings is really equivalent to a refusal to be bound by any decision, will the right hon. Gentleman make representations to the Soviet Government on the subject?

I informed the hon. Member on Monday that the case is still sub judice, and the Government do not propose to act so long as it is sub judice.

As the Soviet Government have refused to submit to arbitration, and that is a refusal to be bound by the award, will the right hon. Gentleman make some representation before it is too late?

I will consider that when the award has been given.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he has now obtained any further information concerning the action of the Soviet Government in transferring certain of their naval forces from the Baltic to the Black Sea; and whether the Straits Commission have intervened and issued an order forbidding the passage of any additional Russian warships?

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

Has the right hon. Gentleman made inquiries on the subject?

So far as my information goes there is no further transference proposed, but in view of the right hon. Gentleman's questions I think I ought to say that the Straits Commission has no authority so far as I am aware to intervene in the matter of the movements in or out of the Black Sea of warships of the Powers bordering the Black Sea.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether artificer apprentices are now compelled to purchase clothing such as football boots, jerseys, etc.; whether any compulsory deductions are made from their wages to the canteens; and can he state what is the lowest payment per day made to artificer apprentices?

The answer to the first and second parts of the question is in the negative. As regards the third part the lowest rate of pay authorised for artificer apprentices is 9d. a day.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what is the ordinary rate?

Not without notice.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is now in a position to make any statement with regard to additional warship building this year?

I hope to be able to make a statement at an early date after the Whitsuntide Recess.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any changes are contemplated in respect of the status of Malta as a naval base?

The reply is in the negative.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the orders which will be placed in Sheffield as a result of the alteration of the naval construction programme?

Apart from the contracts for the ships and their machinery included in the programmes direct contracts are placed by the Admiralty for the necessary equipment such as guns, gun mountings, armour plate and shell, and it may be anticipated that Sheffield will benefit to an appreciable extent in this connection. The shipbuilders and engine builders who may succeed in getting contracts will also have requirements for steel forgings, some of which sub-contracts will doubtless be placed in Sheffield.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the British naval forces in Indian waters have been recently strengthened; whether

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will consider introducing an official prize of £10 for mates who obtain first-class certificates in the examination for the rank of lieutenant under similar conditions as those for sub-lieutenants?

The suggestion will be considered.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any reason still exists for the segregation of mates away from sub-lieutenants during training, the former being sent to Devonport for gunnery and torpedo courses, which the latter undergo at Portsmouth?

The courses undergone by acting mates are not identical with those of acting sub-lieutenants. Lack of accommodation at Portsmouth has in the past necessitated the gunnery and torpedo courses for acting mates being held at Devonport, but the next torpedo course for acting mates will be taken at Portsmouth.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the total time spent by a Dartmouth entry cadet and a special entry cadet, respectively, in the training college or ship, at sea, in shore courses for lieutenant, and also a mate in his qualifying courses for lieutenant?

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

The answer to the first and second parts of the question is in the negative, and the third part, therefore, does not arise. Vessels of the Royal Navy at present employed on the East Indies Station are:

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is prepared to make a statement on the progress of the Disarmament Committee presided over by the Civil Lord of the Admiralty; and what number of persons have been found work by it or are likely to be employed this year?

I think the hon. Member is under some misapprehension. If he is referring to statements already made as to the efforts of the Admiralty to secure the stabilisation of employment in the Royal dockyards, I can inform him that these efforts are being continued.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any progress has been made with the scheme put forward in the interests of economy for retaining in the service ratings who have served for more than the present maximum period of 22 years?

This matter is still under consideration.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, as a result of the promised reconsideration, he is now in a position to make a statement in regard to the McMahon correspondence?

I have been asked to reply to this question. No, Sir; it is not yet possible to make any statement.

Can the hon. Member give us an idea when he will be in a position to make a statement?

I can only refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies in which he said that the matter was under examination, and I suppose that as soon as it is concluded a statement will be made.

Will this correspondence be ready after the Whitsuntide Recess?

If a question is put down after the Whitsun Recess, a definite answer can be given.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is now in a position to state the intentions of His Majesty's Government as to the publication of the evidence given before the committee of inquiry into the recent disturbances in Palestine?

It is not yet possible to name a date for the publication of the evidence; but it is anticipated that it will be in the latter part of this month.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that political prisoners in Palestine have renewed their hunger-strike because of the alleged failure of the prison authorities at Acre to observe assurances given for special treatment to be accorded to political prisoners; how many prisoners are now hunger-striking in Palestine; what improvements have been made for reasonable privileges to be accorded to political prisoners; and what further action, if any, he proposes to take in the matter?

No information has been received from the High Commissioner on the subject. As regards the treatment of political prisoners, I would invite reference to the reply given on the 21st of May to the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Horrabin).

What is the nationality of these prisoners?

I cannot say what is the nationality of the prisoners referred to in the question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if, in view of the widespread disappointment and inconvenience caused by the cancellation of 2,300 certificates granted to Jewish immigrants, he will invite Sir John Hope Simpson to make this question the subject of his first inquiry and report?

The High Commissioner has been asked to confer with Sir John Hope Simpson on the possibility of the matter being treated in this way. As has already been explained to the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Sir R. Hamilton) and the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Marcus) on 21st May, it is not correct to speak of the cancellation of certificates.

Are we to understand from the reply that these certificates are merely suspended?

That is what was said by the Secretary of State in reply to a question a fortnight ago.

Is the hon. Member aware of the very violent disturbance in the minds of the Jewish community at the cancellation of these immigration arrangements, and will he endeavour to make some statement at the earliest possible moment to satisfy them?

Is the hon. Member aware of the disturbing effects of the immigration of these Jewish people on the minds of the Arabs?

It is wrong to say that they are cancelled. They are only suspended.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this cancellation is looked upon as a condonation of murder by Arabs?

Order!

A wicked question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has information about police action against Jewish worshippers at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem on 25th May, when the beadle was arrested while prayers were being recited at the Wall; and if he will state why worship is again being interfered with in view of the inquiry by the International Wailing Wall Commission?

No information has been received from the High Commissioner with regard to any such incident.

Will the hon. Member be good enough to make inquiries and let me have an answer?

I will.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he has had under consideration the official report on the external trade of the Nyasaland Protectorate for the year 1929; if he has noted the growth of intensified foreign competition with British trade in the Protectorate; and what steps he is taking to maintain the predominance of British goods in this market?

The reply to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the third part, would direct the hon. Member's attention to the 18th paragraph of the report.

Is it not important that His Majesty's Government should concentrate upon keeping this market for British manufacturers and that active steps should be taken to prevent the increasing volume of foreign trade?

It is of great importance that we should retain, encourage, and develop this market and markets in every part of the Empire, and I would call the hon. Member's attention to the paragraph in the report which says that it is only by personal representation in the first instance followed by a live agency, that is adopting the methods of foreign firms, can British manufacturers recover trade which has been lost. That applies to parts other than Nyasaland.

But will the Government exercise their influence and back up these representatives?

His Majesty's Government are willing to help manufacturers as far as possible in developing trade in any markets.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, if, as the result of the tariff truce, he has been enabled to secure the entry on more favourable terms of British goods to any of the foreign countries which signed the convention?

As my right hon. friend the President of the Board of Trade informed the hon. and gallant Member on 13th May last, the reduction of tariffs and of other obstacles to trade is not dealt with in the Commercial Convention, but is, under the arrangements concluded at Geneva, to form the subject of future negotiations.

Does the hon. Gentleman consider that this country will be left in a strong position to negotiate for entry into such markets after a tariff truce?

Yes, Sir.

Does this mean that no concession of any sort or kind will be made to this country by the Continental communities which are contributing parties to this treaty, and that we are to stand the whole brunt of foreign competition with no possibility of defending ourselves?

No, Sir, it does not mean that. It means that another stage has still to be entered upon before I can give any definite answer.

How many stages more are there?

Only one or two stages more.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air what is the cost of the design contract for the new airship that has been given out; and whether this will involve a supplementary Estimate?

In answer to the first part of the question, the contract is not for the elaboration of a complete new airship design but for the employment of a technical staff partly to investigate possible detail improvements in the design of R.100 and partly to discover what improvements and modifications to the R.100 type of airship would be necessary, if it were decided to build an airship of capacity greater than five million cubic feet. There is a limit of £2,000 a month to the payments under the contract; expenditure to date is £7,800. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative; provision for this service is made in Air Estimates, 1730, Vote 3 N.

Does that mean that this staff is not designing another great new airship?

It means exactly what I have said in my reply. There is no design of a new airship, because a new airship has not been authorised.

Is it contemplated to design a new airship of 5,000,000 cubic feet?

No; the word "contemplated" is not appropriate. The matter is one of policy, which must be decided some time in the future. In the meantime, it is desirable to keep the technical staff in being.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether the delay in the departure of the R.100 to Canada is to any extent due to the mooring mast in Canada not being suitable for the purpose for which it was intended; and whether any alterations are being made to the nose of the airship in consequence?

The answer to both parts of the question is in the negative; the postponement of the flight to Canada is entirely due to the failure of the tail fairing piece of the R.100 is explained in my reply to the hon. Members for Denbigh (Dr. Morris-Jones) and Willesden, East (Mr. D. G. Somerville) on 28th May.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air when Airship R.100 will commence her flight to Canada; and what programme is being arranged for Airship R.101?

It is hoped that R.100 will be ready for her flight to Canada towards the end of this month or the beginning of July. While her sister ship is in Canada, R.101 will carry out some experimental flying in this country and will then be put back in her shed for the insertion of the extra bay. When the extra bay has been installed, R.101 will undertake her experimental flight to India; I am not in a position to name a, precise date for this flight.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when the visit of Members of this House to this airship is likely to take place?

I answered a question of that kind some time ago, to the effect that it would probably be in July. I do not know anything different.

Will the R.100 take the Lord Privy Seal to Canada?

Is a new bay being built at the present time?

Some minor modifications are being done at Cardington. I do not know that a new bay has actually been commenced.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether, seeing that, as a result of representations made to him by the Australian Government, His Majesty's Government have agreed to lend a 2,000 horse-power engine for an attempt on the world's speed record by a private individual, His Majesty's Government will do the same for any resident in Great Britain or Northern Ireland?

The Australian application related to a 1,200, not 2,000, horse-power engine, and as such an engine is available, the loan of it has in principle been approved, subject to the fulfilment of certain conditions as regards payment of freight, insurance and reconditioning charges. There is no 2,000 horse-power engine available nor a second engine of 1,200 horse-power.

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he has under consideration the question of permitting a certain portion of Hyde Park to be used as an air port; and whether he is in a position to make a statement?

I have seen the reports in the newspapers, but the matter has not otherwise been brought to the notice of my Department. The only statement I can make is that personally I have no intention of giving countenance to any such project.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has any information that the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis or any other licensing authorities in Great Britain are considering introducing relaxations in the constructional requirements applicable to licensed carriages that apply for hire; and can he give particulars?

I am not aware that the Commissioner of Police or any other licensing authority in Great Britain is considering introducing relaxations in constructional requirements applicable to licensed carriages that ply for hire.

Has my hon. Friend received any complaints that these Regulations which prevent standardisation affect our export trade?

I require notice of that question.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he can trace any marked acceleration in road work in response to his appeal to county councils on 26th March, 1930, to put agreed road schemes into operation with the greatest practicable speed and to press forward negotiations on outstanding schemes?

I am glad to say that many county councils have responded actively to the appeal mentioned by my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Transport whether there are any statistics available to show the amount of money which could be spent during each of the next five years upon roads to the economic advantage of the country as opposed to roads for luxury purposes?

I regret that it is not possible for me to give the hon. Member statistics of this kind.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether any estimate which he has received from Sir Henry Maybury as to expenditure, additional to present programmes, which might usefully be made upon roads had relation to all roads the construction or improvement of which is desirable in the national interest, or to those roads which the local authorities would be likely to propose; and whether any such estimates included bridges?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the £20,000,000 estimated by Sir Henry Maybury as the sum which can be usefully spent in the next five years over and above the programme of road works already sanctioned includes the £9,000,000 set aside for the Charing Cross Bridge and other works of urban improvement; and, if not, to what class of works the £20,000,000 specifically relates?

I have been asked to reply. The estimate of £20,000,000 received from Sir Henry May-bury covers the cost of schemes of road construction and improvement, additional to present programmes, which might in his opinion usefully be carried out, including schemes which the local authorities themselves would not be likely to propose. The estimate allows for any necessary construction or reconstruction of bridges on the roads. I may add that Sir Henry has advised that he does not think that more than the amount he has suggested could usefully and economically be expended upon the highways of the country in addition to the programmes already sanctioned. The estimate does not include any expenditure on the Charing Cross Bridge scheme.

asked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been directed to a fatal accident at Radstock where a boy was killed by a passing motor coach on the county bridge; if he is aware of the danger to pedestrians at that point due to the existence of two railway level crossings over the bridge; and what steps he proposes to take in this matter?

I have received a report from my divisional road engineer with regard to this unfortunate accident and am taking the matter up with the county council and the railway companies with a view to measures being taken to add to the safety of pedestrians at this point.

asked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been drawn to the recent serious obstruction caused to traffic by the laying of pipes and cables in Regent Street and the neighbourhood of Victoria; and what steps the Government has taken to encourage the construction of underground subways?

I am aware that the London Power Company are engaged upon the works referred to by the hon. Member but no complaint has been made to me of any avoidable obstruction. The desirability of instituting an inquiry into the general question of underground subways is under consideration.

Why is it the practice of the Department to take up all these roads in June and July every year?

I am quite aware of the superstition which exists to that effect, but I am advised that it is not in accordance with the facts.

asked the Minister of Transport when he expects to be able to present his scheme for dealing with London traffic; and whether he expects it to be ready before the end of this Session?

asked the Minister of Transport what is the position as regards the projected London Traffic Bill?

asked the Miniser of Transport whether in view of the urgency of the matter, he is now in a position to make any statement as to the Government's policy in respect of the London traffic question?

Progress is being made with the preliminary investigations, which, as I informed the hon. Member for Shoreditch (Mr. Thurtle) on 5th December last, have been entrusted to Sir William McLintock, but I am not able to state when I shall be in a position to present the Government's proposals to the House.

Have not these investigations been going on for nearly a year, and ought we not by now to have completed at least the preliminary stage?

It is perfectly true that the financial investigations have been proceeding for some time, but the financial organisation of the undertakings concerned is one of some complexity, and some time has had to be taken. The hon. Member may be sure that nobody is more anxious than I am to get the investigations concluded at the earliest possible date.

Does not the hon. Gentleman think it would be much quicker to re-introduce the old London Traffic Bill?

Will the Minister consider the increasing development of arterial roads maintained by local authorities, and is the acquisition of that work as a national measure under consideration?

I think that supplementary question has no relation to the original question. As regards the question put by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Woolwich (Sir K. Wood) the Government have no intention whatever of re-introducing those completely unsatisfactory proposals.

Is any progress being made as regards the main lines of agreement with the various authorities and bodies concerned, apart from some inquiry into financial matters?

The difficulty on that point is that it is impossible to enter into negotiations, even on broad lines, until we have all the information as to the present financial facts and have substantially determined, in a preliminary way, our own policy, particularly on the financial aspect of the matter. Therefore, negotiations at this stage would be inadvisable.

Have the Government decided as to the principle on which they intend to proceed in this matter?

Yes, certainly, and that principle was announced to the House in December last.

asked the Minister of Transport the position as regards the Charing Cross Scheme; and what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

As the hon. and gallant Member is aware, the question of the promotion of a scheme for the construction of a new bridge at Charing Cross, is a matter which falls primarily to be dealt with by the London County Council as the bridge authority. I understand that the London County Council at their meeting yesterday, decided not to take any action with a view to recommitting the Charing Cross Bridge Bill, but to appoint a Committee representative of all the interests concerned. Until I have had an opportunity of fully considering the matter, I shall not be in a position to make any statement.

Will the Minister consider, in view of the importance of this bridge to the future development of London, the proposal that the design should go out to competition?

That was always intended, but—

We cannot go into that subject now.

asked the Minister of Transport if his attention has been drawn to the present state of Carmarthen Town Bridge as the result of the recent accident; if he is satisfied as to the safety of the bridge; and if he proposes to do anything to accelerate the building of the new bridge?

No report has reached my Department of any recent accident to the Carmarthen Town Bridge, but the condition of the structure is such as to cause some concern, and my Department has discussed with the local authorities on several occasions the best means for providing improved traffic facilities. I hope that these discussions may result in the production of a scheme which the local authorities will be prepared to carry out with assistance from the Road Fund.

asked the Minister of Transport what new constructional work is now in progress on the Chiswick-Chertsey arterial road and, approximately, how many men are at present employed; when tenders will be let for the new bridges at Mortlake and Richmond, sanctioned for this road in the Middlesex and Surrey Thames Bridges Act, 1928; and when work will be started on the section of the road between Twickenham and Chertsey?

The new road from Clifford Avenue to the proposed new bridge at Mortlake (Chiswick) is on the point of completion, and only 11 men are still employed thereon. The construction of the new road from the proposed new bridge at Richmond to Kew Road is in progress and 33 men are employed on this section. It is hoped to invite tenders for the new bridge at Mortlake (Chiswick) within the next few weeks, and for the new bridge at Richmond by August. No proposals have been submitted by the county council with respect to the section of road between Twickenham and Chertsey.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that the problem of unemployment is due to world causes, he will consider the desirability of calling a world conference to consider the matter?

asked the Prime Minister if he will state whether the Government are prepared to invite the League of Nations to give close attention and study to the problem of unemployment, with a view to its being treated on a world-wide basis?

The possibilities of extending world trade and thus relieving unemployment have already engaged, and continue to engage, the attention of the League of Nations and its economic organisation. In particular I would call attention to the elaborate programme for future negotiations which forms the subject of the Protocol signed at Geneva on 24th March last. This Protocol contemplates that negotiations shall be undertaken as soon as possible between the signatory Governments in order

"to determine the speediest and most effective means of adjusting economic conditions in their respective countries, of organising more rationally the production and circulation of wealth and of removing as far as possible unjustified hindrances which hamper the development of international trade."

Has the right hon. Gentleman forgotten the failure of the Protocol of his right hon. colleague?

Will my right hon. Friend also consider the advisability of asking the International Labour Office to make a statement with regard to unemployment, and any suggestions for its alleviations?

Naturally, the International Labour Office is involved in this matter.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say whether this solution is to be included in the short or long method of dealing with unemployment?

Both.

Will the Prime Minister cable the League of Nations that Blenheim has won the Derby?

That is a question which affects the Opposition more than us.

asked the Minister of Labour whether she is prepared to consider the modification of the present Regulations of the Unemployment Grants Committee regarding the transfer of labour in connection with unemployment relief schemes, so as to permit of the fullest financial terms being made available to local authorities who are prepared to employ unemployed workers resident within the immediately surrounding districts, although the percentage of unemployment there may fall below 10 per cent.?

This suggestion has been made, and will, of course, be considered, but my right hon. Friend cannot give any undertaking that it will be possible to adopt it.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a very strong feeling among local authorities, who want first to absorb their own unemployed on unemployment relief works before being forced to take transferred labour?

I am sorry I cannot add anything to what I have said except that the hon. Member's question will receive consideration.

In the Whitsuntide Recess, will the Minister of Labour bring to the notice of the Cabinet the overwhelming decision of local authorities, including that of Woolwich, to agree to transfer schemes so long as the proportion of unemployed remains as high as it is?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware that at Falkirk Sheriff Court, on Friday, 30th May, eviction orders were granted at the instance of James Nimmo and Company, Coalmasters, Redding Colliery, Stirlingshire, against four families on the ground that the houses occupied by them were service tenancies, and that these families had been transferred from Lanarkshire to the above colliery on a promise that had not been kept; and whether, in order to prevent employers in the mining industry in Scotland abusing the privilege they now enjoy over other owners of houses, he will consider the advisability of introducing legislation to enable the Courts to exercise a discretion in the granting of eviction orders in what is known as service tenancies?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I am informed that the let in each case was for the period of a week and contingent on the tenant remaining in the employment of the colliery company. Decrees were granted of consent for removal not sooner than four weeks from date of decree. I have no information as to the matter referred to in the second part of the question, but I understand that the hon. Member is addressing a question to the Minister of Labour on the subject. As regards the concluding part mineowners are legally in the same position as regards service lets as other owners of houses, and I am not now in a position to give any undertaking as to legislation on the subject.

asked the Minister of Labour whether she is aware that four families named Collins, Lambie, Lepinski and McDonald were sent from the Employment Exchange area in which Hamilton Palace colliery is situated to work at Redding colliery, Stirlingshire, owned by James Nimmo and Company, on the promise that their wages would not be less than the recognised standard rate; that they removed their families to houses owned by the above-named company on that understanding; that they worked in that colliery for several months and never were paid the wages they were induced to believe by Employment Exchange officials they would be paid; that, having left the colliery, they are now to be evicted from the houses they occupy; and whether she will arrange that the officials of her Department shall be advised to discontinue the practice of transferring workmen from one part of the country to another unless after consultation with the organisation to which the transferred persons belong or a written guarantee being received from the employer to whom they are being transferred that the wages promised will be paid?

I am making inquiries and will write to my hon. Friend.