asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has now received a reply from the Portuguese Government to his communication of 21st November on the question of flag discrimination?

I am glad to be able to state that the Portuguese Minister for Foreign Affairs has informed His Majesty's Ambassador at Lisbon that a decree will be issued early in January abolishing flag discrimination as regards quay dues and that methods of helping the Portuguese mercantile marine by expedients other than discrimination are now being studied by the Portuguese Government.

Can we rely on the Portuguese Government not running away from any undertaking that they may give?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the proportion of the contribution of His Majesty's Government to the total expenditure of the League of Nations for the 12 months ended to the last convenient date; whether any additional expenditure was necessitated by the expanding work and increased responsibilities of the League of Nations; and if he can say whether all other members of the League have paid their quota?

The contribution of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom to the budget of the League of Nations, including the International Labour Office and the Permanent Court of International Justice, for the year 1930 amounted to, roughly, £116,000. The total budget was about £1,128,400, representing an increase of £74,000 on that of the preceding year, necessitated by the increased activities of the League of Nations. Certain States Members are still in arrears with their contributions, but there are indications that, as the result of the greater importance now attached to prompt payment, the States concerned are taking steps to reduce their outstanding obligations.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give me the names of the States which have not paid their quota?

There is no reason why that information should not be given.

Is it not a fact that our contribution is about 1 per cent. of the amount we are spending on preparations for war?

Is it not a fact that our contribution is larger than that of any other country?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when it is proposed to accede, on behalf of this country, to the General Act of Arbitration, Conciliation, and Judicial Settlement, in view of the agreement reached at the Imperial Conference?

I hope that, subject to the exigencies of public business, it may be possible to afford an opportunity for debate before Easter.

If I put this question down in January, will the right hon. Gentleman try to fix a date?

I cannot fix a date at the moment.

When will the right hon. Gentleman be in a position to fix a date?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has considered a statement, signed by 52 Members of Parliament, asking him whether he will use his influence towards the release of political prisoners in Poland and whether he will raise the question of the Ukrainian minorities in Poland as a member of the Council of the League of Nations; and can he say whether he will take any action on the lines of the statement?

I have received a copy of the statement referred to, and have given it my careful consideration. I cannot undertake to make any general representations to the Polish Government in favour of the release of political prisoners, since I have no sufficient ground for such intervention in the internal affairs of another country. As regards the Ukrainian minority, I understand that petitions have been presented in due form to the Secretary-General of the League, and these, with the observations of the Polish Government, will be carefully examined. I trust that these observations will be received in time for the matter to be dealt with during the next session of the Council of the League in January.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state what mandated territories make contributions to the cost of local administration; what is the total cost to this country in the fulfilment of treaty obligations in the mandated territories; and when the equal rights in trade which foreign countries enjoy with this country under the mandates will be revised?

The local administration of all mandated territories is a charge upon the finances of those territories. The only charge falling upon the United Kingdom in respect of local administration in mandated territories in the current financial year is £84,000 as grant-in-aid to Transjordan. As regard the third part of the hon. and gallant Member's question, the terms of the mandates which provide for equal commercial rights for all States members of the League of Nations can be altered only by the unanimous decision of the Council of the League of Nations.

In view of the responsibilities of this country, will not that question be raised, in order to see whether some benefit cannot be given to British trade?

I should have thought the hon. and gallant Member would have known that it is an integral part of the conditions under which mandated territories are administered that there must be equal treatment for all members of the League of Nations.

Is it not a fact that, in addition to the unanimous vote of the Council of the League, a two-thirds majority of the Assembly is required to amend, not a mandate, but the Covenant itself.

Yes, I believe that is so.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the recommendation contained in the report of the Chelmsford Committee to the effect that free passport visas should be made available for three months to visitors to the British Industries Fair; whether he proposes to accept that recommendation; and whether he will consider its extension to include all visitors coming to the United Kingdom on business at any time of the year?

My attention has been drawn to the recommendation of the Chelmsford Committee, which His Majesty's Government are prepared to accept. I regret that it is not possible to adopt the suggestion contained in the last part of the right hon. Gentleman's question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these charges are a great source of irritation to persons coming to this country on business?

Yes, I have admitted that before.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any communication or report with regard to the Balkan Conference recently held at Athens?

The conference published a full summary of its proceedings and the text of the resolutions which it adopted. I have received copies of these publications from His Majesty's Minister at Athens, and I am sending the hon. Member a copy of the summary. When I receive additional copies of the resolutions, I will send him one also.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think, owing to the serious situation in the Balkans caused by the continued ill-treatment of minorities, that a movement of this kind deserves every possible support?

That hardly arises out of the question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can now state when the White Paper will be issued in relation to decrees concerning the abolition of unemployment benefit in Soviet Russia and kindred matters; and whether he has now received such information from the Soviet Ambassador that decrees relating to conscription of labour and the use of prisoners in concentration camps will also be included?

As regards the first part of the question, I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to my reply to the hon. and gallant Member for Maidstone (Commander Bellairs) on Monday last. The White Paper will not be restricted to unemployment legislation, but will include the principal ordinances regarding labour conditions generally in the Soviet Union. As regards the second part of the question, the right hon. Gentleman appears to be under some misapprehension. The Soviet Ambassador in London has at no time been consulted in connection with the White Paper.

Can the right hon. Gentleman indicate more definitely when we may anticipate this White Paper?

There has been no delay in the publication of the White Paper.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether a representative from the Embassy in Moscow or the British Government will be sent to the timber camps, especially in Archangel, in view of the sworn statements sent to the Prime Minister?

Answer!

On a point of Order. Cannot I have an answer to my supplementary question?

The hon. Member's supplementary question does not arise from the question on the Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the all-union council of trades unions in Russia is under the supervision or control of the Soviet Government or the Third International?

The all-union council of trades unions is, I understand, represented in certain Government departments which deal with economic questions, such as the Commissariat of Labour, the Supreme Council of National Economy and the State Planning Committee. Until February, 1922, the trade unions performed a number of State functions and received State support. But since that time they appear to have recovered a certain degree of the independence attaching to a non-party organisation. The international organisation to which the Soviet trades unions are affiliated is the Red International of Labour Unions, which, while undoubtedly working in collaboration with the Third International, is a separate organisation. On the other hand, the all-union council of trades unions includes in its membership prominent officials of the Russian Communist party.

Is it not apparent that the excuse given by the Soviet Government was an evasion and a subterfuge?

Mr. Mander—

May I not ask a supplementary question?

Order!

We have had a very long and full reply.

Mine is quite a separate supplementary question.

If it is a separate question, it cannot be relevant to the question on the Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can now state generally the reply of the Soviet Government with reference to the arbitral award in favour of Lena Goldfields, Limited?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has yet received the decision of the Soviet Government concerning the Lena Goldfields arbitration; and whether he has yet sent any reply?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can now inform the House as to the reply of the Soviet Government to the representations made by His Majesty's Government with reference to the non-payment of the arbitral award to Lena Goldfields, Limited?

The reply of the Soviet Government has been received, and my Department is in communication with the company with regard to the present position and possible future developments. It would, therefore, be premature for me to make a statement on this case.

Having regard to the great public interest in this matter—

Are you a shareholder?

Order!

Is it in order for an hon. Member on the other side of the House to put a question to my right hon. Friend because he is raising this matter and ask him, "Are you a shareholder of this company"?

I do not like innuendoes from any quarter of the House.

As the individual who interjected the remark, may I say that the reply was that this matter was under consideration with the people who matter most, that is, the shareholders of this company, and, since the interest of the right hon. Gentleman in this matter is evidently great, I asked whether he was a shareholder.

Withdraw!

It is quite unnecessary for the hon. Member to intervene in the matter at all.

On a point of Order. Is not an hon. Member of this House perfectly in order in interjecting a perfectly logical interjection at any moment when an hon. Member is putting a question which is not pertinent to the matter before the House?

You have no qualifications, anyhow.

These interjections are hardly helpful and certainly not relevant.

May I just put my supplementary question, and, in doing so, say that I have no interest, private or otherwise, in this company? May I ask whether, as this matter has already been the subject of public proceedings, the right hon. Gentleman can state generally whether the reply is favourable inasmuch as an admission of liability has been made?

I am not at this moment prepared to add anything to what I have said. We are in communication with the party most directly affected—the company.

Arising out of my question, is not this a matter in which the public are concerned quite apart from the company; do they not want to know whether the Soviet Government have disclaimed liability or not?

I am not denying the public interest, but at the moment I am concerned with the interests of the company.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether a naval attaché has been appointed to Moscow?

As I informed the hon. Member for North Newcastle (Sir N. Grattan-Doyle) last Wednesday, there are no service attachés at Moscow.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any reason why these attachés should not be appointed?

No, I do not know. I have already answered a similar question in the House.

Having regard to the fact that this is the greatest naval and military Power in Europe—

Order!

This is not the time to have a debate.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what organisations in the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics he regards as being under the direct or indirect control of the Soviet Government for the purpose of the latter's pledge to abstain from hostile propaganda, and does the Soviet Government accept responsibility for such control?

I do not consider it desirable to attempt to define and limit the application of the pledge in the manner suggested by the hon. Member. The question of the responsibility of the Soviet Government in respect of any alleged breach of the pledge should, in my judgment, always be considered by His Majesty's Government in the light of the circumstances attending the particular case.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say when he is going to take the House into his confidence, and explain the position between His Majesty's Government and the Soviet Republic with regard to these matters which remain in abeyance, in view of the fact, particularly, that the Prime Minister himself—

Speech!

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state whether any effort has been made by the Government to obtain the recasting in a more explicit form of the mutual pledge to abstain from propaganda, which was the condition on which diplomatic relations were renewed between Great Britain and Russia?

No action in the sense indicated has been taken by His Majesty's Government.

In view of the apparent difference of opinion between His Majesty's Government and the Government of the Soviet Union, does not the right hon. Gentleman think it advisable that some line of demarcation should be drawn as to what is and what is not propaganda against this country?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Soviet Government have made any complaints about the number of anti-Russion questions appearing on the Order Paper here?

That does not arise. Mr. Barr.

Question 17.

May I ask for a reply to my question?

The hon. Member cannot force an answer.

On a point of Order. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Dulwich (Sir F. Hall) asked a supplementary question and the Minister gave no indication that he was not willing to answer that question, but, before there was time to give an answer, another supplementary which you, Sir, ruled out of order, was asked. Meanwhile, the House has had no indication from the Minister that he is not willing to answer my hon. and gallant Friend's supplementary question.

On a point of Order. Is is not the case, Sir, that you had called on me to put Question No. 17, before this intervention.

This seems to me to be a storm in a tea-cup.

rose —

Answer!

I hope that hon. Members will allow questions to proceed.

On a point of Order. May I draw attention to the disorderly conduct of the hon. and gallant Member for Dulwich (Sir F. Hall).

I do not need my attention called to that.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the number of protests recently addressed by His Majesty's Government to the Soviet Government of Russia and the consequent risk of a strained relationship between the two countries, he will issue orders that the export credits guarantee scheme shall no longer operate in respect of exports to Russia?

I have been asked to reply. The relations between His Majesty's Government and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics are not such as to call for any action such as that which the right hon. Gentleman proposes.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, whereas in other countries this risk is spread over many thousands of accounts, if there is one single failure in Russia we lose £2,500,000?

Is it the fact that when this policy was pursued under the last Government strained relations were not improved by such action?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is prepared to advise the withdrawal of the British forces from Egypt?

The acceptance by Egypt of the recent proposals of His Majesty's Government for a Treaty of Alliance would have entailed the withdrawal of the British forces from the interior of Egypt. Pending the resumption of negotiations no such withdrawal is contemplated.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the policy of the Government is not to assist in the establishment of a democratic constitution in Egypt; and whether he has had representations—

That does not arise out of the question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information with regard to negotiations between the United States Government and the Mexican Government with regard to Mexico's external debts; and will he take steps to ensure that in any such negotiations the interests of British creditors are safeguarded?

I am not aware of any negotiations between the United States and Mexico in regard to the Mexican foreign debt, which formed the subject of an agreement concluded in July last between the Mexican Government and the International Committee of Bankers, on which both British and United States interests are represented. This agreement is at present awaiting consideration by the Mexican legislature.

In view of the very large British interests in Mexico, and the grave apprehension which exists concerning them, can the right hon. Gentleman say if those interests are being safeguarded?

I do not know that that question arises. I think British interests are safeguarded to the extent that they are being taken into consideration in the way that I have indicated.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what guarantee was given by Germany with regard to her obligations in carrying out the Young plan?

I would refer the hon. Member to the terms of the agreement signed by Germany at The Hague in January last (Cd. 3484), and in particular to Articles 1 and XIV of that agreement.

Does that mean that Germany will carry out the whole of the agreement, or are parts of the agreement dependent on the ability to carry out the first part?

I do not know that it is possible for me to say how much any Government will carry out an agreement.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if his attention has been called to the gallantry of the sailors of His Majesty's Ship "Suffolk" in rescuing the crew of 14 from the Swedish motor-ship "Hedwig," aground on the Pratas Reef; whether any recognition of the services rendered has been considered; and if he intends taking any action in the matter?

The "Hedwig," which is a Dutch registered vessel, had ridden over a reef and was lying in calm but very shallow water in the Pratas Lagoon. The "Suffolk" took up a position outside the reef opposite the "Hedwig," and lowered a motor boat and whaler which proceeded to cross the Lagoon. As visibility was poor the "Suffolk" made smoke to give the rescue boats a leading mark. The boats crossed the Lagoon but could not reach the wreck owing to the shallow water. The crew of the "Hedwig" abandoned ship on a raft and were transferred to the "Suffolk's" boats, which then returned to the ship and were safely hoisted in, although there was considerable sea and wind. The boats covered a total distance of 28 miles, mostly through coral reefs, in poor visibility and partly in rough sea, and the success of the rescue was entirely dependent on boat work. The appreciation of the Board of Admiralty of the good work performed by the Officer-in-Charge and the boat's crews has been conveyed to the Commander-in-Chief.

Is the First Lord prepared to recommend some kind of medal for these men for their services?

I think that any further consideration of the matter by the Admiralty must await a full written report of the circumstances. What I have stated to-day is based upon a telegraphed report.

Has the right hon. Gentleman the name of the officer commanding the boats?

I have received it, but I did not bring those particulars with me.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many temporary clerks are borne in lieu of departmental clerical officers and writing assistants in the Naval Store Department, Chatham, and the Expense Accounts Department, Chatham?

In the Naval Store Department 23 "P" Class or temporary clerks are at present borne in lieu of clerks, third grade, or writing assistants, and in the Expense Accounts Department 11 "P" Class or temporary clerks are similarly borne in lieu of departmental clerks, third grade.

In view of the fact that the work is permanent why cannot these temporary clerks be promoted to the establishment?

I think my hon. Friend will appreciate that there has been considerable redundancy caused by reductions in staff and appointments from the departmental examination held in 1924. We are getting through that, and we hope now that there will be some appointments under these heads of "P" class clerks, writing assistants and typing staff, and a Committee is at present dealing with that matter.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many third-grade clerks have been substituted by temporary clerks in the office of the Inspector of Naval Ordnance, Royal Arsenal, Woolwich, during the last five years?

Two temporary clerks have, during the last five years, been appointed to the office of the Inspector of Naval Ordnance, Woolwich, in posts provided in the ultimate complement for 3rd grade clerks. This is, however, a temporary arrangement which does not affect the authorised complement of 3rd grade clerks in the Department.

Can the hon. Gentleman explain why in case after case we find temporary staff employed on posts which are permanent, and is it not possible to promote them to the establishment and permanent grade?

The answer which I gave to a previous supplementary question covers that point. It is owing to the redundancy, and the wish to equalise the appointments for the various classes that are not dismissed, and we hope to be able to make other appointments from "P" class clerks very shortly.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that a writing assistant employed in the Admiralty inspection offices, Janson Street, Sheffield, is doing work proper to the third grade departmental clerical class; and whether he will take steps to secure that she is promoted to that class?

The writing assistant employed in the office of the Inspector of Naval Ordnance at Sheffield is employed mainly on registry duties. These duties are among those that are normally performed by the writing assistant grade. The lady in question will be considered for promotion to the departmental clerical class with others of her grade serving in Admiralty establishments, as vacancies occur. It may be mentioned, however, that she recently declined an opportunity of promotion to a departmental clerical class, as this promotion would have involved her transfer from Sheffield.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is yet in a position to state when the report of the committee set up to inquire into the working of the mate scheme will be ready?

The committee have not yet completed the task of taking evidence, and it is therefore not possible to say when the report will be ready.

Must this committee confine their findings to amendments to the present scheme, or have they liberty to make a report in favour of its complete supersession?

The committee understand that they have very wide terms of reference, and they will make what recommendations they think fit.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the ages, ranks and ratings of the promotions made under the mate scheme of 1st December last?

With my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, I will circulate the information in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The information is as follows:

Rating and age on 1st December, 1930.

Leading seaman, 24 years 9 months.

Acting leading seaman, 23 years 6 months.

Able seaman, 23 years.

Able seaman, 22 years 10 months.

Able seaman, 23 years 1 month.

Able seaman, 22 years 11 months.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will state, respectively, the conditions under which quartermasters, warrant and non-commissioned officers, and direct-entry officers on the retired list of the Royal Marines qualify for a step in rank; and, if the conditions vary, the reason therefor?

Warrant officers and non-commissioned officers of the Royal Marines on the retired or pension lists are not granted steps in rank. The regulations governing the grant of a step in rank to commissioned officers of the Royal Marines are shown on page 76 of the Supplement to the Navy List, a copy of which I am sending to my hon. and gallant Friend. It would be too complex a matter in reply to a question to go into detail as to the reasons for the differences which arise. When the present regulations were laid down in 1921, the governing considerations were to assimilate the regulations, on this subject, for the Royal Marines to those for the Royal Navy, subject to the proviso that retired officers should not have a higher rank than their contemporaries on the Active List.

Are quartermasters included in the regulations to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred?

Yes.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the results obtained from the experiments in the Royal Navy in the use of oil fuel produced from British coal, the purchase, at the present low market price, of suitable coal mines has been considered, as well as the erection of Government extracting and refining plant for obtaining oil fuel for the Fleet from British coal?

No such steps are contemplated.

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered the possible danger of depending on overseas supplies of oil fuel, when we have no alternative from our own national resources?

I have had that matter repeatedly before me. It is because of that and the general desire to help the coal industry that we have been pressing at the Admiralty along the lines of giving actual trials with samples of oil, but on the present economic basis it will be quite impossible for the Admiralty to purchase such oil to a large extent for Fleet requirements. We have to rely upon getting much better economic conditions of production than we have at present, but we are pressing forward.

Why is the suggestion in the question not contemplated, in view of the fact that it is a splendid opportunity of putting into operation the Socialist programme of the nationalisation of mines?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that Petty-officer Charles E. Murrell, official No. C/J/57,064, His Majesty's Ship "Royal Oak," after 13 years' service in His Majesty's Navy, died from disease of the lungs contracted on board ship, and after one month's treatment on such ship; that his widow has been refused any pension; and whether he will reconsider the case?

Further consideration is being given to this case, and I will let the hon. Member know the result as soon as possible.

If the naval authorities find that they cannot grant a pension, will the widow be entitled to a civil pension?

I will answer that when we look into the other matter.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the limitation of tonnage in the London Naval Treaty, it is the intention of the Admiralty to make any reduction in the personnel of the Royal Navy?

I would refer the Noble Lady to my reply of the 25th June (OFFICIAL REPORT, columns 1125-6) to the hon. and gallant Member for Londonderry (Major Ross).

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if established men in the Royal dockyards are regarded in all respects as civil servants; and, if not so regarded, in what respects they differ from civil servants?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The second part of the question does not therefore arise. It should be understood that there is no uniform set of conditions of service for civil servants.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if established men in the Royal dockyards have security of tenure from the date of establishment or if security of tenure is acquired under Admiralty Fleet Order 1368/24 as a consequence of deductions from pay of 1s. to 5s. per week?

The security of tenure enjoyed by established men is first acquired on the date of transfer to the established list.

Is it absolute security?

Subject to the ordinary conditions of the Civil Service. A civil servant has not security of tenure if he does things that are wrong.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that established men have been discharged?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will approve the payment of tropical allowance to seaman ratings of the China submarine flotilla under the conditions of Article 1,642 of the King's Regulations and Admiralty Instructions, observing that payment of this allowance is authorised to all engine-room ratings by this article while actually employed in the interiors of submarines, and that of a necessity all officers and ratings are, whilst on sea service in the submarine flotilla, employed in the interiors of the vessels and not the engine-room ratings only?

The whole question of tropical allowances is at present under consideration.

When is that consideration likely to be brought before our notice?

I am afraid that I cannot say.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, with a view to the avoidance of errors of constructional policy, he will appoint a committee on naval designs to study the situation and to recommend a naval programme?

In studying the question of naval design, the Board of Admiralty are in a position to bring to bear on the subject the most expert advice in the country. I am aware of no grounds on which the appointment of a special committee is desirable.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the intention of the British Admiralty to assist in the installation of talking-picture apparatus in British battleships, he will give an assurance that only British equipment manufactured by British companies, will be purchased?

The hon. and gallant Member is under a misapprehension as to the position of the Admiralty in this matter. I would refer him to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Central Southwark (Mr. Day) on 10th December (OFFICIAL REPORT, cols. 382–3).

Is it not the case that four experimental sets have been put into battleships, and that two of them were put in by Americans and two by British firms; and will the hon. Gentleman give us a promise that, when the installation is done in bulk, the big order will be given to British firms in order to make work for British workmen?

Will the Admiralty bear part of the cost of the installation of the new apparatus?

I certainly cannot make a promise of that description. There is a misapprehension. The Admiralty do not bear the cost. It is borne out of canteen funds and by the officers.

Will the hon. Gentleman undertake to see that only British machines are installed?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that British firms were not allowed to tender for the installation in the American Fleet?

What I am trying to convey to the hon. Member is that we cannot dictate to other people how they shall spend their money.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether there is any regulation, and, if so, its terms, which lays down the procedure to be adopted in the case of men found to be unsuitable or incompetent after entering the service; and whether it applies to mechanics and other engineering units?

The procedure relating to unsuitable or incompetent men will be found in Article 420, King's Regulations, 1926, and Volume II, 1929, a copy of which I will send to my hon. Friend. As will be seen, it is applicable to all naval ratings.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) if he can say in what way his Department is encouraging the national mark scheme as regards British beef, mutton and pork;

(2) if he can give any figures showing the number of carcases of British beef and mutton consumed by the Navy during the past year; and if he can say how many had the national mark?

The great bulk of the meat purchased is frozen imported meat of Dominion origin and very little home-killed meat is taken for the naval service for reasons which have in the past been made clear to the House. The actual amounts were approximately 24,000 lbs. of beef and 1,600 lbs. of mutton. I am afraid I cannot say to what extent, if any, it has been found possible, to purchase national mark carcases.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied with the amount of encouragement his Department is giving to British agriculture?

I think I have said in reply to another question that we do all we can in the way of encouraging Empire production.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Board is satisfied that calculations of aggregate tonnage of warships under the system of standard displacement agreed to in Article 6 of the Washington Treaty result in exact measurements for all countries?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the definition of standard displacement contained in the Treaty of Washington, Chapter II, Part IV, and confirmed in the London Naval Treaty, Article VI, which is so framed as to ensure that similar conditions must in all cases be observed in measuring the displacement of warships belonging to the signatories of the said treaties, he is satisfied that similar conditions to those observed in the British Navy in obtaining such measurements are observed in the navies of France, Italy, Japan, and the United States of America?

The Board of Admiralty are satisfied that the definition of standard displacement is so framed as to ensure as far as possible that similar conditions must in all cases be observed in measuring the displacement of warships of different nations. They are further satisfied that under these conditions the possible margin of variation in the calculations should be small.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether he is aware that ex-German ships of equal displacement that were handed over to France and Italy are now returned by Italy as having a standard displacement 25 to 33 per cent, less than that of the French ships; and, in view of the fact that the published material particulars of armament, etc., correspond to those of the French ships, whether he can give the explanation of the discrepancies;

(2) whether, in view of the fact that by Article 8 of the Naval Treaty ships of under 600 tons are exempt from limitation, he can explain why the ex-Austrian "Dukla" class of 787 tons displacement now appear in the French Navy as 748 tons standard displacement, and in the Italian Navy as 555 tons, 558 tons, and 568 tons, respectively?

The Board of Admiralty are aware that, with regard to the ex-German and ex-Austrian ships now belonging to France and Italy, there are certain cases in which ships originally of the same class are now shown as of differing displacements. No information which would explain these differences is available, but it should be observed that up to the present these particular vessels are not included in any Treaty limitation. It may also be remarked that the vessels concerned are either over age or will shortly become so.

Does not that suggest that Italy has a different system of reckoning standard displacement? On that she is getting a reputation for warship building which is leading to many losses of orders for warship building in this country—if the system is wrong.

It is difficult to answer that point, but I will put it this way: There is no agreement yet between France and Italy as to these particular categories of ships, and, if an agreement is arrived at and if they adhere to Part III of the London Naval Treaty, I can only say that I have no reason to doubt that all parties to such an agreement will abide by it.

In view of the importance of getting the same standard of measurements for displacement, having regard to the recent London Treaty, will the right hon. Gentleman make representations to the French and Italian Governments with the object of securing that the measurements in all cases are, in fact, the same?

We have no reason to doubt, up to the present, that any Treaty obligations entered into have not been fulfilled, and until these particular ships are covered by a Treaty I do not think it would be wise to raise the matter.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in conjunction with the proposed survey for the construction of a railway from Haifa to Bagdad, he will also consider the desirability of a road engineer being asked to report on the comparative cost of an all-weather road?

The survey is now in progress and is being carried out as expeditiously as possible. The funds available are sufficient only for the purpose for which the survey has been undertaken, and it would not be practicable to enlarge its scope.

Does not the hon. Member think it is very undesirable to omit an examination of the possibilities of constructing a road?

It is not thought that the additional expenditure involved would be justified; and I am sure that with the hon. and gallant Member's zeal for economy he will appreciate that reason.

Is it not a fact that motor traffic is in many cases being substituted for rail traffic, even where a railway has already been built; and is it not better that the road possibilities should be examined, and possible economies effected in that way, before building a railway which may be rendered obsolete by the roads?

This is not a very hopeful case. Six hundred miles of motor road without any prospect of intermediate traffic is not a very good proposition.

asked the Under secretary of State for the Colonies whether the fair wages and fair condi- tions of labour in force at the Haifa harbour construction and other works, executed under the Palestine and East African Loan Act, apply equally to men and women?

I have no reports on the employment of women on these works, but I know of no reason why the provisions in question should not apply to all workers irrespective of sex.

Will the hon. Gentleman be kind enough to make inquiries on that point?

I shall be very glad to investigate any specific point which is brought to my notice.

Are there any women employed there at all?

I have been over the works recently and I never saw any women. It is possible that there may be some women engaged in office work and that I did not see them.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware of the fact that the High Commissioner for Palestine has issued instructions to the effect that in future no work on the Haifa Harbour construction should be carried on on Sundays; and, seeing that Moslems and Jews would thus be compelled to work on their respective Sabbaths, what steps does he intend to take in the matter?

I am aware that such an instruction in respect of the Athlit Quarry has been reported. My Noble Friend is awaiting a report from the High Commissioner, on the receipt of which the matter will be fully considered.

Is it not a very good compromise, seeing that, if Friday were a holiday, the Jews would object, and, if Saturday were a holiday, the Arabs would object, and by giving Sunday as a holiday, nobody would object?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if, as it is the policy of the Government to encourage local residents in Crown Colonies to subscribe to the loans issued by the Crown agents for those Colonies, he will state what specific arrangements were made to that end in respect of the issue of the recent Kenya loan and the result of those arrangements?

In the case of the recent issue of £3,400,000 Kenya 4½ per cent. stock, at the request of the Government of Kenya £50,000 was reserved by the Crown agents for the Colonies for local subscriptions. The Government of Kenya were asked to telegraph the total of the actual subscriptions not later than the morning of the second day after the final date for the closing of the lists in London. The amount received was £2,700.

Is the hon. Member aware that this unsatisfactory result is due to the fact that insufficient time was given for local subscriptions to be sent in?

I believe about two more days were allowed in Kenya than were available for people in London, and it was not found possible, in the circumstances, to give any more time.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it is the intention of the Secretary of State to withhold his final approval to the draft Estimates for 1931, submitted by the Government of Kenya, until he has satisfied himself that they conform to the conditions laid down in the Memorandum on Native Policy in East Africa?