asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is prepared to advise a reduction in the rent of steel houses at Sandyhills, Shettleston?

I would refer to the reply on this subject given to my hon. Friend on the 9th December last, to which I have nothing to add.

In view of the difference in the rentals of these houses in various areas, would the hon. Gentleman consider this question further, with a view to a reduction of these rents?

I do not know that the Department has any power to grant reductions, but I will certainly have inquiries made into the point raised by my hon. Friend, and see whether it is possible for anything to be done in the way of advice or suggestion to this housing company.

Will not the hon. Gentleman, in view of the general reduction in wages that is now taking place, and the almost impossibility of paying these rents, consider recommending to the authorities that they should reduce the rents charged?

I am afraid that, as I have already pointed out, the Department has no power, because I am advised that, under the terms of the agreement between the housing company and the Department, the rents of steel houses, subject to the approval of the Department, must be fixed with reference to the rents charged for houses with similar accommodation in the district; but I have already said, in reply to the first supplementary question, that I will certainly have proper inquiries made and see if it is possible to do anything in the direction suggested.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, whether his attention has been drawn to the defalcations in the assessor's department of the Glasgow Corporation where employés have tampered with and reduced the valuation of properties in the city without the knowledge or consent of the assessor; and what action, if any, he proposes to take?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. My right hon. Friend has no control over the proceedings of the assessor or his staff.

As I understand that these valuations have to be approved by the Scottish Office, may I ask whether it is the fact that 61 valuations have been reduced by these employés, that the cost to the city was £13,000 to restore them, and that important papers were stolen and valuations obliterated by these employés; and whether the hon. Gentleman does not consider that the Scottish Office should take action with a view to setting up a complete Governmental inquiry into these allegations?

All I can say is that, according to the advice given to me, the Department has no control over the assessor. It is an appointment made by the town council, and under the complete supervision of the town council.

If the Scottish Office has to approve of these valuations; if, after they have been approved by the Scottish Office, those employés, behind its back, have been reducing these valuations, and if the claim is made by the assessor that a sum of money has changed hands, does not the hon. Gentleman think that the Scottish Office ought to take action to see that these values should not be tampered with?

I shall certainly have inquiries made into the point raised, and see if it is possible for anything to be done.

asked the Lord Advocate why, after a complaint had been lodged in Glasgow of an attempt to bribe Bailie Jeffrey in order that he should vote for or support the granting of a public house licence, the prosecution was dropped?

The complaint referred to was a police complaint that libelled an alleged contravention of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1906. On examination it appeared that the facts of the case would not support a charge of contravention of the Statute, and the complaint was dropped. As the matter has been brought to my notice, I am considering whether on the facts of the case a prosecution for an offence at common law should be directed.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether the Government have yet come to any decision with regard to the operation of the seven-hours day after 8th July?

asked the Secretary for Mines if he can now state what are the intentions of the Government in regard to legislation affecting the hours of labour underground in coal mines?

My hon. Friend regrets that he cannot as yet add anything to the answers previously given to questions on this subject. Discussions are still proceeding between the Government, the Mining Association, and the Miners' Federation, and no stone is being left unturned in the endeavour to find a satisfactory solution to the problem as a whole.

asked the Secretary for Mines in how many districts coal miners are working on spread-over agreements as to hours which have not been sanctioned by the Miners' Federation of Great Britain?

Practically speaking, such working is confined to two districts, Scotland and part of North Wales; though my hon. Friend has been notified of two isolated cases in other districts.

Do the Government condone the illegalities——

rose——

Is it not the case that it is the Miners' Federation that is prohibiting the spread-over in Scotland, and will the right hon. Gentleman suggest that the Miners' Federation allow the Scottish miners to have Home Rule in this matter?

asked the Secretary for Mines the quantity of coal exported from South Wales during the first three months of 1930 and 1931, respectively, and also the corresponding figure for exports of coal from Poland?

The quantity of coal exported from the Bristol Channel ports during the first three months of 1930 was 6,634,680 tons, and during the same period of 1031, 4,096,040 tons. The corresponding figures of exports of coal from Poland were 2,808,893 tons and 2,770,119 tons, respectively.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether he has received a report from Messrs. Pease and Partners, the owners of the Chilton Colliery Com- pany, Durham, with regard to the closing down of that mine and the dismantling of the pumping machinery and the consequent flooding of the workings; and whether there is any action his Department can take with a view to preventing this?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. My hon. Friend has had inquiries made, however, and he understands that the proposal is to withdraw the pumps at Chilton Colliery from the lower seams only. This mine has been idle for the last 13 months, owing to the depression in the iron and steel trade, upon which it is entirely dependent, and the owners consider that the cost of pumping and of the maintenance of the workings in the lower seams can no longer be afforded. The withdrawal of the pumps from these seams is, however, regarded by them only as a temporary measure, and they hope to re-open the seams when trade improves. My hon. Friend regrets that there is no action that he can take in the matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in the opinion of expert mining engineers and practical workmen, if these pumps are withdrawn it will be many long years before they can be started again; and will he consider a very practical proposal for setting up central pumping machinery in that area, in order that the work may be done more efficiently and the whole cost may not fall upon the workers?

I have great sympathy with my hon. Friend in regard to this trouble. The second part of his supplementary question would require consideration, but, as regards the first part, I am advised that it would always be possible to resume without any very great difficulty.

May we have the right hon. Gentleman's assurance that he will consider the question of setting up central pumping machinery?

Plainly I must make inquiries, and I will, of course, do so, and will inform my hon. Friend of the result.

In view of the references to the steel industry in the right hon. Gentleman's reply, may I ask him if he still adheres to the policy laid down by the Government in relation to steel?

asked the Secretary for Mines whether the Mines Reorganisation Commission have had under consideration the following mines in Durham County, owned by Messrs. Pease and Partners, namely: West Comforth, Chilton, and Windlestone; and, if not, will he suggest that this be done immediately before these mines become derelict, owing to the removal of pumping machinery and the withdrawal of safety men?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to a question by the hon. Member for Blackley (Mr. P. Oliver) on the 31st March, of which I am sending him a copy. I understand that there is at present no question of these collieries being permanently abandoned.

May I again ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is fully aware of the fact that valuable seams are likely to be lost, and that this is an urgent matter which ought to receive the immediate attention of the Coal Mines Reorganisation Commission, as a question which is suitable for the particular class of inquiry which the Commission is conducting?

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a colliery in Durham in which there are estimated to be 8,500,000 tons of coal has been scrapped?

The Coal Mines Act!

No, it is not due to the Coal Mines Act.

I am afraid that this is a much wider problem, and I must not say more than a word or two in reply to the supplementary questions. There is, of course, depression in the industry, but I will undertake to bring these supplementary questions to the notice of the Commission.

rose——

These questions do not really arise out of the question on the Paper.

As this question is so important, and the answers are so unsatisfactory, I beg to give notice that at the earliest opportunity I shall raise, on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House, the question of the closing of these coal mines in Durham.

asked the Secretary for Mines if he will give the figures, up to the latest convenient date, of the total expenditure on low-temperature carbonisation experiments conducted by the Government since experimental work in this branch of research was first undertaken?

I regret that it is impossible to give the figures for which the hon. Member asks owing to the fact that experiments on low-temperature carbonisation form but a part of the general programme of research on fuel conducted by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research the cost of which was given by my hon. Friend the Secretary for Mines in reply to a question asked by the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Freeman) on 22nd May. The different parts of the programme are so interdependent that it is not possible to say in terms of expenditure how much of it has been devoted to low-temperature carbonisation. For a fuller explanation of this interdependence I would refer the hon. Member to the report of the Fuel Research Board for the year ending 31st March, 1931, pp. 9–12.

As the right hon. Gentleman cannot ascertain the precise figures, would he say if the expenditure incurred up to the present has been justified by the results achieved by the experiment?

This is undeniably a very difficult problem, but I hope the research has been justified.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has anything to report in connection with the reorganisation of the iron and steel industries?

I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to the reply given on 12th May to the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Remer).

Has nothing happened since 12th May?

Things are happening very week. I have promised to make a full report on them on the Board of Trade Vote.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the value of tea imported from the British Empire and the Dutch foreign possessions, respectively, into Holland during each of the years 1928, 1929 and 1930?

During the years 1928, 1929 and 1930, the value of British Indian and Ceylon tea imported for consumption into the Netherlands was £152,000, £187,000 and £216,000 respectively. During the same years the imports of tea grown in Java and other Dutch East Indies amounted to £1,257,000, £1,172,000 and £1,070,000, respectively. By far the greater part of the British Indian and Ceylon tea and an appreciable proportion of the Dutch Colonial tea imported during these years consisted of re-exports from the United Kingdom.

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been called to the fact that, since the abolition of the Tea Duty by the late Government——

Sir Kingsley Wood.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can now make a further statement as to the position of the tariff truce proposals; and whether he proposes to ask the German Government to reconsider their decision not to deposit their ratification of the commercial convention?

With regard to the first part of the question, I can add nothing to the answer which was given on the 19th May to my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Freeman), of which I am sending the right hon. Gentleman a copy. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative.

Is the right hon. Gentleman proposing to continue this matter further?

Yes, Sir, it will be continued with all earnestness.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, with regard to the negotiations with the French Government for alterations of tariffs on United Kingdom goods, in view of the fact that an offer by the French Government to give us most-favoured-nation treatment in any new arrangement confers no advantage on British goods entering France, whether he will state what action he proposes to take?

I cannot admit that the most-favoured-nation tariff treatment which United Kingdom exports to France at present enjoy confers no advantage on our trade with that country. As regards the proposals which Has Majesty's Government have submitted to the French Government for reductions of the rates of duty levied on United Kingdom goods I can add nothing at present to the information which I have already communicated to the House.

Does the right hon. Gentleman expect any tangible results from negotiations?

Yes, Sir, I have always said that it is a difficult matter, but I am still full of hope.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the British Chamber of Commerce in Paris has reported to the Board of Trade that the most-favoured-nation clause confer no benefit whatever upon British goods?

I have already given the hon. Member a reply on that point, and I feel that I cannot accept his view regarding the position of this matter at all.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what has been the percentage drop in the cost of oils and fats during the last two years; and what has been the corresponding percentage drop in retail soap prices?

The average declared import value (c.i.f.) of oils and fats, other than mineral and for food, imported into the United Kingdom during the first four months of 1929 was about £36 per ton and during the first four months of 1931 £23 10s. per ton, a fall of about 1⅛d. per lb. or 35 per cent. The average retail price of household soap in great Britain, as calculated from returns supplied to the Ministry of Labour for the purpose of the Cost of Living Statistics, was approximately 6½d. per lb. in the first four months of 1929, and 6d. per lb. in the first four months of 1931, a fall of about 8 per cent.

In view of the extraordinary disparity between the size of the drop in the wholesale price of oils and fats, and the size of the drop in retail prices of soap, can the Government hold out any expectation of legislation with a view to dealing with this gap?

That, of course, is precisely one of the objects covered by the Consumers' Council Bill.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how he got the figure, because my information is that it is £8 a ton.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has investigated the report submitted to him by the London Trades Council on the Americanisation of the British film industry; and if he is prepared to publish that report?

I can only refer the hon. Member to the answers which I gave him on this subject on 19th May.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman of the opinion that the public are entitled to know that the film industry in this country is largely controlled by Mr. William Fox at the present moment?

This is a report by the London Trades Council marked "Private and Confidential." It is entirely for the Trades Council to say whether it should be published, and it is not a matter with which I have anything to do at all.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the London Trades Council said they have no objection to the publication of the matter?

In that event, it lies with them to publish it.

Is it not a fact that there are many British companies which are not controlled by Mr. William Fox?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he has taken to obtain compliance with the 1883 Suez Canal agreement, which provides for the canal transit dues to be reduced to a basis of five francs (gold) when the canal dividend has reached 25 per cent.?

His Majesty's Government has, from time to time, supported in the general interest proposals for reasonable reductions in the Suez Canal dues and, in particular, as my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade indicated in the Debate on the Adjournment of 22nd May, the Government lent their support to proposals for reduction in the present level of the dues. As regards the precise provisions of the 1883 agreement, however, I would point out that this appears to have been concluded between the Association of Steamship Owners trading with the East on the one hand and the Suez Canal Company on the other. His Majesty's Government were not a party to the agreement, and any question of securing compliance with its terms would appear to be a matter for the shipowners concerned.

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that he is a party to acquiescing in non-compliance with the agreement of 1883?

No, Sir, that cannot be suggested. The last part of the reply makes it clear that the question of compliance really relates to the Suez Canal Company and the shipowners concerned.

If the shipowners apply to the Board of Trade, will the right hon. Gentleman give them support for getting compliance with the 1883 agreement with the help of the British Government?

If that relates to efforts to secure a reduction of dues, we have, of course, already done that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the industrial survey of the North-East Coast has been undertaken; if so, whether any report has been made to his Department; and will he instruct those persons responsible for this survey to specially consider the possibility of starting new industries in the distressed mining areas of the south and west of Durham county?

The industrial surveys of this and other areas have been commenced, but in view of the large amount of statistical and other material to be examined some months must elapse before the results can be expected. As regards the last part of the question, the object of these inquiries is to present a survey of the present industrial position of the areas and of the prospects of early expansion and new development.

Are we to understand that these surveys by the universities do not take into account the starting of new businesses in distressed mining areas?

Oh, no, that would be a serious error. They survey the whole industrial position, and part of the inquiry-is to see what new industries can be established.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what will be the use of these surveys to the mining classes?

I should hope that in due course they will be useful in suggesting new industries to replace other industries.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many articles are subject to additional duties by the new Canadian tariff; and whether he will make representations to the Canadian Government as to the undesirability of imposing fresh barriers on trade at a time of universal trade depression?

I have not yet received retails of all the changes recently made in the Canadian Customs tariff, and I am unable therefore to say how many of the articles exported from this country will be subjected to increased duties. Some details were published in the last issue of the "Board of Trade Journal," and full particulars will be similarly published as soon as they are received. The point raised in the second part of the question cannot usefully be considered in the absence of fuller information than I at present possess.

When the right hon. Gentleman is in full possession of the facts, if he find that some of these duties are increasing against this country, will he consider making representations?

I can assure my hon. Friend that that point will be considered.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that the making of representations will be of the slightest use, unless he is prepared to offer something in return?

Yes. On innumerable occasions in all parts of the world we get concessions without becoming involved in tariffs in this country.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the present position with regard to the trade agreement made by Lord D'Abernon's mission to the Argentine?

The agreement is still awaiting legislative approval in Argentina.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any idea when it is likely to be given effect to?

No. It depends entirely on the circumstances in Argentina, and those are beyond my control.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the amount of Russian butter imported into this country in the last six months to date, and the amount of British margarine exported to Russia in that period?

During the five months ended 30th April, 1931, 7,007 cwt. of butter, valued at £34,455, were imported into the United Kingdom registered as consigned from the Soviet Union, and 128,195 cwt. of margarine, valued at £301,875, of United Kingdom manufacture, were exported from this country registered as consigned to the Soviet Union. The figures for the domestic exports of margarine to the Soviet Union during May have not yet been compiled, but I will send them to the hon. Member as soon as they are available, together with particulars regarding the imports of butter from the Soviet Union during May, which will be published on the 12th June in the "Accounts relating to Trade and Navigation of the United Kingdom."

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Russian Government have asked to be informed of the conditions under which British margarine is made?

No, Sir. There is no question of that kind, as far as I know.

Is it not produced under fair conditions of labour?

Is there any reason why such a stupid question should be answered?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether it is still the opinion of his advisers that it is essential to maintain in this country an efficient dyestuffs industry for research and other purposes; and what comparable alternative for the safeguarding of the industry do they propose which is more consistent with the general fiscal and commercial policy of this country than a continuance of the Dye-stuffs (Import Regulation) Act?

It is the business of my advisers to advise on questions of national defence, and from this point of view the importance of an efficient dye-stuffs industry is recognised. My ad- visers would not, however, make proposals in the sphere of fiscal and commercial policy.

May we take it that they have no alternative plan?

It is not the business of the advisers of the War Office to make plans of a fiscal nature.

Am I to understand that the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman in December last that they were considering comparable plans with other countries, was not correct?

I never made a statement that the advisers of the War Office were considering alternative plans. It is not their business to advise as to fiscal policy.

asked the Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department whether he can state the details of official representations made to the Government by the Soviet Government for credits to construct vessels in British yards for employment under the Soviet flag; and if the Government have come to any decision on this matter?

asked the Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department if he can now state what progress has been made in the negotiations now taking place between His Majesty's Government and the trade representatives of the Russian Government on the request from the latter for credits to enable them to order a number of ships to be built in British shipyards; and whether His Majesty's Government will give such credits in order to encourage heavy and light engineering?

His Majesty's Government are considering this matter as one of urgency, but a decision cannot be reached until all the necessary information is available.

With a large amount of shipping laid up, is it necessary to consider construction, and the giving of money to the Soviet Government until some of the existing shipping is purchased?

There is, of course, a very large amount of unused tonnage lying up and that is being taken into account, but there are many other considerations, including in particular certain classes of ships.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these ships would feed the unemployed and that we have thousands of shipbuilders in this country who are anxious and willing to build these ships for the Russians? Will he, therefore, see his way to grant the Russians the same credits as they are getting from Italy?

rose——

On a point of Order. Why am I not getting a reply to my question?

I have already indicated that much additional information is necessary on this by no means easy problem, and that information includes the question of rival credit terms.

Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply which I have received to this very important question, affecting the shipbuilding and engineering trade which I represent, I beg to give notice that I am going to raise the matter on the first available opportunity.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether the committee set up on the marking of foreign butter has yet reported; and, if not, when is it likely to report?

The Standing Committee has submitted its report which will be published in the course of a day or two.

Is there any need to mark foreign butter seeing that it is easily recognisable by the lepidoptera contained in it?

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is prepared to consider the extension of the provisions of the Merchandise Marks Act to foreign butter and margarine?

There is power under the Merchandise Marks Act, 1926, to make an Order in Council requiring the marking of imported goods of any class or description provided an application is made for the Order substantially representing one or more of the interests mentioned in Section 2 (3) of the Act. No such application has been made in respect of margarine. In the case of butter an application made by a number of interests has been the subject of an inquiry by the Standing Committee set up under the Act and the report of this body will be published in the course of a day or two. I am not, however, at present in a position to say what action will be taken upon it.

May I take it that the right hon. Gentleman is sympathetic, at any rate, to the proposal contained in the question?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what Governments who were represented at the Convention of 1929 for Safety of Life at Sea have ratified that Convention; and if any reservations have been declared?

Up to the present Denmark and the Netherlands only have ratified the Convention, with no reservations in either case.

Has the Convention to be accepted as a whole, or may it be signed with reservations?

Will the right hon. Lady also make a statement as to the fall in the Labour vote at Gateshead?

That is a rather different point, and I prefer that the hon. and gallant Member should give me notice of the question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade at whose instance the question of lack of uniform practice in the use and application of helm orders was raised at the Convention of 1929; and if he is prepared to publish the minutes of evidence on this subject?

The proposal for a uniform international system of helm orders was discussed at the International Conference on Safety of Life at Sea held in 1913–14, and the Conference recommended that "in view of the diversity of practice and opinion in the different countries, the question of the adoption of a uniform system of helm orders should be considered at the same time as the revision of the regulations for preventing collisions at sea." As proposals for the amendment of the Collision Regulations were to be considered at the 1929 Conference, it was inevitable that the subject of helm orders should be discussed; and definite notice to raise the matter was given before the Conference assembled by Denmark, Finland, The Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. As regards the second part of the question I am circulating a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) whether he will approach the various leading British shipowners' associations and suggest to them that they should themselves nominate their own joint representatives to fill future vacancies on the board of the Suez Canal Company;

I am informed that under the London Agreement of 1883 seven directors chosen from among British shipowners and merchants were added to the board of the Suez Canal Company. These directors form what is known as the London Committee, and I understand that it is the practice of the committee on the occurrence of a vacancy in its membership to nominate a new member, whose name is then submitted to the board of directors for election and for subsequent confirmation at a meeting of shareholders. The question of the best means of securing proper representation for British shipping interests is one for the shipping industry itself.

Am I to understand from the reply of the right hon. Gentleman that these representatives are now nominated by the Shipowners' Associa- tion, or are they nominated by the Government?

No, I think that I made it clear that it is largely an agreement between the Suez Canal Company and the shipping interests and that nominations will be made in that way.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) whether the present seven directors on the board of the Suez Canal Company under the agreement of 1883 represent British shipping and are themselves shipowners;

Under the agreement of 1883 the seven directors in question are to be chosen from amongst English shipowners and merchants. In fact six of the seven are either shipowners or closely connected with shipping. The Chamber of Shipping and the Liverpool Steamship Owners' Association are not directly represented on the board of the company but there are two ex-presidents of the chamber and two ex-chairmen of the Liverpool Steamship Owners' Association among these directors.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the crews of steamers at Craigendoran, owned by the London and North Eastern Railway Company, are required to work an 11-hour day, with overtime in addition; that in the steamer "Waverley" the seamen and firemen have been reduced by two; that in the steamer "Jeanie Deans" only one fireman is employed to attend a double-ended boiler with six fires, closed stokehold, and forced draught for 11 hours at a stretch; and whether he will inquire into the matter in order to provide for the safety of passengers and secure proper working conditions for the crew?

I have obtained a report on this matter from which it appears that the facts differ in certain respects from those stated in the question. The position is that the new vessel "Jeanie Deans" is not at present on any regular service but will shortly take up the service now carried on by the "Waverley," and the latter will be transferred to another service. The number of seamen on the "Waverley" has been reduced from six to five, and the number of firemen was experimentally reduced from five to three. As, however, the arrangements involved one fireman being on duty alone for part of each day, the owners have decided to increase the number of firemen to four and have arranged the conditions so that at no time while the ship is on service are less than two men employed in the stokehold. The same conditions will apply to the "Jeanie Deans" when she takes up service. The Board are satisfied that no question of safety arises as regards the manning of these vessels either on deck or in the stokehold.

If I satisfy the right hon. Gentleman that engineers, firemen in the stokehold and the crew are working 11 hours without any break, will he interfere and see that that is changed?

My hon. Friend knows that I am very anxious to do my best in regard to these matters, and certain improvements are represented in the reply that I have read. I can also give him information on the subsequent points which he has put.

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government propose to implement the recommendations contained in the first report of the Royal Commission on Unemployment Insurance?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave on Thursday last in reply to a question by the hon. Member for Torquay (Mr. C. Williams), to which I have nothing to add.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government accept in principle the recommendations of the Commission?

Did not the right hon. Gentleman himself press again and again that the Commission should issue an interim report?

asked the Minister of Labour if she is aware that unemployed men are being offered, by Employment Exchanges, jobs with the Eldorado Ice Cream Company; that the wages offered are 3s. per day plus 2s. in the £ commission; that the hours are expressly stated as 9.30 a.m. to 9 p.m., Mondays to Sundays; that this means 801 hours per week; and that men who have refused such work have been disallowed benefit; and whether she will give instructions to her officers to offer no more of these jobs?

The wages and hours are substantially as stated; I understand the hours are those of leaving and returning to the depot. In certain cases benefit has been disallowed by courts of referees on refusal of this employment, but I am informed that the question of an appeal to the Umpire is under consideration. I have no authority to issue the instructions suggested in the last part of the question.

Does not the right hon. Lady see the danger of the principle involved in this matter, and that is that no one shall be allowed unemployment benefit if they refuse a job where they have to work seven days a week? Does she not see the danger of the implication?

That is not the principle involved here, because, as a, matter of fact, in two or three cases of a similar kind the courts of referees have allowed benefit.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether land of which the freehold is owned by private individuals and which is subject in perpetuity to restrictions providing that no buildings shall be erected on it will have the privilege of exemption from the proposed land tax?

No, Sir. Such land would not be exempt from tax; but while I cannot of course speak with assurance in the absence of details of a particular case, it may be anticipated that the restrictions to which the hon. Member refers would normally be taken into account in arriving at land value.

Does that mean that land on which no building can be erected will be subject to the tax?

Unless I have full details of particular places I cannot give a definite reply that will be applicable generally.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider publishing a White Paper giving the method of taxing and rating land values in the Dominion of New Zealand as well as in the various States comprising the Commonwealth of Australia?

I have considered this suggestion. The information asked for by my hon. Friend could not be compiled before the discussions on the Finance Bill are concluded, and in these circumstances I doubt whether the labour involved in the compilation would be justified.

Could not this information be obtained from the various High Commissioners' offices and Agents-General without much delay?

As the hon. Member knows, a good deal of information on these matters can already be found in various publications. As I have said, it will take considerable time to put it into proper form, and I am quite sure it could not be done in time for the consideration of the Finance Bill.

Is it not the fact that the system of rating and taxation in these lands is entirely different from the proposals of the Government?

Not at all.