asked the President of the Board of Trade the value of imports from and exports to Russia from 1st December to the latest available date?

During the month of December, 1933, the total declared value of the imports into the United Kingdom of merchandise consigned from the Soviet Union amounted to £1,317,487. Exports to the Soviet Union amounted to £216,244, including re-exports valued at £82,941.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if an export quota has now been agreed with Russia under the wheat convention?

No, Sir, but I understand that the matter is still under discussion between the Soviet Union and the four major exporting countries.

In the event of an agreement not being made with Russia on this point, will the other parties to the Convention still remain bound?

I am afraid that I shall have to ask for notice of that question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the export and import trading figures for the six months ended 31st December, 1933, or the nearest convenient date between this country and Canada, Australia and New Zealand respectively?

As the answer involves a tabular statement, I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

May I ask my hon. Friend whether these figures show that the British Empire is still our best customer?

asked the President of the Board of Trade with what countries negotiations for trade agreements are now proceeding?

Negotiations are at present proceeding with the Soviet Union, Estonia and Latvia, and negotiations with Lithuania are being opened this week.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what foreign countries have in operation discriminatory duties against British goods; and if the Government contemplate the termination of existing trade agreements with such countries?

The only existing case of any material importance in which discriminatory duties are imposed against United Kingdom goods is the French import turnover tax. The French Government has undertaken to remove this differentiation so soon as the necessary legislation can be passed. In these circumstances no action on the lines suggested in the last part of the question is in contemplation.

I asked my hon. and gallant Friend whether His Majesty's Government will enunciate some definite policy for dealing with these questions as they arise? Will he consider the advisability

Perhaps the hon. Member had better wait to see the statement.

We can under the Import Duties Act take steps in a great many cases.

Having regard to the statements made yesterday in the House that action will be taken in 10 days' time, will arrangements be made in the meantime so that there is no delay afterwards?

Yes, Sir.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the negotiations with the Spanish Government in relation to the duty on motor cars of British manufacture entering Spain being on the same basis of import duty as cars imported from France have been completed; and from what date the rebate on British cars becomes operative?

Yes, Sir; the concession to French cars has been extended to cars of United Kingdom origin with effect as from 1st October last.

In cases such as this, may I ask again whether, if action of this kind is taken by the Spanish or any other Government, retaliatory measures will at once be taken so that this country can exercise its rights?

We have obtained satisfaction without resorting to retaliatory measures, but, if necessary, they are there to be used.

But is not the process of getting satisfaction entirely too slow in dealing with these cases?

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number and the aggregate registered tonnage of British vessels transferred to foreign flags in the last three years, with the tonnage transferred to Panama, Finland, Yugoslavia, and Greece, respectively?

As the answer contains a tabular statement I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will the hon. Gentleman state whether there have been very large transfers of British tonnage to some of these relatively unimportant countries, and whether there is some explanation for the disproportionate number of ships transferred to these countries, such as Panama and Greece?

I think that the hon. Gentleman will find the whole of the figures for Panama, Finland, Greece and

Can the hon. Gentleman give an explanation for this transfer?

I think that that is a separate question, and perhaps the hon. Member will give me notice of it.

Is the question of the sale of ships to foreign countries a subject for discussion in the negotiations now taking place between the Government and the Chamber of Shipping?

It is certainly an allied question which might properly be discussed at the same time if there is any general desire.

Have the Government any intention of putting an embargo on the sale of British ships to foreign countries?

That is quite another question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can now make a statement with reference to the Silk Duties and the suspension of their consideration by the Import Duties Advisory Committee?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer which I gave to him on the 5th December.

In view of the injurious effect that the delay has had upon the industry and employment concerned, may I ask whether a conclusion will be made of these negotiations in the very near future?

I cannot say when the conclusion will take place, but I can assure the hon. and learned Gentleman that no time will be lost.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can give any information relating to the setting up of the credit institution for the purpose of providing finance for the development of medium and small-sized manufacturing and trading concerns?

I presume that my hon. Friend has in mind the statements made in the report of the Macmillan Committee regarding the representations which had been made to them on this subject. The committee clearly had in mind that the setting up of such a credit institution was a matter which should be pursued on an ordinary commercial basis. I understand that the matter has been, and still is, under consideration in the City.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the present position of British shipping?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the statement made by my right hon. Friend in the Debate on this subject on 13th December last, and to the reply I gave yesterday to my hon. Friend the Member for Salford South (Mr. Stourton).

In view of the national importance of British shipping, may I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he can state when measures will be brought forward in order to enable British shipping to compete with that of foreign countries, which in fact in every case to-day is subsidised in one form or another?

The Government are very concerned about the position of British shipping, but we are waiting for a good deal of information from the shipping industry itself.

Cannot the hon. Gentleman say when they are likely to receive the whole of that information and decide upon it, as this matter is so important?

No time will be lost once the information is received, but a good deal of information has been asked for, and the replies have not yet come in.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can now state what is the policy of the Government regarding Japanese competition?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply which I gave yesterday to the hon. Members for Platting (Mr. Chorlton) and Salford South (Mr. Stourton), and to the further answer which I shall give later to-day in reply to a Private Notice Question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can make any statement as to his visit to Manchester during last week?

As my hon. Friend is no doubt aware, my right hon. Friend went to Lancashire last week in order to obtain first-hand information regarding the views of the cotton industry on the various problems confronting them, including the problem of Japanese competition. With this object he met the Special Committee which has been set up by the industry with regard to Japanese competition, and he also had meetings with representatives of the spinning, manufacturing and merchanting sections of the industry, with representatives of the operatives, and with the Joint Committee of Cotton Trade Organisations. From all sides my right hon. Friend received representations regarding the urgency of the problems presented by Japanese competition, and he assured the industry that the Government fully realised the importance of the time factor and that they could not afford to delay. I am, happily, now in a position to add to this statement. Within the last 24 hours His Excellency the Japanese Ambassador has informed His Majesty's Government, under instructions from the Japanese Government, that the following representatives have been duly authorisd by the Japanese industries concerned to enter into formal negotiations with the representatives of British industries:—

In view of the necessity of obtaining further information from the hon. and gallant Gentleman and the President of the Board of Trade, I beg to give notice that at the earliest possible opportunity I shall raise this matter on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury the amount of duty paid on the potatoes imported into this country during the past 12 months, and comparable figures for the year 1932?

The approximate amounts of duty collected on potatoes during each of the calendar years 1932 and 1933 were as follow:

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office what progress has been made during the financial year 1933 to 1934 in the introduction of mechanisation into the War Office and the reduction of redundant staff?

No additional mechanical methods have been introduced into the War Office itself during the current financial year, but experiments have been and are still in progress in certain outstation establishments.

Is the War Office keeping in touch with the developments in other Departments and also with the latest practice outside?

Yes, Sir.

Is the War Office absolutely efficient in every detail?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether the Government intends to take action to implement the recommendations of the Committee on Police Consolidation in Scotland?

I have asked police authorities and others concerned to send me any observations they desire to make on the report of this Committee on or before the 31st instant. These observations will be carefully considered and the decision of the Government will be announced as soon as possible.

asked the Secretary for Mines the results of representations made to him by Members during the last three years on the question of providing suitable tipping equip- ment at Swansea docks, so as to avoid the breakage of coal and loss of time in shipping coal cargoes?

The subject of coal shipment and anti-breakage facilities has engaged the constant attention of the Mines Department and of the Ministry of Transport during the past three years. In 1931, following a conference convened by the then Secretary for Mines and the Minister of Transport, committees representative of all the trade interests concerned were set up in the various coal shipping districts to determine what types of anti-breakage appliances would be most effective, and what steps should be taken to secure their installation. Considerable progress has been made in South Wales, particularly at Swansea, where nine anti-breakage appliances have been installed during the last three years. I am informed by the Great Western Railway Company that a further appliance will be fitted to the hoist now under construction at King's Dock, and that the company, in conjunction with the traders, are at present conducting experiments at Swansea with a view to further improving the coal shipment facilities at that port.

Will the hon. Gentleman convey a suggestion to the Great Western Railway Company that they should, in addition to consulting the traders, ask the workmen engaged in this work for practical suggestions for improvement?

I will certainly do that. I should like to call the hon. Member's attention to the fact that there is a South Wales Coal Shipment Advisory Committee, and, if representations are to be made in this subject about a local problem, that is the appropriate body to whom to make them. The hon. Member will remember that I wrote to him some time ago about that.

asked the Secretary for Mines the number of hours of overtime worked at the following collieries during the months of October, November, and December: Tibshelf colliery, Derbyshire, Rufford and Blidworth collieries, Nottinghamshire?

During the three months in question the total number of hours overtime worked was 1,787 at Tibshelf colliery, 1,279 at Rufford and 630 at Blidworth. These totals represent 1.64 per cent., .36 per cent., and .23 per cent. respectively of the total hours worked underground during the same period at these three collieries.

May I ask the Secretary for Mines, in view of the growing practice of working overtime in mines, whether he has anything further to report with regard to the matter he mentioned some time ago in the House? He told us that his Department were having investigations made into this matter, and I would like to know whether those investigations have been made and what is happening?

If the hon. Member wants an answer on that point, I should prefer to have the question put down; but I would say at the moment that I am proposing to begin an investigation in Lancashire almost immediately. If further information is wanted, I should prefer to have notice.

I wish to say that I consider the answer of the Secretary for Mines quite unsatisfactory, and I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs if any further negotiations have been entered into during the Recess for the settlement of outstanding difficulties between this country and the Irish Free State and with what, if any, result?

No, Sir.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether any representations have been made to him from any of His Majesty's Dominions that this subject ought somehow or other to be brought to a definite conclusion at the earliest possible moment?

No one would welcome a satisfactory settlement of this question more than His Majesty's Government. No communication of any sort has been made to us by any of the Dominions, for the reason that they believe that it is a domestic matter between the Irish Free State and ourselves. We, on the other hand, have never closed the door to any settlement.

Would the right hon. Gentleman be prepared, when the deficit on the annuities is balanced by the special duties, to consider some means by which this festering sore in the body politic of the Empire might be healed?

I repeat that no one would welcome a settlement more than the British Government; but it would be a mistake to assume that you help towards a settlement by showing that you are not prepared to stand up for your rights.

When the right hon. Gentleman says that no one would welcome a settlement more than the British Government, will he give a sign that he is prepared to make such a settlement?

I have repeatedly done so. As recently as Saturday night I said so, and it is responded to by a statement from the other side that they do not believe that they are entitled to pay the dues, and that they do not intend to pay. I cannot go on merely repeating that we want a settlement; we expect some response.

Is it not a fact that these dues are not paid by the Irish Free State Government?

May I ask how long it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to remain the armchair upon which Mr. de Valera sits?

asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs if he has any statement to make with regard to the situation in Newfoundland; and what progress has been made with the new administration?

His Majesty has approved the appointment of the following to be members of the Commission of Government to be established in Newfoundland:

• The Honourable F. C. Alderdice.
• Sir John Hope Simpson, C.I.E.
• Mr. W. R. Howley, K.C.
• Mr. T. Lodge, C.B.
• The Honourable J. C. Puddester.
• Mr. E. N. R. Trentham.

Of these, Sir John Hope Simpson, Mr. Lodge and Mr. Trentham have been chosen from the United Kingdom, and the other three from Newfoundland.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can state the number of convictions for failure to insure against third-party risk for the past 12 months?

Preliminary figures which have been obtained show that during 1933 there were 12,479 convictions in England and Wales on charges of failing to insure against third-party risks.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will state the number of claims for transitional benefit which have been considered from November, 1931, to the latest available date, with the percentage of awards of full benefit, reduced benefit, and nil benefit, respectively; and whether he will give the numbers separately for Glamorganshire, Monmouthshire, Carmarthenshire, Durham, Lancashire, and London, with the approximate percentage of the population unemployed in each case?

As the reply includes Tables of figures I will, if I may, circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if he is aware that a farm worker named Chessum was discharged from employment on the Crown farm at Pointon, Billingborough, as a result of certain activities in the by-election in the Rutland and Stamford Parliamentary Division; and whether he will have inquiries made as to why this man was thrown out of employment?

I am satisfied after thorough inquiry that this man was discharged from employment for failure on more than one occasion to carry out orders given to him by the farm manager and the foreman, and for insubordinate language in the presence of other men working on the farm. His dismissal had nothing to do with his political activities.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is the local opinion that his statement gives an excuse rather than the reason for the dismissal? Is he aware that the farm agent, who was a very active worker during the recent election, had an altercation with this man because the man had party colours in his windows; and will he reconsider the matter and let this man start work again?

I have made a very thorough inquiry into the report of the farm manager. On one occasion the man was reprimanded for not having steam-up in a threshing set, although he had previously received instructions to do so, and on another occasion he had disobeyed definite instructions given to him with regard to the conveyance of a threshing set from one farm to another farm, with the result that half-a-day was lost on the farm. My hon. Friend will see my difficulty in further investigating a case which has been investigated already.

With all due respect to the right hon. Gentleman, the fact of the matter is—

The hon. Member is now giving information.

May I give notice that, owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I shall draw attention to this matter on the Adjournment in the near future?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the present position with regard to the negotiations being carried on by the League of Nations for removing the Assyrians from Iraq and establishing them in some other country?

The committee which the Council of the League of Nations has set up to deal with this problem are at present investigating a scheme for the settlement of any Assyrians who may wish to leave Iraq on land owned by a British company of high standing in the State of Paraná in Southern Brazil. The Brazilian Government have generously offered on certain conditions to accept the whole of the Assyrians in groups of 500 families a month, as and when the company can provide for their settlement. Meanwhile, the committee have thought it essential to assure themselves, by means of a local investigation, that the land proposed is suitable for the purpose, and that the conditions are such as to enable the Assyrians to become a useful element in Brazil. They have entrusted this investigation to Brigadier J. G. Browne, until recently Officer Commanding the Assyrian Levies in Iraq. Brigadier Browne, who will be assisted by a representative of the Nansen Office at Geneva, and by the Counsellor of the Swiss Legation at Rio de Janeiro, left for Brazil on the 27th January.

May I ask whether the Government have come to any decision as to making any financial contribution towards this work, in view of the special responsibility of this country in this matter?

Perhaps my hon. Friend will put that question down.

Is there no possibility of getting the Turks to take them back to their original old home?

Is there any chance of Brazil taking all the minority communities in India?

asked the Minister of Health the number of persons in receipt of Poor Law relief in each county in Wales on the last available date, giving separate figures for men, women, and children, together with figures for the same period of the previous year?

The total number of persons (men, women and children) in receipt of poor relief, excluding rate-aided patients in mental hospitals, persons in receipt of domiciliary medical relief only, and casuals, in the 13 administrative counties and the four county boroughs in Wales (including Monmouthshire) on Saturday, the 13th January, 1934, was 149,027, and on Saturday, the 14th January, 1933, 140,407? I will send the hon. Member a statement showing the numbers in each county and county borough. The weekly returns from which these figures have been obtained do not distinguish the numbers of men, women and children, but I will, if he desires, send the hon. Member a statement showing separately the number of men, women and children in receipt of poor relief in each county and county borough on 1st January of the two years when the detailed returns relating to this year are available.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now make any statement concerning the alleged ill-treatment of children in British Somaliland?

During the absence of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies in East Africa, I have been asked to reply to Questions on his behalf. I am sure that I speak for the whole House in saying that we greatly regretted to hear of his illness. I am glad to be able to add that the most recent report is that he is making progress.

The alleged ill-treatment refers to punishment of boys for refusing to carry out the task of keeping the streets of the native village at Sheikh clear of refuse. This duty was assigned to the village boys with the acquiescence of the tribal elders, and on two occasions only within the last four years have boys been punished, the punishment awarded being four strokes with a light cane. No complaint has been received from the villagers of Sheikh.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will furnish this House with full particulars of the development schemes recommended by the Colonial Development Advisory Committee since its inception, and what is the total of the expenditure involved; and is he satisfied that this committee is taking advantage of every opportunity to develop the colonies to the mutual advantage of the member nations of the British Empire?

The particulars for which my hon. Friend asks are contained, so far as relates to the period ending the 31st March, 1933, in the four Interim Reports of the Colonial Development Advisory Committee published as Command Papers under the following numbers:—Cmd. 3540; Cmd. 3876; Cmd. 4079 and Cmd. 4316. Particulars of later schemes will be included in the Fifth Interim Report, which will cover the period from the 1st April, 1933, to the 31st March, 1934. As regards loans from the fund, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given on the 6th December last to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Ross and Cromarty (Sir I. Macpherson). The total amount to be contributed by the Colonial Development Fund in aid of schemes approved before the 31st March, 1933, is £3,054,508. The total estimated expenditure from all sources on the schemes so assisted is about £9,500,000. The reply to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.

Does the hon. Gentleman intend to imply by those reports that they represent the limit of the possibilities of development within the Colonies?

The reports merely refer to the schemes approved and make no comment otherwise than by implication. The latter part of my reply covers the supplementary question, which indicates that I am satisfied.

We maintain that there is a great deal of opportunity in the Colonies—

The hon. Member must ask a question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amounts by way of loan or grant for which the Treasury bas been made responsible since the introduction of the Finance Bill, 1933?

I will, with my right hon. Friend's permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the figures for which he asks.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give the details of the foreign debtors of the Government of Great Britain who have defaulted, or partially defaulted, since May, 1929; and if all Empire Governments have honoured their obligations?

I take it that my hon. Friend is referring to intergovernmental debts arising out of the War. No such default as suggested in the question has taken place in respect of debts due to the United Kindom, and payments were regularly received down to the 30th June, 1931. Thereafter the situation has been governed by the Hoover Moratorium and the Lausanne Agreements. The suspension of payments in respect of Reparations and War Debts agreed to at the Lausanne Conference remains in force, all the rights of His Majesty's Government under the existing Agreements being integrally re- served, and certain relief and other post-War debts have also been suspended. A similar suspension of payments was offered to the Dominion Governments and the Government of India in respect of their War Debts. I am glad to take this opportunity of again expressing my appreciation of the fact that the Government of the Union of South Africa decided not to avail themselves of this offer, but have continued the payment of the instalments due up to the present date.

If the United States of America insist upon renewal of the payment of debt from this country, what prospects are there of our getting our debts from foreign countries?

That is a hypothetical question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether His Majesty's Government is using the Exchange Equalisation Fund to create an artificial value of sterling abroad in order to return to the Gold Standard; and what steps are being taken to safeguard the taxpayers against loss arising out of the purchase of foreign exchange?

No, Sir. The purpose of the Exchange Equalisation Account is to correct temporary fluctuations in the exchange value of sterling. It has not been used to create an artificial value for sterling for the purpose of returning to the Gold Standard or for any other purpose, and as there is a good deal of misunderstanding on this matter I should perhaps add that it would in my opinion be ineffective if so used. In reply to the last part of the question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the discussions which took place during the passage of the Exchange Equalisation Account Bill and Finance Bill last year.

In view of the equalisation fund that has been created in America, is there any likelihood of competition between our Equalisation Fund and the equalisation fund of America?

We had better wait and see what the operation of the fund in America is likely to be.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the £350,000,000 is still in the Equalisation Fund.

Yes, Sir.

Is not the existence of the new American equalisation fund an added reason why the conversations between us and America should be expedited?

I do not know to what conversations the hon. Gentleman refers.

Regarding currency and regarding our mutual obligation; are there no conversations now in prospect?

No, Sir, not that I know of.

Before I ask this question, I should like to say that it refers to a Motion which was on the Paper yesterday, but which has since been removed for technical reasons. Otherwise, several additional names would appear.

As my hon. and gallant Friend is no doubt aware, an opportunity will occur to-morrow for a Debate on this subject on a Private Member's Motion, which is to be moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Park (Sir A. Shirley Benn).

After the reply of the Prime Minister, may I ask him if he is aware that this Motion is supported by a very large majority of the back-benchers who support the Government, and actually by a majority now of the Members of the House of Commons, and, in view of the totally inadequate time of 3½ hours for a Private Members' Debate, would he consider giving an opportunity for ventilating the whole subject before the Easter holidays?

I cannot go any further than I have gone in answer to this question at the moment.

May I ask if it is too late to reconsider the request of the hon. and gallant Baronet, in view of the fact that the Motion which stands in the name of the hon. Member for the Park Division of Sheffield (Sir A. Shirley Benn) for to-morrow covers a much wider subject than is included in the Motion of the hon. and gallant Baronet, which is supported, I believe, by more than 300 supporters of the Government and other Members of Parliament?

I think that we had better wait until this Debate takes place to-morrow. The ground covered by both Motions has so much in common that the hon. and gallant Baronet will have to have his Motion removed before the other can be debated.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the number and type of aeroplanes bought by the German Government, trade firms, or other persons interested in aviation in Germany from manufacturers in this country during the past 12 months?

I am unable to furnish any information as to the number and type of aeroplanes bought from manufacturers in this country during the past 12 months, but the number of complete aeroplanes exported from the United Kingdom to Germany during the year 1933 was four.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider taking steps to get the necessary information with regard to the export of both completed planes and parts of planes intended for military purposes?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has any statement to make on the present position in Malta?

No, Sir. In the absence of my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, I do not think that there is any general statement that I could usefully make. Reports from Malta do not indicate that there is anything in the situation there that calls for special comment.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has any statement to make with reference to the situation in Austria, and whether any information has been received from the Austrian Government with regard to a proposal to raise the question of the differences between Austria and Germany before the Council of the League of Nations.

The Austrian Minister recently informed my right hon. Friend of representations made by the Austrian Government at Berlin, in which the possibility was mentioned of an eventual appeal by Austria to the League of Nations. So far as I know, no reply has yet been made by the German Government to these representations, and I cannot, therefore, make any further statement at the present time.

Is the hon. Gentleman in a position to deny the rumour that the British Government are discouraging Austria from raising the matter before the Council of the League?

Yes, Sir. I have heard that rumour, and am glad of this opportunity of saying that there is no truth in it whatever.

Does not the hon. Gentleman consider that it is of the utmost importance that this matter should be raised as a means of bringing about peace?

That is a matter of opinion.

I desire to ask a question of the Leader of the House. In the course of yesterday's proceedings on the Unemployment Bill, several important Clauses were not discussed, and I desire to ask whether it would not be possible for the Leader of the House, in his capacity as such, to have the whole question of the proceedings on the Bill reopened. In view of the fact that no time was wasted yesterday, and that several important Clauses, affecting large numbers of working people, were left undiscussed, is it not possible, having regard to the future discussions on the Bill, to have the whole question of the Guillotine and the allocation of time reopened?

I had no knowledge that this question was going to be asked. The point that the hon. Member raises is one that invariably occurs when any Bill is taken under the Guillotine. The allocation of time is always made with very great care, it is debated in the House, and it has been decided by the House that the allocation shall be made. In practice, when matters of any importance escape discussion during the Committee stage, that is very often corrected by those particular matters being discussed on Report. Certainly I can hold out no hope at this moment that reconsideration would now be given to what was decided by the House.

Then I would like to ask you, Mr. Speaker, with regard to the rights of the House, whether, seeing that matters which are of vital importance, and affect the interests of huge bodies of people, have not been discussed by the House, you have any rights in this matter of safeguarding the rights of the House of Commons?

I take it that the hon. Member asks me that question on a point of Order. The matter is entirely out of my hands. The House of Commons itself has decided by a majority that the time of the House should be allocated in a certain way. I have nothing to do with the way in which that time is expended.

Is it the intention of the Leader of the House, in view of the large number of points that have not been discussed, and will not be discussed, on this Bill, to add to the time that will be available for the Report stage?

No; one must certainly wait and see. I would remind the hon. Member, who has not been a Member of the House for very long, that these difficulties have occurred ever since the Guillotine was first employed as part of the procedure of Parliament. They have been unfortunately, an inseparable concomitant of the Guillotine. The alternative that was found in the old days, when the Guillotine was not employed, was that discussion would often be carried to such a length as would make it perfectly impossible, with the amount of business which this House now has to do, to get legislation through.

In view of what happened yesterday, when no unnecessary time was taken up, could not the Government give us some reply on the question of extra time? It is very evident that the Bill has not been discussed as fully as it ought to be discussed, and the granting of more time is well worthy of consideration.

I spent a great many years of my life sitting where the hon. Member is now sitting, and I quite understand his feelings. But, also, he has sat on this side of the House, and he knows that it would be perfectly impossible for the Leader of the House, after a Bill has been started, to commit himself in any way on such a question.

Everyone who took part in the Debate realises that no time was wasted. We were only able to discuss two Clauses out of five. On Clauses 2, 4 and 5 there was no Debate at all. There is substance in the plea that is being made for reconsideration of the allocation of time.

There is always substance in these claims, as the right hon. Gentleman will remember when he had the good, or it may be the evil, fortune to sit on these benches. I take note of what has been said, but the Prime Minister is out of the House, and I cannot add anything at the moment to what I have said.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the experience of yesterday shows that in such an allocation of time as we have under this Bill there might be more compartments so as to ensure that every Clause has an opportunity at some time of consideration?

I beg to move, in page 6, line 9, to leave out from the beginning to the end of line 14, and to insert:

"(1) Sub-section (1) of Section four of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1930, shall have effect as if there were inserted therein after the words 'offered to him' the words 'or if it is proved by an officer of the Ministry of Labour that the claimant has neglected to avail himself of an opportunity of suitable employment'."

When this Bill was first printed, I invited representations and opinions not only from Members of all parties in the House but from people outside who were entitled to express the views of those who were likely to be affected, and the conclusion that I came to was that there was, and is, a doubt sincerely felt by large numbers of people that the words "unable to obtain employment" might be so construed as to mean in effect a reinsertion of the words "genuinely seeking work." Having had almost more experience than anyone in the House of what those words might mean, I am determined at all costs to avoid any doubt, and it is for the purpose of resolving those doubt that I propose this Amendment.

The reason that I speak with some feeling about these words "genuinely seeking work" is this: They were part of the Acts from 1921 onwards; in 1921 they applied to those on uncovenanted benefit. Cases of uncovenanted benefit were referred to committees which advised the Minister, and we had to give a final decision in many hundreds of cases as to whether this condition of "genuinely seeking work" was fulfilled. In order to satisfy the condition, a man had to go from colliery to colliery and from factory to factory where there might be no earthly chance of obtaining employment, and there was case after case where a man, perhaps, went and badgered the foreman of some works or factory which all the time had displayed outside a notice that no labour would be engaged except at the Employment Exchange. That experience satisfied me, and I have been convinced, that those words "genuinely seeking work" are not proper words for an Act of this kind. In 1924 for the first time they were applied also to standard benefit, and in 1927 they were re-enacted. The trouble arose in the construction of the words "genuinely seeking work." It did not arise upon the words "unable to obtain employment."

I am satisfied, as the result of representations from many quarters inside and outside the House, that the fear is real and sincere that, when it comes to construction by the court of referees or by the umpire, it might conceivably be said that "unable to obtain employment" was in effect the same thing as "genuinely seeking work." Let me, by reference to the Royal Commission, state why the words "unable to obtain employment" were inserted in the first instance. The Royal Commission, in paragraph 439, relating to the condition "unable to obtain suitable employment," said:

"If that condition were restored, and if it were administered in the way in which it was administered when it formed part of the Third Statutory Condition, the effect would be that a claimant would not lose his benefit unless the Court were satisfied that he knew that there was a possibility of getting work and he did not take reasonable steps to get it. It has been suggested that such a condition might be so construed as in effect to require the claimant to prove that he was genuinely seeking work. We do not think that such a construction would be right."

Therefore, the view of the majority was, that, although there was a possibility of these words being so construed, it was so remote that it might safely be disregarded. The minority came to very much the same conclusion. The minority state, in paragraph 73, on page 411:

"We have stated that benefit should be continued so long as a claimant is without work, able to work, and unable to get work. We do not think that with proper safeguards as to interpretation there is any reason why the condition which existed in the 1911 Act 'unable to obtain suitable employment' should not be reinstated."

At the bottom of the same page, in paragraph 74, it says:

"It must be made clear that the only other occasion on which a claimant might fail to satisfy this condition would be if it were proved that he knew that suitable employment was available and he made no reasonable efforts to obtain it. The condition would thus only apply in cases where a claimant had shown by his acts that he preferred benefit to work."

It will be seen that there was a gap which both the majority and the minority thought ought to be closed. The case, of course, was that of a man who knew that work was available and did not apply for it. There is common ground with regard to that matter. The Amendment strikes out from the Bill Sub-section 1 of Clause 6, and inserts, in Section 4 of the Act of 1930, the words of the Amendment which I have moved. As very few hon. Members will have a copy of the Act of 1930 before them, perhaps the Committee will forgive me if I read from it. Section 4 of that Act reads as follows:

"If on a claim for benefit it is proved by an officer of the Ministry of Labour that the claimant, after a situation in any employment which is suitable in his case has been notified to him by an Employment Exchange or other recognised agency, or by or on behalf of an employer as vacant or about to become vacant, has without good cause refused or failed to apply for such situation, or refused to accept such situation when offered to him."

At that point, after those words, I propose to close the gap to which I have referred by inserting the words in the Amendment, which reads that this Section shall have effect

"as if there were inserted therein after the words offered to him,' the words 'or if it is proved by an officer of the Ministry of Labour that the claimant has neglected to avail himself of an opportunity of suitable employment,"

I do not think that I need read the rest. From what I have said, I have made it clear that, on the one hand, I have closed the gap to which both reports of the Royal Commission have referred, and at the same time I have made it abundantly clear that there is no question now of the restoration of words equivalent to "genuinely seeking work." I have put the onus of proof upon the officer of the Ministry in this matter in the same way as the onus is upon him in regard to the other cases referred to in this Section. When I introduced the Bill on Second Reading I said in all good faith that I was prepared to welcome constructive suggestions to make the Act as good an Act as it could possibly be, and I believe that this suggestion, coming as it does, not from one quarter but from many quarters, goes the whole way to meet a position of which I ought to take notice. I explained why the words were originally put into the Bill, and I have explained the reasons which have induced me to take them out and to insert other words. I claim that I have, in this matter at any rate, fulfilled the promise to give full and fair consideration to any suggestions from whatever quarter they come if I believed such suggestions tended towards making the Bill a better Measure.

This is a very difficult matter to discuss, because we have only just had the Amendment put into our hands.

It has only just been drafted.

It is very difficult to visualise its full effect. I should like to hear from the right hon. Gentleman the administrative reasons which have led him to change the wording of the 1930 Act at all. He has mentioned the minority and majority reports of the Royal Commission, but what experience in the Ministry of Labour and at the exchanges has led him to desire any alteration at all? We have not heard. I have not heard from any official at the exchanges any effective criticism of the existing procedure.

The hon. Member has put his point on procedure and has asked the Minister for further information, and I do not think that he ought to make a speech at this point on the Amendment.

It is a perfectly fair question, but obviously one which I cannot adequately answer across the Table at this stage. I suggest to the hon. Gentleman that the answer is to be found in the evidence which was tendered to the Royal Commission and upon which both the majority and the minority made their report. I think that it would be agreed that I would incur a very serious responsibility if, having had this report before me, I had done nothing to meet the case, which I have endeavoured to meet in a way which I hope the Committee will approve.