Skip to main content

Written Answers

Volume 296: debated on Friday 14 December 1934

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

Written Answers

Loud-Speaker Van, Chingford

asked the Home Secretary the reasons why Miss Matheson, of 7, Crescent Road, Chingford, Essex, was refused permission by the local police to tour a loud-speaker van in Chingford in connection with propaganda for the peace ballot; whether he is aware that this van has been habitually used without restriction for touring for publicity and advertising purposes by loud-speaker; that in Chingford a similar loud-speaker was used by a parliamentary candidate without interference; and what were the reasons for this prohibition?

It is not for the police to give or refuse permission for this purpose, and I am informed that the action of the police was confined to drawing Miss Matheson's attention to certain statutory provision, which, it was thought, might be infringed by the proposed use of the van. No previous use of this or any other similar van in Chingford has come to the notice of the police.

Colliery Owners (Profits, War-Time)

asked the Secretary for Mines what percentage of profit was allowed to colliery companies when they were under control during the War period?

The control of the coal mining industry which covered the period 1st March, 1917–31st March, 1921 (with the exception of South Wales, where it commenced on 1st December, 1916), was regulated by the Coal Mines Control Agreement Act, 1918, and the Coal Mines (Emergency) Act, 1920, respectively. Under the former Act, a colliery owner was entitled, broadly speaking, either (1) to retain his pre-War standard of profits, with an adjustment for increase or decrease in capital, plus 5 per cent. of any excess of profits thereover; or (2) to have his profits made up to his pre-War standard, less an adjustment for any reduction in his accounting period output as compared with the standard period output. Under the latter Act, an owner retained only his pre-War profits standard, or had his pre-War profits standard made up to him as the case might be in each case with an adjustment where necessary to allow for any increase or decrease of capital.

Ex-Service Hospital Patients (Eggs)

asked the Minister of Pensions whether foreign eggs are supplied to ex-Service patients in hospitals under his jurisdiction?

No, Sir. Under the contracts in operation none but eggs of British origin are supplied.

Broadcasting (Foreign Diplomats)

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what foreign diplomats have availed themselves of broadcasting facilities in this country, and whether the Foreign Office received any notice of this intention previous to the broadcast?

As regards the first part of the question, a list of occasions on which foreign diplomats have availed themselves of facilities for broadcasting in this country from 1931 to 1934 is annexed. As regards the second part of the question, it is not the practice for my Department to be notified in advance.

Following is the list referred to:

FOREIGN DIPLOMATS BROADCASTING IN THIS COUNTRY.

1931–32.

June 26.—The Czechoslovak Minister, discussing "Czechoslovakia" with Sir Evelyn Wrench in the series "The World and Ourselves".

1933.

March 11th.—The Chinese Minister, discussing with a Japanese gentleman "The Situation in Manchuria".

1934.

February 28th.—The Belgian Ambassador on "King Albert".

April 12th.—The Spanish Ambassador—Spanish Lesson.

July 24th.—The Austrian Minister on "Dr. Dollfuss".

August 7th.—The German Ambassador on "President Hindenburg".

October 18th.—The Yugoslav Minister on "King Alexander".

Czechoslovakia (Ruthenia)

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, seeing that, under the Treaty signed on 10th September, 1919, at Saint Germain-en-Laye between the British Empire, the United States of America, France, Italy, Japan, and Czechoslovakia, Czechoslovakia undertook to constitute the Ukrainian territory known generally as Podkarpatska Rus as an autonomous unit within the Czechoslovak State, to create a special Diet, and that officials in that territory should be chosen as far as possible from the inhabitants, he will state what steps have been taken to carry out these provisions; and, if none have been taken, whether any action is being taken or has been proposed?

Articles 10 to 13 of the treaty to which my hon. Friend refers, relating to the autonomy of sub-Carpathian Ruthenia, are incorporated in paragraph 3 of the Constitutional Charter of the Czechoslovak Republic. Administrative effect has in fact already been given to Articles 12 and 13, which provide respectively for the choice of officials as far as possible from among the inhabitants of the territory and for the representation of Ruthenia in the Czechoslovak Legislative Assembly. The Czechoslovak Government, while freely admitting that they have not yet found it possible to give effect to Articles 10 and 11, have more than once announced their intention to do so as soon as the territory in question is economically Capable of supporting an autonomous administration. This question has been considered by Minorities Committees of the Council of the League of Nations on several occasions, the most recent of which was in December, 1933. The report the Committee then issued made it clear that in their opinion the Czechoslovak Government could be relied on to execute in full the provisions of the Treaty as soon as practical difficulties had been overcome which consist in or arise out of the very poor and backward state of the country.